University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Lithium-ion batteries (LIB) industrial recycling and policies

(USC Thesis Other)

Lithium-ion batteries (LIB) industrial recycling and policies

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Copyright 2021 Anas Alhaddad

Lithium-ion batteries (LIB) industrial recycling and policies

by

Anas Alhaddad

A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC Viterbi School of Engineering
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF SCIENCE
(Environmental Engineering)

December 2021
ii

Acknowledgments
I would first like to thank my thesis advisor Dr.Kelly Sanders. Though the circumstances
this year were not the best, she was always available when I ran into a trouble spot or had questions
about my research or writing. Given the relatively short amount of time allocated to complete this
thesis, she gave me freedom and steered me in the right the direction when she saw fit, and for that
I will be forever thankful.
I would also like to thank the committee members, Dr.George Ban-Weiss and Dr.Adam
Smith who despite their busy schedule joined the committee and helped throughout the past year.
Without you all, this would have not been possible.
I would like to also express my gratitude for my family and my sponsors “Kuwait Cultural
Office” for being there for me during this hard year.

iii

Table of Contents

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................ ii
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ v
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... vi
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. vii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT ...................................................................................................... 3
1.3 OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................................... 4
1.4 SCOPE OF STUDY ............................................................................................................... 4
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY ................................................................................................... 5
1.6 THESIS LAYOUT ................................................................................................................ 5
CHAPTER 2: RECYCLING PERSPECTIVE .......................................................................... 6
2.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 LITHIUM BATTERIES .......................................................................................................... 7
2.2.1 LIB Structure ................................................................................................................ 7
2.2.2 Failure Mechanisms ..................................................................................................... 8
2.2.3 Supply Chain of Raw Material ................................................................................... 10
2.3 INDUSTRIAL RECYCLING PROCESS .................................................................................. 16
CHAPTER 3: INDUSTRIAL RECYCLING CHALLENGES .............................................. 24
3.1 TECHNICAL ASPECTS ...................................................................................................... 25
3.2 ECONOMIC ASPECTS ....................................................................................................... 28
3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL & SAFETY ........................................................................................... 29
3.4 DATA COLLECTION ......................................................................................................... 29
3.5 IMPROVEMENT ................................................................................................................ 30
3.6 ROBOTIZING RECYCLING PROCESS ................................................................................. 31
3.7 RECYCLING LIB RESEARCH PROJECTS (EU) ................................................................... 33
CHAPTER 4: RECYCLING POLICY IMPLICATIONS & ORIENTATION ................... 37
4.1 POLICY-ORIENTED RECYCLING ............................................................................ 37
4.1.1 USA ............................................................................................................................. 38
4.1.2 Germany ..................................................................................................................... 39
iv

4.1.3 Japan .......................................................................................................................... 41
4.1.4 China .......................................................................................................................... 42
4.1.5 Other EU countries ..................................................................................................... 45
4.2 LESSONS FROM LAB ....................................................................................................... 46
4.3 POLICIES DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................. 49
4.3.1 Pilot Projects .............................................................................................................. 49
4.3.2 Market Creation ......................................................................................................... 50
4.3.3 Design ......................................................................................................................... 51
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................ 54
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 57

v

List of Tables
Table 2.1 : Pros and cons for current recycling methods (Mayyas et al., 2019) .......................... 18
Table 2.2 : Industrial recycling technologies adopted by numerous companies (Fan et al., 2020)
....................................................................................................................................................... 21
Table 3.1: Ongoing projects on LIB recycling under Faraday program (Melin, 2019) ................ 35
Table 4.1: Spent batteries regulations in China (Werner et al., 2020) .......................................... 45

vi

List of Figures
Figure 1.1: Distribution of Lithium production by country (Kahl, Pavón & Bertau, 2021) ........... 2
Figure 2.1: Overview of LIB components. (Kim et al., 2021)........................................................ 7
Figure 2.2: Rechargeable batteries degradation mechanisms (Fan et al., 2020) ............................. 9
Figure 2.3: LIB life cycle process in Chinese practice (Qiao et al., 2021) ................................... 14
Figure 2.4: Overall comparison of the three recycling methods for LIB (Harper et al., 2019) .... 17
Figure 2.5: Detailed stages of the pretreatment process (Kim et al., 2021). ................................. 19
Figure 2.6 : Map of the leading companies in LIB recycling (Li et al., 2018) ............................. 22
Figure 3.1: Battery recycling proposal in the future (Fan et al., 2020) ......................................... 24
Figure 3.2: Robot setup for dismantling LIB (Bai et al., 2020) .................................................... 33
Figure 4.1: LIB and LAB composition comparison (Bai et al., 2020) ......................................... 48
Figure 4.2: Recycling setup. For (a) BIGP (b) design for LIB. (Bai et al., 2020) ........................ 53

vii

Abstract
Lithium -ion batteries (LIB) are rechargeable batteries used in electronic devices due to its
efficiency and long service life. Lately, it has been introduced into the electrification of the
transportation system and power storage. The demand on LIB is expected to grow rapidly with the
shifting trend towards cleaner energy in an attempt to halt the environmental footprint produced
by the current fuel driven systems. The latest literature is focusing more on recycling spent LIB
mainly from electrical vehicles (EVs). Currently, the number of EVs on the road is not significant,
yet the number is expected to grow in the few years to come. The main challenges for recycling
spent LIB compared to conventional batteries (i.e., lead acid batteries), are due to the diversity of
the components, sizes and structure. As a result, the existing recycling methods, namely
pyrometallurgy, hydrometallurgy and direct method, are not efficient for sound recycling
outcomes due to technical, economic, quality, environmental and data collection hurdles.
Investing more time and money on the recycling infrastructures, research and development, and
techniques is pivotal for the environmental movement. Ongoing projects are taking place in this
regard mainly by manufacturing companies. However, more collaboration is required especially
by the governmental sector to formulate systematic policies and regulations. Currently, there are
No well-established oriented policies by leading countries in this field. Nonetheless, recycling
spent batteries seems to be inevitable due to the scarce of the raw materials used for manufacturing
LIB. Initiatives in recycling spent LIB by some countries such as China and Japan are noteworthy
even though it is far behind aspirations.
1

Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Introduction
The introduction of electronic devices such as cameras, notebooks and cell phones has resulted in
the demand for high-capacity rechargeable batteries to replace the lead acid batteries and nickel-
Cadmium batteries (Yoshino, 2012). Concentrated international research found that the compact,
rechargeable and efficient characteristics of (LIB) stand out compared to other types of batteries
(Armand & Tarascon, 2008; Manthiram, 2020; Whittingham, 2004; Whittingham, 1976). During
the 1990s, Sony sold the first Lithium -Ion Battery to support the revolution of portable electronics
for over three decades. Since then, the era of electrical mobility and storage of renewable energy
has been revolutionized by LIB.
There are various types of batteries depending on their type and application. Batteries can
be classified as primary and secondary batteries where the former describes the non-rechargeable
batteries while the later describes the rechargeable batteries (Dell & Rand, 2001). Nguyen, Fraiwan
& Choi, (2014) further classified batteries according to their basic operating principles as
electrochemical batteries, biofuel cells, lithium-ion batteries, and super capacitors. Batteries are
also classified based on their applications (Linden, 1995). For example, in mobile electronic
gadgets and electrical vehicles. In recent years, however, a great number of LIB have been
generated since consumer electronics stationary storage systems and other consumer items such as
power tools have been growing rapidly and are expected to grow more especially in electrical
powered vehicles (Beaudet et al., 2020). LIB are usually made up of materials from cathode, anode,
2

electrolyte and a separator. Some elements utilized in LIB are a specific hazard to our ecosystem
and human health, such as heavy metals and toxic electrolytes (Zheng et al., 2018).
Recent studies are focusing on LIB recycling due to the increasing demand and production
of this type of batteries. Recycling of spent LIB has received substantial attention in recent years
due to the growing demand for the relevant key metals and rising pressures regarding
environmental impacts from solid waste disposal (Lv et al., 2018). Recycled waste might offer a
range of advantages such as reducing pollution, preventing harmful consequences, reducing land
demand in landfills, lowering demand for scarce resources, and reducing the environmental costs
of mining raw resources (Gaines, 2014). LIB recycling is also critical in order to prevent future
Cobalt, Nickel and Lithium shortages, and to ensure that these technologies can have a sustainable
life cycle. In view of this, worldwide demand for Lithium (Li) in 2019 grew to substantially up to
77,200 tons. A continuing demand trend was shown by U.S. Geological Survey, using up to
188,000 tons. Although the world's Lithium reserve was 17 million tons by 2019, supply has been
critically assured, because 88% of the world's output is concentrated in Australia, Chile and China
as shown in Figure 1.1 (Kahl, Pavón & Bertau, 2021)

Figure 1.1: Distribution of Lithium production by country (Kahl, Pavón & Bertau, 2021)
3

Sommerville et el., (2020) stated that almost 95% of LIB ended up at waste disposal
facilities, and just 5% of the LIB are still recycled in the European Union in 2019. On the other
hand, Lead Acid Batteries (LAB) recycling system is now well-operated and can give expertise
and direction for LIB recycling. In the US, for instance, about 99% of LAB are recycled, greater
than any other everyday waste (for example, tires, paper, aluminum canisters, glass, etc.) (Huang,
Pan, Su & An, 2018). Collaborative policy-making towards more systemic measures must
therefore help to encourage investments in LIB recycling.
1.2 Problem Statement
Rechargeable batteries, especially, LIB , are developing rapidly as an attractive power storage
technology for renewables and electricity transport (Zhang et al., 2018). The intrinsic toxicity of
rechargeable batteries due to harmful components is nonetheless potentially dangerous to the
environment. In addition, enormous battery manufacturing consumes a great amount of resources,
some of which in nature are scarce (Goodenough & Kim, 2010). Thus, policies on battery recycling
and development of battery systems must be taken into serious consideration. Yet, a generally
acceptable battery recycling technology has been hindered by various hurdles. The limited battery
components and the high costs of existing recycling systems are among these problems (Fan et al.,
2020). In this work, the policies perspective requires a rigorous review of the rechargeable battery
recycling operation. The purpose of the study is therefore to give the latest basic research and
industrial battery recycling methods with particular emphasis on the recycling of Lithium-ion
batteries policies. For certain developed countries, especially the United States, the European
4

Union and China, the notion of sustainability through a discussion of the battery recycling life
cycle evaluation will be presented.
1.3 Objectives
The ultimate aim of this work is to review the current recycling technologies and policies of spent
Lithium batteries in developed countries. The following objectives to be fulfilled:
1- Review the latest development in lithium batteries and recycling techniques.
2- Evaluate the existing recycling policies for LIB in developed countries mainly, USA,
European Union, China and Japan.
1.4 Scope of study
This study focuses on the recycling policies of LIB since this type of batteries are produced
progressively worldwide and are the focus of recent studies. This study is a review in nature,
therefore the leading countries in the developed world will be selected to review their technologies
and policies for recycling spent batteries. These countries are the USA, European Union, China
and Japan. A newly suggested policy will be interpreted to aid the recycling of LIB.
5

1.5 Significance of study
Growing concerns regarding the burden that the retired batteries will pose on the environment,
specifically LIB. The shortage of Lithium is also a major drive for LIB recycling. More studies
focus on investing new methodologies and systematic policies for recycling this type of batteries.
Yet there are more challenges for a widely accepted methodology. Therefore, the significance of
this study is in investigating the challenges faced in developing a widely accepted technique and
policies adopted for recycling LIB in developed countries.
1.6 Thesis Layout
Chapter 1 highlights the key issues related to recycling LIB in terms of providing a contextual
introduction, highlights the associated problems, determines the objectives, scope and significance
of the study.
Chapter 2 presents the latest studies related to LIB recycling methods and challenges faced by
recycling industry.
Chapter 3 reviews the industrial challenges and suggestions towards achieving successful
recycling method.
Chapter 4 reviews the current status of the policies and regulations for LIB recycling in developed
countries.
Chapter 5 provides concluding remarks and recommendations for future studies.

6

CHAPTER 2: RECYCLING PERSPECTIVE
This chapter highlights the current practiced methods of recycling Lithium-ion batteries which are
adopted on a large-scaled level, ongoing research projects and the challenges faced towards
achieving comprehensive and efficient recycling processes.
2.1 Background
With tremendous growth and applications of Lithium ion batteries, development of appropriate
recycling techniques are essential to recover the valuable materials and reduce the environmental
damages. Battery waste is currently seen as a strategically valuable waste stream that contains a
large metallic value to be recovered for the depleting supply of primary and key resources, such
as Cobalt, Nickel and Lithium (Ongondo, Williams & Whitlock, 2015). The usage of portable and
rechargeable appliances increases every year and thus battery waste as a result. In addition to that,
the inappropriate handling and waste disposal can have very harmful implications on human safety
and environmental health (Pagnanelli, Moscardini, Altimari, Atia & Toro, 2016). Therefore, few
methods have been identified by growing research bodies such as hydrometallurgical and
pyrometallurgical processes. The following sections highlight the existing recycling methods,
challenges and research & development in this respect.
7

2.2 Lithium Batteries
This section is aimed to provide background about Lithium ion batteries in terms of components,
failure mechanism and supply chain management.
2.2.1 LIB Structure
LIB consists of a Li Salts, organic solvents, anode, cathode, current collectors and a separator, as
seen in figure 2.1. A cathode is composed of cathode active substances, a carbon conductive agent
and a polymer binder. Anode contains of the anode's active agents including graphite and a
polymer binder (Ryu, Song, Lee, Choi & Park, 2020). Lithium transitioning metal oxides such as
LCO, LiMn2O4 (LMO), LiFePO4 (LFP), and Li [NixMnyCoz]O2 (NMC) are generally used as
cathode active materials (Kim et al., 2021). These active anode and cathode materials are covered
respectively on the existing columns of Copper (Cu) and Aluminium (Al) within Iron (Fe) from
the cases of the battery and portion of equipment that is used in the recycling phase of LIB
(Lombardo, Ebin, Foreman, Steenari & Petranikova, 2020).

Figure 2.1: Overview of LIB components. (Kim et al., 2021)
8

Cobalt (Co) is the most thoroughly researched recycling metal because of its relatively
high price among the elements found in LIB (Ku et al., 2016). Li and Nickel (Ni) are also
common recycling targets in addition to Co. The new approaches are aimed at hydro-
metallurgically recycling Co and Ni in the slag. Additionally, Co and Ni might be extracted from
leaching, precipitation and solvent extraction using a conventional hydrometallurgy technique by
leaching the liquid solution linked to different impurities in previous steps (Liu, Lin, Cao, Zhang
& Sun, 2019). Economic elements, like Cu, Al, Carbon (C) and Fe are generally regarded as
contamination elements that must be isolated, in the pre-treatment phase, among LIB
constituents containing additional desirable elements, like Ni, and Li and Co (Kim et al., 2021).
As the key source of Co, Ni and Li are cathode active materials, it is crucial for pre-treatment
processes that the active cathode material be released from the conductive the current collector
Al and polymer binder C agents like polyvinylidene fluoride (Kim et al., 2021).
2.2.2 Failure Mechanisms
Recycling companies are significantly affected by the exponential growth of batteries, not only
due to their shortened serviceability, but further reasons such as battery extension, short circuits,
output loss and leakage of electrolyte (Birkl, Roberts, McTurk, Bruce & Howey, 2017).
Consequently, it is also useful for LIB’ stable and effective recovery to consider failure
mechanisms. The main causes of rechargeable batteries failure can be studied in four areas from
the viewpoint of the battery structure: cathode restraints, anode constraints, limitations on
electrolytes and the separator. Figure 2.2 illustrates a schematic graphic that outlines various
degradation pathways Figure 2.2 (Fan et al., 2020).
9

Figure 2.2: Rechargeable batteries degradation mechanisms (Fan et al., 2020)
According to Fan et al., (2020), the cathode and anode failure for metal ion batteries can
be classified as structural failure and electrical packing, corrosion and decomposition of the
binding collector, transition metals of the cathode material dissolving, solid interphase
electrolyte surface growth, leading to lack of Li on the inner battery system. Electrolyte
decomposition and worsening as well as ageing, puncturing and obscuring can occur in all
10

scrapped rechargeable batteries. LIB have several inherent problems: (1) anode deposit of
insoluble Li2S2 or Li2S; (2) generation of different intermediate soluble polysulfide Li2S(n) (3 ≤
n ≤ 6); (3) Li/electrolytes interface that is poorly controlled; (Bruce, Freunberger, Hardwick &
Tarascon, 2012).
The major reason for Li−O2 battery cathode failure is porous blockage produced by the
discharge product Li2O2 and by-products (Bruce et al., 2012). The power decrease of electrode
content will generally derive from two fundamental principles: structural modifications during
cycling and the chemical reaction of decomposition and dissolution. Therefore, it is possible to
choose an appropriate recovery process to optimize electrode regeneration, with special attention
paid to cathode materials. Researchers used easy physical isolation or direct recycling for these
materials for the non-damaged electrode materials and other elements. In order to recuperate
broken-down cathode content, metal ions should be used to restore the electrochemical
properties of cathode matter by applying metal ions and heat treatment to the material. Material
extraction technologies such as hydrometallurgy and pyrometallurgy will recycle batteries which
have failed due to serious damages to cathode materials (Fan et al., 2020).
2.2.3 Supply Chain of Raw Material
The increasing LIB demand has highlighted potential issues in the supply chain of the raw
materials required for its production (Mayyas, Steward & Mann, 2019). Any essential metals, such
as Li, Co and Ni, used in LIB are scarce, and they are not being mined in large amounts or only in
a few countries whose trade policies could restrict supply and price stability. As supply rises to
meet the increased demand, the environmental and social implications of these materials’
extraction have also attracted interest (Olivetti, Ceder, Gaustad & Fu, 2017). Closed-loop systems
11

with recycling at the end-of-life provide a pathway to lower environmental impacts and a source
of high value materials that can be used in producing new batteries. Because environmental
regulations concerning end-of-life LIB are not fully developed or implemented, most of these
batteries currently end up in the landfills, with a very small number of spent batteries sent to the
existing recycling facilities (Mayyas et al., 2019). In various areas, the supply of raw materials and
LIB production constraints vary. Currently, the United States solely manufactures cells and
separator materials of LIB. The main imports of cathode, anode and electrolyte are from China,
Japan and South Korea.
Generally, from a supply chain management point of view, the key short-term hurdles for
LIB recycling are the absence of a suitable battery recovery mechanism, limited volumes and an
incertitude about the total cost of LIB recycling. Currently, there are few LIB end-of-life recycles
comparable to the number of recycled LAB and NiMH batteries due to a lack of environmental
restrictions, poor manufacturer support and insufficient public information on the economics of
recycling (Church, 2019). Current recovery processes evaluate high-value cathode materials and
overlook anodes and other components in packaging. Cathode materials recovered might save 20%
of the overall LIB pack cost by recovering additional materials and components from wasted
batteries thus achieving further potential savings is possible. Nevertheless, the experience of a lead
acid battery demonstrates that the advantageous economics alone cannot be sufficient to build and
maintain a sustainable LIB recycling sector (King, Boxall & Bhatt, 2018). Long-term LIB
recycling problems mostly relate to uncertainties about LIB' future composition. If efforts are
successful in reducing LIB' Co concentration, the economic feasibility of LIB recycling might be
jeopardized. Highly specific procedures for recycling may potentially become obsolete or useless
if the chemicals of batteries change considerably. Flexible, low-cost recycling procedures that
12

recover maximum number of items might help preserve a long-term recycling sector (Beaudet,
Larouche, Amouzegar, Bouchard & Zaghib, 2020).
2.2.3.1 Supply chain in the USA
US as a producer of LIB barely influence over both the procurement and the cost of the raw
ingredients included into their battery components. The US also has very limited raw material
processing or main component production capabilities in battery manufacturing infrastructure;
well behind Asian countries (Igogo, Sandor, Mayyas & Engel-Cox, 2019). However, the United
States has a strong automotive industry and a vast car market that might be a major alternative
source of materials imported for the local production of EV LIB. Recycling might be particularly
useful to LIB manufacturers that serve the US car industry, since a major hurdle to the production
of domestic LIB components is being recognized by the lack of an affordable supply chain for raw
materials (Mayyas et al., 2019).
Although recycling may be an important motivating factor for the development of the U.S.
as a primary components manufacturer in the future, the United States must meet some of the
challenges of current LIB supply chains and develop a series of short-term solutions, such as
securing resources via multiannual purchases and working directly with material critical suppliers.
This would serve as a triage for US producers, but long-term strategic planning continues to be
needed to make the US a prominent participant in the LIB global market (Mayyas et al., 2019).
The US could need to establish new supply chain capacity in recycled materials to occupy
a big role in this market. Current forecasts of LIB volumes indicate that in a few years the supply
potential of key important raw materials is limited with expected high demand (Sidorenko,
Sairinen & Moore, 2020). High supply risk raises the likelihood of supply shortages and price
13

increase. Recycling is an eco-friendly alternative to end-of-life LIB packs and can give a high
value material supply at possible cheap cost. A shift to a complete recycling loop system might
supply important parts of cathode materials, including Lithium and Cobalt. While the use of LIB
raw materials now is only a small part of world production, the availability of some virgin raw
materials in the medium term is projected to be potentially bottlenecked in 5 to 15 years (Costa et
al., 2021). While the problems facing the supply chain provide a strong case for recycling, more
examination of the supply chain and recycling economics are needed to properly evaluate the
potential impact of recycling on future LIB production (Mayyas et al., 2019).
2.2.3.2 Supply Chain in China
Recovered Lithium's contribution to the future accessibility of Lithium sources is dependent on its
recovered Lithium recycling efficiency and quality. The open-loop recycling scenario will fast
surpass the available Lithium requirements, limiting the used battery recycling contribution to the
future availability of Lithium supplies (Ziemann, Müller, Schebek & Weil, 2018). It should be
noted that the overall Chinese Lithium demand of around 5.67 million ton (MT) in 2031 will be
higher than that of China's present lithium reserves of 5.29 Mt. In addition, assuming the recovery
rate from recycling is 20 percent, the difference between the overall demand for Lithium and the
recovered Lithium will peak at 6.26 Mt by 2050 (Qiao, Wang, Gao, Wen & Dai, 2021). The bigger
the difference between recovered Lithium supply and total demand for Lithium, the greater the
need for Lithium raw materials to be developed, which directly leads to the increase of Lithium
resources' external reliance and seriously undermines the security of supply of Lithium resources.
The use of recovered Lithium might, however, save considerable amounts of Lithium raw material
under a closed-loop scenario (Closed-loop indicates that one buys, uses, recycles and then buy
again. Open-loop on the other hand suggests the opposite where one buys, consumes and the
14

disposes without the consideration of recycling) as shown in Figure 2.3. Regardless of the kind of
battery utilized, in different scenarios presented by (Qiao et al., 2021), for different scenarios, the
recovered Lithium would fulfill the requirement of around 49% (optimistic scenario), 53% (neutral
scenario), and 60% (pessimistic scenario) of the Lithium demand by 2050 with a recovery rate of
80%.

Figure 2.3: LIB life cycle process in Chinese practice (Qiao et al., 2021)
2.2.3.3 Concluding Remarks
The coordinated planning method describes the intricate planning and interdependencies in closed
loop supply chains (Yang et al., 2018). Planning tasks are therefore recognized and grouped at the
strategic, tactical and operational level. These planned activities are organized further and the
15

methodology benefits from the reverse supply of the chain-specific activities. However, the key to
understanding existing interdependencies is the forward-looking and backward supply chain
guidelines, feedback, and collaboration. The coordination of future and reverse supply chain is
particularly crucial since they are vital to economic and environmental sustainability and to
competitiveness in the long run. During the design and plan of the closed loop supply chain, the
stakeholders comprehend the complex causes by organized description of the planned activities
and their interdependencies (Scheller et al., 2021). By incorporating the results of the coordinated
planning strategy into their forward supply chain planning enterprises, the use of secondary
resources may become sustainable, while the supply risks of scarce materials may be reduced. The
reverse supply chain may lead to less uncertainty and therefore to more profitability of its
operations by recognizing interdependencies and the significance of a coordinated strategy.
Further study in this respect is particularly necessary in two fields. Firstly, a proper
assessment study to cooperate between the supply chain forward and backward in the closed loop
system. Although, there are some studies focused on this issue, the current planning practices are
generally overlooked. An advanced circular economy such a digital circular economy can be
defined. First approaches must be found to this sophisticated circular economy. Secondly, only a
few planning methodologies focus on the particular requirements of lithium-ion battery circular
economy. These involve major supply risks, legal requirements and considerable reverse supply
chain concerns. However, further study is therefore necessary to develop viable closed-loop supply
networks (Scheller et al., 2021).
16

2.3 Industrial Recycling Process
Spent LIB recycling process is led by numerous companies worldwide. The general structure for
the adopted recycling methods for LIB is shaping now (Werner, Peuker & Mütze, 2020). The
recycling methods differ in principle depending on the process and unit processes employed as
well as the final recovered products. This is related to the historical evolution of each company,
the environmental circumstances and laws and the appropriate position on the market (Werner et
al., 2020). In principle, it is possible to characterize each technology based on the methodology
adopted which pass through subsequent stages (Qiao et al., 2021). Generally, there are three
methods used for LIB recycling. The (1) Hydrometallurgical method uses aqueous chemistry, by
means of acid leaching and subsequent concentration and purification, as a means of recovering
the target material while (2) Pyrometallurgy methods use a high temperature melting process.
(3) Direct method a way for re-collecting active LIB directly, while maintaining their original
compound structure (Harper et al., 2019). Although each method includes several stages, the
intention here is to highlight the overall method which is represented by the last process stage. A
comparison of LIB recycling methods are shown in Figure 2.4 while the advantages and
disadvantages of each method are shown in table 2.1 (Harper et al., 2019).
17

Figure 2.4: Overall comparison of the three recycling methods for LIB (Harper et al., 2019)
Initially, several industries employed the pyrometallurgic technique to recycle spent LIB
because of its easy operations, however this approach was not meant for use during their initial
design for recycling spent LIB. The capability of mineral recovery using hydrometallurgical
recycling in prior literatures is substantially higher compared to other methods (Debnath,
Chowdhury & Ghosh, 2018). Additionally, their carbon footprint is substantially smaller than
pyrometallurgical recycling processes. It is found that the overall impact on the major impact
groups is significantly small and that the release of dangerous metals such as Cobalt and Lithium,
together with trace components such as nickel and manganese, has been reduced (Harper et al.,
2019). However using this method, it is only possible to recover Ni, Co and Cu as alloys while Li
is lost in the slag. Due to increased demand for all these precious metals, a hydrometallurgical
technique has been developed by many businesses to recover Li and some purity for Co (Fan et
al., 2020). However, these technologies contain a range of environmental challenges, including
wastewater, residues and exhaust gas, which represent a risk to the environment and human health.
Consequently, the main goal of recycling is to reduce or prevent subsequent contamination. Thus,
due to the sophisticated metal components of used LIB this recovery is challenging. The metal
18

components in the solution obtained after the metal-extraction process are complex, and a
combination of chemical precipitation and solvent extraction is required for the separation and
recovery of metal components. In the hazardous composition of cathode materials, the
performance of materials and the cost of recovery must also be taken into account (Zheng et al.,
2018). From these comparisons, it can be concluded that there is no superior method for LIB
recycling. There are advantages and disadvantages for each method. However, prior to recycling,
the selection for which method shall be used is subjected to various factors such as the facilities in
hand, type of the batteries, targeted material recovery and safety & environmental considerations.
It is worth noting that in certain cases a combination of more than one method is deployed to
enhance the recovery efficiency (Azhari, Bong, Ma & Wang, 2020).

Table 2.1 : Pros and cons for current recycling methods

19

However, for hydrometallurgical technology and direct recycling, the pretreatment step is
very critical. The pretreatment method may improve the recovery efficiency of precious elements
within LIB and in subsequent processing minimize energy consumption (Kim et al., 2021).
treatment process may be characterized as released, dismantled, combined, categorized,
disconnected, dissolved and thermally treated, as illustrated in Figure 2.5.

Figure 2.5: Detailed stages of the pretreatment process (Kim et al., 2021).
The pretreatment method aims to minimize the volume of used LIB and pollutants when
they are recycled and enhance precious metal parts recovery. At the pretreatment stage, the issue
of how the wasted LIB will be dismantled safely, effectively and automatically becomes important
and hence hinders the development of the industrial recycling of the used LIB. The pretreatment
process also generates several pollutants and other toxic gasses that pollute the environment at a
secondary cost (Fujita et al., 2021).
20

A number of recent life cycle analyses have shown that existing recovery procedures may
not in all circumstances lead to savings in greenhouse gas emissions compared with primary
manufacture for the current generation of LIB electric vehicles (Ai, Zheng & Chen, 2019).
Therefore, there is a need for effective procedures to increase the environmental and economic
feasibility of recycling that now depends largely on cobalt. However, given that, for economic and
other reasons, the proportion of cobalt in cathodes is lowered, recycling using present technologies
will become less beneficial due to decreased values of the recovered minerals (Harper et al., 2019).
Meanwhile the economic size of recycling operations is being challenged. In particular,
pyrometallurgical approaches suffer from high capital costs and if LIB is to be fully recycled,
different approaches are urgently needed. Currently, the market uses pyrometallurgical methods
to recover more valuable cobalt and nickel metals in spent batteries and lithium is left unprofitable.
Lithium recycling therefore relies heavily on the economic advantages, which implies that the
profitability of the lithium recovery from spent batteries depends on the price of lithium raw
materials (Qiao et al., 2021).

21

Table 2.2 : Industrial recycling technologies adopted by numerous companies (Fan et al., 2020)
22

(Li et al., 2018) reviewed the current recycling processes for LIB. The distribution and
recycling technology features of LIB recycling companies around the world are shown in Figure
2.6 and Table 2.2. Among the reviewed companies five of them have been using the
pyrometallurgy method; three companies have used the hydrometallurgy and three have used the
combination of the two methods.

Figure 2.6 : Map of the leading companies in LIB recycling (Li et al., 2018)
In general, pyrometallurgy with subsequent hydrometallurgy, because to its core focus on Co,
Cu and Ni, and the loss of metallic al, Mn, non-metallic components and Li, are increasingly
influenced by the need for mass recovery (Makuza, Tian, Guo, Chattopadhyay & Yu, 2021).
Mechanical treatment, by contrast, allows for an increased recycling rate of materials. Therefore,
in future, it might be required to balance individual benefits and drawbacks by novel process
combinations (e.g. the separation of Al and Fe casing before pyrometallurgy). The Emissions
Trading Scheme of the European Union is another legal framework that might affect the recycling
of LIB (Baars, Domenech, Bleischwitz, Melin & Heidrich, 2021). The impact at present is minor,
23

but with rising CO2 pricing it is predicted to expand. However, the price levels required to provide
a substantial steering impact, which processes will have a competitive benefit and how the price
of CO2 would affect the European LIB recycling sector's competitiveness, are not obvious at all
(Qiao et al., 2021).
24

CHAPTER 3: INDUSTRIAL RECYCLING CHALLENGES
The two inherent obstacles today arise from the balance between these two components, energy
and the environment. Every year, LIB production is growing and thus leading to significant
volumes of LIB retired and the lack of Li resources (Velázquez-Martínez, Valio, Santasalo-Aarnio,
Reuter & Serna-Guerrero, 2019). There have been several improvements in resolving these issues,
but LIB and recycling of rechargeable batteries in the future are still under development. In this
regard, the comprehensive assessment standard is focused primarily on three pillars: efficiency,
economy and environment with an essential safety assessment aspect represented as depicted in
Figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1: Battery recycling proposal in the future (Fan et al., 2020)
25

3.1 Technical Aspects
For simple disassembly, the design of existing battery packages is not optimal. Using adhesives,
bonding techniques and devices do not make it simple either by hand or by machine to dismantle.
Shredding or milling of the component materials is used in the present commercial physical cell
fractionation methods (Sommerville, Shaw-Stewart, Goodship, Rowson, Kendrick, 2020). This
makes it more difficult to separate the components than if they were supplied and significantly
diminishes the financial worth of waste material streams. Many of the issues of remanufacturing,
recycling and reusing might therefore be solved if the design process is taken into account at early
stages (Harper et al., 2019).
The issues of LIB recycling cannot be solved fully with the available techniques. Each
recycling method focuses on various end products and has its own advantages and constraints.
Combination of various recycling systems can contribute to economic recovery process
advancement. The melting slag process, for example, includes Li, which may be recycled by
laundering and cleansing. The hydrometallurgical technique may also be applied to separation
processes established for the direct recycling method (Brückner, Frank & Elwert, 2020).
The technique of direct recycling is still in the laboratory, and several research efforts are
underway. The regenerated cathode might be obsolete due to the quick development of new
cathode compositions, as a constraint on direct recycling (Melin, 2019). How to update cathode
chemistry is still a challenge and a grueling research opportunity. In order to increase recycling
income and to promote the circular economy of LIB, the emphasis should be focused on recovery
of additional materials, in addition to direct cathode recycling. For instance, a viable research
26

directive to recover additional values from wasted LIB materials may be a direct regeneration of
anode materials (Bai et al., 2020).
Laboratory technologies are typically confronted with hurdles to increase due to high cost
of capital, high energy usage and environmental difficulties (Hua et al., 2020). It is crucial to
evaluate process recycling costs and to establish their economic and environmental feasibility. For
the purpose of assessing costs and environmental impacts during the different life cycles of LIB,
assessing and comparing the impacts of virgin batteries with recycled materials is a requirement
(Bai et al., 2020).
Technologies of batteries are rapidly changing. Therefore, recycling procedures should
continue with the constantly changing improvements in batteries. Speedy performance and prices
improvements in present technologies are insufficient to fulfill market demands, meaning that
novel technologies of the next generation, such as stationary batteries, are necessary to bring
change in performance. Battery technology should pursue the next generation of revolutionary
recycling technology (Bai et al., 2020). New technologies need to be built for recycling, such as
solid-state batteries (Xu, Tan & Chen, 2021). Given the future situation in which all solid-state
batteries are increasingly close to their lifetime, it is worth considering the continued relevance of
the existing strategy for recycling of existing battery systems (Mayyas et al., 2019). Furthermore,
lithium metal as opposed to graphite is used in present-day batteries in all solid-state battery types.
This presents grave security issues when pyro- or hydrometallurgical procedures are used directly
without additional pre-treatments (Doose, Mayer, Michalowski & Kwade, 2021). The employment
of sound electrolytes and cathode electrolyte layouts also poses additional obstacles and limitations
for current techniques of recycling (Arambarri et al., 2019). These issues also provide new
opportunities and necessitate novel recycling procedures, for example, all solid-state batteries are
27

likely to be recovered by a preceding stage of 200 °C above the melting point of Lithium metal
from end of life. Such technologies should be linked with current recycling techniques like
pyrotechnics or pyrotechnical recycling, to efficiently recycle all future solid-state batteries (Bai
et al., 2020).
Designing recyclable batteries must be to efficiently disassemble and recycle and/or
repurpose applications of the secondary life. Unlike the large-scale LAB, LIB consist of a wide
variety of materials, including transition metals and other components (e.g., graphite, aluminum,
plastics, steel, and electrolyte solution) (Zhao et al., 2021). Also in the battery packs are sensors,
circuits and other components electric and electronic (Habib et al., 2021). Recyclers must also
address substantial size and format discrepancies (e.g., mixes of cylindrical, prismatic, and pouch-
type cells). Standard battery technologies are difficult, if not impossible, in contemporary
situations since variations in design and composition often become essential to meet the unique
energy and power requirements of EV models as well as in the interests of the manufacturer
(Beaudet et al., 2020). Even a single carmaker can at any moment employ several battery chemicals
and geometries (Gaines, Richa, Spangenberger, 2018). These variations also provide the basis for
the battery industry's competitive benefit and intellectual property rights (Gaines et al., 2018;
Gaines, 2014). This comprises simple removal, disassembly, and preparation of packs and modules
for recycling, as well as material and other component selection, which are easy (and safe) to
remove and recycle (Beaudet et al., 2020). Currently, because of the price competition and the
need to satisfy many conditions, including the use of high energy and power density and safety,
product life cycle, recyclability may someday be a competitive advantage for battery producers
(Ioakimidis, Murillo-Marrodán, Bagheri, Thomas & Genikomsakis, 2019). The requirement to
"design for recyclability" techniques will rise as recycling becomes more appealing and /or
28

inevitable due to regulation demands. This will contribute, among other things, to the design and
optimization of reuse and recovery projects. As noted in (Larouche et al., 2020), the development
of suitable recycling techniques, particularly direct recycling, will allow better understanding of
aging mechanisms in LIB, which includes cell deterioration, structural changes, electrolyte
evaporation, breakdown or degradation, and collector corrosion. The identification of knowledge
gaps and the establishment of research and development priorities are a continuous activity. One
major element of all this is that while research and development into individual recycling
techniques is vital, a more integrated strategy is needed to rethink and improve the whole value
chain from design, production, collection and recycling (Beaudet et al., 2020).
3.2 Economic Aspects
For recycling companies to exist and thrive, the economic benefits of recycling procedures are
crucial (Qiao et al., 2021). Based on cost-benefit calculations, the major means of improving
economic efficiency are cost reduction and the rise in the value of products (Tang, Zhang, Li,
Wang & Li, 2018). Easy processing, low-cost goods and high-value or pure goods are therefore
preferred (Fan et al., 2020). Furthermore, economic analysis should take into account the treatment
of secondary pollutants, including wastes, waste gas and waste residues (Kim et al., 2021).
Especially in order to guarantee the highest potential recycling advantages, several types of
rechargeable batteries with various recycling values should utilize appropriate recycling processes
(Kim et al., 2021).
29

3.3 Environmental & Safety
Improving the manufacturing process energy efficiency; lowering electrode heavy metal content
and the selection of eco-friendly binders and electrolytes contributes to the environmental impacts
of rechargeable batteries (Dehghani-Sanij, Tharumalingam, Dusseault & Fraser, 2019). With
sophisticated re-chargeable battery components, recovery operations might possibly be hazardous
and cause secondary pollution such as wastewater, gas and waste, which must be prevented and
treated to achieve less secondary pollution emissions (Doose et al., 2021) Spent battery recycling
operations must be fitted with secondary pollution protection systems and sound control methods.
Some procedures most likely to generate secondary pollution are the recycling and processing of
electrolytes, battery wasted storage and disassembly, the hydrometallurgical use of acid and
alkaline, and the creation of pyrometallurgic high energy and high pollutant waste gas
(Sommerville et al., 2020) . During the rehabilitation process, several things should be considered.
Control over pollution production at source, however, should also be fostered through the
exploration of less polluting technologies for low energy recycling and the replacement of toxins
with noxious substances (Bai et al., 2020).
3.4 Data Collection
It is important to set up a complete battery recycling management infrastructure (Li, Ku, Liu &
Zhou, 2020). By gathering full-time battery data for manufacture, sale, usage, retirement and
recycling, each connection may be monitored in real-time to take over its recycling burden and to
arrange battery recycling (Bai et al., 2020). These huge data volumes may be used for the
30

secondary battery assessment and recycling evaluation. However, it will be difficult to
comprehensively collect data on used batteries. Local and domestic administrations, companies
and individuals will undertake to develop a comprehensive and transparent battery recovery usage
industry and network chains (Beaudet et al., 2020). Meanwhile, governments should develop
appropriate battery recycling standards and specifications, such as battery management
information traceability; battery decommissioning techniques, classification, labeling, stockage
and information entries, residual battery energy detection and residual value assessments (Li et al.,
2020).
3.5 Improvement
A variety of enhancements might economically enhance LIB electric car recycling processes, such
as improved sorting techniques, the way electrode materials are separated, improved processing
flexibility, recycling design, and improved battery standardization by manufacturers (Chen et al.,
2019). A more advanced approach to the battery recovery may easily be achieved by automated
disassembly, smart battery segregation and intelligent characterization and assessment of spent
batteries in streams for restoration, reuse and recycling. The possible benefits include lower cost,
increased value for the materials collected and the proximate removal of the danger of damage to
the workforce (Ai, Zheng & Che , 2019).
In summary, safe and efficient automated disassembly is the major objective for tackling the
high number of pensioned LIB in order to minimize potential risks in future recycling procedures
(Rastegarpanah et al., 2021). At the same time, redesign of LIB packs should make reuse or
recycling dismantling possible (Fan et al., 2020). Other answers to this problems are the scarcity
31

of essential LIB resources and the development of alternative batteries (Pinegar & Smith, 2019).
The complicated structure of LIB has led to the recovery of most of the recycling methods for
various components. To accomplish highly efficient recovery of numerous components, therefore,
a simple recycling procedure is urgently needed. The primary difficulty with the recycling of
cathodes is that of lowering energy consumption and preventing exhaust gas pollution; the quicker
and more effective removal of impurities is needed using hydrometallurgical procedures to
improve the purity of regenerated materials (Pinegar & Smith, 2019). The recovery from anodes
and electrolytes should also be the focus of future effort in the context of environmental
conservation.
3.6 Robotizing Recycling Process
Batteries of electric vehicles (EV) are presently being removed manually because of limited
quantities and varied sizes. The volume envisaged can be expected to streamline the disassembly
by increasing the degree of automation in the future (Rastegarpanah et al., 2021). This is a key
aspect in improving the efficiency and economic performance of the overall recycling process.
Previous studies showed that completely automated dismantling is not viable at this time, because
of the various product variations and the lack of battery design standards and the fact that the
recycling firms typically do not have access to comprehensive battery designs (Harper et al., 2019).
Fully automation process is viable when standardizing battery systems evolves
successfully in addition to the design variation being considerably reduced (Sharma, Zanotti &
Musunur, 2019). A partial automation using human robot work can be used to enhance the
efficiency compared to manual decommissioning was thus considered (Rastegarpanah et al.,
32

2021). In recent years, human robot cooperation has received considerable scientific attention.
This is due to a wide range of options for hybrid work areas where robots are not separated by
safety barriers and cooperate with manufacturers (Hentout, Aouache, Maoudj & Akli, 2019).
These workstations provide a flexible and adaptable manufactured system where people do
complicated sensory jobs and robots deal with recurring and monotonous, unergonomic activities.
This enables manufacturing systems to be quickly modified to various product variations and batch
sizes. The benefits of such method of production significantly contributes to companies with small
scale manufactures and a large range of products. Human robot cooperation thus has a huge
potential, in particular for the dismantling of car battery systems, to cover a large range of
manufacturers and battery types (Rastegarpanah et al., 2021).
Furthermore, progressive sensors and improved techniques of battery monitoring and end-
of-life testing would make it possible to better match the features of each battery's last life to
proposed applications of second use that have concurrent benefits in life, safety and market value
(Hanisch, Diekmann, Stieger, Haselrieder & Kwade, 2015). A procedure which implies reduced
component contamination during the break-up phase is critical for direct recycling, where qualities
of the recovered material is required (Gaines, Dai, Vaughey & Gillard, 2021). Analyzing the
chemicals of the cell components and their condition and health before dismantling into
components would be highly beneficial instead of producing a blend of all components. This is
currently only done on a laboratory scale and generally uses manually difficult to measure manual
disassembly methods (Harper et al., 2019).
Automation utilizing artificial intelligence research to sort batteries might save time and
effort to separate downstream operations. If the cathode and anode electrode sheets can be
automatically separated, many separation operations, including the removal of Al foil from Cu
33

foils and active cathode material from anode materials may be bypassed, therefore reducing
recycled costs and preventing contamination (Li, 2020). A study was conducted by (Bai et al.,
2020) to propose a robotic technique for collecting data. The assembly of this setup is shown in
Figure 3.2. The suggested system minimizes human interaction during the collection of EIS data
and hence removes the dangers associated with LIB to health and safety. This approach was created
to operate the robot while tracking the intended item in the face of uncertainties which may occur
in actual industry.

Figure 3.2: Robot setup for dismantling LIB (Bai et al., 2020)
3.7 Recycling LIB Research Projects (EU)
(Melin, 2019) conducted a study on past and ongoing research projects on LIB recycling in the
European Union since 2011. According to this study, around 33 projects have been launched, each
34

including the recycling or reuse of lithium-ion batteries. About 19 of these projects were finished
or are soon to end. The numerous initiatives are very wide, with an emphasis on all aspects, from
recycling procedures to the chain value. Four projects were conducted on testing the potential of
hydrometallurgical recycling technologies whereas many projects have assessed many other forms
of reuse applications. For example, it was found the combination of hydrometallurgy and direct
recycling have highest potential. The following table 3.1 summarizes the key issues regarding
these projects.
Research body Project aim
AutoBatRec 2020139 The purpose of the research is to discover effective and
environmentally and economically sound and scalable techniques of
recycling electric car batteries.
CROCODILE140 The objective of the project is to show different metallurgical
processes in order to develop a working value chain for materials and
products containing cobalt.
Close WEEE141 The aim of the initiative is to boost electronic waste exchange, which
includes lithium-ion batteries.
Norwegian LIBRES142 A significant number of players such Glencore Nikkelverk and
Keliber, from the collector (Batteriretur) to the downstream receiver,
engage in this initiative. The project involves additionally Norsk
Hydro and the recycling process.
UK The project aims, among others, at the creation of a "triage" system
for spent batteries, autonomous battery analysis, robotic sorting,
innovative recycling technologies and the development of new
business models.
35

United States For the Lithium Recycling Center, the Energy Department has
earmarked US$ 144 million. Argonne National Laboratories, Oak
Ridge Laboratories and National Renewable Energy Laboratories are
leading this facility, which focuses mostly on direct recycling of
lithium-ion batteries. Some research groups were also linked to the
other research centers, such the technical university of Michigan, San
Diego University of California and the Polytechnic Institute of
Worcester, etc.
Sweden Several projects aim to reprocess the lithium end battery electrolyte
by means of so-called mechanical activation, coherent system for
recycling lithium-ion batteries at a large scale, recycling vehicle
batteries in energy storage applications, development of an
automated process for smartphone and tablet battery identification
and disassembly that is capable of leading to increase the recovery
potential.
Table 3.1: Ongoing projects on LIB recycling under Faraday program (Melin, 2019)
Industries such as battery manufacturers, manufacturers of original equipment, battery
recyclers, governments, and end users are crucial to stimulating and making economically viable
recycling processes of LIB, requiring coordinated, immediate action by businesses, investors and
policy-makers in consultation with all interested parties (Zeng et al., 2019). Increase LIB recycling
would promote industry innovation, with more groups trying to make the process commercially
feasible and ecologically friendly (Doose et al., 2021). The U.S. Department of Energy, for
example, established the 2019 recycling prize to encourage innovative companies to create and
show lucrative solutions by achieving a 90% LIB recovery rate (Mayyas et al., 2019).
With a growing number of writings on this subject, the world's scientific community clearly
acknowledges the necessity to promote recycling technologies (Hu, Yu, Huang & Wang, 2020; Melin,
36

2019). For example, the "Recycling LIB for EV" project (ReLieVe) including Eramet, Suez, BASF, Chemie
ParisTech and the University of Science and Tech of Norway has promised potential research &
development projects. (Harper et al., 2019); ReCell Centre, Argonne National Laboratory (and its plans to
develop the new direct recycling process); and several Canadian projects involve the National Center for
Environmental Technology and Electrochemistry (CNETE) and the National Research Council of Canada
(NRC). The National Center for Electrical and Energy Storage Transport Excellence and the Hydro-Quebec
Centre (NRC) (Beaudet et al., 2020).
37

CHAPTER 4: RECYCLING POLICY IMPLICATIONS &
ORIENTATION
In the European Union where the battery recycling regulations are comparatively advanced, less
than 20% of the LIB spent were collected in 2016 because LIB recycling is still in the early stages
with much of spent LIB landing in waste (Beaudet et al., 2020). One of the reasons for this poor
recycling rate is that to date, LIB has different sizes and components (Wang, Gaustad, Babbitt &
Richa, 2014). Therefore, funds and other policy instruments are important to promote robust value
chains which can compete in terms of costs, consistency and durability with virgin resource supply
chains while providing substantial advantages for security, the environment and energy efficiency
compared to traditional (non-circular) spent battery management approaches (Govindan &
Hasanagic, 2018). Policy makers are supposed to accelerate investment in this area including
research and development financing, funding for trial initiatives, market-pull policies to support
the establishment of a favorable LIB collection and investment environment.
4.1 POLICY-ORIENTED RECYCLING
Laws, rules, and policies are crucial for the management and recycling of used LIB as guidelines
or as compulsory documents. In order to recycle spent batteries, advanced nations such as the
United States, Germany and Japan have already begun governing legislation in this field from a
battery life-cycle viewpoint (Bresser et al., 2018). The policy on the management and recycling of
used LIB has also been initiated by China. The European Union (EU) has established an EU-wide
38

extended producer responsibility (EPR) for LIB that calls for the collection and management of
LIB by manufacturers (Velázquez-Martínez et al., 2019). A repository reimbursement mechanism
might also incentivize the usage of spent batteries to be recycled or discharged correctly. In order
to encourage insurance, the concern about recycled material focuses on its performance and on
extended, trustworthy testing. Standardized LIB assessment policies and standards might make the
overall usage of recycled materials easier. The 2006 Batteries Directive (2006/66/EG) defines the
regulatory basis for LIB recycling in Europe (Brückner et al., 2020). The recycling of LIB from
EVs is not expressly addressed due to limited use of LIB in the early 2000s (Pellow et al., 2020).
4.1.1 USA
The legal structure in the USA covers federal, state and municipal levels for the recycling of used
batteries. Licenses for battery makers and battery recycling enterprises are utilized at federal level.
Mercury-containing and refillable battery management Act regulates the manufacturing and
transfer of used batteries (Fan et al., 2020). The Battery Council International (BCI) has
recommended to guidance retailers and customers on a price system for engaging in recycling
expensive batteries at state level, most of them having approved battery recycle rules. New York
State Battery Rechargeable Law and California Rechargeable Battery Recycling Act, for example,
mandate retailers to recuperate the rechargeable battery of consumers without charging (Wang,
Gaustad, Babbitt & Bailey, 2014). At the local level, the majority of towns in the United States
have adopted legislation on the recovery of power batteries to minimize the environmental risks
of expended batteries. Battery product management law has been introduced by the American
Battery Council International and a battery re-circulation deposit system has been devised to
encourage users to collect and submit old batteries (Ai et al., 2019). In addition, the United States
39

has undertaken substantial research into the use of power cells and recycling technologies,
including economic benefits analyses for battery recycling (Fan et al., 2020).
However, in the USA the collecting and recycling of large-format LIB has no yet well
national regulations basis. While national policy on LIB recycling is not in place, certain existing
state rules aim to encourage the sustainability of EV LIB (Tervo et al., 2018). In encouraging
electrification of vehicles, California is a forerunner and continues to be a national leader in LIB
recycling where new objective for developing new business prospects for battery recycling was
established by the EV action plan of California in 2016 (Richa, Babbitt & Gaustad, 2017). In
reality, the policy on LIB production, collection, transportation and recycling of materials may be
launched (Liao et al., 2017). The proposals for manufacturing standards might include module
design (energy, size and voltage, reversible for disassembling packs) specifications, and adhesive
specifications which might successfully encourage recycling acceptance. If fewer varieties occur,
less work would be required for disassembly and separation during recycling, and the suitable
automation systems may be created. Regulations might also be raised, from recycling, storage,
logistics and transport to real process recycling at the facility for the complete life of recycling
(Dai, Kelly, Gaines & Wang, 2019). Policies may involve LIB (manufacturers, distributors),
collecting rates and recycling efficiency in terms of policy objectives or principles (Richa et al.,
2017).
4.1.2 Germany
In its legal framework, dividing up obligations and technological battery recycling ways, Germany
has achieved significant achievements (Kalkbrenner, 2019). The Battery Recycling Act, the Scrap
Automotive Recycling Act (SEC) and other related recycling acts have been enacted under
40

directives like the Waste Framework Directive (Directive 2008/98/EC) and Battery Recycling
Directive (Directive 2006/ 66/EC) as well as the scrapped vehicles Directive (Directive
2000/53/EC) (Ongondo, Williams & Cherrett, 2011). The spent battery recycling system has a
defined division of labor under the limitations of the appropriate regulatory framework. The
associated responsibility and obligations lies with producers, consumers and recyclers in the
industrial chain (Bresser et al., 2018). Furthermore, the system of extending production
responsibility is underlined. Active recycling of wasted batteries was carried out by new
powertrain manufacturers like Volkswagen and BMW. In order to give detailed study on the usage
of various recycling technology for batteries, the Federal German Environmental Ministry
supported demonstration projects employing pyrometallurgical and hydrometallurgical recycling
technologies (Fan et al., 2020). In 2019, Germany launched its Bonus Program. Before it, there
were few incentives. In November 2019, the decision was reached to increase the bonus to less
than € 40,000 for BEVs and to € 5,000 for BEVs costing between € 40,000 and € 50,000. The aim
of this project was to extend the bonus program to 2025 and maintain the 50/50 cost split between
industry and government (Figenbaum, Thorne, Amundsen, Pinchasik & Fridstrøm, 2020).
Overall, with the exception of Li, the creative scenario uses far less resources. The
inclusion of metal manufacturing input from scrap recycled helps to lower the overall metal
demand and the need for new metals. Because of the inadequate infrastructure for recycling,
however, this is at present just specific metals such as copper and nickel (Marinaro et al., 2020).
In Germany, the future deployment of LIB in electricity transmission and storage batteries as
recommended by the energy scenario is particularly important for the fulfilment of national
environmental objectives (Bresser et al., 2018). But these objectives cannot be sustainably
achieved in Germany, given LIB' existing situation, with rapid and significant fluctuations both in
41

terms of supply and demand. Therefore, while shaping national trading and external investment
policies and allotting national research resources, the safety of key metals as well as a focused
development and recycling of LIB should not be disregarded (Bongartz, Shammugam, Gervais &
Schlegl, 2021).
4.1.3 Japan
Driven by the shortage of natural resource resources, Japan is a world leader in battery recycling
(Fan et al., 2020). Japan has been pursuing a program of battery retraining since 1994, creating a
"battery sales – recycling" recycling scheme. Japan has adopted matching rules and regulations
from three levels to govern the growth of the battery recycling industry: fundamental law,
comprehensive law and special legislation (Sato & Nakata, 2020). New power car manufacturers
are required for the recycle and disposal of expended batteries. Vehicle makers are advised to pay
attention to research into automobile recycling technology resource recovery. Car manufacturers
including Toyota, Nissan and Mitsubishi have made an active contribution to battery recycling
research and development (Stephan, Schmidt, Bening & Hoffmann, 2017). The usage of
emergency power supply was driven by frequent natural disasters in Japan. In the driving force of
automotive industries, the decommissioned new electricity batteries are used by families and
business as an emergency energy source. This recycling approach is based on the production
company and supports the company's original research and design innovation and enhances the
recycling rate (Fan et al., 2020).
42

4.1.4 China
Since the onset of the battery recycling growth in 2016, China has released policy
documentations such as "the Standard Conditions for the Full Utilization
of New Energy Vehicle Waste Energy Storage Battery" (Fan et al., 2020). These requirements
offer clear and explicit procedures for assessing and reviewing the recycling industry, which are a
significant step towards the creation of a comprehensive national battery recycling standard system
(Bresser et al., 2018). The following four regulatory publications on power battery disassembly
and recycling have recommended clear and operational standards for the battery recycling sector
and have set up an integrated national standard system. Firstly, there are stringent safety, operating
procedures for storage and management of spent battery recycling, which are favorable to standard
recycling and dismantling of EV in China, as defined in the Code for the recycling and dismantling
of vehicles (GB/T 33598-2017). Second, energy detection (GB/T34015-2017) standards for
vehicle power battery recycling standard inspection of battery appearances, polarity detection,
discrimination in the voltage, discrimination in current charging and release, waste energy testing
and other detection procedures. This guideline provides a scientific technique for the assessment
of residual energy from EV batteries. Third, the GB/T34014-2017 regulations for automotive
power battery codes notably enable power batteries to be tracked across their entire life cycle.
Electric Vehicle Power Battery Criteria and Dimensions (GB/T34013-2017) combines power cell,
modular and battery packing specifications to decrease recycling power battery problem. This
measure encourages makers of batteries to work with large user companies (Fan et al., 2020).
Since 2012, the spirit of the national policy has been heavily implemented by local
governments and a number of initiatives have been taken to promote power recycling (Song, Hu,
Chen & Zhu, 2017). For example, a specific budget has been allocated for battery recycling firms
43

to Shanghai Municipal Government Incentives of 1000 Chinese Yuan Renminbi (CNY) per
electric car. For example, manufacturer and county governments granted battery recycling
incentives for 600 CNY and 300 CNY respectively when consumers bought the electric car
Shenzhen had first set-up battery recycling programs for enterprises (Gu et al., 2017). Continuous
policy development is anticipated to resolve the problem of recycling power batteries and
development of green electric car industries.
In 2015, a combined "Notice on Promotion and Implementation of New Energy Vehicle
Tax Support Policies" was released by four Chinese ministries comprising finance, science and
technology departments (Gu et al., 2017). In 2016 subsidies of up to 55,000 CNY was provided
for the purchasers of all hybrid passenger cars and EVs. In 2016, the National Development and
Reform Commission and the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology created the
Technical Policy for the Recover and Use of EV power batteries, which seeks to introduce an
extended framework for the manufacturer responsibility (Qiao et al., 2021). It provides for the
recycling of used batteries for manufacturers, importers and associated companies. At the same
time, producers of electricity vehicles and batteries may collect a repository or provide new
batteries with a price reduction, if the battery requires replacement, which facilitates the efficient
recycling of batteries (Pinegar & Smith, 2019).
Chinese officials are aiming to adapt to the closed-loop recycling not only to prevent the
possible over-supply of recovered Lithium, but also conserve substantial quantities of basic raw
materials as opposed to open-loop recycling (Song et al., 2017). The establishment of a closed-
loop recycling system, accomplished via battery standardization, financial subsidies, and improved
recycling infrastructure, should thus be strongly promoted (Scheller et al., 2021). For this purpose,
Chinese authorities have been aiming to provide all electrical vehicles with a particular ID after
44

August 2018 to assist trace and recycle batteries from first to second usage (Wang, Li, Lu, Yang
& Wang, 2020). In recent decades the State Council and the Environment Ministry have worked
towards the development and implementation of adequate systems for efficient used battery
management. Table 4.1 provides a summary throughout the years of modifications to China's
energy battery recycling laws. In 2012, the State Council established the first Special Requirement
for Power Batteries, entitled "Energy Saving and New Energy Auto Industrial Plan 2012–2020."
An overview of recycling and treatment of spent LiFePO4 batteries in China (Lu, Liu & Yang,
2017). Although China improved its waste management rules and subsequently created more than
10 regulations, compulsory battery recycling procedures are still lacking (Sun et al., 2015).

45

Table 4.1: Spent batteries regulations in China (Werner et al., 2020)
4.1.5 Other EU countries
Norway is among the leading EU countries in battery recycling; however, a full-scale recycling
program is still hindered. The Norwegian materials industry that organizes the EydeCluster aims
to be at the forefront of battery material recycling to accommodate the expected big battery
volumes from EVs as better alternative to reduce emissions from conventional cars (Figenbaum et
al., 2020). They sought to investigate the market, technical and policy developments for electric
battery passenger vehicles, heavy and light-duty transportations, urban busses and long-haul trucks
as well as when adequate battery volumes are made accessible to ensure investment in battery
recycling. This work is a component of the Norway Research Board (NFR: BATMAN – 299334)
sponsored BATMAN project (Figenbaum et al., 2020).
The policies and stimulus have evolved over time. In certain countries, the framework was
very unstable, whereas other countries developed stability frameworks. The example of nations
with unstable policies and frequent and significant modifications of the incentives for BEVs and
46

ICEVs is Denmark and the Netherlands (Bresser et al., 2018). These previous modifications to
policy are not represented in the current status table. Sweden has previously had an assistance
scheme from the government to buy BEVs and PHEVs requiring public financing. There was no
support provided for the remainder of the year after the budget was spent. It is much more stable
to go to a bonus malus scheme. The BEV purchase bonuses are being paid by maluses paid by
ICEVs' purchasers and the mechanism is meant to be neutral in terms of income. For many years
France has had the same system. Temporary imbalances can arise in such systems if the demand
for BEVs vs ICEVs changes substantially (Figenbaum et al., 2020).
4.2 Lessons from LAB
LABs are now a cost-effective and resilient battery system, which contributes to the world's battery
industry, where they are widely employed in the starting, lighting, ignition and energy storage
systems (Mongird et al., 2019). LABs are growing at a considerably lower price, but at a
considerably slower rate than its competitor LIB (Cao, Li, Lu, Liu & Amine, 2019). In the next
four years LIB will contribute 85 % to the overall increase in rechargeable batteries (Baars et al.,
2021). In 2018, around 86.14% of the worldwide share of secondary battery recycling is LAB
recycling which is projected to be the market leader in battery recycling between 2020 and 2025
(Qiao et al., 2021). LAB recycling is one of the major success stories of the recycling business
with up to 99% of the battery being recycled due to product design and chemical characteristics,
lead-based products can be readily identified, collected and recycled at an economical cost (May,
Davidson & Monahov, 2018).
47

There are a lot of lessons from the successful lead- acid batteries (LAB) recycling sector
for the future of LIB recycling. The technology that is used to disassemble and recycle the
LAB reasonably standardized, minimizing costs and allowing for the value of the driving force for
the recycling. Unfortunately, similar benefits are unlikely to apply in the near future to fast growing
technologies, for LIB (Harper et al., 2019). Lead acid batteries are one of the most extensively
utilized batteries in a number of small and medium-sized storage applications (Xi Tian, Wu, Gong
& Zuo, 2015). It is believed that almost 99% of LAB are recycled in the United States and this is
one of the most effective recycling programs (Tian, Xiao, Liu & Ding, 2021). Many variables
contribute to the success of the recycling of lead-acid batteries, and this success can lead to lessons
to be learnt from LAB recycling. For example, the uniform design for the LABs leads to a
straightforward recycling procedure, combined with the properties of a single chemistry (Joshi,
Vipin, Ramkumar & Amit, 2021). In Figure 4.1 illustrates the cell composition of LAB and LIB.
It is obvious that LAB type contains less diverse components which is easier to recycle compared
to LIB. Moreover, about 70% of the mass of LABs is lead-acid / oxide, which is simply revived at
a very low temperature. Therefore, from economical point of view, LAB recycling is profitable
(Bai et al., 2020).
48

Figure 4.1: LIB and LAB composition comparaison (Bai et al., 2020)
LAB recycling model to examine the state of recycling companies under various policy
portfolios to measure the scale and emissions of recycling companies and the fiscal funds of
government (Joshi et al., 2021). The ideal dynamic policy portfolio from 2000 to 2015 reduced
over 700 illegal recycling firms (97,9 percent) as well as 219,6 thousand tons in yearly waste lead
emissions compared to the case when no policy has been adopted (a reduction of 45.8 percent)
(Tian et al., 2021). The recovery efficiency of government funds in the optimum dynamic policy
portfolio has grown by nearly 30 percent compared to other policy portfolios. From a dynamic
approach, the government should establish policies depending on the recycling market scenario
(Tian et al., 2021). Registered recycling companies make up a modest part of the recycling market's
growing phase. Therefore, registered recycling companies will gain additional subsidies and
competitive benefits under the same financial support expenditures. The Government should
49

encourage registered recycling companies more and focus more in the growth stage on the
implementation of tax reduction and subsidy schemes (Tian et al., 2021).
4.3 Policies development
4.3.1 Pilot Projects
While it is extremely desired to boost research and development work on battery recycling value
chains (and recyclability), as mentioned above, several existing battery recycling methods exist
(Beaudet et al., 2020). Therefore, policy goals should also include financing pilot projects to show
these solutions' technical and financial viabilities. Such studies can also assist to create integrated
value chains around LIB for recycling and production, produce investment planning data and assist
identify gaps in future research and development goals. All stakeholders in the large-scale LIB
recycling sector, including cars, batteries, transportation and recycling industries, the regulators
and the scientific community, should be included in the projects (Beaudet et al., 2020). For
example, the acquisition of steady sources of used batteries is one of the major recyclers' concerns.
The present recycling capacity, showing the need to centralize the battery supply, has been
underused, according to industrial sources. Increased cooperation and communication throughout
the value chain might reduce such issues. Finally, pilot programs enable battery producers to test
recycled material quality and appropriateness and to acquaint themselves with closed-loop
recycling processes. Fleet operators (e.g. transit and school buses, taxis, shipping vans, car sharing
companies or rental car firms) tend to be very attentive to asset productivity and total operator
costs and thus encourage them to reduce the costs of disposal and/or increase income from the re-
sale of used components (Beaudet et al., 2020). In order to cut transactional and transit expenses
50

together with a generally homogenous battery supply (subject to the fact that a fleet operator works
on a restricted number of vehicle types), they can also make recycling easy. The assessment of
energy usage and lifetime emissions from recycling procedures would be another emphasis for
pilot projects. There is currently limited data on industry recycling procedures, for example on the
solvent application in hydrometallurgical processes and the use of energy in pyrometallurgical
processes (Larouche et al., 2020).
4.3.2 Market Creation
Technology action should typically be supplemented by favorable market pull policies to
encourage the upscaling and optimization of value chains of recycled products, particularly during
this industry's emerging phase. As noted by (Kim et al., 2018), technology action should typically
be supplemented by favorable market pull policies to encourage the upscaling and optimization of
value chains of recycled products, particularly during this industry's emerging phase. Recycling
may be a "chicken and egg" dilemma in the absence of such rules (Zhao et al., 2021). The limited
amount of used recycling batteries prevents firms from investing in recycling infrastructure which
inhibits the sector from investing in battery recovery and transport or in research & development
connected to recycling. Indeed, one of the most fundamental impediments to LIB recycling
according to industry discussions is the lack of legal incentives (Figenbaum et al., 2020). One of
the initiatives under discussion is the implementation of Extended Manufacturer Responsibility
(EPR) for the battery sector (ie. EV). This means taking responsibility for cost recovery and
recycling of batteries from the automobile makers, giving them the incentive to set up effective
recycling value chains and integrating "design for recycling" into their product development efforts
and their suppliers (Scheller et al., 2021). For example, China's legislation currently require
51

rigorous rules across the full life cycle, to take responsibility for spent battery collecting for
automobile makers and importers (Gaines et al., 2018).
4.3.3 Design
Prescient product design might assist to make the future LIB more recyclable by addressing battery
components separation (Gies, 2015). Batteries may increase recyclability by taking into account
their final use. The ability to easily break up and recover may result in a simple design
modification. To encourage product design, financial aid and non-financial incentives, new ideas
might be stimulated and improved designs for re-use and recycling swiftly implemented (Ferronato
& Torretta 2019). Battery producers need to pro-actively include design ideas for recycling into
their products and production processes in addition to regulatory laws. In Figure 4.2, the authors
present some insights into the notion of recycling design at several levels to assist the future
recycling of batteries. One of the challenges for LIB recycling is how batteries of various chemicals
are sorted efficiently to prevent or at least to decrease complex separation operations. The labeling
in numerous forms, such as labels, QR codes and RFID tags would be suitable for an efficient yet
simple design idea (Harper et al., 2019). The Society of Automotive Engineers' (SAE) Battery
Recycling Committee has devised a label that should be placed on EV battery packages to allow
independent treatment of various battery types (Gaines et al., 2018). Another example is that
Battery Recycling Prize from United States Department of Energy funded Everledger to trace the
lifecycle of LIB using block chain technology to ensure optimal management and responsible
recovery at end-of life (Bai et al., 2020). As indicated in Figure 4.2, it will be easier to scan these
labels automatically by avoiding the above-mentioned difficult procedures of separation.
Recyclers may make fewer efforts to determine electrode chemistry given as much information as
52

feasible (Alliance, 2019; Harper et al., 2019). A recent World Economic Forum Report and the
Global Battery Alliance advises that battery diagnostics and battery passports, especially for EV
batteries, should be created (Alliance, 2019). The creation of this kind of battery-embedded system
or as a separate device might include the battery chemistry, source, battery health conditions and
the custody chain which battery recyclers may capture at recycling facilities. As shown in Figure
4.2, the Battery Identity Global Passports (BIGP) assist to unveil quickly the identification of the
components in the cells, thereby facilitating the rapid and automated sorting process. A battery-
based BIGP information may be used by a second-life application industry to effectively choose
and evaluate appropriate batteries for reuse. In addition, the BIGP may provide recyclers with
information on cathode and electrolyte compositions. This might be difficult since companies may
not want to reveal their unique formula. Therefore, collaborating and making agreements among
battery producers and recyclers is crucial for all parties involved including policy makers.
Automation might increase the economic efficiency of recycling batteries, leading to more
separation of battery components (Harper et al., 2019). Current batteries are not, however,
designed to disassemble easily. The disassembling procedure would be easier to design items
without utilizing permanent assembling methods. The manufacturers should be urged to explore
at least in limited designs standardizing their cell and pack structure so that easy and automated
disassembling techniques may be used (Bai et al., 2020).
53

Figure 4.2: Recycling setup. For (a) BIGP (b) design for LIB. (Bai et al., 2020)
Besides exploring packages and module levels, novel designs on the electrode and cell
levels should be examined. A novel electrode design might allow for the rapid and easy separation
from other inactive elements of active electrode materials, decreasing the recycling costs and
times. Alternative binding advances and novel electrodes can be followed by research directions
with decreased inactives like current collectors (Li et al., 2020; Li, Liu, Ng & Sharma, 2020). In
addition to innovative electrode designs, rejuvenation in the battery cell seems to be an ignored
field of study and development. Fresh cell designs are being investigated which will allow cells to
be cleansed and replaced at the end of their life in new batteries as reconstituted components. For
this purpose, the creation and testing of novel cell geometries allows the flush and fill idea (Bai,
Muralidharan, Li, Essehli & Belharouak, 2020).
54

Chapter 5: CONCLUSIONS
The growing market for LIB is driven mainly by electricity storage technology for high-energy
applications, such as portable electronic equipment and electric vehicles (EVs). The increasing
popularity of LIB has led to an enormous increase in LIB demand for minerals, including Li, CO
and Ni. Comprehensive mineral deposits and mining, refining and manufacturing activities are
projected to allow mass manufacturing of electricity vehicles that led to certain analysts
questioning battery sustainability as a solution for decarbonized transport. The increasing LIB
demand has highlighted potential issues in the supply chain of the raw materials required for its
production. Any essential metals, such as Li, Co and Ni, used in LIB are scarce, are not being
mined in large amounts or only in a few countries whose trade policies could restrict supply and
price effects. As supply ramps meet increased demand, the environmental and social implications
of these materials’ extraction have also attracted interest.
As other types of batteries (i.e., LAB), recycling for LIB spent batteries has been pushing
forward to overcome the supply chain and environmental challenges. Currently, there are three
recycling methods namely, pyrometallurgy, hydrometallurgy and direct method. The
pyrometallurgy or the smelting and hydrometallurgy, as used in various chemicals processes,
including precipitation, solvent extraction, the exchange of ions and the electrical pinning, which
are usually used in a wide variety of combinations are two technologies which can either be
commercially or in combination. Direct recycling with supercritical carbon dioxide (CO2) solvent
extraction has also been demonstrated. There are advantages and disadvantages of each method.
The application of pyrometallurgy requires heating energy which poses some concerns about the
gas emission footprint. Moreover, the diverse components of LIB challenge the recycling
55

profitability where each component requires different heating temperature. Pre-treatment has been
anticipated to split the components prior to pyrometallurgy recycling. Hydrometallurgy is also a
viable method. However, the waste material at the downstream which requires further treatment.
Direct recycling, in which battery materials are recovered and can be reintroduced into the supply
chain with little additional processing, has been demonstrated at the bench scale. Call for applying
combination of the previous methods has been voiced by the researchers. Automating recycling
has been proposing to tackle issues such as safety, need to extensive labour and quality.
Nonetheless, the size and components diversity in LIB are the main hurdles towards fully
automation recycling.
The penetration of electrification transport (i.e. electrical vehicles), benchmarks the
ongoing cutting-edge literature about LIB recycling with minimal focus on other types of LIB used
in other electronic application (i.e. mobile phones, laptops, cameras ..etc). Stakeholders aware of
the expected boom in EVs industry to encounter the reliance on the fuel and shifting to more
cleaner and renewable energy alternatives. Knowing that the current materials used for LIB
production are scarce in nature (mainly lithium and cobalt), more challenges are expected to appear
especially such raw materials are concentrated in few countries with limited amount. Therefore,
the essence of managing such resources wisely has led to considering the recycling option for LIB
spent batteries. The current recycling techniques are not satisfactory which is still in its infancy
compared to other types of batteries. Based on the literature reviewed, most of the recycling
projects are still in the laboratory scale and theoretical perspective. Luckily, the EVs on the road
are still limited but EVs number is expected to grow in the few years to come. With information
in hand, LIB recycling will not an easy task as hurdles has been faced mainly with current recycling
techniques. Challenges such as the difference in LIB sizes and diversity of the manufacturing
56

components seems to be unresolved if no systematic policies and reinforced regulations are
initiated.
While certain policies have been implemented by some developed countries like China,
Japan and EU and the US, there are still no explicit systems and rules in place for recycling spent
energy batteries. In the European Union, China and other industrialized nations, which have
relatively high standards for battery recycling, less-expensive LIB are recycled than other
conventional batteries. LIB is recycled in sites that are not used after many years of use. The variety
of the LIB in terms of components and in size is a cause of this poor recycling rate. Funds and
other policy instruments must therefore be developed and deployed to encourage strong value
chain recycling capabilities that can compete in terms of cost, quality, and reliability with virgin
materials supply chains while also offering significant advantages over conventional (open-loop)
battery management approaches. The lack of available policies and regulations are understandable
due to the uncertainty of the EVs industry growth, economic feasibility and potential of inventing
solid state battery type. Nevertheless, there are three goals for governments aimed at increasing
investment in this industry: firstly, research and development (R&D) financing; secondly, pilot
projects financing; and thirdly, market-pull policies to help create a favorable LIB collecting and
recycling investment environment.
57

References
Ai, N., Zheng, J., & Chen, W.-Q. (2019). US end-of-life electric vehicle batteries: Dynamic
inventory modeling and spatial analysis for regional solutions. 145, 208-219.
Alliance, G. B. (2019). A Vision for a Sustainable Battery Value Chain in 2030: Unlocking the
Full Potential to Power Sustainable Development and Climate Change Mitigation. Paper
presented at the World Economic Forum.
Arambarri, J., Hayden, J., Elkurdy, M., Meyers, B., Abu Hamatteh, Z. S., Abbassi, B., & Omar,
W. J. E. E. R. (2019). Lithium ion car batteries: Present analysis and future predictions. 24(4),
699-710.
Armand, M., & Tarascon, J.-M. J. n. (2008). Building better batteries. 451(7179), 652-657.
Azhari, L., Bong, S., Ma, X., & Wang, Y. J. M. (2020). Recycling for All Solid-State Lithium-Ion
Batteries. 3(6), 1845-1861.
Baars, J., Domenech, T., Bleischwitz, R., Melin, H. E., & Heidrich, O. (2021). Circular economy
strategies for electric vehicle batteries reduce reliance on raw materials. 4(1), 71-79.
Bai, Y., Muralidharan, N., Li, J., Essehli, R., & Belharouak, I. J. C. (2020). Sustainable direct
recycling of lithium‐ion batteries via solvent recovery of electrode materials. 13(21), 5664-5670.
Bai, Y., Muralidharan, N., Sun, Y.-K., Passerini, S., Stanley Whittingham, M., & Belharouak, I.
(2020). Energy and environmental aspects in recycling lithium-ion batteries: Concept of Battery
Identity Global Passport. Materials Today, 41, 304-315. doi:10.1016/j.mattod.2020.09.001
Beaudet, A., Larouche, F., Amouzegar, K., Bouchard, P., & Zaghib, K. J. S. (2020). Key
Challenges and Opportunities for Recycling Electric Vehicle Battery Materials. 12(14), 5837.
Birkl, C. R., Roberts, M. R., McTurk, E., Bruce, P. G., & Howey, D. A. J. J. o. P. S. (2017).
Degradation diagnostics for lithium ion cells. 341, 373-386.
Bongartz, L., Shammugam, S., Gervais, E., & Schlegl, T. J. J. o. C. P. (2021). Multidimensional
criticality assessment of metal requirements for lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles and
stationary storage applications in Germany by 2050. 292, 126056.
Bresser, D., Hosoi, K., Howell, D., Li, H., Zeisel, H., Amine, K., & Passerini, S. (2018).
Perspectives of automotive battery R&D in China, Germany, Japan, and the USA. 382, 176-178.
58

Bruce, P. G., Freunberger, S. A., Hardwick, L. J., & Tarascon, J.-M. J. N. m. (2012). Li–O 2 and
Li–S batteries with high energy storage. 11(1), 19-29.
Brückner, L., Frank, J., & Elwert, T. J. M. (2020). Industrial Recycling of Lithium-Ion Batteries—
A Critical Review of Metallurgical Process Routes. 10(8), 1107.
Cao, Y., Li, M., Lu, J., Liu, J., & Amine, K. J. N. n. (2019). Bridging the academic and industrial
metrics for next-generation practical batteries. 14(3), 200-207.
Chen, M., Ma, X., Chen, B., Arsenault, R., Karlson, P., Simon, N., & Wang, Y. (2019). Recycling
End-of-Life Electric Vehicle Lithium-Ion Batteries. Joule, 3(11), 2622-2646.
doi:10.1016/j.joule.2019.09.014
Church, C. (2019). Sustainability and second life: The case for cobalt and lithium recycling:
International Institute for Sustainable Development.
Costa, C., Barbosa, J., Gonçalves, R., Castro, H., Del Campo, F., & Lanceros-Méndez, S. J. E. S.
M. (2021). Recycling and environmental issues of lithium-ion batteries: Advances, challenges
and opportunities. 37, 433-465.
Dai, Q., Kelly, J. C., Gaines, L., & Wang, M. J. B. (2019). Life cycle analysis of lithium-ion
batteries for automotive applications. 5(2), 48.
Debnath, B., Chowdhury, R., Ghosh, S. K. J. F. o. e. s., & engineering. (2018). Sustainability of
metal recovery from E-waste. 12(6), 1-12.
Dehghani-Sanij, A. R., Tharumalingam, E., Dusseault, M. B., & Fraser, R. (2019). Study of energy
storage systems and environmental challenges of batteries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 104, 192-208. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2019.01.023
Doose, S., Mayer, J. K., Michalowski, P., & Kwade, A. J. M. (2021). Challenges in ecofriendly
battery recycling and closed material cycles: A perspective on future lithium battery generations.
11(2), 291.
Fan, E., Li, L., Wang, Z., Lin, J., Huang, Y., Yao, Y., . . . Wu, F. (2020). Sustainable Recycling
Technology for Li-Ion Batteries and Beyond: Challenges and Future Prospects. Chem Rev,
120(14), 7020-7063. doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00535
Ferronato, N., Torretta, V. J. I. j. o. e. r., & health, p. (2019). Waste mismanagement in developing
countries: A review of global issues. 16(6), 1060.
59

Figenbaum, E., Thorne, R. J., Amundsen, A. H., Pinchasik, D. R., & Fridstrøm, L. (2020). From
Market Penetration to Vehicle Scrappage: The Movement of Li-Ion Batteries through the
Norwegian Transport Sector (8248012948). Retrieved from
Fujita, T., Chen, H., Wang, K.-t., He, C.-l., Wang, Y.-b., Dodbiba, G., . . . Materials. (2021).
Reduction, reuse and recycle of spent Li-ion batteries for automobiles: A review. 28(2), 179-192.
Gaines, L., Dai, Q., Vaughey, J. T., & Gillard, S. J. R. (2021). Direct Recycling R&D at the ReCell
Center. 6(2), 31.
Gaines, L., Richa, K., Spangenberger, J. J. M. E. (2018). Key issues for Li-ion battery recycling.
5.
Gaines, L. (2014). The future of automotive lithium-ion battery recycling: Charting a sustainable
course. 1, 2-7.
Gies, E. J. N. (2015). Recycling: lazarus batteries. 526(7575), S100-S101.
Govindan, K., & Hasanagic, M. J. I. J. o. P. R. (2018). A systematic review on drivers, barriers,
and practices towards circular economy: a supply chain perspective. 56(1-2), 278-311.
Gu, F., Guo, J., Yao, X., Summers, P. A., Widijatmoko, S. D., & Hall, P. (2017). An investigation
of the current status of recycling spent lithium-ion batteries from consumer electronics in China.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 161, 765-780. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.181
Habib, A. A., Hasan, M. K., Mahmud, M., Motakabber, S., Ibrahimya, M. I., & Islam, S. J. I. P.
E. (2021). A review: Energy storage system and balancing circuits for electric vehicle
application. 14(1), 1-13.
Hanisch, C., Diekmann, J., Stieger, A., Haselrieder, W., & Kwade, A. (2015). Recycling of
Lithium-Ion Batteries. In Handbook of Clean Energy Systems (pp. 1-24).
Harper, G., Sommerville, R., Kendrick, E., Driscoll, L., Slater, P., Stolkin, R., . . . Anderson, P.
(2019). Recycling lithium-ion batteries from electric vehicles. Nature, 575(7781), 75-86.
doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1682-5
Hentout, A., Aouache, M., Maoudj, A., & Akli, I. J. A. R. (2019). Human–robot interaction in
industrial collaborative robotics: a literature review of the decade 2008–2017. 33(15-16), 764-
799.
Hu, Y., Yu, Y., Huang, K., & Wang, L. J. J. o. E. S. (2020). Development tendency and future
response about the recycling methods of spent lithium-ion batteries based on bibliometrics
analysis. 27, 101111.
60

Hua, Y., Liu, X., Zhou, S., Huang, Y., Ling, H., Yang, S. J. R., Conservation, & Recycling. (2020).
Toward Sustainable Reuse of Retired Lithium-ion Batteries from Electric Vehicles. 105249.
Igogo, T. A., Sandor, D. L., Mayyas, A. T., & Engel-Cox, J. (2019). Supply Chain of Raw
Materials Used in the Manufacturing of Light-Duty Vehicle Lithium-Ion Batteries. Retrieved
from
Ioakimidis, C. S., Murillo-Marrodán, A., Bagheri, A., Thomas, D., & Genikomsakis, K. N. J. S.
(2019). Life cycle assessment of a lithium iron phosphate (LFP) electric vehicle battery in second
life application scenarios. 11(9), 2527.
Joshi, B. V., Vipin, B., Ramkumar, J., & Amit, R. K. (2021). Impact of policy instruments on lead-
acid battery recycling: A system dynamics approach. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,
169. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105528
Kalkbrenner, B. J. J. E. P. (2019). Residential vs. community battery storage systems–consumer
preferences in Germany. 129, 1355-1363.
Kim, H., Jang, Y.-C., Hwang, Y., Ko, Y., Yun, H. J. F. o. e. s., & engineering. (2018). End-of-life
batteries management and material flow analysis in South Korea. 12(3), 1-13.
Kim, S., Bang, J., Yoo, J., Shin, Y., Bae, J., Jeong, J., . . . Kwon, K. (2021). A comprehensive
review on the pretreatment process in lithium-ion battery recycling. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 294. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126329
King, S., Boxall, N. J., & Bhatt, A. (2018). Lithium battery recycling in Australia. In: CSIRO,
Australia.
Larouche, F., Tedjar, F., Amouzegar, K., Houlachi, G., Bouchard, P., Demopoulos, G. P., &
Zaghib, K. J. M. (2020). Progress and status of hydrometallurgical and direct recycling of Li-ion
batteries and beyond. 13(3), 801.
Li, J., Ku, Y., Liu, C., & Zhou, Y. (2020). Dual credit policy: Promoting new energy vehicles with
battery recycling in a competitive environment? Journal of Cleaner Production, 243.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118456
Li, J., Lu, Y., Yang, T., Ge, D., Wood III, D. L., & Li, Z. J. i. (2020). Water-Based Electrode
Manufacturing and Direct Recycling of Lithium-Ion Battery Electrodes—A Green and
Sustainable Manufacturing System. 23(5), 101081.
Li, L. (2020). The Material Separation Process for Recycling End-of-life Li-ion Batteries. Virginia
Tech,
61

Li, L., Zhang, X., Li, M., Chen, R., Wu, F., Amine, K., & Lu, J. (2018). The Recycling of Spent
Lithium-Ion Batteries: a Review of Current Processes and Technologies. Electrochemical Energy
Reviews, 1(4), 461-482. doi:10.1007/s41918-018-0012-1
Li, Z., Liu, Z., Ng, T. Y., & Sharma, P. J. E. M. L. (2020). The effect of water content on the elastic
modulus and fracture energy of hydrogel. 35, 100617.
Liao, Q., Mu, M., Zhao, S., Zhang, L., Jiang, T., Ye, J., . . . Zhou, G. J. I. J. o. H. E. (2017).
Performance assessment and classification of retired lithium ion battery from electric vehicles
for energy storage. 42(30), 18817-18823.
Liu, C., Lin, J., Cao, H., Zhang, Y., & Sun, Z. J. J. o. C. P. (2019). Recycling of spent lithium-ion
batteries in view of lithium recovery: A critical review. 228, 801-813.
Lombardo, G., Ebin, B., Foreman, M. R. S. J., Steenari, B.-M., & Petranikova, M. J. J. o. h. m.
(2020). Incineration of EV Lithium-ion batteries as a pretreatment for recycling–Determination
of the potential formation of hazardous by-products and effects on metal compounds. 393,
122372.
Lu, B., Liu, J., & Yang, J. (2017). Substance flow analysis of lithium for sustainable management
in mainland China: 2007–2014. 119, 109-116.
Makuza, B., Tian, Q., Guo, X., Chattopadhyay, K., & Yu, D. J. J. o. P. S. (2021). Pyrometallurgical
options for recycling spent lithium-ion batteries: A comprehensive review. 491, 229622.
Manthiram, A. J. N. c. (2020). A reflection on lithium-ion battery cathode chemistry. 11(1), 1-9.
Marinaro, M., Bresser, D., Beyer, E., Faguy, P., Hosoi, K., Li, H., . . . Passerini, S. J. J. o. P. S.
(2020). Bringing forward the development of battery cells for automotive applications:
Perspective of R&D activities in China, Japan, the EU and the USA. 459, 228073.
May, G. J., Davidson, A., & Monahov, B. (2018). Lead batteries for utility energy storage: A
review. 15, 145-157.
Mayyas, A., Steward, D., & Mann, M. (2019). The case for recycling: Overview and challenges
in the material supply chain for automotive li-ion batteries. Sustainable Materials and
Technologies, 19. doi:10.1016/j.susmat.2018.e00087
Melin, H. E. (2019). State-of-the-art in reuse and recycling of lithium-ion batteries – A research
review.
62

Mongird, K., Viswanathan, V. V., Balducci, P. J., Alam, M. J. E., Fotedar, V., Koritarov, V. S., &
Hadjerioua, B. (2019). Energy storage technology and cost characterization report. Retrieved
from
Olivetti, E. A., Ceder, G., Gaustad, G. G., & Fu, X. J. J. (2017). Lithium-ion battery supply chain
considerations: analysis of potential bottlenecks in critical metals. 1(2), 229-243.
Ongondo, F. O., Williams, I. D., & Cherrett, T. J. J. W. m. (2011). How are WEEE doing? A global
review of the management of electrical and electronic wastes. 31(4), 714-730.
Pagnanelli, F., Moscardini, E., Altimari, P., Atia, T. A., & Toro, L. J. W. m. (2016). Cobalt
products from real waste fractions of end of life lithium ion batteries. 51, 214-221.
Pellow, M. A., Ambrose, H., Mulvaney, D., Betita, R., Shaw, S. J. S. M., & Technologies. (2020).
Research gaps in environmental life cycle assessments of lithium ion batteries for grid-scale
stationary energy storage systems: End-of-life options and other issues. 23, e00120.
Pinegar, H., & Smith, Y. R. (2019). Recycling of End-of-Life Lithium Ion Batteries, Part I:
Commercial Processes. Journal of Sustainable Metallurgy, 5(3), 402-416. doi:10.1007/s40831-
019-00235-9
Qiao, D., Wang, G., Gao, T., Wen, B., & Dai, T. (2021). Potential impact of the end-of-life
batteries recycling of electric vehicles on lithium demand in China: 2010-2050. Sci Total
Environ, 764, 142835. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142835
Rastegarpanah, A., Ahmeid, M., Marturi, N., Attidekou, P. S., Musbahu, M., Ner, R., . . . Stolkin,
R. (2021). Towards robotizing the processes of testing lithium-ion batteries. Proceedings of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part I: Journal of Systems and Control Engineering.
doi:10.1177/0959651821998599
Richa, K., Babbitt, C. W., & Gaustad, G. J. J. o. I. E. (2017). Eco‐efficiency analysis of a lithium‐
ion battery waste hierarchy inspired by circular economy. 21(3), 715-730.
Ryu, J., Song, W. J., Lee, S., Choi, S., & Park, S. J. A. F. M. (2020). A game changer: functional
nano/micromaterials for smart rechargeable batteries. 30(2), 1902499.
Sato, F. E. K., & Nakata, T. J. S. (2020). Recoverability analysis of critical materials from electric
vehicle lithium-ion batteries through a dynamic fleet-based approach for Japan. 12(1), 147.
Scheller, C., Blömeke, S., Nippraschk, M., Schmidt, K., Mennenga, M., Spengler, T. S., . . .
Goldmann, D. J. P. C. (2021). Coordinated Planning in Closed-loop Supply Chains and its
Implications on the Production and Recycling of Lithium-ion Batteries. 98, 464-469.
63

Sharma, A., Zanotti, P., & Musunur, L. P. (2019). Robotic Automation for Electric Vehicle Battery
Assembly: Digital Factory Design and Simulation for the Electric Future of Mobility.
Sidorenko, O., Sairinen, R., & Moore, K. J. R. P. (2020). Rethinking the concept of small-scale
mining for technologically advanced raw materials production. 68, 101712.
Sommerville, R., Shaw-Stewart, J., Goodship, V., Rowson, N., & Kendrick, E. (2020). A review
of physical processes used in the safe recycling of lithium ion batteries. Sustainable Materials
and Technologies, 25. doi:10.1016/j.susmat.2020.e00197
Song, X., Hu, S., Chen, D., & Zhu, B. J. J. o. I. E. (2017). Estimation of waste battery generation
and analysis of the waste battery recycling system in China. 21(1), 57-69.
Stephan, A., Schmidt, T. S., Bening, C. R., & Hoffmann, V. H. J. R. P. (2017). The sectoral
configuration of technological innovation systems: Patterns of knowledge development and
diffusion in the lithium-ion battery technology in Japan. 46(4), 709-723.
Tang, Y., Zhang, Q., Li, Y., Wang, G., & Li, Y. (2018). Recycling mechanisms and policy
suggestions for spent electric vehicles' power battery -A case of Beijing. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 186, 388-406. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.043
Tervo, E., Agbim, K., DeAngelis, F., Hernandez, J., Kim, H. K., Odukomaiya, A. J. R., & Reviews,
S. E. (2018). An economic analysis of residential photovoltaic systems with lithium ion battery
storage in the United States. 94, 1057-1066.
Tian, X., Wu, Y., Gong, Y., & Zuo, T. (2015). The lead-acid battery industry in China: outlook
for production and recycling. 33(11), 986-994.
Tian, X., Xiao, H., Liu, Y., & Ding, W. (2021). Design and simulation of a secondary resource
recycling system: A case study of lead-acid batteries. Waste Manag, 126, 78-88.
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2020.12.038
Velázquez-Martínez, O., Valio, J., Santasalo-Aarnio, A., Reuter, M., & Serna-Guerrero, R. J. B.
(2019). A critical review of lithium-ion battery recycling processes from a circular economy
perspective. 5(4), 68.
Wang, J., Li, H., Lu, H., Yang, H., & Wang, C. J. J. o. C. P. (2020). Integrating offline logistics
and online system to recycle e-bicycle battery in China. 247, 119095.
Wang, X., Gaustad, G., Babbitt, C. W., Bailey, C., Ganter, M. J., & Landi, B. J. J. J. o. e. m. (2014).
Economic and environmental characterization of an evolving Li-ion battery waste stream. 135,
126-134.
64

Wang, X., Gaustad, G., Babbitt, C. W., Richa, K. J. R., Conservation, & Recycling. (2014).
Economies of scale for future lithium-ion battery recycling infrastructure. 83, 53-62.
Werner, D., Peuker, U. A., & Mütze, T. (2020). Recycling Chain for Spent Lithium-Ion Batteries.
Metals, 10(3). doi:10.3390/met10030316
Whittingham, M. S. J. C. r. (2004). Lithium batteries and cathode materials. 104(10), 4271-4302.
Whittingham, M. S. J. S. (1976). Electrical energy storage and intercalation chemistry. 192(4244),
1126-1127.
Xu, P., Tan, D. H., & Chen, Z. J. T. i. C. (2021). Emerging trends in sustainable battery chemistries.
Yang, M., Smart, P., Kumar, M., Jolly, M., Evans, S. J. P. P., & Control. (2018). Product-service
systems business models for circular supply chains. 29(6), 498-508.
Zeng, X., Li, M., Abd El‐Hady, D., Alshitari, W., Al‐Bogami, A. S., Lu, J., & Amine, K. J. A. E.
M. (2019). Commercialization of lithium battery technologies for electric vehicles. 9(27),
1900161.
Zhao, Y., Pohl, O., Bhatt, A. I., Collis, G. E., Mahon, P. J., Rüther, T., & Hollenkamp, A. F. J. S.
C. (2021). A Review on Battery Market Trends, Second-Life Reuse, and Recycling. 2(1), 167-
205.
Zheng, X., Zhu, Z., Lin, X., Zhang, Y., He, Y., Cao, H., & Sun, Z. (2018). A Mini-Review on
Metal Recycling from Spent Lithium Ion Batteries. Engineering, 4(3), 361-370.
doi:10.1016/j.eng.2018.05.018Ziemann, S., Müller, D. B., Schebek, L., Weil, M. J. R.,
conservation, & recycling. (2018). Modeling the potential impact of lithium recycling from EV
batteries on lithium demand: a dynamic MFA approach. 133, 76-85.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Lithium-ion batteries (LIB) are rechargeable batteries used in electronic devices due to its efficiency and long service life. Lately, it has been introduced into the electrification of the transportation system and power storage. The demand on LIB is expected to grow rapidly with the shifting trend towards cleaner energy in an attempt to halt the environmental footprint produced by the current fuel driven systems. The latest literature is focusing more on recycling spent LIB mainly from electrical vehicles (EVs). Currently, the number of EVs on the road is not significant, yet the number is expected to grow in the few years to come. The main challenges for recycling spent LIB compared to conventional batteries (i.e., lead acid batteries), are due to the diversity of the components, sizes and structure. As a result, the existing recycling methods, namely pyrometallurgy, hydrometallurgy and direct method, are not efficient for sound recycling outcomes due to technical, economic, quality, environmental and data collection hurdles. Investing more time and money on the recycling infrastructures, research and development, and techniques is pivotal for the environmental movement. Ongoing projects are taking place in this regard mainly by manufacturing companies. However, more collaboration is required especially by the governmental sector to formulate systematic policies and regulations. Currently, there are No well-established oriented policies by leading countries in this field. Nonetheless, recycling spent batteries seems to be inevitable due to the scarce of the raw materials used for manufacturing LIB. Initiatives in recycling spent LIB by some countries such as China and Japan are noteworthy even though it is far behind aspirations.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Modification of electrode materials for lithium ion batteries

PDF

Integrating systems of desalination and potable reuse: reduced energy consumption for increased water supply

PDF

Understanding the role of electrode design in determining the electrochemical performance of high-energy/high-power lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur batteries

PDF

Evaluating the role of energy system decarbonization and land cover properties on urban air quality in southern California

PDF

Catalytic oxidation and precursor identification of disinfection byproducts in recycled water

PDF

Nanostructured silicon for lithium-ion battery anode

PDF

Advancing lithium batteries and related electrochemical technologies for a sustainable future

PDF

Nanostructure design of sulfur cathodes and lithium metal anodes for lithium-ion batteries

PDF

Thermally driven water treatment with membrane distillation: membrane performance, waste heat integration, and cooling analysis

PDF

Investigating the role of climate in affecting residential electricity consumption through high spatiotemporal resolution observations

PDF

Studies on lithium-ion battery electrolytes and three component Strecker reaction

PDF

Developing frameworks to quantify the operational and environmental performance of energy systems within the context of climate change

PDF

Nanostructured silicon anode and sulfur cathode for lithium rechargeable batteries

PDF

Oxidative potential of urban atmospheric particles: spatiotemporal trends and associations with source-specific chemical components

PDF

Beyond greenhouse gases and towards urban-scale climate mitigation: understanding the roles of black carbon aerosols and the urban heat island effect as local to regional radiative forcing agents

PDF

Electrocatalysts for direct liquid-feed fuel cells and advanced electrolytes for lithium-ion batteries

PDF

Residential electricity demand in the context of urban warming: leveraging high resolution smart meter data to quantify spatial and temporal patterns…

PDF

Analysis of sources and profiles of organic carbon in ambient particulate matter across fine and coarse sizes and introducing an optical technique for real-time urban dust measurement

PDF

From tugboats to trees: investigating the coupled systems of urban air pollution and meteorology

PDF

Investigating the temporal trends, sources, and toxicity of ambient particulate matter (PM) in different metropolitan environments, and development of a novel aerosol generation setup for inhalat...

Asset Metadata

Creator Alhaddad, Anas (author)

Core Title Lithium-ion batteries (LIB) industrial recycling and policies

School Viterbi School of Engineering

Degree Master of Science

Degree Program Environmental Engineering

Degree Conferral Date 2021-12

Publication Date 10/06/2021

Defense Date 08/21/2021

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag batteries,battery recycling,electronic vehicles,EV,hydrometallurgy,lithium,lithium batteries,lithium-ion batteries,OAI-PMH Harvest,pyrometallurgy,rechargeable batteries,Recycling

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Sanders, Kelly (committee chair), Ban-Weiss, George (committee member), Smith, Adam (committee member)

Creator Email A7alhaddad@gmail.com,aalhadda@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC16022364

Unique identifier UC16022364

Legacy Identifier etd-AlhaddadAn-10138

Document Type Thesis

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Alhaddad, Anas

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu