4.8 Article

Scalable Direct Recycling of Cathode Black Mass from Spent Lithium-Ion Batteries

期刊

ADVANCED ENERGY MATERIALS
卷 13, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/aenm.202203093

关键词

cathode black mass; direct recycling; lithium-ion batteries; purification; regeneration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

End-of-life lithium-ion batteries are accumulating at an alarming rate, posing a threat to environmental health. The dominant lithium-ion battery cathode material, LiNixCoyMnzO2 (NCM), represents a significant portion of this waste. The integration of pretreatment and cathode relithiation has been demonstrated in a lab-scale operation, showcasing 100% electrochemical performance recovery and a promising 91% yield rate. This process clears the way for direct recycling to move from lab to industry scale with profitability.
End of life (EoL) lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) are piling up at an intimidating rate, which is alarming for environmental health. With further expected rapid growth of LIB use, the magnitude of spent battery accumulation is also expected to grow. LiNixCoyMnzO2 (NCM) cathode materials are a dominant chemistry in high energy LIBs, and make up a huge portion of this waste accumulation. Direct recycling is one of the most promising ways to turn this waste to wealth, but has been limited to lab-scale, due to lack of robustness, namely the tedious pretreatment required that involves toxic organic solvents. Herein, a process that integrates the pretreatment and relithiation of the cathode black mass is demonstrated. Cathode material from EoL electric vehicle (EV) batteries is treated in a 100 g per batch operation and the regenerated cathode active material demonstrates 100% electrochemical performance recovery, with 91% yield rate, and shows promise for further scale up. This process has the advantages of integration, scalability, and universality, which clears the barricade for direct recycling to move from lab to industry scale with considerable profitability.

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