RE:RE:ANATOMY OF THE FLOAT AND UPSIDE POTENTIALIt is not a stretch at all to consider Nano displacing current practices, as the current process (95% China based) is dirty as Hell. The IRA has the potential to deman cleaner processes, and could be a massive boost for Nano, but there are some current loopholes that need to be closed.
For example, what if the dirty side of processing remained in China, and just final processing was done here? That's what I mean by a loophole. And there is a bit of a problem currently in that SO much of LFP is China based, and the plants here are still only on paper, that it's difficult to demand everything the IRA would like to accomplish when China is currently essentially the only game in town. So it's a balancing act as to how far the IRA can push to clean things up.
The bigger issue, and the reason the IRA came to be in the first place, is that there is a realization that China essentially currently holds all the keys to LFP. Geopolitical tensions are now causing a major rethink to onshore production on several fronts, LFP being one of them. We saw, and continue to see, the same thing with chip production. Onshoring is the name of the game now to cut down reliance should geopolitical tensions boil over. Even Taiwan, the biggest chip producer, is considered a risk, given China thinks it's theirs.
So there are a LOT of moving parts here. But really, the Nano story is simple and on track. Cheaper, faster, CLEANER, and longer lasting. It doesn't get any better than that. IRA aside, Nano will do very well. Anything onshore already negates shipping costs from China and time lag, both of which are wins. Should IRA gain the teeth that we want and close the loopholes, then it becomes jetfuel for Nano's share price.
Will this all happen? If only to ultimately negate the reliance on China, I would say a definite yes.