life-cycles of lithium ion batteries ... - naefrontiers
TRANSCRIPT
Life-cycles of lithium ion batteries: Understanding impacts from extraction to end-of-life
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Dr. Gabrielle Gaustad Rochester Institute of Technology
Collaborators and Funding • Dr. Callie Babbitt, Dr. Brian Landi, RIT • Dr. Nenad Nenadic, Dr. Eric Hittinger, RIT • RIT PhD Students: Xue Wang, Kirti Richa,
Michele Bustamante, Matt Ganter, Chris Schauerman
• Dr. Elsa Olivetti, MIT Thank you!
Hi! I’m…. • Sustainability considerations for materials at
end-of-life – clean energy focus • Intersection of materials engineering
& systems analysis – material scarcity and criticality – recycling tech dev & assessment – environmental impacts at end-of-life
Quantifying sustainability impacts
Lithium Ion Batteries
(LIBs)
Critical Materials
Viebhan, et al. 2015. Ren & Sust En Rev 49, 656-671
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Critical: adjective 1. “crucial”, “indispensable, vital”, “of the highest importance” 2. “being in or approaching a state of crisis”,“of, relating to, or being a turning
point or specially important juncture”
How do we measure scarcity? • Physical resource constraint
– amount & quality of resource physically determined
• Institutional inefficiency – failures by markets, firms, and governments that result
in transitory resource unavailability
Alonso, Elisa, et al. Environmental science & technology 41.19 (2007): 6649-6656. Goe, Gaustad. Applied Energy 123 (2014): 387-396.
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Resource restrictions for LIBs
Olivetti, Ceder, Gaustad, et.al Resource considerations for LIBs, under review at Joule.
LIB materials relatively scarce BUT new reserve, reserve base, and deposits explosive investment But combined with a supply chain lacking in diversity….
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Resource restrictions for LIBs
Olivetti, Ceder, Gaustad, et.al Resource considerations for LIBs, under review at Joule.
Concentrated supply chain more vulnerable to disruption: -Socio-political upheaval -Labor issues -Weather -Manufacturing bottlenecks
Energy storage is… “green technology” “holy grail for PV & wind” “renewable energy enabler” “clean tech” …..
• But actually CO2 emissions from bulk energy storage are significant
Extraction Deployment End of Life
100 kg/MWh 200 kg/MWh 300 kg/MWh 400 kg/MWh
Hittinger and Azevedo, Bulk Energy Storage Increases US Grid Emissions, ES&T
Energy arbitrage – bc $ varies f(time) – buy at night, sell at day Generally, “dirty” electricity replaces “clean” electricity.
Storage is not 100% efficient – an energy-consuming device
Why?!
Image: http://greensmith.us.com/applications/peak-shifting
Coal as marginal generator
Natural gas as marginal generator
10 Extraction Deployment End of Life
Effect holds for charging from renewables as
well!
Grid Integration Key Area
LIBs reaching end of life – how much??
A cumulative outflow between 0.30 million metric tons to 4 million metric tons of lithium-ion cells could be generated between 2015 to 2040.
1 6 15 23
40
3
25 60
95
140
23
110
190
260
340
0255075
100125150175200225250275300325350375
2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Mas
s of l
ithiu
m io
n ce
lls in
EV
bat
tery
was
te
stre
am (T
hous
and
Met
ric
Tons
)
Low Scenario Baseline Scenario High Scenario
Lithium, 1.4% Nickel, 2.4%
Iron, 3.3% Cobalt, 4.0%
Aluminum, 4.3%
Copper, 5.7%
Manganese, 8.8%
Steel, 22.4% Others, 23.1%
Carbon, 24.5%
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Carbon: carbon black and graphite Others: plastics, binders, electrolytes, metals
Richa, Babbitt, Gaustad, Wang (2014), A future perspective on lithium-ion battery waste flows from electric vehicles, Resources, Conservation, and Recycling. v 83, 63-76
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Options at End of Life
Key Challenges: Uncertainty: composition, cathode, form factor Economics, Liability, Safety, Battery Management Systems, Supply-Demand Mismatch
Raw Materials
Battery Grade
Materials
ReFunctional-izeation
LIBsReUse
Cascaded Use
Recycling LandfillReMan
same applicationeg. EVs-EVs
other applicationeg. EVs-grid storage
Richa, Babbitt, Gaustad, (2017), Eco-efficiency analysis of LIB waste hierarchy inspired by the circular economy, Journal of Industrial Ecology, forthcoming.
Compositional variability is high
• 24 LiCoO2 18650 cells – 10 bill of materials, MSDS, lit review
– Sanyo, Panasonic, Lishen, Sony, Moli, AT&T, Matsushita
Al Co Cu Li NiSteel
Craphite
Carbon blackLiPF6EC/other
BindersPlast
ics0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Mas
s (g
)
25
50
75
100
125260
CV%
Total2436
40
44
48
Mass
(g)
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
CV%
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Wang, Gaustad, Babbitt, Bailey, Ganter, Landi (2014), “Economic and environmental characterization of an evolving Li-ion battery waste stream,” Journal of Environmental Management, v 135, 126-134
Cathode chemistries evolving
0
50
100
150
200
250
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Theo
retic
al S
peci
fic C
apac
ity (A
h/kg
)
Li-SOCl2 LiSO2
LiCoO2
LiMnO2
Li-polymerLiMn2O4
LiFePO4
LiNiO2
Li(Ni1/3Mn1/3Co1/3)O2
LiFeS2
LiMnCoNiO2
LiNiCoAlO2
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Time
Economics • Contained materials vary by cathode chemistry, form factor, and size
• Compositional variability indicates uncertainties in their potential recoverable value
• Cobalt content varies a lot among different cathode types
• Low potential recoverable values for Mn-spinel and iron phosphate batteries
Table Representative composition for four selected case study cathode chemistries (by wt.%)
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Wang, Gaustad, Babbitt, Bailey, Ganter, Landi (2014), “Economic and environmental characterization of an evolving Li-ion battery waste stream,” Journal of Environmental Management, v 135, 126-134
Economies of Scale Revenues ($) from recycling one metric ton of LIBs for all possible mixed scenarios.
• Darker green means higher economic values; vice versa
• Larger proportion LiCoO2 cathode LIBs means higher profitability
• Theoretical threshold 21%
• Does the large proportion of less valuable LIB types mean recycling is not worthwhile?
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Wang, Gaustad, Babbitt, Richa (2014), “Economies of scale for recycling Li-ion batteries”, Resources, Conservation, and Recycling. v 83, 53-62
Environmental impacts Estimated embodied energy EPA CERCLA points weighted by mass
Besides Co, some other types of materials show recycling incentives: • Li needs to be targeted from an economic perspective • Al recovery needs to be improved from the energy savings perspective • Cu and Mn need to be properly recycled from the eco-toxicity perspective
Secondary usage of electric vehicle (EV) batteries
Reduction in EV Li-ion battery environmental impact in most cases, except in scenarios of extremely low refurbished battery lifespan or cell conversion rate Reduction in 0.3 to 69% of impact due to stationary application Only < 3% increase in CED in unfavorable cases
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Richa, Babbitt, Nenadic, Gaustad (2015), “Environmental trade-offs across cascading lithium-ion battery life cycles”, International Journal of Life-cycle Assessment
Secondary usage of electric vehicle (EV) batteries
PbA battery manufacturing impact >double of refurbishing a LIB pack. Due to lower efficiency of lead acid battery, use phase impacts are can be higher in lead acid battery 12% to 46% reduction in CED and GWP impacts
Extraction Deployment End of Life
Richa, Babbitt, Nenadic, Gaustad (2015), “Environmental trade-offs across cascading lithium-ion battery life cycles”, International Journal of Life-cycle Assessment
Looking forward • Extraction
– Supply looks stable out to 2025 but unrest in DRC, ramp-up in Li production, and dynamics of gigafactory roll-out may have an impact
• End-of-Life – Policy intervention likely needed for both reuse
and recycling routes – Lots of fundamental R&D still needed to keep up
with battery development • Pre-processing • Risks of nanoparticulate exposure, etc.
Gabrielle Gaustad Golisano Institute for Sustainability Rochester Institute of Technology [email protected] Summary of my research: • Quantifying the economic and environmental trade-offs for materials at their end-
of-life with a focus on recycling and resource recovery. Recent work emphasizing implications of material scarcity and criticality for clean energy technologies
Resources/Skills I can offer Resources/Skills I could use:
• Material compositional characterization (XRF, ICP-OES)
• Environmental impact assessment and material flow analysis (MFA, LCA)
• Modelling/Programming (Decision Analysis, Optimization, Simulation)
• Survey design • Mathematical epidemiology • Resource conflict • Commodity trading • Students interested in cross-disciplinary
graduate research
THANK YOU
@gggaustad
Motivation High cost of EV lithium-ion battery Projection of large scale EV battery waste
EV LIB reuse in stationary energy
*EV price data: David, H. (2012). Battery status and cost reduction prospects. EV everywhere grand challenge. U.S. DOE. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/ev_everywhere/5_howell_b.pdf
Potential benefits of reuse of EV LIBs: Reduce EV battery cost Delay entry of EOL LIBs in waste stream Avoiding life cycle environmental impacts of a new lead acid battery-???
EOL
Economies of scale for LIB recycling
1,,0,1
))**(*(
0)*(*.
321
3
1
3
1
7
1,
≤≤=
=
≥+−
∑
∑ ∑
=
= =
αααα
α
ii
i jjjiji REAvaPR
TVCFCRTStMinT
Goal: to identify the minimum amount of spent LIBs for a recycling facility to be profitable
200000150000100000500000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Maximum Recycling Capacity (tons/yr)
Fixe
d C
osts
(,0
00 $
/yr)
US_Case 1
Italy
US_Case 2 Mexico
Canada
Economies of Scale
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
100
450400
350
150
300
250
200
1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500500000
750000
1000000
1250000
1500000
Fixe
d C
osts
($/y
r)
Variable Costs ($/ton)
15000
30000
45000
60000
Max
imum
Cap
acity
(ton
s/yr
)
Figure Minimum volumes of spent LIBs for a recycling facility to cover all expenses for different fixed and variable costs. Star refers to the base case.
• Reducing fixed or variable costs lower breakeven amount; improve profitability
• Base case assumption: 80% LiCoO2 10% LiFePO4 10% LiMn2O4
What does the co-mingled waste stream look like in the future?
Economies of Scale
Revenues ($) from recycling one metric ton of LIBs for all possible mixed scenarios.
• Darker green means higher economic values; vice versa
• Larger proportion LiCoO2 cathode LIBs means higher profitability
• Theoretical threshold 21%
• Does the large proportion of less valuable LIB types mean recycling is not worthwhile?
Current Situation Current low collection rate – an example of 2012:
10 million lbs of rechargeable batteries
20% 80%
2 million lbs of LIBs 8 million lbs of other types of rechargeable batteries 45 g/cell
6 cells/laptop
3.36 million laptops 33 million laptops
Cameras, cellphones, other products
Refs: http://www.call2recycle.org/battery-recycling-program-reports-double-digit-collections-in-2012/ Enterprise, A. (2009) Advanced Rechargeable Battery Market: Emerging Technologies and Trends Worldwide EPA (2011) Electronics Waste Management in the United States through 2009.
• Collection rate << 10%
• How many LIB recycling facilities can be satisfied?
Potential Issues
• Exposure to dust: carbon black? Other materials?
• Potential for exposure to nanoparticles
Recycling Energy Consumption
GHG Emission
Hazardous Wastes
NP Exposure
Pre-recycling
Pyrometallurgical
Hydrometallurgical
Assessment of NP exposure
Equipment: TSI’s Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS) Spectrometer
• Size range: 2.5 – 1,000 nm • Particle concentration: 0-107 particles/cm3
Goal Fill research gaps in the LCI for LIBs, with a focus on end-of-life Research questions:
Understand how particle size distribution and particle concentration
• Change over time • Vary by location
Preliminary work
• Particle concentration changed substantially over time for ultrafine particles (<100 nm)
Scan up time = 45 secs; retrace time = 10 secs
1 10 100
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
Part
icle
Con
cent
ratio
ndN
/dlo
g(D
p) (c
m-3
)
Diameter, Dp (nm)
1 10 100
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Par
ticle
Con
cent
ratio
ndN
/dlo
g(D
p) (c
m-3
)
Diameter, Dp (nm)
Battery Pack II Battery Pack KK
• The fume hood can protect workers
• Risk still remains
Conclusion
1) Learn different measuring metrics: environmental and economic 2) Understand the potential economic values of spent LIBs 3) Learn economies of scale for EOL LIB recycling 4) Learn nanoparticle exposure potential might exist during the EOL
processing
Four learning objectives:
• EOL LIBs have incentives to be recycled from both the economic and environmental perspectives
• Beside cobalt, other types of materials also need to be recovered at a higher level
• Collection rate of EOL LIBs should be improved • Nanoparticle exposure potential during EOL treatment of
LIBs
Pre-recycling Results Material segregation Sample: LiCoO2 18650 cells from Manufacturer A
>6 mm 2.5 – 6 mm 1 – 2.5 mm 0.5 – 1 mm < 0.5 mm
0
20
40
60
80
100
Metallic portion
(<0.5 mm )
(0.5 mm, 1 mm)
(1 mm, 2.5 mm)
(2.5 mm, 6 mm)(>6 mm)0
20
40
60
80
100
Others Fe Al Mn Cu Ni Co
HP, Battery Pack #S
• XRF results (in wt.%)
• Purity improved
Pre-recycling Results
(<0.5 mm)
(0.5 mm, 1 mm)
(1 mm, 2.5 mm)
(2.5 mm, 6 mm)(>6 mm)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Pro
porti
on (%
)
(<0.5 mm)
(0.5 mm, 1 mm)
(1 mm, 2.5 mm)
(2.5 mm, 6 mm)(>6 mm)0
20
40
60
80
100
Pro
porti
on (%
)
Co-based LIBs Mixed-metal LIBs
Figure The average metallic material distribution in each size fraction for (a) cobalt-based and (b) mixed-metal cathode LIBs
The performance of this pre-recycling process vary by cathode chemistry type:
It works better on Co-based LIBs
(<0.5 mm)
(0.5 mm, 1 mm)
(1 mm, 2.5 mm)
(2.5 mm, 6 mm)(>6 mm)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Prop
ortio
n (%
)
(<0.5 mm)
(0.5 mm, 1 mm)
(1 mm, 2.5 mm)
(2.5 mm, 6 mm)(>6 mm)0
20
40
60
80
100
Prop
ortio
n (%
)
Co-based LIBs Mixed-metal LIBs
Figure The average metallic material distribution in each size fraction for (a) cobalt-based and (b) mixed-metal cathode LIBs
(<0.5 mm)
(0.5 mm, 1 mm)
(1 mm, 2.5 mm)
(2.5 mm, 6 mm)(>6 mm)0
20
40
60
80
100Po
tent
ial E
cono
mic
Val
ue (i
n %
)
Co-based LIBs Mixed-metal LIBs
(<0.5 mm)
(0.5 mm, 1 mm)
(1 mm, 2.5 mm)
(2.5 mm, 6 mm)(>6 mm)0
20
40
60
80
100
Pote
ntia
l Eco
nom
ic V
alue
(in
%)
Figure The contribution of each type of material to the total recoverable value in each size fraction (a) LiCoO2 cathode LIBs, (b) mixed-metal LIBs
Pre-recycling Results
• Chemistry standardization
• Labeling system is highly recommended