4.7 Article

Recovery of active cathode materials from lithium-ion batteries using froth flotation

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.susmat.2018.e00062

关键词

Recycling; Lithium-ion battery; Froth flotation; Physical separation

资金

  1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Michigan Technological University [SU839299]
  2. MTU I-Corps Site Program
  3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [SU839299]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An ability to separate battery electrode materials while preserving functional integrity is essential to dose the loop of material use in lithium-ion batteries. However, a low-energy and low-cost separation system that selectively recovers electrode materials has not yet been established. In this study, froth flotation experiments were carried out with a variety of new and spent lithium-ion batteries using kerosene as the collector. The products were characterized using thermogravimetric and chemical analysis. It was found that over 90% of anode materials were floated in froth layers, while 10-30% of cathode materials were floated. Thermogravimetric analysis showed that the presence of binders and conductive additives might be responsible for the partial floatability of the liberated cathode materials. Separability of mixed electrode materials was evaluated using a modified procedure based on release analysis. Results showed that the froth flotation process using kerosene as the collector produced a tailing product having cathode materials of higher purity than those obtained without kerosene. For spent lithium-ion batteries, a low purity of cathode materials in tailings might be improved by fine grinding, at which freshly liberated hydrophobic surfaces are exposed and consequently anode materials become floatable. The present result confirms that the froth flotation technique is a viable and versatile technique in producing high purity cathode materials from lithium-ion batteries. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. 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