4.7 Article

Recovering Fe, Mn and Li from LiMn1-xFexPO4 cathode material of spent lithium-ion battery by gradient precipitation

Journal

SUSTAINABLE MATERIALS AND TECHNOLOGIES
Volume 36, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.susmat.2023.e00625

Keywords

Spent lithium-ion battery; LiMn1-xFexPO4 cathode material; Valuable element; Gradient precipitation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, an effective method based on simple gradient precipitation was proposed for the recovery of Fe, Mn, and Li from spent lithium manganese iron phosphate (LMFP) cathode material. The results showed that 100% Fe, 99.54% Mn, and 100% Li in the cathode material were successfully leached and recovered. Economic analysis indicated that the process had potential for large-scale application with good economic benefits.
Lithium manganese iron phosphate (LiMn1-xFexPO4, LMFP) has been applied in electric vehicles due to combining the performance advantages of LiFePO4 (LFP) and LiMnPO4 (LMP). Because of its more complex composition than LFP, the comprehensive recovery of LMFP remains a challenge. In this study, an effective method for recovery of Fe, Mn and Li from spent LMFP cathode material based on simple gradient precipitation was proposed. Firstly, the recovery of valuable metals by gradient precipitation was proved to be feasible by theoretical calculation. Then, 100% Fe, 99.54% Mn, and 100% Li in the spent LMFP cathode material were leached under the conditions of H2SO4 concentration of 1.5 mol.L-1, liquid-solid (L/S) ratio of 6: 1, temperature of 85 degrees C and reaction time of 60 min. Subsequently, 96.52% Fe, 98.46% Mn and 96.06% Li in the leaching solution were recovered by gradient precipitation in the form of phosphate at pH values of 1, 5.5 and 12, respectively. Moreover, economic analysis was conducted and the whole process had potential for large-scale application with good economic benefits.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available