Advertisement

A cascaded life cycle: reuse of electric vehicle lithium-ion battery packs in energy storage systems

  • Leila Ahmadi
  • Steven B. YoungEmail author
  • Michael Fowler
  • Roydon A. Fraser
  • Mohammad Ahmadi Achachlouei
ASSESSING AND MANAGING LIFE CYCLES OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES

Abstract

Purpose

Lithium-ion (Li-ion) battery packs recovered from end-of-life electric vehicles (EV) present potential technological, economic and environmental opportunities for improving energy systems and material efficiency. Battery packs can be reused in stationary applications as part of a “smart grid”, for example to provide energy storage systems (ESS) for load leveling, residential or commercial power. Previous work on EV battery reuse has demonstrated technical viability and shown energy efficiency benefits in energy storage systems modeled under commercial scenarios. The current analysis performs a life cycle assessment (LCA) study on a Li-ion battery pack used in an EV and then reused in a stationary ESS.

Methods

A complex functional unit is used to combine energy delivered by the battery pack from the mobility function and the stationary ESS. Various scenarios of cascaded “EV mobility plus reuse in stationary clean electric power scenarios” are contrasted with “conventional system mobility with internal combustion engine vehicles plus natural gas peaking power.” Eight years are assumed for first use; with 10 years for reuse in the stationary application. Operational scenarios and environmental data are based on real time-of-day and time-of-year power use. Additional data from LCA databases are utilized. Ontario, Canada, is used as the geographic baseline; analysis includes sensitivity to the electricity mix and battery degradation. Seven environmental categories are assessed using ReCiPe.

Results and discussion

Results indicate that the manufacturing phase of the Li-ion battery will still dominate environmental impacts across the extended life cycle of the pack (first use in vehicle plus reuse in stationary application). For most impact categories, the cascaded use system appears significantly beneficial compared to the conventional system. By consuming clean energy sources for both use and reuse, global and local environmental stress reductions can be supported. Greenhouse gas advantages of vehicle electrification can be doubled by extending the life of the EV batteries, and enabling better use of off-peak low-cost clean electricity or intermittent renewable capacity. However, questions remain concerning implications of long-duration use of raw material resources employed before potential recycling.

Conclusions

Li-ion battery packs present opportunities for powering both mobility and stationary applications in the necessary transition to cleaner energy. Battery state-of-health is a considerable determinant in the life cycle performance of a Li-ion battery pack. The use of a complex functional unit was demonstrated in studying a component system with multiple uses in a cascaded application.

Keywords

Electric vehicle Energy storage systems (ESS) Life cycle assessment (LCA) Li-ion battery Resource efficiency Reuse Second use 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge support in this research from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), Mitsui & Co. (Canada) Ltd., and Nuvation Engineering.

Supplementary material

11367_2015_959_MOESM1_ESM.docx (34 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 33.5 kb)

References

  1. Ahmadi L, Fowler M, Young SB, Fraser RA, Gaffney B, Walker SB (2014a) Energy efficiency of Li-ion battery packs re-used in stationary power applications. Sustainable Energy Technol Assess 8:9–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmadi L, Yip A, Fowler M, Young SB, Fraser RA (2014b) Environmental feasibility of re-use of electric vehicle batteries. Sustainable Energy Technol Assess 6:64–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennion K, Thornton M (2009) Fuel savings from hybrid electric vehicles fuel savings from hybrid electric vehicles. In: National Renewable Energy Laboratory, USGoogle Scholar
  4. Casals LC, García BA, Aguesse F, Iturrondobeitia A (2015) Second life of electric vehicle batteries: relation between materials degradation and environmental impact. Int J Life Cycle. doi: 10.1007/s11367-015-0918-3 Google Scholar
  5. Cicconi P, Landi D, Morbidoni A, Germani M (2012) Feasibility analysis of second life applications for Li-ion cells used in electric powertrain using environmental indicators. In: Energy Conference and Exhibition (ENERGYCON), 2012 I.E. International, pp 985–990Google Scholar
  6. Cready E, Lippert J, Pihl J, Weinstock I, Symons P, Jungst RG (2003) Final Report Technical and Economic Feasibility of Applying Used EV Batteries in Stationary Applications A Study for the DOE Energy Storage Systems ProgramGoogle Scholar
  7. Ekvall T, Tillman AM (1997) Open-loop recycling: criteria for allocation procedures. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2(3):155–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ellingsen LAW, Majeau-Bettez G, Singh B, Srivastava AK, Valøen LO, Strømman AH (2014) Life cycle assessment of a lithium-ion battery vehicle pack. J Ind Ecol 18(1):113–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Frischknecht R, Jungbluth N, Althaus H, Doka G, Dones R, Heck T, Spielmann M (2007) Overview and methodology. DubendorfGoogle Scholar
  10. Gaffney B, Walker SB, Fowler M, Young SB et al. (2014) FMEA and fault tree analysis for second use EV battery in a residence. 64th Canadian Society of Chemical Engineers Conference (CSCHe2014), pp 19–22 October, 2014, Niagara Falls, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  11. Gaines L, Sullivan J, Burnham A, Belharouak I (2011) Life-cycle analysis for lithium-ion battery production and recycling. Transportation Research Board 90th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, pp 23–27Google Scholar
  12. Gemechu E, Sonnemann G, Young S (2015) Geopolitical related supply risk assessment as a complement to environmental impacts assessment: the case of electric vehicles. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi: 10.1007/s11367-015-0917-4 Google Scholar
  13. Hawkins TR, Singh B, Majeau-Bettez G, Strømman AH (2013) Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of conventional and electric vehicles. J Ind Ecol 17(1):53–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Herrmann C, Raatz A, Mennenga M, Schmitt J, Andrew S (2012) assessment of automation potentials for the disassembly of automotive lithium ion battery systems. In: Leveraging Technology for a Sustainable World, pp 149–154Google Scholar
  15. Heymans C, Walker SB, Young SB, Fowler M (2014) Economic analysis of second use electric vehicle batteries for residential energy storage and load-levelling. Energy Policy 71:22–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hischier R, Classen M, Lehmann M (2007) Life cycle inventories of electric and electronic equipment: production, use and disposal. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, St. Gallen/DubendorfGoogle Scholar
  17. IESO (2012a) Monthly Market Report December 2012. Mississauga, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  18. IESO (2012b, January 6) Composition of Ontario’s electricity mix continues to change: consumer response supports reliability. Independent electricity system operator. http://doi.org/613 -738-2646
  19. IESO (2013) Monthly Market Report June 2013 (Vol. 73). Toronto, Ontario, CA. Retrieved from http://www.ieso.ca/imoweb/pubs/marketReports/monthly/2013jun.pdf
  20. JRC (2010) International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD handbook). Retrieved from http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/uploads/2014/01/ILCD-Handbook-LCIA-Background-analysis-online-12March2010.pdf
  21. Long RT, Kahn M, Mikolajczak C (2012). Lithium-ion battery hazards. Fire protection engineering. Retrieved from http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/lithium-ion-battery-hazards
  22. LTEP (2010) Building our clean energy future; Ontario’s long-term energy plan. Toronto, Ontario, CA. Retrieved from http://www.energy.gov.on.ca/docs/en/MEI_LTEP_en.pdf
  23. MacLean HL, Lave LB (2003) Life cycle assessment of automobile/fuel options. Env Sci & Tech, 37(23), 5445–52. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14700331
  24. Majeau-Bettez G, Hawkins TR, Strømman AH (2011) Life cycle environmental assessment of lithium-ion and nickel metal hydride batteries for plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 45(10):4548–4554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mallia E, Lewis G (2012) Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of electricity generation in the province of Ontario, Canada. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(2):377–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McManus MC (2012) Environmental consequences of the use of batteries in low carbon systems: the impact of battery production. Appl Energy 93:288–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mikolajczak C, Kahn M, White K, Long RT (2011) Lithium-ion batteries hazard and use assessment. Springer. http://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-1-4614-3486-3
  28. Notter DA, Gauch M, Widmer R, Wäger P, Stamp A, Zah R, Althaus H-J (2010) Contribution of Li-ion batteries to the environmental impact of electric vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 44(17):6550–6556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Richa K, Babbitt CW, Gaustad G, Wang X (2014) A future perspective on lithium-ion battery waste flows from electric vehicles. Res Conserv Recycl 83:63–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Richa K, Babbitt CW, Nenadic N, Gaustad G (2015) Environmental trade-offs across cascading lithium-ion battery life cycles. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi: 10.1007/s11367-015-0942-3 Google Scholar
  31. Rydh CJ, Sandén BA (2005) Energy analysis of batteries in photovoltaic systems. Part I: performance and energy requirements. Energy Convers Manag 46(11–12):1957–19793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Saha B, Goebel K (2009) Modeling Li-ion battery capacity depletion in a particle filtering framework. In: Annual Conference of the PHM Society, San Diego, CA, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  33. Shokrzadeh S, Bibeau E (2012) Repurposing batteries of plug-in electric vehicles to support renewable energy penetration in the electric grid. SAE. doi: 10.4271/2012-01-0348 Google Scholar
  34. Simon B, Weil M (2013) Analysis of materials and energy flows of different lithium ion traction batteries. Rev Métal 110(1):65–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Miller HL (2007) Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  36. Sonnemann G, Gemechu ED, Adibi N, De Bruille V, Bulle C (2015) From a critical review to a conceptual framework for integrating the criticality of resources into Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment. J Clean Prod 94:20–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tomić J, Kempton W (2007) Using fleets of electric-drive vehicles for grid support. J Power Sources 168(2):459–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van Lanen D, Cocking J, Walker SB, Fowler M, Fraser R, Young SB, Yip A (2015) Economic and environmental analysis of a green energy hub with energy storage under fixed and variable pricing structures. Int J Process Systems EnginGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang X, Gaustad G, Babbitt C, Bailey C, Ganter M, Landi B (2014) Economic and environmental characterization of an evolving Li-ion battery waste stream. Environ Manag 135:126–134Google Scholar
  40. Williams BD, Lipman TE (2010) Strategy for overcoming cost hurdles of plug-in-hybrid battery in California. Trans Res Rec: J Trans Res Board 2191:59–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wolfs P (2010) An economic assessment of “ second use ” lithium-ion batteries for grid support. In: AUPECGoogle Scholar
  42. Zackrisson M, Avellán L, Orlenius J (2010) Life cycle assessment of lithium-ion batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles—critical issues. J Clean Prod 18(15):1519–1529CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leila Ahmadi
    • 1
  • Steven B. Young
    • 2
    Email author
  • Michael Fowler
    • 3
  • Roydon A. Fraser
    • 4
  • Mohammad Ahmadi Achachlouei
    • 5
  1. 1.Energy, Mining and EnvironmentNational Research Council CanadaOttawaCanada
  2. 2.School of Environment, Enterprise and Development|University of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  3. 3.Department of Chemical EngineeringUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  4. 4.Department of Mechanical and Mechatronics EngineeringUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  5. 5.Division of Environmental Strategies Research (fms) and Centre for Sustainable Communications (CESC), KTH Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations