4.7 Article

Lithium-ion battery 2nd life used as a stationary energy storage system: Ageing and economic analysis in two real cases

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
卷 272, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122584

关键词

Electric vehicle; Battery second life; Stationary energy storage system; Battery ageing research; Economic analysis

资金

  1. ACCIO [COMRDI15-1-0036]
  2. European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) under the RIS3CAT Energy Community
  3. Spanish government (ReViBE project) [TEC2015-63899-C3-1-R]
  4. Generalitat de Catalunya, AGAUR scholarship [2016 DI 060]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Electric vehicles (EVs) are considered a viable alternative to internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs) and as a result of recent advances in battery technologies, sales are increasing year by year. However, recycling these batteries at the end of their useful life in the car can be a problem because they contain materials that can harm human health and the environment. Thus, car manufacturers consider that when those batteries have finished their first life in an EV, they still contain enough energy and capacity to be used in a stationary energy storage systems (SESSs), significantly contributing towards an increased sustainable transport sector in the future. This study focuses the analysis on the viability of a SESS installation, considering battery ageing from an economic perspective in two different real scenarios in Spain. This study simulates the electricity bill cost with and without SESS and calculates the annual savings accordingly. Following, the return on investment (ROI) of installing a SESS is calculated. Afterwards the lifetime of the batteries is calculated in order to compare it with the ROI and to decide if the installation of a SESS is advisable from an economic point of view. Major results indicate that any feasibility study of installing a SESS must be studied from an economic and battery ageing point of view. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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