第 34 集：Carmelo Lo Faro，索尔维复合材料

CW Talks:The Composites Podcast 第 34 集的嘉宾是索尔维复合材料公司（美国乔治亚州阿尔法利塔）总裁 Carmelo Lo Faro。 Carmelo 在意大利出生和长大，职业生涯的大部分时间都在 Cytec 和 Solvay 度过，当时 Solvay 于 2015 年收购了该公司。 他担任总裁职位长达五年，主要在 Solvay 位于美国佐治亚州 Alpharetta 的办公室工作.

Carmelo 与 CW 交谈 关于他如何进入复合材料，他在 Cytec 和 Solvay 的工作，他如何领导，他如何看待航空复合材料在 COVID-19 时代的发展，计算能力的兴起以发展复合材料的使用，增加复合材料使用的前景汽车市场，以及教育在复合材料行业日益重要。

Carmelo Lo Faro 对 CW Talks 的采访记录，录制于 2020 年 9 月 24 日

杰夫·斯隆（JS）： 让我们开始吧。我知道您在复合材料行业拥有悠久的历史。你先是在氰特，现在是索尔维，几年前收购了氰特。但即使在氰特之前，在意大利的大学里，你在 1990 年代初期就接触过复合材料，这在复合材料行业的历史上是相对较早的。我想知道最初是什么吸引您使用复合材料？

卡梅罗·洛法罗（CLF）： 这是一个很好的问题。不，我是一个总是喜欢探索和在新领域和未知领域工作的人。我一直喜欢复合材料的一点是，它们最终是一项非常年轻的新技术，有很多很多机会。现在，作为一名工程师，查看复合材料具有的许多自由度，确实令人着迷和令人兴奋。你有多个层，你可以改变最终的方向，你可以在层之间引入一些东西，你可以自由地制作任何你想要的形状。只要你能够制作模具，你就可以改变纤维的类型、树脂的类型。是的，我一直认为我们在自然界中拥有的结构，树干，人类骨骼，极其高效和智能，这些结构来自数千年的进化。当我研究复合材料时，由于我提到的所有这些自由度，复合材料具有巨大的潜力，可以创造出与我们在自然界中看到的结构一样高效和有效的结构。对我来说，那真的很棒。这对工程师来说非常鼓舞人心。而且，在我从事该行业的整个过程中，这一直是我思考的一部分，您知道，能够真正提取出这种令人难以置信的潜在编译器技术。

JS： 所以你说它可以令人兴奋，我认为它有时也会有点吓人，不能吗？

CLF： 绝对可以。而且我确实相信，如果处理不当，这种复合材料的复杂程度可能会造成拖累。然而，我还要告诉你，今天我们拥有数量惊人的计算能力，这是我在 90 年代初上大学时所没有的。现在，组件计算能力增长得令人难以置信。而且我相信，利用这种计算能力，再加上机器学习、人工智能以及该领域取得的所有进展，确实可以让我们理解这种复杂性。这就是这些新的数字技术真正可以创造价值的地方。理解这种复杂性，让我们，你知道的，显着远离黑金属，真正能够建模，能够定义复杂性并实际利用它而不是害怕它。

JS： 我知道你是从研发和产品开发开始的。当然，现在您是 Solvay Composite Materials 的总裁。这对你来说是一个很大的变化。我想知道如果 20 年前，我告诉过您 2020 年您将成为索尔维复合材料公司的总裁，您认为您的反应会是什么？而且，我想知道您如何将您现在的工作与您刚开始在这种环境中加入 Cytec/Solvay 组织时在研发方面所做的工作进行比较？

CLF： 是啊，如果你告诉我这些，我可能会嘲笑你说那是做梦都没有的。我于 1998 年以实习生的身份开始从事这项业务。并且在几次收购中我都留在了这项业务中。当我还是个孩子的时候，我对太空旅行非常着迷，你知道，尤其是航天飞机。当我还是个孩子的时候，我画了无数的航天飞机及其助推器和飞行器的图画。当我加入这项业务时，能够与我们公司的人会面并交谈，他们通过开发助推器材料，使太空重新进入大气层，从而实现了该计划，这真的是我儿时的梦想真的。我很谦虚也很兴奋能和他们一起工作，能够向他们学习是一个绝对的梦想。所以，老实说，我不能要求更多。因此，想到有一天我可以有幸领导我们业务中的这些非常聪明的男人和女人，我永远不会想到。我也将转到你问题的第二部分。你知道，在我的整个职业生涯中，我从来没有真正受到过职位或工作时间的激励。我实际上深信这对大多数人来说都是正确的。我一直受到激励，让人们发挥最大的作用，并帮助我们的客户尝试完成极其困难的任务以完成他们的任务。因此，当我回顾我今天所做的工作时，这与我多年前刚开始时所做的工作非常相似。在某种程度上，共同点仍然相同——利用人们的力量来开发可以解决未知领域中非常困难的问题的技术。现在保持不变。有一些事情发生了变化，当我看到我所做的工作时，这就是，你知道，在我职业生涯的早期，我有幸有一位导师与我分享，我有很多亏欠那人。这位先生叫 Mike Molyneux，当我 98 年开始工作时，他实际上是这家公司的总裁。迈克只是问了我一个非常厚颜无耻的问题，作为一个年轻的实习生，他每天都在做什么。他说他一天中的大部分时间都花在了人事上。这在当时非常有启发性，并且已经证明是正确的。你知道，当我回顾我今天所做的事情时，是的，我有任务，我会做决定。但归根结底，我的大部分时间都花在了人身上。每当我们开始一个新项目时，我认为要做的第一件事甚至不是目标或时间表，而是将要参与该项目的人员。人们经常带着问题和意见来找我，我确实为此投入了大量时间。所以这就是我的改变：花在任务和行动，甚至决策上的时间少了很多，花在人身上的时间多了很多。我非常感谢我的导师早先给了我这条道路，所以我可以看到并意识到它的重要性。

JS： 因此，当您谈论管理人员时，我假设您谈论的是一个新项目或新计划，然后您会考虑可能涉及的人员，我假设这意味着您正在尝试考虑组织内的哪些人最适合某些任务，具体取决于项目或程序的要求。这必须要求你对某些人的长处、弱点、兴趣、他们喜欢做什么和不喜欢做什么有相当多的了解。与此同时，你想挑战人们走出去，也许走出他们的舒适区，做一些他们过去没有做过的事情。我想知道当您考虑管理人员时，是否会考虑所有这些因素，或者您是如何考虑的？

CLF： 是的，所以我会分享一些想法。第一点是，我举了一个项目的例子，但我想到了许多其他领域的人，不仅仅是项目，从所有在我们工厂工作的人开始，每天制作我们交付给我们的产品。顾客。但回到你的观点，我有一个简单的信念，即你的知识比你的态度和行为重要得多。这意味着，归根结底，只要我们有表现出正确行为、正确态度和正确领导力的人，我认为我们几乎可以让这些人参与每个项目。是的，我是一个技术人员，如果你需要推动一个技术问题计划，技术知识是必需的，但我坚信有能力培养那些提供成功所需的能力和行为的人。你知道，当我们在一个执行团队中讨论关于增加一个被认为相对缺乏经验的人并让这个人进入拉伸滚动时，我的团队中不时会有人。有时我会听到评论，‘嘿，那个人是绿色的。他或她没有经验。 ’我的回答一直是你知道，我真的很高兴，你知道，过去在决定我们的职业生涯时，我们不在房间里。当我没有真正准备好或没有资格获得这个机会时，我的领导给了我机会。而且我绝对相信，给人们一个机会或让人们舒展筋骨是非常有价值的。现在，在大多数情况下，我们已经让人员紧张了，这些人已经交付了，而且他们已经交付了。

JS： 你提到态度和工作习惯对你很重要，如果你能给我举几个你认为特别有价值的态度或习惯的例子，你就赢了。

CLF： 我认为对我来说有价值的是意识到没有人知道所有的答案。我们可以依靠周围人的集体智慧来获得更好的答案。现在这是需要时间和精力才能实现的事情，尤其是技术人员——工程师或科学家——他们敢于提供答案。因此，有时在会议中您没有答案对我们的自我非常不利。是的，现实是，我这些年来学到的是，我并不总是有答案。第二，当我可以依靠周围人的智慧时，我总会有更好的答案。所以这花了我一些时间来学习。是的，但我认为这对领导角色绝对至关重要吗？

JS： 让我们特别多谈谈索尔维。您知道，在复合材料行业，有一些像 Solvay 这样的公司供应碳纤维、热固性树脂、热塑性树脂、预浸料、粘合剂、套件和材料，当然还有更多，并服务于所有主要终端市场服务于复合材料行业。我想知道您认为该公司的优势是什么，以及它在复合材料供应链中的地位是什么？也许更重要的是，您认为哪些领域需要更好地开发或成熟？

CLF： 是的，杰夫，很好，很好的问题。我认为正如您所说，我们的优势在于我们必须提供非常独特、非常广泛的技术，您知道，涵盖化学、工艺和性能。几乎所有您能想到的化学物质——BMI、环氧树脂、酚醛树脂、苯并恶嗪，我们都有热塑性塑料、复合纺织品、粘合剂、底漆、辅助材料。现在，这是一种力量。因为它使我们能够成为物质不可知论者，因为它与取代金属有关，这确实是我们的最终使命。使这些优势真正有价值的是我们在我所说的应用工程方面拥有强大的专业知识。对于复合材料的应用工程，我指的是将设计、材料和工艺结合在一起以解决问题并创建结构的能力。我可能不会对复合材料社区说一些新的东西，但复合材料的简单事实是您在构建零件的同时构建材料，这意味着这三个组件之间存在非常密切的联系 - 设计、材料和工艺 - 并且同时开发材料的能力和使设计与压力、制造、材料对话的能力是项目成功的关键。而且让我觉得是索尔维的一个非常大的优势。现在，我们需要更好地发展和成熟的领域。当然，有一些。我会我会强调一个。我相信我们需要做的，我认为整个行业需要做的，是在定制/剪裁和工业化之间取得适当的平衡。当我们开始时，我们想解决很多不同的问题。答案通常是大量的定制。现在对于复合材料来说，继续被允许并继续取代我们今天所处市场之外的金属，能够进行工业化真的很重要，工业化意味着很多事情。这意味着我们运行资产的方式、自动化水平、我们可以为我们的产品添加的质量控制水平，以及主动而不是被动的能力，你知道，建立质量而不是检查质量。那是我们开车的地方。所以工业化真的是我们的游戏名称。

JS： 我们将在几分钟内更多地讨论这个，但是你提到要积极主动地建立质量，当我听到这个时，它让我想起了汽车供应链，它以使用过程控制、良好的过程控制而闻名, 管理和规范质量。对于大多数复合材料制造商来说，这是一个有点陌生的想法——我会说大部分是陌生的。我想知道，这是对我们正在谈论的内容的公平总结吗？如果是这样，您认为在一个如此依赖检查来验证质量的行业中实现这一目标有多难？

CLF： 是的，首先，我认为您的评估是正确的。
会有多困难？我相信，要达到这一点，我们的行业存在一些文化障碍。但我也相信我们需要这样做。我不相信，从长远来看，如果不这样想，我们就可以实现可持续发展。你知道，当我看我最了解的行业时，那就是航空航天业，然后我会看到整个行业在质量和交付方面面临的一些挑战。这些是您可以在新闻中看到的挑战。对于想要保持小规模的行业来说，这可能没问题。但是，如果您认为您的行业应该扩大和发展并使越来越多的人受益，那么我们将面临所有人都需要解决的挑战。我在 2017 年接受这份工作时做出的第一个决定之一是在我们的业务中任命一名质量负责人，并聘请不会以合规性条款看待质量的人，你知道在墙上挂一张证书或满足基本要求，但真正以转型的方式看待质量。而且，再次，能够利用我们今天在统计过程控制方面可用的所有工具。我们有一个复杂的设置。我们在一个复杂的行业中运营。我们生活在一个并不总是欢迎变革的行业。我已经看到我们一些最大的客户也接受这些原则。我非常相信这就是我们要走的路。

JS： 好的。你提到了航空航天。我现在想稍微谈谈这个。你知道，在冠状病毒大流行之前，我认为复合材料行业一直在为至少一个新的主要飞机项目做准备，这将消耗大量的碳纤维和树脂，包括热塑性塑料和热固性树脂。然而，现在随着大流行和航空旅行的严重萧条，新飞机计划的时间表至少已经推迟了几年。当您审视一般的商业航空旅行，特别是复合材料在航空结构制造中的作用时，我想知道，您如何看待未来几年的发展？您认为复合材料行业应该从波音、空中客车、巴西航空工业公司和其他一些大型原始设备制造商那里得到什么？

CLF： 我的职业生涯经历了三个航空业低迷时期。这是第四个，显然是迄今为止最锐利的。他是一个非常不同的人。因此，毫无疑问，我们正处于一场明显的危机之中。那么我们应该期待什么呢？你发表声明说，新飞机计划的时间表已经推迟了几年。这可能是今天的共识。我会等几个月，看看这种共识是否属实。我确实相信有新的需求正在出现。而且还有一些技术正在迅速加速。我会看这个空间。也许你知道，如果我们在一年后谈论，我们会对即将发生的事情进行不同的讨论？当我确实怀疑推进技术的明显加速将支持可持续性。这包括新的混合动力、电动、氢和燃料电池。为什么？我认为这场大流行已经做了一些事情，也许我会强调一些事情。虽然它确实让一个新项目突然停止，这让我们所有人都想知道一些无视界技术是否可以更快地准备好，它们是否可以准备好，更快，从而与新的飞机问题相交。然后我认为大流行的第二个有趣的影响是可持续性变得更加重要，原因有几个。一个是我们听说过，我们通过这种病毒看到了一些自然的力量。我们已经看到，人们对大流行的一些恐惧实际上已经实现了。我相信这也意味着人们现在开始看到我们面临的另一个威胁，即全球变暖，实际上是一个真正的威胁。它正在发生，它可能发生。我们都需要尽自己的一份力量。我为 Solvay 为一家将可持续发展放在首位和中心位置的公司工作感到非常自豪。我们的激励措施的一部分，我们目标的一部分，我们文化的一部分，而不仅仅是长长的清单。它实际上转化为我们分配资源的方式。我相信航空航天业现在正朝着这个方向认真前进。显然，空中客车公司刚刚宣布了他们的 ZEROe 计划。这表明了做一些不同的事情的认真意图。所以这个推进和创新阶段，我们将在推进中看到，将会有一个非常非常有趣的领域。回到复合材料，我实际上相信这将是复合材料可以发挥作用的领域。也许我们可以稍后再谈。

JS： 是的，请向我们的听众澄清一下，您提到的 ZEROe 计划是空中客车公司在 9 月中旬宣布的开发氢燃料飞机的计划。所以我们谈论的是氢燃烧技术。空中客车公司宣布了三款使用氢气推动飞机的概念​​飞机。当然，是的，复合材料在那里的使用潜力很大，特别是因为空中客车公司正在谈论液态氢，液态氢必须保持在低温下。这带来了一系列技术挑战，我相信在接下来的几个月和几年内我们会听到很多关于这些挑战的信息。作为一个快速的后续问题，空中客车公司表示，他们希望这项技术到位，以便在 2035 年投入使用。从现在起 15 年，这似乎很长一段时间，但在商业航空航天领域，事实并非如此。我想知道你对此有何看法？你觉得它太激进了吗？或者看起来可行吗？或者我们拭目以待。

CLF： 我没有足够的知识来说明这是否过于保守或过于激进。我确实相信，我们作为一个行业将通过可持续推进的路线图，认为路线图将开始，并且已经从混合动力开始，并将转向电力推进。然后我们将去氢和氢燃料电池。而且我真的不知道它将如何进行，是否会有一些顺序路径或一些并发路径。但我确实相信，这些技术最终具有潜力。自喷气时代和航空航天时代开始以来，飞机一直在燃烧化石燃料。我相信这些类型技术的时机已经成熟。所以我欢迎公司在那里做出的努力。大多数飞机原始设备制造商和发动机制造商都在推动它们。当然，我相信还有很多问题需要解决。现在您提到了有关储氢和所需的整个基础设施以及所需的生态系统的问题。还会有很多其他的问题需要解决。但这就是我们来这里的目的。这就是科学和技术的用途。我可以告诉你，氢和电已经在我们的路线图中有一段时间了。因此，作为一个集团，索尔维，作为一家复合材料企业，我们已经充分考虑了我们可以用我们的技术做什么来解决我们不可避免的问题。我通常是一个乐观主义者。当科学和技术可以为人类的问题提供解决方案时，我始终是一个乐观主义者。我的头脑中并没有以科学的方式所需的所有科学和知识，但我很乐观，我相信我们可以非常有效地沿着这条道路前进。

JS： 我们将谈谈航空航天供应链。 It seems to me that Tier 2 and Tier 3 fabricators in the aerocomposites supply chain might be particularly vulnerable in the wake of the pandemic. Given Solvay's place in the supply chain, I assume you have some decent visibility into how this might play out or how this is playing out. I'm just wondering what your assessment is of the health of the supply chain and how it might be affected over the next five or so years.

CLF: I would say that this fact of the supply chain was was already in a challenging situation before the pandemic, and I think that the pandemic is making making things difficult. Very difficult. There is no doubt about that. I don't have a great crystal ball, but my belief is that we will see consolidation in this area. There are already some active M&A deals out there. I also believe we will see consolidation not just at the M&A level, but also as it pertains to the footprint and assets of the different players. Because obviously, you know, having a fragment and then disperse the footprint creates a significant fixed costs. And that becomes a part of that anatomy to live with when you have when you have a downturn. I would like to make a couple of other points. One is that a lot of the Tier 2 and Tier 3s in the industry have a lot of important competencies, and these competencies are needed. They're needed for commercial aerospace, they're very much needed for our defense industrial base, particularly here in the U.S. And it's important that those competencies are preserved. The second point I would like to make is that our belief that the ultimate success of any aerostructures manufacturer, whether it is a Tier 1, 2 or 3, is not necessarily tied to scale. But it’s actually tied to the ability to differentiate and innovate on automation, on digital, and of course, on materials and processes. I think we we have seen very clearly that transferring work to lower cost country as a nice finding in the short term, but is clearly not sustainable. Ultimately, what the industry needs to do is make some step changes to the production system. And what this means for us at Solvay is that we have a strong conviction that we need to continue to develop material technologies that can enable a production system upgrade through automation and through lean manufacturing. We have launched over the years a lot of technologies in the areas of resin infusion, press forming, out-of-autoclave thermoplastic manufacturing, structural bonding. I have a strong belief that that materials are key to the upgrade of the production system. And I believe that the fabricators that are able to see that will be the ones who will be very successful in the future. Maybe one last point to make is, at the time of downturn, there is clearly an opportunity for the industry and the supply chain to look at adjacencies. As I said, this industry has a lot of competencies. There are not too many companies in the world that know how to make parts, complex parts, highly loaded parts out of composites. And I believe these competencies can be leveraged in new markets. We've seen some examples of that, you know, just one example that comes to my mind is Spirit AeroSystems working on Hyperloop. But it can be added. So I believe these companies should absolutely try and leverage their expertise and use it as an opportunity to explore diversification outside of aerospace and defense.

JS: You mentioned competencies. And I want to follow up on that real quick.
Because I think you're right. I think even if you were a Tier 2 or Tier 3 supplier who maybe is vulnerable right now, it's it's entirely possible that you have some tactical advantage or competencies that make your place in the supply chain particularly important, and you said those should be preserved. I'm wondering how that preservation might take place or how do you see that happening?

CLF: It's not easy, obviously, to do that in the current environment. I have a couple of thoughts. One, I do believe that governments can and should help. And what I mean is not by handing any company subsidies. That's not what we what we need as an industry. But I believe that what government could do is make sure that they selectively support the ability to maintain and develop some of those key competencies. And I believe government needs some education on what those key competencies are. But I think this is where public money will be very well spent. And then, in addition to that, I believe, we are all in a situation where we have probably less dollars to invest than we had in the past. Because of course, you know, the future cash flow for the next few years are not what we expected. And I believe it’s important that we make the right choice. And that's true for the aerostructures manufacturer. And it's true for us. And by making the right choice is a means to ensure that we continue to invest on the competencies that make sense, and continue to hire the people that have competencies that we are going to need in four or five years. And you know, he's better than me, this is a long-term industry. And if we take too much of a short-term approach, we are going to lose. So we need to continuously remind ourselves we are in this for the long haul. And we are in business because we are able to create value through innovation. I think that's what I would offer.

JS: You mentioned thermoplastics a few minutes ago; I want to talk about that next. Solvay is aggressively developing thermoplastic solutions for a lot of applications, but next-generation aerostructures in particular, I know, are important. However, thermoplastics use and large structures is still relatively new, or it's a novel concept. These materials still need to be tested and qualified. I know some of that's going on right now. What can you tell us about how you see qualification proceeding for thermoplastics use in large aerostructures?

CLF: You know, thermoplastic composites have been qualified and have been flying for a couple of decades. And there are customers out there who have ambitious plans to increase adoption of thermoplastic composites in aerospace. And we are we are qualified in a lot of those applications. Now, we have not seen very large-scale adoption of thermoplastic composites. And part of the reason is that in the past that supply chain was not was not ready. Today, I believe that the scale, most raw material and the price is there. And there are more companies that have learned and made the investment on what is needed to use thermoplastic composites. I believe there is work to do. I look at the work work to do in the areas of fully exploiting some of the advantages and thermoplastics. Now, one example that comes to mind is welding. Now if we are able to certify thermoplastic welded structure, this will be a huge enabler, because it will open up the ability to use thermoplastics on large primary structure. So that's something that needs work and needs to be done. Ultimately, I believe that the industry will continue to be interested in thermoplastics because they are an enabler for both affordability and rate. I think it's fair to say that just because of the slowdown of the industry, and therefore the limited availability of new programs, this adoption will slow down. That's just a natural effect of not having too many new problems. Retrofitting into existing programs is not always too easy. But I think we can get the drivers will be there. We need the we need to continue to develop the needed technologies, whether it is in-situ consolidation, welding, new polymers that enable new processes, we all need to continue to develop that. And lastly, something I've seen over the years and is a consistent lesson, when I spoke about as being material agnostic. It's very important that the when a technology is selected that whoever selects that technology keeps a very open eye. And technology is not selected because of fashion or because of what height at the moment, because it actually provides a better balance of cost and performance, and ability to meet rate that is ultimately what we care about. So the trap we all need to avoid adopting technologies for the wrong application. This is a sure way to, you know, create frustration and really not capture the value of these new technologies.

JS: I think what you mean is that we wouldn't adopt a technology for the sake of adopting a technology if it's not a good fit. My perception is that the airlines themselves, who are the customers of Boeing and Airbus, seem to favor composites. I don't know if they favor them so much that it makes composites inevitable for all major aerostructures and all aircraft in the future. But I do wonder if you have any thoughts about how customer preference influences decision making, when it comes to aircraft development?

CLF: I have a single view on this. I think only an airline cares about
not accumulating cost and maintenance costs and passenger comfort.
Any any preference is not driven by just liking one material over the other. But it's driven by the ability of OEMs to leverage these technologies to address these needs. Now composites have been able to address these needs, you know, the use of composites on commercial aircraft, the fuselage, a wing, has contributed to reduce fuel cost and or reduce maintenance costs by extending the intervals of maintenance and improving passenger comfort in terms of humidity and pressure inside the plane. So ultimately, that's why airlines are kind of welcome composites because they have solved the problems they have. I talk to airline executives quite a bit, and as you would expect, I don't think there is a particular preference for one versus another material. The clear preference is to buy a plane that consumes less fuel, doesn’t have very high maintenance costs and has an acquisition cost that is affordable to the airline. Composites are great that will help with that.

JS: I would like to turn out to the automotive industry. I think the automotive automotive has always been the composites industry’s Holy Grail. While composites use in high-volume vehicles is slowly increasing, I think it's fair to say that the pace of conversion of automotive parts to composites is probably proceeding more slowly than the industry would like. Automotive OEMs typically point to material cost and cycle time as barriers. I'm wondering if you still think that's a fair assessment of composites placed on the automotive industry? And do we need to adjust our expectations of of the automotive industry in terms of its adoption of composite materials?

CLF: Yeah, first of all I would say that they are proceeding more slowly than the industry would like. That's very true. But the speed at which these progress does not really surprised me, and this is my personal perspective on that. I believe that if the automotive industry looks at composites purely for lightweighting, the ability of composites to be adopted will be limited. It's a very basic and obvious fact that, you know, saving 1 kilogram on a plane will always be a lot more compelling than saving 1 kilogram in a car. So, I believe that what the automotive industry needs to do is to really think about composites and their benefits beyond lightweighting. There are many other advantages that composites allow. That is flexibility in design, that is function integration, that is corrosion resistance. Now, even in aerospace, I can give you a few examples where the primary reason for using composites has not been weight, it has been something else. So I believe that the industry, the automotive industry needs to embrace that. And we as a composite community need to continue educating the automotive industry. And I think, anytime we go and try to promote composites purely because they are lighter than steel, or aluminum, we are unlikely to win the trades. It's pretty hard to win, especially for people who already have sound costs in terms of infrastructure and people expertise. So that I believe is the key.

JS: All right, so I'm going ask you the same customer question I asked you about aerospace. I should say my my opinion is that the the car-buying public — the customers of the auto dealers who are are buying vehicles — don't ultimately don't really care what materials were used to fabricate their car. And they probably don't care that one car weighs more or less than another car. And I'm wondering if you think that's a consideration that we need to think about? Or does the decision-making not trickle down into the supply chain from the customer that way?

CLF: No, I think Jeff said you said very wisely. Ultimately, I think that the people who buy a car, I'd say 99% of them do not really care about what material the car is made off. I actually suspect if you did a survey and asked people on the street what materials their cars were made of, they probably wouldn't be able to answer. I don't think that's a driver. I believe the driver is, again, how much your car cost, how comfortable it is, what are the aesthetics. It is true that there is a segment of the market that looks for super luxury and high luxury element where the customer may be willing to pay more to have composite interiors on a car or composite hood.. But that's a small part of the market. The big part of the market ultimately cares about what what I just described. And so we as an industry need to recognize that. We need to earn our way into applications. People are not just going buy a car because it uses composites. And we don't have that entitlement, we need to create value.

JS: And how does how does all of this apply to the hybrid-electric and all-electric automotive market? What is Solvay's thinking on that and is there a better case to be made for composites use an EVs or are we talking about similar metrics and similar drivers?

CLF: I would say that in case where you actually are developing a new platform that requires a new infrastructure and new design and new challenges, that opens up a new opportunity for composites because there is no inertia and no need to maintain some of the previous paradigm, so that makes the ground a little bit more fertile for a new material technology. Again, that technology still needs to earn its right to be used. From a Solvay
perspective, what I would say is that we are very excited about the drive for electrification and hydrogen. Beyond composites, Solvay has a number of technologies that can be used in batteries, fuel cells, and on containment structures for those. I do believe that there will be a good ability for us that way. I mean, of course, is, is clear that, you know, none of this will happen overnight. But we need to create an ecosystem, certainly for hydrogen, but we are very excited, and I know for sure our customers are very excited about some of these technologies and any problems we can solve.

JS: I want to circle back to something you mentioned very early on, you were talking about designed freedom and industrialization. And you mentioned the variety of resin and fiber types available, and different processing types. And you could throw in tooling types as well. A designer and a fabricator has lots of options to solve manufacturing problems or challenges. This is sort of the advantage of the material that has brought us to this point. But you also mentioned the need for industrialization. And some people say call it standardization. And I'm wondering where you see the industry on this path to industrialization? And what are the technologies, either materials or processes, that you think will enable this this migration toward greater industrialization and standardization?

CLF: So it's a long answer, but I will try and give you some of the highlights. I think if we start from 60,000-feet level, like I hinted before, something that will enable this is the ability to really use all the tools that computational power increases and has now enabled. You know, I'm not going to use the buzzword of digital, because I think that word is being terribly abused, particularly by consultants. I just want to think if the power of AI and machine learning, particularly deep learning. So, you know, the ability to take data that is unstructured and make sense out of it as a huge enabler. Now, I actually believe that by being an industry that is so inherently complex, we will take a lot more advantage than other industries from advances in this area. I mean, this is something overarching that can help with over the industrialization. Now, if I go down at 30,000-feet level, my view is what I said to before. I believe that there is a tremendous opportunity to improve processes. By improving processes, I mean making processes that are leaner than what we have today, processes where a structure doesn't move 20 times in the factory, you can have a more of a single-part flow; processes where you don't need fancy tools or expensive capex to make the parts and processes where takt time can be a shorter than it is today. Now, obviously, I come from a big long bias perspective, being in a material business. But I firmly believe that composite materials technology can enable these processes. And they can generally enable the ability of out-of-autoclave to potentially eliminate a monument in the middle of a factory. Take the ability of technologies like the Double Diaphragm Forming technology that we developed internally and launched several months ago, to reduce the takt time to just a few minutes. So my simple view on this is, let's make sure we use all the computational tools that we are so fortunate to have and that I didn't have when I was in university 25 years ago. And, and then let's continue to use the
materials to enable processes.

JS: Alright, and so my final question for you, Carmelo, is a simple one. What keeps you up at night? What what are your concerns about either Solvay or the industry that consume your thoughts in your idle moments?

CLF: So I don't know if I have the answer you're looking for, but let me try. I actually sleep better at night than I used to earlier in my career. I think one of the reasons is that I felt that my job as a leader was to be ever active, ever worried, and have a lot of reasons to stay up at night. And you know, don't get me wrong, I am still worried and I still have concerns. But I've actually learned that if I manage to keep calm and steady mind, I do a better job at addressing concerns than being perpetually worried. I will not give you something that keeps me up at night in the frame of Solvay or even the industry, I will share something that keeps me up at night in general. As a father, and as someone who is a natural optimist, and is actually about education, and our education is today probably undervalued compared to what it was in the past. You know, I believe that education is what will help all of us be in a better future. Education is what we need to inspire and motivate the young people today. And now I have a very simple belief that leadership education happens in a family and business and science education happen in schools. So what keeps me up at night is that both family and schools maybe have a little bit forgotten the importance of education. And you know if I can link it to our industry, so I try at least to a little bit answer your question. Now our industry is based on science and technology. And I strongly believe that the whole education system needs to do a better job of developing young people who are excited and are competent about science and technology. And I of course believe that basic leadership education, know how you can be a leader and inspiring people around you and lead people to a better place, is key. Again, I have the belief that that's an education that that has to happen in family. So, maybe I'm giving you a bit more of a philosophical answer than you were looking for. But that's ultimately what I will call keeping me up at night.

JS: You mentioned that you feel like education is not valued the way it used to be. I imagine you have some thoughts about why that is. Do you feel like this is a cultural problem? Is this a political problem? Maybe it's a little bit of both. How do you what do you see as the root of this problem that you see?

CLF: I think it is a little bit of both. It will look like now I'm speaking out of both sides of my mouth. I spent a lot of the time and during our discussion
talking about the benefits of computational powers and what it today is called technology. I actually do believe that has been a bit of a double-edged sword. I believe that we as a society are relying a little bit too much on technology to address the basic needs that family and school need to provide. I still believe in the value of formal education that comes from a book and education from the family. And I believe that the world of, you know, apps, technology, tools, and proliferation of devices and cell phone, has not always been used to our advantage. And I also believe that governments overall are not placing the right importance on STEM education. You know, thinking about developing people afterwards, when they are in the workforce, is very late. It's not a sustainable way to to develop or to develop people. So I believe we all need a bit of a wake up call is area.

JS: I want to bring this back to something you said earlier. You mentioned the fact that you look for in employees good work habits — you know, curiosity and interest — that probably drive innovation and creativity, which is a value to you and Solvay. I'm wondering if traditional education, pursued over time by students, develops some of those characteristics and habits that you value? And I wonder if that's part of what you see going on as well?

CLF: Yeah, I think it is. I believe that it was ultimately — and it's been a long time since I was, was a child myself — I believe that children are inherently extremely curious, children are extremely excited by exploring and by solving problems. And you know, ultimately that can be very happy. Every single day I've worked in this business has been the ability to do that, so what I really would like is that we help our children discover or rediscover that. Be excited about seeing a spaceship going to the moon, being excited about the engine of a fighter jet, being excited about having a plane that you can pilot from your room. So that's something that I believe will provide inspiration. And I think it is our job to inspire the younger generation and have them understand that, you know, ultimately, the answer in addressing humanity's problem is going to be through science and technology. Nothing else.

JS: All right, Carmelo. Well, I appreciate your time today. This has been a great conversation. And I want to thank you for joining me here on CW Talks.

CLF: Thank you Jeff. I have enjoyed very much our discussion and it's been a pleasure to be with you. Thanks for having me. Thank you.