On the sustainability of lithium ion battery industry – A review and perspective

Electric car battery: An overview on global demand, recycling and future approaches towards sustainability.

Sustainable value chain of retired lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles

/pdf/a-review-on-second-life-of-li-ion-batteries-prospects-1dlculjn.pdf

A review on second-life of Li-ion batteries: prospects, challenges, and issues

Critical review of life cycle assessment of lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles: A lifespan perspective

With the rapid development of electric vehicles and portable electronics, lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) are increasingly widely used in our daily life. At the same time, how to deal with the spent LIBs has been a hot study topic as well. 383 relevant articles were obtained in Web of Science Core Collection and a bibliometrics analysis about the recycling of spent LIBs was conducted by Excel, BibExcel and Pajek. According to the analytical results, the research of LIBs recycling has been growing fast and relevant achievements will continue to increase in the future. China is the most active country in this field. Central South University and Beijing Institute of Technology in China is the most productive single and collaborative institution, respectively. Journal of Power Sources has published the most articles compared with other journals. On the basis of the statistical data hydrometallurgical process with acid leaching and valuable metals has been the main recycling method and object of study. Other routes and components also received attention and have potential to be developed and recycled in the future. Before the complete recycling system is established, there would stillbe much detailed work in many respects to be accomplished to tackle the coming wave of spent LIBs in the near future. This article has performed a quantitative analysis of the development tendency about the recycling methods of spent lithium-ion batteries and will provide experienced reference for intended researchers interested in this field.

Development tendency and future response about the recycling methods of spent lithium-ion batteries based on bibliometrics analysis

Lithium-air, lithium-sulfur, and sodium-ion, which secondary battery category is more environmentally friendly and promising based on footprint family indicators?

Battery electric vehicles (BEVs) have been widely publicized. Their driving performances depend mainly on lithium-ion batteries (LIBs). Research on this topic has been concerned with the battery pack’s integrative environmental burden based on battery components, functional unit settings during the production phase, and different electricity grids during the use phase. We adopt a synthetic index to evaluate the sustainability of battery packs. A life cycle assessment (LCA) is used to reveal the aspects of global warming potential (GWP), water consumption, and ecological impact during the two phases. An integrative indicator, the footprint-friendly negative index (FFNI), is combined with footprint family indicators of battery packs and electricity sources. We investigate two cases of 1 kg battery production and 1 kWh battery production to assess nickel–cobalt–manganese (NMC) and lithium–iron phosphate (LFP) battery packs and compare their degrees of environmental friendliness. Then, we break down the battery pack to identify the key factors influencing the environmental burden and use sensitivity analysis to analyze the causes. Moreover, we evaluate the environmental impact of battery packs during the use phase among different regions. Regardless of the functional unit (FU), the weights of the carbon footprint (CF), water footprint (WF), and ecological footprint (EF) are approximately the same. The results of the integrative environmental indicator, the FFNI, illustrate that the LFP is approximately 0.014, which is lower than that of the NMC battery pack in the mass production case. When using energy units as the FU, the FFNI of the NMC is 0.015, which reflects a lower environmental burden than that of other battery packs. In the use phase, 1kWh electricity consumption in China and Europe has the highest and lowest FFNI, respectively. When breaking down the battery-pack components, the simplified model advocates the cathode as the major contributor that determines the total environmental performance. In the following sensitivity analysis, the battery management system (BMS) is found to be the most intensive part of the footprint of most battery packs. FU can influence the evaluation results. Developing proper renewable energy sources can reduce the footprints of battery packs during the use phase. The positive electrode pastes in the battery cell, BMS, and packaging in the battery pack can influence the environmental burden. Adopting green materials in sections like the BMS may be a specific measure to enhance the environmental friendliness of a battery pack during the production phase.

The environmental footprint of electric vehicle battery packs during the production and use phases with different functional units

With the rapid increase in production of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) and environmental issues arising around the world, cathode materials, as the key component of all LIBs, especially need to be environmentally sustainable. However, a variety of life cycle assessment (LCA) methods increase the difficulty of environmental sustainability assessment. Three authoritative LCAs, IMPACT 2002+, Eco-indicator 99(EI-99), and ReCiPe, are used to assess three traditional marketization cathode materials, compared with a new cathode model, FeF3(H2O)3/C. They all show that four cathode models are ranked by a descending sequence of environmental sustainable potential: FeF3(H2O)3/C, LiFe0.98Mn0.02PO4/C, LiFePO4/C, and LiCoO2/C in total values. Human health is a common issue regarding these four cathode materials. Lithium is the main contributor to the environmental impact of the latter three cathode materials. At the midpoint level in different LCAs, the toxicity and land issues for LiCoO2/C, the non-renewable resource consumption for LiFePO4/C, the metal resource consumption for LiFe0.98Mn0.02PO4/C, and the mineral refinement for FeF3(H2O)3/C show relatively low environmental sustainability. Three LCAs have little influence on total endpoint and element contribution values. However, at the midpoint level, the indicator with the lowest environmental sustainability for the same cathode materials is different in different methodologies.

https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9717/7/2/83/pdf

Yuchen Hu

Papers

Development tendency and future response about the recycling methods of spent lithium-ion batteries based on bibliometrics analysis

Lithium-air, lithium-sulfur, and sodium-ion, which secondary battery category is more environmentally friendly and promising based on footprint family indicators?

The environmental footprint of electric vehicle battery packs during the production and use phases with different functional units

Environmental Sustainability Assessment of Typical Cathode Materials of Lithium-Ion Battery Based on Three LCA Approaches

State-of-health estimation for the lithium-ion battery based on gradient boosting decision tree with autonomous selection of excellent features