4.7 Article

One-step leaching mechanism for total elemental recovery from spent lithium-ion batteries utilizing ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jece.2023.110275

关键词

One-step leaching; Spent LIBs; Ethylene diamine tetraacetic; Synergistic reduction; Valuable metals

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A process for leaching valuable metals from spent lithium-ion batteries using ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) has been proposed. The process achieved a recovery rate of up to 99.9% under optimal conditions. Kinetic and thermodynamic analysis revealed the control mechanism and activation energy of the leaching process. Furthermore, individual ions in the leachate were separated using different reagents, allowing for recycling.
A process capable of leaching full component valuable metals including Ni, Co, Mn, and Li from spent lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) without additional reducing agents has been proposed. As a strong chelating organic acid, ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) is suitable for recovering up to 99.9 % of each metal element under optimal conditions of EDTA concentration of 0.5 M, liquid-solid ratio of 30:1 mL g(-1), the temperature of 353 K, and leaching duration of 2 h. Kinetic analysis shows that the entire leaching process is controlled by the chemical reaction, accompanied by the apparent activation energy of 56.6 kJ mol(-1) for Ni, 68.2 kJ mol(-1) for Co, 49.5 kJ mol(-1) for Mn, and 53.0 kJ mol(-1) for Li, respectively. The thermodynamic mechanism indicates that EDTA acts as a proton chelating agent and Fe/Al exhibits a synergistic reduction effect during leaching process. In addition, the whole process is divided into three stages, where the behavior of each substance is specified. The individual ions in the leachate are separated by precipitation with different reagents and the filtrate can be recycled for the next stage of leaching, which also provides a novel approach for an industrial one-step leaching process.

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

4.7
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