4.8 Article

Second life and recycling: Energy and environmental sustainability perspectives for high-performance lithium-ion batteries

Journal

SCIENCE ADVANCES
Volume 7, Issue 45, Pages -

Publisher

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abi7633

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) CAREER Award [CBET-1643244]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Research shows that LIBs with higher specific energy perform better in terms of lifecycle environmental performance, but their environmental benefits from second life application are less pronounced. Direct cathode recycling is found to be the most effective method in reducing environmental impacts, while hydrometallurgical recycling has limited sustainability benefits for high-performance LIBs. Battery design with less aluminum and alternative anode materials, like silicon-based anode, could enable more sustainable LIB recycling.
Second life and recycling of retired automotive lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) have drawn growing attention, as large volumes of LIBs will retire in the coming decade. Here, we illustrate how battery chemistry, use, and recycling can influence the energy and environmental sustainability of LIBs. We find that LIBs with higher specific energy show better life cycle environmental performances, but their environmental benefits from second life application are less pronounced. Direct cathode recycling is found to be the most effective in reducing life cycle environmental impacts, while hydrometallurgical recycling provides limited sustainability benefits for high-performance LIBs. Battery design with less aluminum and alternative anode materials, such as silicon-based anode, could enable more sustainable LIB recycling. Compared to directly recycling LIBs after their electric vehicle use, carbon footprint and energy use of LIBs recycled after their second life can be reduced by 8 to 17% and 2 to 6%, respectively.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available