4.8 Article

Direct recycling of shorted solid-state electrolytes enabled by targeted recovery

期刊

ENERGY STORAGE MATERIALS
卷 52, 期 -, 页码 365-370

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ensm.2022.08.017

关键词

Solid-state batteries; Garnet; Recycling; Targeted recovery; Sustainability

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [92163120]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study provides a targeted recovery strategy for recycling short-circuited garnet-type solid-state batteries by investigating the reaction between garnet grains and dendritic lithium. The results show that annealing at a high temperature can rapidly recover the shorted garnets and restore their electrochemical properties, significantly extending their lifespans. Economic and environmental analysis demonstrates the advantages of this targeted recovery strategy in terms of reducing fabrication time, energy consumption, and production costs.
Solid-state batteries (SSBs) present an opportunity for simultaneously offering high energy density and safety. Yet sustainable developments of SSBs have been hindered due to the dendrite-induced short-circuit of solid-state electrolytes (SSEs) and the lack of recycling routes. Here we provide a targeted recovery strategy to directly recycle shorted garnet-type Li6.5La3Zr1.5Ta0.5O12 SSEs based on a detailed investigation of Li dendrites. We find that garnet grains can in-situ react with dendritic Li and its derivate by a one-step annealing at 900 degrees C, which enables a rapid recovery of shorted garnets. Moreover, electrochemical properties of garnets can be well restored even after multiple short-circuits, significantly extending their lifespans. Economic and environmental analysis shows the superiorities of targeted recovery strategy in thrifting fabrication time, energy consumptions and production costs. Such a simple yet efficient recovery strategy would advance sustainable developments of solid-state batteries.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据