Next Article in Journal
Thermo-Electro-Mechanical Modeling and Experimental Validation of Thickness Change of a Lithium-Ion Pouch Cell with Blend Positive Electrode
Next Article in Special Issue
State of Charge Estimation for Lithium-Ion Battery Based on Unscented Kalman Filter and Long Short-Term Memory Neural Network
Previous Article in Journal
Anion and Cation Co-Modified Vanadium Oxide for Cathode Material of Aqueous Zinc-Ion Battery
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Batteries
Volume 9
Issue 7
10.3390/batteries9070353
batteries-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Sustainable Development Goals and End-of-Life Electric Vehicle Battery: Literature Review

by
Muhammad Nadeem Akram
and
Walid Abdul-Kader
*
Department of Mechanical, Automotive, and Materials Engineering, University of Windsor, Windsor, ON N9B 3P4, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Batteries 2023, 9(7), 353; https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries9070353
Submission received: 10 May 2023 / Revised: 19 June 2023 / Accepted: 25 June 2023 / Published: 2 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Battery Management System for Electric Vehicles)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
With a global urgency to decrease greenhouse gas emissions, there has been an increasing demand for electric vehicles on the roads to replace vehicles that use internal combustion. Subsequently, the demand and consumption of raw materials have increased, and thus, there has been an increasing number of retired lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) that contain valuable elements. This literature review paper looks at the following: lifecycle assessments (LCA) of EV batteries, the recycling of LIBs while analyzing what studies have been conducted to improve recycling processes, what recycling facilities have been established or are being planned, studies on the circular economy, the environmental benefits of recycling end-of-life (EOL) batteries, and how LIB recycling is aligned with the Sustainable Devel opment Goals, focusing in particular on Goal 13: Climate Action.

1. Introduction

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) published in 2015 were an achievement for putting both developing and developed countries on the path of sustainable development (United Nations General Assembly, 2015) [1]. Through these goals, the world hopes to transform itself by ensuring human well-being, economic prosperity, and environmental protection, all by 2030. Many difficult issues that affect the globe are considered and worked upon through these SDGs, which consist of 17 goals and 169 targets. However, since these SDGs are linked implicitly, two conflicting goals may hinder the entire process and result in the world deviating from the path [2].
Due to this issue, it is necessary to investigate these interrelations and links between the goals so that we may find possible points of conflict and address them, and these points of concern can be found across [3] and within the SDGs) [4]. While this may seem to be a major problem, it can be noted that this is not the first time such dependencies that cause issues have appeared in global agendas. Plans such as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) [5], poverty alleviation [6] and climate change adaptation and mitigation response [7], have also faced and addressed similar issues. Below in Table 1, we have listed the seventeen goals highlighted in the SDG agenda.
Of these seventeen goals, our focus is primarily on Goal 13: Climate Action. We will investigate how recycling the LIBs of Electric Vehicles (EVs) around the world plays a role in the progress and success of this goal. To keep the global temperature increase below 2 °C, CO2 emissions must be reduced “by around 25% by 2030 from 2010 levels, and reach net zero by around 2070” [9]. To keep the increase in temperature below 1.5 °C, which is the more optimized and preferred target, there must be a reduction of 45% by 2030 in global human-produced net CO2 emissions compared to the 2010 levels, to reach a net zero near 2050 [9]. Unfortunately, instead of decreasing, emissions have, in fact, increased [10].
There have been several reviews of the current literature regarding LIB recycling, like [11], who focused on recycling and its environmental impact, and [12], who primarily studied recycling technologies and used a Weighted Product Method to choose the best LIB recycling processes. [13] prepared a review using two methodologies, namely ProKnow-C and Methodi Ordinatio, to develop a bibliographic portfolio that presents the latest and best literature regarding LIB recycling. They propose a database of a finite collection of articles and reports with relevant authors to push new research forward on this theme, which is a crucial endeavor. With respect to BEV range anxiety, [14], both address concerns and propose a solution involving Peer to Peer Car Charging (P2C2), which allows EVs to share charge while in motion. Through observations of simulations of this P2C2 solution, they found significant improvement in EV mobility. Furthermore, ref. [15], prepare a literature review of the current and potential charging infrastructures, addressing various strategies in their present use as well as future possibilities.
The purpose of this article is to provide a literature review on battery recycling by considering its evolution and impact on sustainable development. Academic and industrial readers will find it convenient to consider papers and models that we examined and investigated on lifecycle assessments of EV batteries, recycling processes, circular economies, and environmental benefits with an analysis of how the reduction of GHG emissions through battery recycling could enhance the attainment of Goal 13 (climate change) of the SDGs.

2. Research Methodology

This research study was conducted in two stages. Firstly, the key phrases “Recycling Lithium-Ion batteries” and “literature review” were used in the title, abstract, and keywords to undertake the search for articles. These keywords were used in the Google-scholar search engine and Scopus. Searches were performed for LIB recycling, then for the circular economy, and finally for the Sustainable Development Goals; all the articles were then analyzed for relevancy. Secondly, this process was repeated for the years 2020, 2021, and 2022 to make sure articles and reports were as recent as possible. A total of 357 articles were searched for and collected, and after a meticulous assessment of each, 164 were chosen to be analyzed and discussed in this review. To accurately investigate LIB recycling, recycling processes, the circular economy, and the Sustainable Development Goals, this is a valid number of articles, papers, and reports to examine. Table 2 below summarizes the research methodology and presents the remainder of this work where every row of the table denotes a future section of the manuscript. For example, row three or Section 3 relates to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Section 4 is about the Life Cycle Assessment, Section 5 covers recycling processes, Section 6 addresses the circular economy, and Section 7 presents environmental benefits, and then, finally, related discussions are reported.
Figure 1 below reveals the number of papers reviewed per year from 1990 to 2023.

3. Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)

In 2000, the Millennium Development Goals were agreed upon by the United Nations to guide global development. These goals were to be achieved by 2015 [16]. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were a collection of 17 topics and a total of 169 targets agreed upon by the United Nation General Assembly [1]. They were the succession of the Millennium Development Goals. While the former ran from 2000 to 2015, the latter focused on the years 2015 to 2030. However, the difference of the SDGs was to push a shift in the global development paradigm towards more economic, social, and environmental sustainability. With five cores (5P) of the people, planet, prosperity, peace, and partnership, the SDGs have jumpstarted many national actions, and provided many visions for the future. Table 3 summarizes the papers reviewed in this research work.
While there have been numerous setbacks from difficult circumstances, ranging from global to national in scale, we noticed a consistent drive for progress. Many countries wish to adopt frameworks and execute plans that touch multiple goals from the SGDs, such as the circular economy and stimulation of the electric vehicle market. The magnitude of progress fluctuates over the years, so the literature on our advancements toward sustainability will increase continuously.

4. Life Cycle Assessment

Ref. [30] claim that using EV batteries in stationary applications would be environmentally beneficial when considering their life cycle. These said batteries still have roughly 80% of the capacity they come with, which makes them good for reuse in applications with a lower energy demand [31]. Table 4 below presents the papers reviewed in this research work. Below that, in Figure 2, we present a Lifecycle assessment for LIBs.
Table
Table 4. Life Cycle Assessment of LIBs by Author and Year.
Table 4. Life Cycle Assessment of LIBs by Author and Year.
AuthorYearRemarks
Koroma et al.2022
[32]		This study conducted an LCA for three contexts considering future changes in EV charging, battery efficiency fade and refurbishment, and recycling by determining their significance on battery life cycles and performance.
Shafique and Luo2022
[33]		This paper investigated the impacts on the environment caused by the production, transportation, and other EV phases; it found that China’s EVs had the high est impact when compared to other EVs, considering the 2019 and 2025 electricity mix scenarios.
Yang et al.2021
[34]		This study used an LCA to find the CO2 emissions from vehicle production, use, and EOL.
Sun et al.2020
[35]		This paper showed that, for a LIB’s lifecycle, the highest energy demand and global warming potential come from its material preparation, wrought aluminum, and electrolytes.
Qiao et al.2019
[36]		This paper showed that in 2015, the life cycle GHG emissions of an EV came out to be 41.0 t of CO2-eq, which was 18% lower than ICE vehicles.
Bicer and Dincer2018
[37]		The study conducted an in-depth comparison of ICE vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles, and EVs, with regards to environmental impact, by employing a process based LCA to analyze raw material extraction to vehicle disposal.
Burchart-Korol et al.2018
[38]		This paper focused on EVs in Poland and the Czech Republic, conducting an LCA about electricity production for charging batteries; it considered systems from 2015 to projected systems in 2050 to be used to charge EVs.
Wu et al.2018
[39]		This study conducted an LCA to quantify the GHG emissions from EVs and ICE vehicles across their lifecycles in 2010, 2014, and 2020 under various contexts; it found that there is potential for such GHGs to be reduced by adopting EVs as the main mode of transport, as their life cycle showed lower emissions than ICE vehicles.
Kim et al.2016
[40]		This paper assessed the emissions across the life cycle of a particular battery in an EV, namely, the LIB in the Ford Focus. It considered energy materials’ input and other data collected from the battery cell and pack supplier, and it concluded that the GHG emissions for these 24 kWh LIBs are 3.4 tons of CO2-eq across its lifespan, which translates to 140 kg per kWh or 11 kg per kg of the battery.
Tagliaferri et al.2016
[41]		This study conducted an LCA on a European LIB powered EV and compared it to an ICE vehicle; it showed that the GHG emissions for the former were half that of the latter during their use phases.
Batteries 09 00353 g002 550
Figure 2. LIB’s Lifecycle State [42].
Figure 2. LIB’s Lifecycle State [42].
Batteries 09 00353 g002

5. Recycling Processes

Although recycling techniques are typically utilized in industry, there is still considerable work being done on an experimental and laboratory scales to improve recycling operations, profit, and energy efficiency [43]. Table 5 below lists the worldwide facilities for recycling LIBs as per [35,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57]. The remainder of this section covers the LIB recycling steps and the various recycling processes.

5.1. Recycling Steps

The steps for the industrialized recycling for EV LIBs, as shown in Figure 3, usually consist of collection, sorting, handling, elimination, and distribution, which allow for significant material recovery [58].

5.2. Pyrometallurgical Process

Pyrometallurgy is a widely used process to recover various metals (precious metals and base metals) from electronic waste. This process encompasses smelting, incineration, and high-temperature roasting [60]. A single-shaft furnace is employed in the pyrometallurgical process where the batteries are brought apart and placed into the furnace by gradually increasing the temperature from 300–700 °C to 1200–1450 °C. Given this heat, the electrolyte is faded/evaporated, the plastic is pyrolyzed and the other materials are melted down [61,62]. The outcome of this process results in a mix of copper, cobalt, nickel, lithium, iron, and rare earth elements [61,63].
From the pyrometallurgical process, cobalt, copper, and “nickel alloys (metallic phase) or matte (Sulfidic phase)”, aluminum, manganese, lithium “slag (oxidic phase)”, and flying ash, are produced [64,65,66]. Another process, hydrometallurgy, is used to separate these mixed materials and recover the individual metals: cobalt, lithium, manganese, nickel, and graphite [65,66]. Table 6 summarizes the papers reviewed and related to the pyrometallurgical process.

5.3. Special Recycling Process

A mechanochemical recycling process, used for retired LIB cathode materials (C and LiCoO2), and waste polyvinyl chloride (PVC) was examined by [74]. With a combination of grinding and leaching techniques, they found a viable recovery of raw materials, as well as a high potential for an environmental and economic impact. Table 7 presents a summary for the papers reviewed for such special recycling processes.

5.4. Direct Recycling Process

This process comprises physical and chemical steps, with battery separation completed at low energies and temperatures. Thus, ref. [82] determine that this would be more cost effective than leaching due to a lower material requirement. They also note that direct recycling is not widely used across the industry currently, and published processes from recycling companies are scarce [83]. Table 8 summarizes the papers reviewed regarding direct recycling processes.

5.5. Hydrometallurgical Process

Leaching and purification used in the hydrometallurgical method have been found effective in recovering precious metals from electronic waste [94].
There have been many changes and additions to hydrometallurgical processes and techniques to recycle active materials of cathodes made of different chemistries of LIBs such as Lithium Cobalt Dioxide (LCO), Lithium Manganese Dioxide (LMO), Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide, (NMC), Lithium Nickel Cobalt Aluminum Oxide (NCA), and Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) [95], to salvage valuable metals, specifically cobalt, nickel, manganese, and lithium [96,97]. Any hydrometallurgical technique involves physical and chemical steps through liquid processing, thus resulting in a high material recovery [98,99,100]. The key benefits of hydrometallurgical processes are the decreased energy requirement under lower temperatures, the significant recovery of lithium in the carbonate form, the leaching of metals for use in new LIBs cathodes, and s efficiency on a variety of battery chemistries [101]. Table 9 presents a summary of the papers reviewed for hydrometallurgical processes.

5.6. Metallurgical and Mechanical Processes

EOL LIBs can also be treated via mechanical techniques. First, they are broken down into incredibly fine pieces and are then categorized by their physical properties. From here, typical outputs are aluminum/copper, non-ferrous metals, and ferrous metals, which can be treated with other metallurgical processes, and a material called black mass, which can be treated through pyrometallurgy or hydrometallurgy. If the latter is performed, organic components must be removed via thermal processes [65,116]. “Employing pyrometallurgical method, cobalt, copper, and nickel alloys (metallic phase) or matte (sulfidic phase), aluminum, manganese, and lithium slag (oxidic phase), and flying ash are produced” [64,65,67]. “These elements can be further processed by hydrometallurgical methods to recuperate the individual metals”. In hydrometallurgy, cobalt, lithium, manganese, nickel, and graphite can be recovered [65,117]. Table 10 summarizes the reviewed papers on metallurgical and mechanical processes.

6. Circular Economy

According to several authors [115,123,124], the notion of a circular economy was first proposed by [125] and it has been increasing in popularity since the 1970s. [126] The report by Pearce and Turner investigated economic systems, especially their linearity and open-endedness by looking at how natural resources are used in production and consumption as inputs, as well as how they end up as waste as output. Figure 4 shows how a circular economy would connect its processes, namely, material input, design, production, consumption, and recycling. When considering recycling as a product’s end-of-life, it allows us to close the loop by using the materials from the output as new materials for input [127].
Ref. [128] published a Canadian report with respect to reverse logistics whose purpose was to find the best places to establish battery dismantling recycling facilities, as well as calculate the economic and environmental impacts of such infrastructure. Their results indicated that the average costs of recycled raw materials are 1.29 CAD per kg of spent battery pack, and carbon intensity is 0.7 kg CO2-eq per kg of spent battery pack. As per the Paris Agreement targets [129], a main driver for their completion is establishing a circular supply chain for electric vehicle batteries. Valuable materials such as cobalt, nickel, copper, lithium, and aluminum can be recovered via LIB recycling, as shown in Figure 5.
Table 11 summarizes the research work pertaining to the circular economy.

7. Environmental Benefits

There are immense costs, energy, and environmental deficits (GHG emissions) to producing items with raw extracted resources. As such, there are equally significant benefits for remanufacturing, repurposing, and recycling, as they cut down on all three of the aforementioned metrics [43,149]. All the tasks that occur when a LIB is to be remanufactured, repurposed, or recycled (via reverse logistics) are shown below in Figure 6, a process flow chart.
Table 12 summarizes the papers reviewed that talk about environmental benefits.

8. Discussion

In the industry, two processes are extensively employed: pyrometallurgy and hydrometallurgy, which when correctly used together are incredibly efficient at recycling materials, particularly black mass, which can reach almost 100%. Specifically, through pyrometallurgy, cobalt, copper, and nickel are retrieved, and through hydrometallurgy, lithium, manganese, and further cobalt and nickel can be retrieved [65,157].
Various studies take into consideration the flow of materials from recyclable batteries and economic value chains across years. In Catalonia, Spain, under strict climate change laws, an increase of twenty-five times the number of batteries in 2030, and an increase of seventy-two times in 2040 are expected. An increase of up to 80% of cobalt, nickel, and copper, and 60% of lithium are projected in potential supply from secondary materials received from EOL batteries. As such, it is highly encouraging to put optimal management strategies in place as soon as possible to keep material recovery as efficient as possible [158]. A study in Brazil by [159], addressed how in 2030, the number of new electric vehicles in the market could exceed 1.8 million, which results in a demand of 8700, 15,000, 46,000, 15,000 and 92,000 tons of lithium, cobalt, nickel, manganese, and graphite, respectively. In addition, the number of EOL batteries would exceed 340,000 but the amount of raw material truly recovered is heavily dependent on the strategy employed to manage the input and output of batteries to/from recycling facilities. Thus, we consider the flow of materials through the phases of an EV battery, and a substance flow analysis done by [160] does so. They first determined that by 2040, 72–78 million electric vehicles would be present in Europe, whereas the number of batteries in their second use would number 3–11 million. In the same year 2040, the recycling waste flow would increase to around three million batteries with the total capacity being 125 GWh. Regarding the future, the authors concluded that the waste stream could substitute 10–300% of the demand for raw materials for electric vehicles.
The recovery of materials present in electric vehicle batteries offers a great benefit for countries wishing to partake in environmental goals. As mentioned earlier in Table 1, goal thirteen of the Sustainable Development Goals (Climate Action) discusses the reduction of emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. We can see that through battery recycling, environmental detriments associated with extracting raw materials and their transportation can be significantly reduced. It is shown in a study analyzing hydrometallurgical processes, a net saving of 1 kg of CO2-eq per kg of EOL battery can be achieved [161]. Furthermore, even if we set a lower bound that says 30% of EOL batteries are to be recycled, a study by [162], showed that in China alone, 4.3 million tons of CO2 emissions can be reduced by 2030. Additional research is still required to select the most efficient pyrometallurgical processes to optimally decrease CO2 emissions [151].
The economic benefits achievable from battery recycling are also incredibly high. A study by [104], considered 500,000 tons of recyclable batteries from 2019, and determined that through correct recycling procedures, 15,000, 35,000, 45,000, 60,000, 75,000, and 90,000 tons of aluminum, phosphorus, copper, cobalt, lithium, and iron could be recovered, respectively.

9. Future Work

We now discuss various areas currently requiring additional study. A Life Cycle Assessment model for EOL batteries can be done with consideration to electric vehicle markets at the local (national) and global scales. Some developing countries have fewer opportunities for recycling management, so optimal route selection has yet to be researched. Battery storage systems constructed from cells from EOL LIBs are a growing concept, and they should be analyzed further to determine maximal economic benefits. Currently, it is not cost-effective for electric vehicle manufacturers to put recycling procedures in place, so an assessment of the level of government subsidies and assistance packages is still necessary. The applications and effects of blockchain technologies on EOL batteries’ waste streams have yet to be discussed. Finally, new business models with consideration to reverse logistics may result in more efficient material returns to manufacturers, so in-depth research can be done.

10. Conclusions

With many countries striving for improvements in environmental policies, the demand for electric vehicles over internal combustion engine vehicles has been increasing. It follows, nonetheless, that the demand for electric vehicle batteries and their raw materials has seen an upwards trend. With many batteries reaching their end-of-life, it is equally imperative for environmental policies to recycle them to recover their valuable materials for reuse. We investigate the current most widely used recycling processes globally, as discussed in Section 8. Furthermore, an analysis of these various recycling processes of current recycling facilities worldwide was conducted, and the total annual recycling amounts for each process were calculated. After studying the various articles in the current literature, we found that there exist significant economic and environmental benefits of recycling batteries as opposed to discarding them at their EOL. Although various literature reviews have been published with respect to battery recycling, our review differs by focusing on the Sustainable Development Goals, specifically, Goal 13: Climate Action.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.N.A. and W.A.-K.; Papers collection, M.N.A.; Methodology, M.N.A. and W.A.-K.; Analysis, M.N.A. and W.A.-K.; Validation, M.N.A. Writing—original draft, M.N.A.; Review and Editing, M.N.A. and W.A.-K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), Canada. Grant number: RGPIN-2020-05499.

Data Availability Statement

All the data used in this research work are incorporated in the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. United Nations General Assembly. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf (accessed on 13 March 2023).
  2. Nilsson, M.; Griggs, D.; Visbeck, M. Policy: Map the interactions between Sustainable Development Goals. Nature 2016, 534, 320–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Lu, Y.; Nakicenovic, N.; Visbeck, M.; Stevance, A.-S. Policy: Five priorities for the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Nature 2015, 520, 432–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Schmidt-Traub, G. Investment Needs to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals: Understanding the Billions and Trillions. 12 November 2015. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep15864 (accessed on 16 January 2023).
  5. Bue, M.C.L.; Klasen, S. Identifying Synergies and Complementarities Between MDGs: Results from Cluster Analysis. Soc. Indic. Res. 2013, 113, 647–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Mathy, S.; Blanchard, O. Proposal for a poverty-adaptation-mitigation window within the Green Climate Fund. Clim. Policy 2015, 16, 752–767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Smith, P.; Olesen, J.E. Synergies between the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change in agriculture. J. Agric. Sci. 2010, 148, 543–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015; Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda (accessed on 21 December 2022).
  9. IPCC. Global Warming of 1.5 °C. An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5°C above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018; Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  10. UNEP. The Emissions Gap Report 2018. United Nations Environnent Programme, Nairobi. 2018. Available online: sources/emissions-gap-report-2018 (accessed on 10 February 2022).
  11. Pražanová, A.; Knap, V.; Stroe, D.-I. Literature Review, Recycling of Lithium-Ion Batteries from Electric Vehicles, Part I: Recycling Technology. Energies 2022, 15, 1086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Loganathan, M.K.; Anandarajah, G.; Tan, C.M.; Msagati, T.A.M.; Das, B.; Hazarika, M. Review and selection of recycling technology for lithium-ion batteries made for EV application—A life cycle perspective. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2022; Volume 1100, p. 012011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Regatieri, H.R.; Junior, O.H.A.; Salgado, J.R.C. Systematic Review of Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling Literature Using ProKnow-C and Methodi Ordinatio. Energies 2022, 15, 1485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chakraborty, P.; Parker, R.; Hoque, T.; Cruz, J.; Du, L.; Wang, S.; Bhunia, S. Addressing the range anxiety of battery electric vehicles with charging en route. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 5588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Leijon, J.; Boström, C. Charging Electric Vehicles Today and in the Future. World Electr. Veh. J. 2022, 13, 139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. United Nations. The Future We Want: Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly on 27 July 2012. 2012. Available online: https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/66/288&Lang=E (accessed on 10 February 2023).
  17. Bose, S.; Khan, H.Z. Sustainable development goals (SDGs) reporting and the role of country-level institutional factors: International evidence. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 335, 130290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Pereira, P.; Zhao, W.; Symochko, L.; Inacio, M.; Bogunovic, I.; Barcelo, D. The Russian-Ukrainian armed conflict will push back the sustainable development goals. Geogr. Sustain. 2022, 3, 277–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Business Line. Sustainable Mobility: Role of EVs in Achieving SDGs. Retrieved from Sustainable Mobility: Role of EVs in Achieving SDGs; The Hindu Business Line: Chennai, India, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  20. Belmonte-Ureña, L.J.; Plaza-Úbeda, J.A.; Vazquez-Brust, D.; Yakovleva, N. Circular economy, degrowth and green growth as pathways for research on sustainable development goals: A global analysis and future agenda. Ecol. Econ. 2021, 185, 107050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zwiers, J.; Jaeger-Erben, M.; Hofmann, F. Circular literacy. A knowledge-based approach to the circular economy. Cult. Organ. 2020, 26, 121–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hernandez, R.R.; Jordaan, S.M.; Kaldunski, B.; Kumar, N. Aligning Climate Change and Sustainable Development Goals With an Innovation Systems Roadmap for Renewable Power. Front. Sustain. 2020, 1, 583090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Tremblay, D.; Fortier, F.; Boucher, J.; Riffon, O.; Villeneuve, C. Sustainable development goal interactions: An analysis based on the five pillars of the 2030 agenda. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 28, 1584–1596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. García-Feijoo, M.; Eizaguirre, A.; Rica-Aspiunza, A. Systematic Review of Sustainable-Development-Goal Deployment in Business Schools. Sustainability 2020, 12, 440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. UNDP. Impact of COVID-19 on the Sustainable Development Goals: Pursuing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in a World Reshaped by COVID-19; Josef Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver: Denver, CO, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  26. Vinuesa, R.; Azizpour, H.; Leite, I.; Balaam, M.; Dignum, V.; Domisch, S.; Felländer, A.; Langhans, S.D.; Tegmark, M.; Nerini, F.F. The role of artificial intelligence in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Schroeder, P.; Anggraeni, K.; Weber, U. The Relevance of Circular Economy Practices to the Sustainable Development Goals. J. Ind. Ecol. 2019, 23, 77–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Allen, C.; Metternicht, G.; Wiedmann, T. Initial progress in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A review of evidence from countries. Sustain. Sci. 2018, 13, 1453–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Stafford-Smith, M.; Griggs, D.; Gaffney, O.; Ullah, F.; Reyers, B.; Kanie, N.; Stigson, B.; Shrivastava, P.; Leach, M.; O’connell, D. Integration: The key to implementing the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustain. Sci. 2016, 12, 911–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  30. Hossain, E.; Murtaugh, D.; Mody, J.; Faruque, H.M.R.; Sunny, S.H.; Mohammad, N. A Comprehensive Review on Second-Life Batteries: Current State, Manufacturing Considerations, Applications, Impacts, Barriers & Potential Solutions, Business Strategies, and Policies. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 73215–73252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Casals, L.C.; Amante García, B.; Canal, C. Second life batteries lifespan: Rest of useful life and environmental analysis. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 232, 354–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Koroma, M.S.; Costa, D.; Philippot, M.; Cardellini, G.; Hosen, S.; Coosemans, T.; Messagie, M. Life cycle assessment of battery electric vehicles: Implications of future electricity mix and different battery end-of-life management. Sci. Total. Environ. 2022, 831, 154859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Shafique, M.; Luo, X. Environmental life cycle assessment of battery electric vehicles from the current and future energy mix perspective. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 303, 114050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Yang, L.; Yu, B.; Yang, B.; Chen, H.; Malima, G.; Wei, Y.-M. Life cycle environmental assessment of electric and internal combustion engine vehicles in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 285, 124899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Sun, X.; Luo, X.; Zhang, Z.; Meng, F.; Yang, J. Life cycle assessment of lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide (NCM) batteries for electric passenger vehicles. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 273, 123006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Qiao, Q.; Zhao, F.; Liu, Z.; Hao, H. Electric vehicle recycling in China: Economic and environmental benefits. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 140, 45–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Bicer, Y.; Dincer, I. Life cycle environmental impact assessments and comparisons of alternative fuels for clean vehicles. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 132, 141–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Burchart-Korol, D.; Jursova, S.; Folęga, P.; Korol, J.; Pustejovska, P.; Blaut, A. Environmental life cycle assessment of electric vehicles in Poland and the Czech Republic. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 202, 476–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Wu, Z.; Wang, M.; Zheng, J.; Sun, X.; Zhao, M.; Wang, X. Life cycle greenhouse gas emission reduction potential of battery electric vehicle. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 190, 462–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kim, H.C.; Wallington, T.J.; Arsenault, R.; Bae, C.; Ahn, S.; Lee, J. Cradle-to-Gate Emissions from a Commercial Electric Vehicle Li-Ion Battery: A Comparative Analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 7715–7722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Tagliaferri, C.; Evangelisti, S.; Acconcia, F.; Domenech, T.; Ekins, P.; Barletta, D.; Lettieri, P. Life cycle assessment of future electric and hybrid vehicles: A cradle-to-grave systems engineering approach. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2016, 112, 298–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Akram, M.N.; Abdul-Kader, W. Electric vehicle battery state changes and reverse logistics considerations. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 2021, 14, 390–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Nordic Council of Ministers. Mapping of Lithium-Ion Batteries for Vehicles; Nordisk Ministerråd: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2019; ISBN 9789289362931. [Google Scholar]
  44. Dowa Holdings Co. Ltd. DOWA ECO-SYSTEM Expands Used Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling Capacity. 2021. Available online: https://ir.dowa.co.jp/en/ir/news/news20210419.html (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  45. Redux. Our Sites. 2021. Available online: https://www.redux-recycling.com/en/our-company/our-sites/ (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  46. Barker, K. Green Li-ion to Launch First Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling Technology in Singapore. Recycling Product News. 2020. Available online: https://www.recyclingproductnews.com/article/34573/green-li-ionto-launch-first-lithium-ion-battery-recy-cling-technology-in-Singapore (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  47. Jee-Hee, K.; Posco, H.Y. Clean Metal Breaks Ground on Battery Recycling Plant, Korea JoongAng Daily. 2021. Available online: https://korea-joongangdai-ly.joins.com/2021/09/30/business/industry/poscoposco-HY-clean-metal-battery-recycling/20210930191516184.html (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  48. Kumagai, J. Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling Finally Takes Off in North America and Europe. IEEE Spectrum. 2021. Available online: https://spec-trum.ieee.org/lithiumion-battery-recycling-finally-takes-off-in-northamerica-and-europe (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  49. Underwood, J. Canada’s Li-Cycle Plans EV Battery Recycling Facility in Alabama. Made in Alabama. 2021. Available online: https://www.madeinalabama.com/2021/09/canadas-li-cycle-plans-ev-batteryrecycling-facility-in-alabama/ (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  50. Fortum. Fortum Makes New Harjavalta Recycling Plant Investment to Expand Its Battery Recycling Capacity. 2021. Available online: https://www.for-tum.com/media/2021/06/fortum-makes-new-harjavaltarecycling-plant-investment-expand-its-battery-recycling-capacity (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  51. Jones, T. New Battery Recycling Plant to Launch in the Black Country. Business Live. 2020. Available online: https://www.business-live.co.uk/commercial-property/new-battery-recycling-plant-launch-18955327 (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  52. Roedel, K. Construction Could Begin Soon on Lithium-Ion Battery Plant in Fernley. Nevada Appeal. 2021. Available online: https://www.ne-vadaappeal.com/news/2021/apr/14/construction-could-beginsoon-lithium-ion-battery-/ (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  53. NAAT Batt International. Study of Large-Format EV Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling in China. 2019. Available online: https://naatbatt.org/wp-con-tent/uploads/2021/03/FINAL-Report-on-China-EV-Battery-RecyclingFeb.-2019.pdf (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  54. Shalu Agarwal, M.R. Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling Market & Technology Trends 2020. Yole Development. 2020. Available online: https://s3.i-micronews.com/uploads/2020/07/YDR20092_Li-ion_Battery_Recycling_Trends_2020_Sample.pdf (accessed on 10 January 2023).
  55. Lv, W.; Wang, Z.; Cao, H.; Sun, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, Z.H. A Critical Review and Analysis on the Recycling of Spent Lithium-Ion Batteries. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2018, 6, 1504–1521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Velázquez-Martínez, O.; Valio, J.; Santasalo-Aarnio, A.; Reuter, M.; Serna-Guerrero, R. A Critical Review of Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling Processes from a Circular Economy Perspective. Batteries 2019, 5, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Randall, C. Gotion to Construct Battery Recycling Plant in Hefei. Electrive.com. 2021. Available online: https://www.electrive.com/2021/03/23/gotionto-construct-battery-recycling-plant-in-hefei/ (accessed on 11 April 2023).
  58. Fleischmann, M.; Krikke, H.; Dekker, R.; Flapper, S.A. Characterization of Logistics Networks for Product Recovery. Omega 2000, 6, 653–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Akram, M.N.; Abdul-Kader, W. EV Battery Recycling and Its Impact on Society. In Proceedings of the 5th NA International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Detroit, MI, USA, 10–14 August 2020. [Google Scholar]
  60. Szałatkiewicz, J.; Szewczyk, R.; Budny, E.; Missala, T.; Winiarski, W. Construction Aspects of Plasma Based Technology for Waste of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Management in Urban Areas. Procedia Eng. 2013, 57, 1100–1108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Vezzini, A. Manufacturers, Materials and Recycling Technologies. In Lithium-Ion Batteries 2014 Jan 1; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014; pp. 529–551. [Google Scholar]
  62. Cheret, D.; Santén, S. Battery Recycling. U.S. Patent 7169206B2, 30 January 2007. [Google Scholar]
  63. CEC. Environmentally Sound Management of End-of-Life Batteries from Electric-Drive Vehicles in North America. Montreal, Canada Commission for Environmental Cooperation. 2015. Available online: http://www3.cec.org/islandora/es/item/11637-environmentally-sound-management-end-life-batteries-from-electric-drive-vehicles-en.pdf (accessed on 12 February 2023).
  64. Assefi, M.; Maroufi, S.; Yamauchi, Y.; Sahajwalla, V. Pyrometallurgical recycling of Li-ion, Ni–Cd and Ni–MH batteries: A minireview. Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem. 2020, 24, 26–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Brückner, L.; Frank, J.; Elwert, T. Industrial Recycling of Lithium-Ion Batteries—A Critical Review of Metallurgical Process Routes. Metals 2020, 10, 1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Li, L.; Zhang, X.; Li, M.; Chen, R.; Wu, F.; Amine, K.; Lu, J. The Recycling of Spent Lithium-Ion Batteries: A Review of Current Processes and Technologies. Electrochem. Energy Rev. 2018, 1, 461–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Makuza, B.; Tian, Q.; Guo, X.; Chattopadhyay, K.; Yu, D. Pyrometallurgical options for recycling spent lithium-ion batteries: A comprehensive review. J. Power Sources 2021, 491, 229622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Holzer, A.; Windisch-Kern, S.; Ponak, C.; Raupenstrauch, H. A novel pyrometallurgical recycling process for lithium-ion batteries and its application to the recycling of LCO and LFP. Metals 2021, 11, 149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Hu, X.; Mousa, E.; Ye, G. Recovery of Co, Ni, Mn, and Li from Li-ion batteries by smelting reduction—Part II: A pi-lot-scale demonstration. J. Power Sources 2021, 483, 229089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Sommerfeld, M.; Vonderstein, C.; Dertmann, C.; Klimko, J.; Oráč, D.; Miškufová, A.; Havlík, T.; Friedrich, B. A Combined Pyro- and Hydrometallurgical Approach to Recycle Pyrolyzed Lithium-Ion Battery Black Mass Part 1: Production of Lithium Concentrates in an Electric Arc Furnace. Metals 2020, 10, 1069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Arshad, F.; Li, L.; Amin, K.; Fan, E.; Manurkar, N.; Ahmad, A.; Yang, J.; Wu, F.; Chen, R. A Comprehensive Review of the Advancement in Recycling the Anode and Electrolyte from Spent Lithium Ion Batteries. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8, 13527–13554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Pinegar, H.; Smith, Y.R. Recycling of End-of-Life Lithium-Ion Batteries, Part I: Commercial Processes. J. Sustain. Metall. 2019, 5, 402–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Chen, Y.; Liu, N.; Hu, F.; Ye, L.; Xi, Y.; Yang, S. Thermal treatment and ammoniacal leaching for the recovery of valuable metals from spent lithium-ion batteries. Waste Manag. 2018, 75, 469–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Wang, M.-M.; Zhang, C.-C.; Zhang, F.-S. Recycling of spent lithium-ion battery with polyvinyl chloride by mechanochemical process. Waste Manag. 2017, 67, 232–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Chen, L.; Wang, P.; Shen, Y.; Guo, M. Spent lithium-ion battery materials recycling for catalytic pyrolysis or gasification of biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 323, 124584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Cognet, M.; Condomines, J.; Cambedouzou, J.; Madhavi, S.; Carboni, M.; Meyer, D. An original recycling method for Li-ion batteries through large scale production of Metal Organic Frameworks. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019, 385, 121603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Pindar, S.; Dhawan, N. Recycling of mixed discarded lithium-ion batteries via microwave processing route. Sustain. Mater. Technol. 2020, 25, e00157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Norgren, A.; Carpenter, A.; Heath, G. Design for Recycling Principles Applicable to Selected Clean Energy Technologies: Crystalline-Silicon Photovoltaic Modules, Electric Vehicle Batteries, and Wind Turbine Blades. J. Sustain. Met. 2020, 6, 761–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Sommerville, R.; Shaw-Stewart, J.; Goodship, V.; Rowson, N.; Kendrick, E. A review of physical processes used in the safe recycling of lithium ion batteries. Sustain. Mater. Technol. 2020, 25, e00197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Silvestri, L.; Forcina, A.; Arcese, G.; Bella, G. Recycling technologies of nickel–metal hydride batteries: An LCA based analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 273, 123083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Mohr, M.; Peters, J.F.; Baumann, M.; Weil, M. Toward a cell-chemistry specific life cycle assessment of lithium-ion battery recycling processes. J. Ind. Ecol. 2020, 24, 13021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Larouche, F.; Tedjar, F.; Amouzegar, K.; Houlachi, G.; Bouchard, P.; Demopoulos, G.P.; Zaghib, K. Progress and Status of Hydrometallurgical and Direct Recycling of Li-Ion Batteries and Beyond. Materials 2020, 13, 801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  83. Beaudet, A.; Larouche, F.; Amouzegar, K.; Bouchard, P.; Zaghib, K. Key Challenges and Opportunities for Recycling Electric Vehicle Battery Materials. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Montoya, A.T.; Yang, Z.; Dahl, E.U.; Pupek, K.Z.; Polzin, B.; Dunlop, A.; Vaughey, J.T. Direct Recycling of Lithium-Ion Battery Cathodes: A Multi-Stage Annealing Process to Recover the Pristine Structure and Performance. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2022, 10, 13319–13324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Park, K.; Yu, J.; Coyle, J.; Dai, Q.; Frisco, S.; Zhou, M.; Burrell, A. Direct Cathode Recycling of End-Of-Life Li-Ion Batteries Enabled by Redox Mediation. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 8214–8221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Li, L.; Yang, T.; Li, Z. Parameter optimization and yield prediction of cathode coating separation process for direct recycling of end-of-life lithium-ion batteries. RSC Adv. 2021, 11, 24132–24136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Wu, C.; Hu, J.; Ye, L.; Su, Z.; Fang, X.; Zhu, X.; Zhuang, L.; Ai, X.; Yang, H.; Qian, J. Direct Regeneration of Spent Li-Ion Battery Cathodes via Chemical Relithiation Reaction. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 16384–16393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Folayan, T.-O.; Lipson, A.L.; Durham, J.L.; Pinegar, H.; Liu, D.; Pan, L. Direct Recycling of Blended Cathode Materials by Froth Flotation. Energy Technol. 2021, 9, 2100468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Sloop, S.; Crandon, L.; Allen, M.; Koetje, K.; Reed, L.; Gaines, L.; Sirisaksoontorn, W.; Lerner, M.A. Direct recycling case study from a lithium-ion battery recall. Sustain. Mater. Technol. 2020, 25, e00152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Ross, B.J.; LeResche, M.; Liu, D.; Durham, J.L.; Dahl, E.U.; Lipson, A.L. Mitigating the Impact of Thermal Binder Removal for Direct Li-Ion Battery Recycling. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8, 12511–12515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Xu, P.; Dai, Q.; Gao, H.; Liu, H.; Zhang, M.; Li, M.; Chen, Y.; An, K.; Meng, Y.S.; Liu, P.; et al. Efficient Direct Recycling of Lithium-Ion Battery Cathodes by Targeted Healing. Joule 2020, 4, 2609–2626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Garole, D.J.; Hossain, R.; Garole, V.J.; Sahajwalla, V.; Nerkar, J.; Dubal, D.P. Recycle, Recover and Repurpose Strategy of Spent Li-ion Batteries and Catalysts: Current Status and Future Opportunities. Chemsuschem 2020, 13, 3079–3100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Song, X.; Hu, T.; Liang, C.; Long, H.L.; Zhou, L.; Song, W.; You, L.; Wu, Z.S.; Liu, J.W. Direct regeneration of cathode materials from spent lithium iron phosphate batteries using a solid phase sintering method. RSC Adv. 2017, 7, 4783–4790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. Manigandan, S.; Rajmohan, K.; Varjani, S. Current Trends in Gold Recovery from Electronic Wastes. In Current Development in Biotechnology and Bioengineering; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 307–325. [Google Scholar]
  95. Jung, J.C.Y.; Sui, P.C.; Zhang, J. A review of recycling spent lithium-ion battery cathode materials using hydrometal-lurgical treatments. J. Energy Storage 2021, 35, 102217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Chen, X.; Chen, Y.; Zhou, T.; Liu, D.; Hu, H.; Fan, S. Hydrometallurgical recovery of metal values from sulfuric acid leaching liquor of spent lithium-ion batteries. Waste Manag. 2015, 38, 349–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Cerrillo-Gonzalez, M.; Villen-Guzman, M.; Vereda-Alonso, C.; Gomez-Lahoz, C.; Rodriguez-Maroto, J.; Paz-Garcia, J. Recovery of Li and Co from LiCoO2 via Hydrometallurgical–Electrodialytic Treatment. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 2367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. He, Y.; Yuan, X.; Zhang, G.; Wang, H.; Zhang, T.; Xie, W.; Li, L. A critical review of current technologies for the liberation of electrode materials from foils in the recycling process of spent lithium-ion batteries. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 766, 142382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Djoudi, N.; Mostefa, M.L.P.; Muhr, H. Hydrometallurgical Process to Recover Cobalt from Spent Li-Ion Batteries. Resources 2021, 10, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Vieceli, N.; Nogueira, C.; Guimarães, C.; Pereira, M.; Durão, F.O.; Margarido, F. Hydrometallurgical recycling of lithium-ion batteries by reductive leaching with sodium Metabisulphite. Waste Manag. 2018, 71, 350–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  101. Linda, G.; Kirti Richa, K.; Spangenberger, J. Key issues for Li-ion battery recycling. MRS Energy Sustain. 2018, 5, 12. [Google Scholar]
  102. Vieceli, N.; Casasola, R.; Lombardo, G.; Ebin, B.; Petranikova, M. Hydrometallurgical recycling of EV lithium-ion batteries: Effects of incineration on the leaching efficiency of metals using sulfuric acid. Waste Manag. 2021, 125, 192–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Kader, Z.A.; Marshall, A.; Kennedy, J. A review on sustainable recycling technologies for lithium-ion batteries. Emergent Mater. 2021, 4, 725–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Dalini, E.A.; Karimi, G.; Zandevakili, S.; Goodarzi, M. A Review on Environmental, Economic and Hydrometallurgical Processes of Recycling Spent Lithium-ion Batteries. Miner. Process. Extr. Met. Rev. 2020, 42, 451–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Verma, A.; Corbin, D.R.; Shiflett, M.B. Lithium and cobalt recovery for lithium-ion battery recycling using an improved oxalate process with hydrogen peroxide. Hydrometallurgy 2021, 203, 105694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Chitre, A.; Freake, D.; Lander, L.; Edge, J.; Titirici, M. Towards a More Sustainable Lithium-Ion Battery Future: Recycling LIBs from Electric Vehicles. Batter. Supercaps 2020, 3, 1126–1136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Anwani, S.; Methekar, R.; Ramadesigan, V. Resynthesizing of lithium cobalt oxide from spent lithium-ion batteries using an environmentally benign and economically viable recycling process. Hydrometallurgy 2020, 197, 105430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Zhou, L.F.; Yang, D.; Du, T.; Gong, H.; Luo, W.B. The Current Process for the Recycling of Spent Lithium-Ion Bat-teries. Front. Chem. 2020, 8, 578044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Wang, Y.; An, N.; Wen, L.; Wang, L.; Jiang, X.; Hou, F.; Yin, Y.; Liang, J. Recent progress on the recycling technology of Li-ion batteries. J. Energy Chem. 2020, 55, 391–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Cerrillo-Gonzalez, M.D.; Villen-Guzman, M.; Acedo-Bueno, L.F.; Rodriguez-Maroto, J.M.; Paz-Garcia, J.M. Hydro-metallurgical extraction of Li and Co from LiCoO2 particles-experimental and modeling. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Chan, K.H.; Malik, M.; Anawati, J.; Azimi, G. Recycling of End-of-Life Lithium-Ion Battery of Electric Vehicles. In Rare Metal Technology 2020; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 23–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Takacova, Z.; Havlik, T.; Kukurugya, F.; Orac, D. Cobalt and lithium recovery from active mass of spent Li-ion batteries: Theoretical and experimental approach. Hydrometallurgy 2016, 163, 9–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Joulié, M.; Laucournet, R.; Billy, E. Hydrometallurgical process for the recovery of high value metals from spent lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide based lithium-ion batteries. J. Power Sources 2014, 247, 551–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Meshram, P.; Pandey, B.; Mankhand, T. Extraction of lithium from primary and secondary sources by pre-treatment, leaching and separation: A comprehensive review. Hydrometallurgy 2014, 150, 192–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Su, B.; Heshmati, A.; Geng, Y.; Yu, X. A review of the circular economy in China: Moving from rhetoric to implementation. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 42, 215–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Diekmann, J.; Hanisch, C.; Froböse, L.; Schälicke, G.; Loellhoeffel, T.; Fölster, A.-S.; Kwade, A. Ecological Recycling of Lithium-Ion Batteries from Electric Vehicles with Focus on Mechanical Processes. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2016, 164, A6184–A6191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Yao, Y.; Zhu, M.; Zhao, Z.; Tong, B.; Fan, Y.; Hua, Z. Hydrometallurgical Processes for Recycling Spent Lithium-Ion Batteries: A Critical Review. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2018, 6, 13611–13627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Munir, H.; Srivastava, R.R.; Kim, H.; Ilyas, S.; Khosa, M.K.; Yameen, B. Leaching of exhausted LNCM cathode batteries in ascorbic acid lixiviant: A green recycling approach, reaction kinetics and process mechanism. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2020, 95, 2286–2294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Porvali, A.; Aaltonen, M.; Ojanen, S.; Velazquez-Martinez, O.; Eronen, E.; Liu, F.; Wilson, B.P.; Serna-Guerrero, R.; Lundström, M. Mechanical, and hydrometallurgical processes in HCl media for the recycling of valuable metals from Li-ion battery waste. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 142, 257–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Yun, L.; Linh, D.; Shui, L.; Peng, X.; Garg, A.; LE, M.L.P.; Asghari, S.; Sandoval, J. Metallurgical and mechanical methods for recycling of lithium-ion battery pack for electric vehicles. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 136, 198–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Li, L.; Bian, Y.; Zhang, X.; Guan, Y.; Fan, E.; Wu, F.; Chen, R. Process for recycling mixed-cathode materials from spent lithium-ion batteries and kinetics of leaching. Waste Manag. 2018, 71, 362–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Xiao, J.; Li, J.; Xu, Z. Recycling metals from lithium ion battery by mechanical separation and vacuum metallurgy. J. Hazard. Mater. 2017, 338, 124–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Andersen, M.S. An introductory note on the environmental economics of the circular economy. Sustain. Sci. 2006, 2, 133–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Ghisellini, P.; Cialani, C.; Ulgiati, S. A Review on Circular Economy: The Expected Transition to a Balanced Interplay of Environmental and Economic Systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 114, 11–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Bennett, J.W.; Pearce, D.W.; Turner, R.K. Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1991, 73, 227–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the Circular Economy vol.1. Isle of Wight. 2013. Available online: https://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/to-wards-a-circular-economy-business-rationale-for-an-accelerated-transition (accessed on 10 February 2023).
  127. Akram, M.N. EV Battery State Changes and RL Considerations. Master’s Thesis, University of Windsor, Windsor, ON, Canada, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  128. Gonzales-Calienes, G.; Yu, B.; Bensebaa, F. Development of a Reverse Logistics Modeling for End-of-Life Lithium-Ion Batteries and Its Impact on Recycling Viability—A Case Study to Support End-of-Life Electric Vehicle Battery Strategy in Canada. Sustainability 2022, 14, 15321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Global Battery Alliance. A Vision for a Sustainable Battery Value Chain in 2030, Unlocking the Full Potential to Power Sustainable Development and Climate Change Mitigation. World Economic Forum. 2019. Available online: https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEFA_Vision_for_a_Sustainable_Battery_Value_Chain_in_2030_Report.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2023).
  130. Trang, N.T.N.; Li, Y. Reverse supply chain for end- of- life vehicles treatment: An in- depth content review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. Adv. 2023, 17, 200128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Shafique, M.; Rafiq, M.; Azam, A.; Luo, X. Material flow analysis for end-of-life lithium-ion batteries from battery electric vehicles in the USA and China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 178, 106061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Meegoda, J.N.; Malladi, S.; Zayas, I.C. End-of-Life Management of Electric Vehicle Lithium-Ion Batteries in the United States. Clean Technol. 2022, 4, 1162–1174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Akram, M.N.; Abdul-Kader, W. Energy Transition and Environmental Benefit of Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Harare, Zimbabwe, 8–10 December 2020; Available online: http://ieomsociety.org/harare2020/papers/227.pdf (accessed on 1 March 2023).
  134. Fujita, T.; Chen, H.; Wang, K.-T.; He, C.-L.; Wang, Y.-B.; Dodbiba, G.; Wei, Y.-Z. Reduction, reuse and recycle of spent Li-ion batteries for automobiles: A review. Int. J. Miner. Met. Mater. 2021, 28, 179–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Baars, J.; Domenech, T.; Bleischwitz, R.; Melin, H.E.; Heidrich, O. Circular economy strategies for electric vehicle batteries reduce reliance on raw materials. Nat. Sustain. 2020, 4, 71–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Kotak, Y.; Marchante Fernández, C.; Canals Casals, L.; Kotak, B.S.; Koch, D.; Geisbauer, C.; Trilla, L.; Gómez-Núñez, A.; Schweiger, H.G. End of Electric Vehicle Batteries: Reuse vs. Recycl. Energ. 2021, 14, 2217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Curtis, T.; Smith, L.; Buchanan, H.; Heath, G. A Circular Economy for Lithium-Ion Batteries Used in Mobile and Stationary Energy Storage: Drivers, Barriers, Enablers, and U.S. Policy Considerations; NREL/TP-6A20-77035; National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  138. Akram, M.N.; Abdul-Kader, W. Environmental and Economic Impacts of EV Battery Management and State Changes. In Proceedings of the 5th NA International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Detroit, MI, USA, 10–14 August 2020. [Google Scholar]
  139. Kouhizadeh, M.; Saberi, S.; Sarkis, J. Blockchain technology and the sustainable supply chain: Theoretically exploring adoption barriers. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2020, 231, 107831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Albertsen, L.; Richter, J.L.; Peck, P.; Dalhammar, C.; Plepys, A. Circular business models for electric vehicle lithium-ion batteries: An analysis of current practices of vehicle manufacturers and policies in the EU. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 172, 105658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Fan, E.; Li, L.; Wang, Z.; Lin, J.; Huang, Y.; Yao, Y.; Chen, R.; Wu, F. Sustainable Recycling Technology for Li-Ion Batteries and Beyond: Challenges and Future Prospects. Chem. Rev. 2020, 120, 7020–7063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Ahuja, J.; Dawson, L.; Lee, R. A circular economy for electric vehicle batteries: Driving the change. J. Prop. Plan. Environ. Law 2020, 12, 235–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Sehnem, S.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; Pereira, S.C.F.; de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L. Improving sustainable supply chains performance through operational excellence: Circular economy approach. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 149, 236–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Giampietro, M. On the Circular Bioeconomy and Decoupling: Implications for Sustainable Growth. Ecol. Econ. 2019, 162, 143–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Oriekhova, T. Circular Economy as a Global Imperative. J. Eur. Econ. 2019, 18, 415–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Kirchherr, J.; Piscicelli, L.; Bour, R.; Kostense-Smit, E.; Muller, J.; Huibrechtse-Truijens, A.; Hekkert, M. Barriers to the Circular Economy: Evidence From the European Union (EU). Ecol. Econ. 2018, 150, 264–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  147. Korhonen, J.; Honkasalo, A.; Seppälä, J. Circular economy: The concept and its limitations. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 143, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Geisendorf, S.; Pietrulla, F. The circular economy and circular economic concepts-a literature analysis and redefinition. Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev. 2017, 60, 771–782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Or, T.; Gourley, S.W.D.; Kaliyappan, K.; Yu, A.; Chen, Z. Recycling of mixed cathode lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles: Current status and future outlook. Carbon Energy 2020, 2, 6–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  150. Asokan, V.A.; Teah, H.Y.; Kawazu, E.; Hotta, Y. Ambitious EV policy expedites the e-waste and socio-environmental impacts in India. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2023, 190, 106829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Rajaeifar, M.A.; Raugei, M.; Steubing, B.; Hartwell, A.; Anderson, P.A.; Heidrich, O. Life cycle assessment of lithium-ion battery recycling using pyrometallurgical technologies. J. Ind. Ecol. 2021, 25, 1560–1571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Mrozik, W.; Rajaeifar, M.A.; Heidrich, O.; Christensen, P. Environmental impacts, pollution sources and pathways of spent lithium-ion batteries. Energy Environ. Sci. 2021, 14, 6099–6121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Xiong, S.; Ji, J.; Ma, X. Environmental and economic evaluation of remanufacturing lithium-ion batteries from electric vehicles. Waste Manag. 2019, 102, 579–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Tang, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Li, Y.; Li, H.; Pan, X.; McLellan, B. The social-economic-environmental impacts of recycling retired EV batteries under reward-penalty mechanism. Appl. Energy 2019, 251, 113313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Rahman, A.; Afroz, R.; Safrin, M. Recycling and disposal of lithium batteries: An economical and environmental approach. IIUM Eng. J. 2017, 18, 238–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Dunn, J.B.; Gaines, L.; Kelly, J.C.; James, C.; Gallagher, K.G. The significance of Li-ion batteries in electric vehicle life-cycle energy and emissions and recycling’s role in its reduction. Energy Environ. Sci. 2014, 8, 158–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Bae, H.; Kim, Y. Technologies of lithium recycling from waste lithium ion batteries: A review. Mater. Adv. 2021, 2, 3234–3250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Crespo, M.S.; González, M.V.G.; Peiró, L.T. Prospects on end of life electric vehicle batteries through 2050 in Catalonia. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022, 180, 106133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Castro, F.D.; Cutaia, L.; Vaccari, M. End-of-life automotive lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) in Brazil: Prediction of flows and revenues by 2030. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 169, 105522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Abdelbaky, M.; Peeters, J.R.; Dewulf, W. On the influence of second use, future battery technologies, and battery lifetime on the maximum recycled content of future electric vehicle batteries in Europe. Waste Manag. 2021, 125, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  161. Buchert, M.; Jenseit, W.; Merz, C.; Schüler, D. Ökobilanz zum „Recycling von Lithium-Ionen-Batterien “(LithoRec); Öko-Institut: Darmstadt, Germany, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  162. Wang, S.; Yu, J. A comparative life cycle assessment on lithium-ion battery: Case study on electric vehicle battery in China considering battery evolution. Waste Manag. Res. J. Sustain. Circ. Econ. 2020, 39, 156–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Batteries 09 00353 g001 550
Figure 1. Number Per Year of Reviewed Publications.
Figure 1. Number Per Year of Reviewed Publications.
Batteries 09 00353 g001
Batteries 09 00353 g003 550
Figure 3. LIBs recycling [59].
Figure 3. LIBs recycling [59].
Batteries 09 00353 g003
Batteries 09 00353 g004 550
Figure 4. The Circular Economy [127].
Figure 4. The Circular Economy [127].
Batteries 09 00353 g004
Batteries 09 00353 g005 550
Figure 5. Assets Recovery [127].
Figure 5. Assets Recovery [127].
Batteries 09 00353 g005
Batteries 09 00353 g006 550
Figure 6. RL Process Flow of End-of-Life LIB [138].
Figure 6. RL Process Flow of End-of-Life LIB [138].
Batteries 09 00353 g006
Table
Table 1. List of Goals in the SDG Agenda [8].
Table 1. List of Goals in the SDG Agenda [8].
Goals
Goal 1: No PovertyGoal 2: Zero HungerGoal 3: Good Health and Well-being
Goal 4: Quality EducationGoal 5: Gender EqualityGoal 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
Goal 7: Affordable and Clean EnergyGoal 8: Decent Work and Economic GrowthGoal 9: Industry Innovation and Infrastructure
Goal 10: Reduce InequalitiesGoal 11: Sustainable cities and communitiesGoal 12: Responsible consumption and production
Goal 13: Climate ActionGoal 14: Life Below WaterGoal 15: Life on Land
Goal 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong InstitutionsGoal 17: Partnerships for Goals
Table
Table 2. Number of Articles in each Section.
Table 2. Number of Articles in each Section.
Section NumberNo of Articles
1.0 Introduction15
3.0 Sustainable Development Goals15
4.0 Life Cycle Assessment13
5.0 Recycling Processes 17
Pyrometallurgical 14
Hydrometallurgical 21
Special Recycling 8
Direct Recycling 12
Metallurgical and Mechanical 7		79
6.0 Circular Economy27
7.0 Environmental Benefits8
8.0 Discussions6
Total163
Table
Table 3. Sustainable Development Goals by Author and Year.
Table 3. Sustainable Development Goals by Author and Year.
AuthorYearRemarks
Bose and Khan2022
[17]		The study examined how far the SDGs have progressed, as per testimony from companies across the globe; it also investigated how testimony regarding SDGs changes when considering national institutional factors.
Pereira et al.2022
[18]		The editorial team investigated the effects of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict on the SDGs relating to Biophysical, Social, and Economic values, as well as how they affected national partnerships.
Business Line2021
[19]		This article suggested that any sustainable development strategy to fight climate change (according to SDG 13: Climate Change) must be supported by a reduction in emissions from transportations; thus, adopting cleaner options.
Belmonte et al.2021
[20]		This study focused on four areas highly relevant to sustainable development and finding a balance between ecological and economic systems with respect to development: the circular economy, degrowth, green growth, and research specifically addressing the SDGs.
Zwiers et al.2020
[21]		This paper identified the required knowledge that allows for circular economical thinking and practices for sustainable development.
Hernandez et al.2020
[22]		The study used an innovation systems approach to develop a roadmap for solar and wind energy to predict and improve the effects of a transition to a low carbon future in a manner ensuring that climate goals and the SDGs are mutually reinforced.
Tremblay et al.2020
[23]		Considering people, planet, prosperity, peace, and partnership (5P), this paper presents the categorization of the Sustainable Development Goals and their objectives with the aim to offer a better perception of relationships for possible collaborations related the 5P categorization.
Feijoo et al.2020
[24]		A systemic literature review featuring the Sustainable Development Goals and business schools is presented in this paper with emphasis on the role these schools can play to favor the implementation and adoption of these goals.
UNDP2020
[25]		This report assessed the effect of various COVID-19 recovery situations on the SDGs, looking at the impact of the pandemic for the next 10 years (UNDP and the Pardee Center for International Futures at the University of Denver)
Vinuesa et al.2020
[26]		This paper demonstrated that the use of consensus-based artificial intelligence can result in the completion of 134 targets of the SDGs but may slow progress of fifty-nine other targets.
Schroeder et
al.		2019
[27]		This paper identified how relevant circular economical practices are for the progress of the SDGs.
Allen et al.2018
[28]		This paper provided a literature review for national efforts and experiences for progression of the SDGs in twenty-six countries by thoroughly investigating how the countries are considering and progressing through the key stages of SDG implementation provided by the literature.
Stafford-Smith et al.2017
[29]		This study determined that significant attention is required across the connections between each of the industry sectors, societal actors, and countries of ranging economic prosperity.
Table
Table 5. Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling Facilities Worldwide.
Table 5. Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling Facilities Worldwide.
CompanyCountryProcessVolume (tons/year)Status
Recycling by using the Pyrometallurgical/Hydrometallurgical process
AccurecGermanyPyro/hydro4000In Operation
AkkureFinlandPyro/hydro4000In Operation
Umicore ValeasBelgiumPyro/hydro7000In Operation
Brunnp Recycling TechnologiesChinaPyro/hydro10,000In Operation
JX Nippon MiningJapanPyro/hydro combo5000In Operation
GlencoreSwitzerlandPyro/hydro combo3000In Operation
Total33,000
Recycling by using the Pyrometallurgical process
InmetcoUSPyrometallurgical6000In Operation
Quzhou HuayoChinaPyrometallurgical40,000In Operation
ValidiFrancePyrometallurgical20,000In Operation
Sony/SumitomoJapanPyrometallurgical150In Operation
InmetcoUSPyrometallurgical6000In Operation
Quzhou HuayouChinaPyrometallurgical40,000In Operation
Dowa Eco-SystemJapanPyrometallurgical6500In Operation
Total118,650
Recycling by using the hydrometallurgical process
RecupylFranceHydrometallurgical110In Operation
ReduxGermany, AustriaHydrometallurgical50,000In Operation
Retriev (Toxco)CanadaHydrometallurgical4500In Operation
GEMChinaHydrometallurgical30,000In Operation
Li-CycleUSHydrometallurgical5000In Operation
Li-CycleCanadaHydrometallurgical5000In Operation
TaisenChinaHydrometallurgical6000In Operation
Li-CycleGilbert, AZ, USHydrometallurgical10,000Planned
Li-CycleTuscaloosa, AL, USHydrometallurgical10,000Planned
FenixUKHydrometallurgical10,000Planned
Total130,610
Recycling by using the preprocessing process
EnvirostreamAustraliaPreprocessing3000In Operation
Guanghua Sci-TechChinaPreprocessing12,000In Operation
Total15,000
ABTUSUnknown20,000Planned
NorthvoltNorwayUnknown8000Planned
FortumFinlandUnknownUnknownPlanned
Green Li-ionSingaporeUnknownUnknownPlanned
Gotion High-TechChinaUnknownUnknownPlanned
TeslaChinaUnknownUnknownPlanned
Posco Hy Clean MetalKoreaUnknown12,000Planned
Table
Table 6. Pyrometallurgical Process by Author and Year.
Table 6. Pyrometallurgical Process by Author and Year.
AuthorYearRemarks
Makuza et al.2021
[67]		With the aim to recycle EOL LIBs, this article presented an overview of possible pyrometallurgical methods. The article outlined various methods to salvage the active cathode materials.
Holzer et al.2021
[68]		This paper investigated at an elevated temperature the behavior of the cathode materials to identify lithium cobalt oxide (LiCoO2) and lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4) from LIB with a carbon addition.
Hu et al.2021
[69]		This paper provided information about the salvaging of Co, Ni, Mn, and Li through the use of a pilot-scale Electric Arc Furnace.
Assefi et al.2020
[64]		This brief article review discussed the available pyrometallurgical methods for recycling rechargeable batteries including “Lithium-ion, Nickel-Cadmium and Nickel-Metal-Hydride batteries”.
Sommerfeld et al.2020
[70]		This paper addressed an appropriate design to enrich slag by lithium and blended cobalt, nickel, and copper alloy “as intermediate products in a laboratory electric arc furnace”.
Arshad et al.2020
[71]		This paper summarized the recent progress of recycling anode, cathode, and electrolyte materials of LIBs. Through laboratory experimentation and industrial study, the paper focuses on the recovery of anode and electrolyte.
Pinegar and Smith2019
[72]		Metallurgic treatment of LIB modules and cells were addressed in this review with a focus on the excessive costs of managing organic and halogenic parts in the metallurgic process route.
Chen et al.2018
[73]		In their research work to salvage valuable metals from the cathode active powder, the authors proposed a thermal treatment-ammoniacal leaching process.
Table
Table 7. Special Recycling Process by Author and Year.
Table 7. Special Recycling Process by Author and Year.
AuthorYearRemarks
Chen et al. 2020
[75]		This research studied the pyrolysis characteristics of main biomass components (i.e., cellulose, lignin) in the presence of the EOL LIB cathodes enriched in transition-metals (e.g., Ni, Co). The battery cathode with a good thermostability could be used as a catalyst for biomass conversion.
Cognet et al.2020
[76]		Inspired by an open-loop method that limits the amount of waste while manufacturing a high volume of valuable materials, this manuscript proposed such an approach for recycling LIBs.
Pindar et al.2020
[77]		This report showed the effectiveness of metal extraction from the cathodes of EOL LIBs via microwave processes. The report presents a comparative study about microwave reduction of (pure and mixed) cathode materials.
Norgren et al.2020
[78]		This article discussed and proposed improvements for recycling (design for recycling) principles based on a review of published industrial and academic best practices, alongside a consultation with experts in the field.
Sommerville et al.2020
[79]		Separation methods employed in EV LIBs recycling are addressed in this review article with a focus on physical methods that are applied before starting chemical treatment and purification.
Silvestri et al.2020
[80]		This paper discussed the first life cycle assessment (LCA) for nickel–metal hydride (NiMH) batteries, which considers production and recycling processes.
Mohr et al.2020
[81]		This paper parametrized process models of optimized pyrometallurgical and hydrometallurgical recycling for LIBs, showing the possibilities for use beyond just LIB cell chemistries.
Table
Table 8. Direct Recycling Process by Author and Year.
Table 8. Direct Recycling Process by Author and Year.
AuthorYearRemarks
Anthony et al.2022
[84]		This paper evaluated the process of thermal re-lithiation applied to end-of-life cathode materials.
Park et al.2021
[85]		This paper demonstrated oxidation-reduction mediators could deliver lithium ions and electrons from a lithium source to the cathode to “relithiate” the EOL cathode materials, making them (after a post heat treatment) ready for new battery fabrication.
Li et al.2021
[86]		This paper used the Taguchi Design of the Experiment method to study the efficiency of material recovery from cathodes of LIBs. Moreover, a regression model was presented to find the output and help with parameter selection.
Wu et al.2021
[87]		A method considering aclosed-loop LIB cathode regeneration chain with high atomic utilization was introduced in this research work where energy consumption is minimized.
Folayan et al.2021
[88]		This paper demonstrated a satisfactory separation of a “95% grade or higher of NMC111 in the froth product and 95% grade of LMO in the tailing product” when using separation methods with multiple phases.
Sloop et al.2020
[89]		Considering a case study, this research work showed, in an industrial model, the cathode-healing™ method for recycling lithium-ion found in both consumer electronic and EV batteries.
Ross et al.2020
[90]		A method using leftover LiOH·H2O to have a chemical reaction with fluorine can, prevent lithium elimination, and fix the cathode material. The paper also demonstrated that a thermal process can both eliminate the binder and add lithium to the cathode.
Xu et al.2020
[91]		This paper reported “an efficient and environmentally friendly LIB material recovery method based on deflect-targeted healing, which” is a very different perspective for LIB recycling.
Garole et al.2020
[92]		The paper summarized the strategies used to recover materials from EOL LIBs and spent catalysts.
Larouche et al.2020
[82]		This review paper investigated various approaches/alternatives pyrometallurgy method, namely leaching or direct recycling methods.
Song et al.2017
[93]		This paper proposed “a direct regeneration of cathode materials from spent LiFePO4 batteries using a solid phase sintering method”.
Table
Table 9. Hydrometallurgical Process by Author and Year.
Table 9. Hydrometallurgical Process by Author and Year.
AuthorYearRemarks
Vieceli et al.2021
[102]		This paper assessed the consequences of incineration on the leaching yield of metals. Leaching efficiency of metals from EV LIBs (Mn, Ni, Co, and Li), was optimized at lower incineration temperatures of 400–500 °C and extended leaching times. This manner could be linked to the partial carbothermic reduction of the metals.
He et al.2021
[98]		They summarized current technologies used in the recovery of electrode materials derived from EOL LIBs. In addition, an alternative recycling flowchart of EOL LIBs was proposed.
Kader et al.2021
[103]		This paper discussed combined pre-treatment and hydrometallurgical processes as prospective mechanisms with a focus on the recovery value and benefits regarding the economy and environment.
Asadi et al.2021
[104]		This paper investigated the main aspects of spent LIBs’ recycling (environmental and economic) and determined the effectiveness of hydrometallurgical processes to retrieve valuable metals.
Djoudi et al.2021
[99]		This study focused on the recovery of cobalt from LIB leachate in hydroxide form. At 25 °C, the thermodynamic simulations confirmed the possibility of recovering 99.8% of cobalt (II) hydroxide.
Verma et al.2021
[105]		To recover and separate Li and Co from LiCoO2, this paper developed a closed-loop process based on oxalate.
Cerrillo-Gonzalez et al.2020
[100]		To process the battery waste, this research work identified a method coined combined hydrometallurgical-electro dialytic.
Chitre et al.2020
[106]		This paper focused on improvements to the hydrometallurgical processes used to extract materials from LIBs by sorting the batteries and using alternative water-soluble binders. The paper recommended a holistic design approach for LIBs that enables end-of-life recyclability.
Anwani et al.2020
[107]		This study focused on obtaining a purity of 90.13% of lithium cobalt oxide, thus, determining that battery fabrication is possible.
Zhou et al.2020
[108]		This paper reviewed the most recent developments of the technologies to recover materials from EOL LIBs. They also described the challenges and future economic and application prospects.
Wang et al.2020
[109]		This paper summarized the most up to date technologies to recycle LiNixCoyMnzO2 and LiFePO4-based LIBs regarding pre-treatment, hydrometallurgical recycling, and direct regeneration of the cathode materials.
Cerrillo-Gonzalez et al.2020
[110]		This paper presented experimental results for the hydrometallurgical treatment of LiCoO2 cathodes recovered from LIBs. A physicochemical model is shown to improve the knowledge of the leaching process and identify its limitations.
Chan et al.2020
[111]		This study focused on the development and optimization of efficient hydrometallurgical processes to recycle EV LIBs, using systematic experimental and theoretical approaches based on the design of experiment methodology.
Lv et al.2018
[56]		This work focused on hydrometallurgical processes and a summary of current LIB recycling and recycling processes are provided.
Takacova et al.2016
[112]		This paper analyzed how the extraction of cobalt and lithium affects the internal structure of the active mass composed primarily of LiCoO2. In addition, the paper shows that the cobalt extraction depends on the extraction of lithium from the LiCoO2 structure.
Chen et al.2015
[96]		This study considered a hydrometallurgical method to recapture high values of nickel, manganese, cobalt, and lithium from waste cathode materials, using a leaching solution of sulfuric acid.
Joulié, et al.2014
[113]		This study presented a metals recovery process based on hydrometallurgy. The emphasis is on the cathode materials of spent LIBs, where the efficiency rate of salvaging valuable metals reached 100% for cobalt and 99.99% for nickel.
Meshram et al.2014
[114]		This paper considered a pre-treatment process of EOL LIBs. Leaching solutions consisting of various acids were applied to the cathode materials. Next, a separation process of lithium and other metals from the leach solutions followed.
Sun and Qiu2011
[115]		To salvage cobalt and lithium from spent LIBs, this research work proposed a novel approach consisting of vacuum pyrolysis and a hydrometallurgical method.
Table
Table 10. Metallurgical and Mechanical Processes by Author and Year.
Table 10. Metallurgical and Mechanical Processes by Author and Year.
AuthorYearRemarks
Munir et al.2020
[118]		The application of bio-producible/degradable ascorbic acid for the leaching of LiNixCoyMnzO2 (LNCM) cathode batteries was investigated while performing parametric variations. This study showed that using a biodegradable reagent instead of hazardous materials would be effective for sustainable metallurgy.
Brückner et al.2020
[65]		This review article investigated the progress achieved in the metallurgical treatment of lithium-ion battery modules and cells.
Porvali et al.2019
[119]		LIB waste by mechanical and hydrometallurgical techniques in a hydrochloric acid solution.
Yun et al.2018
[120]		This review article summarized the two foremost and fundamental aspects of recycling battery-packs’ mechanical methods, and chemical salvaging (metallurgical) methods. Accordingly, it is necessary to have a process/method that can be semi-automatic to fully automatic to warrant the quicker, more accurate dismantling of battery packs, and identify and detect residual energy in battery packs, as well as recuperate valuable materials from batteries.
Li et al.2018
[121]		To explain the kinetics of the leaching process, the authors proposed a novel formulation inspired from the shrinking-core model. Considering the leaching of Li, Co, Ni, and Mn, the initial energy per metal was found to be 66.86, 86.57, 49.46, and 45.23 kJ mol−1, respectively. Their findings confirm that the leaching process is a controlled chemical reaction.
Xiao et al.2017
[122]		“This study suggested an integrated method to oversee bulk spent lithium manganese (LiMn2O4) batteries to locally recycle high value-added products” without any additional materials.
Table
Table 11. Circular Economy by Author and Year.
Table 11. Circular Economy by Author and Year.
Author YearRemarks
Trang and Li2023
[130]		This paper presented the literature review of a reverse supply chain for end-of-life vehicles.
Shafique et al. 2021
[131]		This paper calculated that by efficient recycling methods, by 2030 there would be around 5–7 kilotons of recovered lithium, 35–60 kilotons of recovered nickel in China alone, as well as 2.3–2.6 kilotons of recovered lithium and 16–26 kilotons of nickel recovered in the US.
Meegoda et al.2022
[132]		This paper suggested improvements to EOL LIB management in the US, considering current and emerging recycling technologies, current collection, transportation, reuse applications, and regulatory policies in place.
Shafique and Luo2022
[33]		This paper presented a life cycle analysis of electric vehicles across ten countries using present and future electricity mix scenarios.
Akram and Abdul-Kader2021
[133]
This paper provided information about hydrogen production and the worldwide entities that are adopting green hydrogen. Moreover, the authors evaluated the benefits of fuel cell EVs on the environment in the case of using hydrogen generated by considering the surplus renewable energy in Canada.
Fujita et al.2021
[134]		The authors presented guidelines on the 3R of LIBs and methods to decrease the usage of valuable materials and the number of EOL LIBs, by salvaging and “remanufacturing used parts and designing new batteries considering the concepts of 3R”.
Szałatkiewicz et al.2013
[60]		The authors addressed various recycling methods that are currently available in the world (with particular attention, in Canada), by focusing on the Canadian job market for disposing spent LIBs.
Baars et al.2021
[135]		This paper described strategies to limit the extraction of raw materials, such as cobalt reserves.
Kotak et al.2021
[136]		This paper investigated the reuse and recycling of LIBs, with a focus on the discussion of whether to reuse the batteries or recycle them after their first use.
Curtis et al.2021
[137]		This report analyzes “drivers, barriers, and enablers to circular economy for LIBs used in United States mobile and stationary applications”.
Akram and Abdul-Kader2021 [138]This research work examined the effects of recycling spent LIBs on the environment and the economy: reduced emissions through recycling and values of recoverable materials from the LIBs.
Kouhizadeh et al.2021 [139]This paper analyzes the implementation of a circular economy, technology such as a blockchain may be helpful. One of the biggest issues in initiating a circular economy is the absence of collaboration between manufacturers and end-of-life product managers. Blockchain technology can improve collaboration while decreasing supply chain barriers.
Albertsen et al.2021 [140]This report mentions circular business model canvases, like repair, refurbishing, repurposing, and recycling strategies.
Akram and Abdul-Kader2021
[42]		This paper calculated that an LIB could work for 12.5 years in an EV. It becomes available for recycling 22.5 years after its use in an Electric Vehicles and in a stationary application.
Fan et al.2020
[141]		This paper analyzed the EV battery market competition, with a focus on the economy, environment, and policy. They then propose a 4H method to recycle batteries to optimize efficiency, safety, economic return, and environmental benefits.
Ahuja et al.2020
[142]		This paper described the current issues to a sustainable value chain for LIBs, while making the case that interventions at the legislative and judicial level are required to steer the market in this direction.
Sehnem et al.2019
[143]		This paper focused on a major factor required for the successful adoption of a circular economy using focal companies selected from both emerging and mature economies, namely Brazil and Scotland, respectively.
Giampietro2019
[144]		This paper clarified the term circular bioeconomy, clearing misunderstandings around its definitions and interpretations.
Oriekhova2019
[145]		This paper presented the primary factors of a circular economy: the possibility of a Fourth Industrial Revolution, circular value chains based on recycled waste, leadership within a circular economy, and cooperation.
Kirchherr et al.2018
[146]		This paper focused on barriers for companies and legislators possible in a circular economy, such as hesitancy within staff and missing consumer awareness and/or interest.
Korhonen et al.2018
[147]		This paper focused on contributing to the scientific research on the circular economy.
Geisendorf and Pietrulla2017
[148]		This paper proposed a revised definition of the “circular economy” after assessing and comparing the related concepts tied most closely to it.
Table
Table 12. Environmental Benefits by Author and Year.
Table 12. Environmental Benefits by Author and Year.
AuthorYearRemarks
Asokan et al.2023
[150]		This paper found the emissions generated from three different recycling processes, and it concluded that the net CO2-eq emissions of the pyrometallurgical treatment for lead acid batteries, hydrometallurgical treatment for LIBs, and pyrometallurgical for LIBs was 29.4, 31.7, and 43.3 kg per kWh, respectively.
Akram and Abdul-Kader2021 [143]This paper investigated “the environmental and economic effects of recycling end of-life (EOL) LIBs entering the future market by finding the emissions mitigated through recycling and the values of materials recoverable from LIBs”.
Rajaeifar et al.2021
[151]		The study analyzed three pyrometallurgical technologies and determined that adopting a process known as direct current plasma smelting, coupled with a pre-treatment phase, could reduce emissions by five-fold when compared to our current processes.
Mrozik et al.2021
[152]		This paper discussed the diverse ways an EOL LIB can cause pollution, such as disposal and careless processing, and it provided evidence for how such practices can pollute the soil, water, and air.
Mohr et al.2020
[82]		This paper pointed out a potential concern for our current recycling processes, namely, that achieving the highest material recovery from a battery may not be the most environmentally beneficial; it mentioned that for there to be both, we would need to adapt our processes for various cell chemistries.
Xiong et al.2020
[153]		This paper evaluated the environmental benefit while remanufacturing lithium-nickel-manganese-cobalt oxide battery cells, and it determined that there is an 8.55% decrease in energy consumption and a 6.62% decrease in GHG emissions; it also considered the economic benefits, concluding that battery remanufacturing allows for cost savings of $1.87 per kg of cells produced.
Qiao et al.2019
[36]		This study viewed “the economic and environmental benefits of EV recycling in China.” It found “that the gross income per recycled EV is about $473.90, and energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions were reduced by about 25.6 GJ and 4.1 t CO2eq, respectively. Also, the environmental benefits per technology cost are about 241.3 MJ per dollar and 36.3 kg CO2eq per dollar”.
Tang et al.2019
[154]		This paper investigated the impacts of recycling retired EV batteries at social, economic, and environmental levels while considering a Stackelberg game theoretical model using reward–penalty mechanisms.
Rahman et al.2017
[155]		This paper investigated the quantity of active materials that can be recovered through a hydrometallurgical process; its results showed that 41% of cathode material and 48.8% of its price, as well as 8.5% of anode materials and 23.4% of its price, can be recovered; furthermore, they found that a figure of 52.85% of GHG emissions from battery material extraction, manufacturing, transportation, etc., can be controlled through recycling batteries.
Dunn et al.2015
[156]		This research work proposed answers to three questions in the current discussion of the environmental impacts of LIBs whether there is a higher energy demand for material production versus battery assembly. The paper discussed the differences of facilities and how they impact the environment, for whether it is worthwhile to recycle batteries, it said that while energy consumption is high for assembling batteries from recycled materials, other environmental motivators take precedence. Finally, they found that EVs do, in fact, emit less GHGs when compared to ICE vehicles, which can be further improved via battery recycling.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Akram, M.N.; Abdul-Kader, W. Sustainable Development Goals and End-of-Life Electric Vehicle Battery: Literature Review. Batteries 2023, 9, 353. https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries9070353

AMA Style

Akram MN, Abdul-Kader W. Sustainable Development Goals and End-of-Life Electric Vehicle Battery: Literature Review. Batteries. 2023; 9(7):353. https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries9070353

Chicago/Turabian Style

Akram, Muhammad Nadeem, and Walid Abdul-Kader. 2023. "Sustainable Development Goals and End-of-Life Electric Vehicle Battery: Literature Review" Batteries 9, no. 7: 353. https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries9070353

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop