Abstract
This study presents a review of how the end-of-life (EOL) stage is modelled in life cycle assessment (LCA) studies of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs). Twenty-five peer-reviewed journal and conference papers that consider the whole LIB life cycle and describe their EOL modelling approach sufficiently were analyzed. The studies were categorized based on two archetypal EOL modelling approaches in LCA: The cutoff (no material recovery, possibly secondary material input) and EOL recycling (material recovery, only primary material input) approaches. It was found that 19 of the studies followed the EOL recycling approach and 6 the cutoff approach. In addition, almost a third of the studies deviated from the expected setup of the two methods by including both material recovery and secondary material input. Such hybrid approaches may lead to double counting of recycling benefits by both including secondary input (as in the cutoff approach) and substituting primary materials (as in the EOL recycling approach). If the archetypal EOL modelling approaches are not followed, it is imperative that the modelling choices are well-documented and motivated to avoid double counting that leads to over- or underestimations of the environmental impacts of LIBs. Also, 21 studies model hydrometallurgical treatment, and 17 completely omit waste collection.
Highlights
Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) have been widely used as power and energy storage components in consumer electronics and portable devices, such as mobile phones and laptops, since the 1990s [1].Compared to other commercially available battery types, LIBs offer, for example, high energy density, long calendar and cycle lives, as well as high energy efficiency [2]
Before presenting the review procedure (Section 4) and the findings (Section 5), we provide a brief description of relevant treatment and material recovery processes for spent LIBs (Section 2), as well as a description of standard approaches for modelling the EOL stage according to generic life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology (Section 3)
The results of this study confirm the dominance of these two methods in battery LCA studies
Summary
Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) have been widely used as power and energy storage components in consumer electronics and portable devices, such as mobile phones and laptops, since the 1990s [1]. Compared to other commercially available battery types, LIBs offer, for example, high energy density, long calendar and cycle lives, as well as high energy efficiency [2]. Rapid adoption of LIBs in a range of applications within the energy and transport sectors has placed them at the core of several emerging and growing technologies addressing energy security, climate change, and fossil fuel dependency. For the development of electromobility, and road-bound electric vehicles in particular, LIBs have grown to become the dominant battery technology [2,3,4]. In the wake of the LIB technology success, there are environmental and resource challenges. With global demand almost doubling every five years, concerns about material availability have been raised, especially for lithium and cobalt [2,4,5,6,7,8]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
