Advertisement

Evaluation of the Recyclability of Traction Batteries Using the Concept of Information Theory Entropy

  • Nicolas BognarEmail author
  • Julian Rickert
  • Mark Mennenga
  • Felipe Cerdas
  • Christoph Herrmann
Conference paper

Abstract

As traction battery technologies and electro mobility as a whole continue to grow in importance, the recyclability of batteries has increasingly gained attention in politics, industry and science. The aim of this paper is to broaden the understanding about the recycling of traction batteries by applying the concept of information theory entropy. To this end, information theory-based entropy indicators are used to determine the material mixing complexity of current and future battery chemistries used in electric vehicles. Through the integration of different economic metrics and with the help of additional related information on industrial, political and social influencing factors the recyclability of traction batteries is evaluated and the development of future battery recycling systems and policies is discussed. The results show that the proposed methodology is suitable for comparing different product technologies and that significant differences exist regarding the determining factors for the recyclability of different battery technologies.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1] Dunn JB, Gaines L, Kelly JC, James C, Gallagher KG (2015) The significance of Li-ion batteries in electric vehicle life-cycle energy and emissions and recycling’s role in its reduction. Energy Environ Sci 8(3):158–168Google Scholar
  2. [2] Nelson PA, Gallagher KG, Bloom ID, Dees DW (2012) Modeling the Performance and Cost of Lithium-Ion Batteries for Electric-Drive Vehicles. Technical Report. Argonne, IL (United States)Google Scholar
  3. [3] Diekmann J, Hanisch C, Froböse L, Schälike G, Loellhoeffel T, Fölster AS, Kwade A (2017) Ecological Recycling of Lithium-Ion Batteries from Electric Vehicles with Focus on Mechanical Processes. J Electrochem Soc 164(1):A6184–A6191Google Scholar
  4. [4] Geyer R, Kuczenski B, Zink T, Henderson A (2015) Common Misconceptions about Recycling. J Ind Ecol 20(5):1010–1017Google Scholar
  5. [5] Dahmus JB, Gutowski TG (2007) What Gets Recycled: An Information Theory Based Model for Product Recycling. Environ Sci Technol 41(21):7543–7550Google Scholar
  6. [6] Pillot C (2017) Worldwide Rechargeable Battery Market 2016-2025 - 2017 edition. In: Advanced Battery Power 2017. Münster, 2018Google Scholar
  7. [7] Kwade A, Diekmann J (2018) Recycling of Lithium-Ion Batteries. Springer International PublishingGoogle Scholar
  8. [8] van Schaik A (2014) Material-Centric (Aluminum and Copper) and Product-Centric (Cars, WEEE, TV, Lamps, Batteries, Catalysts) Recycling and DfR Rules. In: Handbook of Recycling, pp. 307–378Google Scholar
  9. [9] Johnson J, Harper EM, Lifset R, Graedel TE (2007) Dining at the periodic table: Metals concentrations as they relate to recycling. Environ Sci Technol 41(5):1759–1765Google Scholar
  10. [10] Anctil A, Fthenakis V (2013) Critical metals in strategic photovoltaic technologies: abundance versus recyclability. Prog Photovoltaics Res Appl 21:1253–1259Google Scholar
  11. [11] Rechberger H, Brunner PH (2002) A New, Entropy Based Method To Support Waste and Resource Management Decisions. Environ Sci Technol 36(4):809–816Google Scholar
  12. [12] Gutowski TG, Dahmus JB (2005) Mixing entropy and product recycling. Proc 2005 IEEE Int Symp Electron Environ, pp. 72–76Google Scholar
  13. [13] Sherwood TK (1959) Mass transfer between phases. Priest Lect, vol. 33Google Scholar
  14. [14] Allen DT, Behmanesh N (1992) Waste As Raw Materials. Ind EcolGoogle Scholar
  15. [15] Grübler A (1998) Technology and Global Change. Technical Report. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  16. [16] Mohamed Sultan AA, Lou E, Mativenga PT (2017) What should be recycled: An integrated model for product recycling desirability. J Clean Prod 154:51–60Google Scholar
  17. [17] European Commission (2010) Critical raw materials for the EU. Report of the Ad hoc Working Group on defining critical raw materialsGoogle Scholar
  18. [18] Schmidt T, Buchert M, Schebek L (2016) Investigation of the primary production routes of nickel and cobalt products used for Liion batteries. Resour Conserv Recycl 112:107–122Google Scholar
  19. [19] Gaines L, Sullivan J, Burnham AJ, Belharouak I (2011) Life-Cycle Analysis for Lithium-Ion Battery Production and Recycling. In: Transportation Research Board 90th Annual Meeting. Washington DC, pp. 23–27Google Scholar
  20. [20] Romare M, Dahllöf L (2017) The Life Cycle Energy Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Lithium-Ion Batteries. Technical Report. IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute LtdGoogle Scholar
  21. [21] Cerdas F, Titscher P, Bognar N, Schmuch R, Winter M, Kwade A, Herrmann C (2018) Exploring the effect of increased energy density on the environmental impacts of traction batteries: A comparison of energy optimized lithium-ion and lithium-sulfur batteries for mobility applications. Energies 11(1):150Google Scholar
  22. [22] Placke T, Kloepsch R, Dühnen S, Winter M (2017) Lithium ion, lithium metal, and alternative rechargeable battery technologies: the odyssey for high energy density. J Solid State Electrochem 21(7):1939-1964Google Scholar
  23. [23] Fraunhofer-Institut für System- und Innovationsforschung ISI (2015) Gesamt-Roadmap Lithium-Ionen-Batterien 2030Google Scholar
  24. [24] Peters J, Buchholz D, Passerini S, Weil M (2016) Life cycle assessment of sodium-ion batteries. Energy Environ Sci 9(5):1744–1751Google Scholar
  25. [25] Schönemann M (2016) Multiscale simulation approach for battery production systems. Springer International PublishingGoogle Scholar
  26. [26] EuroStat (2017) Statistics on the production of manufactured goods Value - ANNUAL 2016. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/prodcom/data/database/
  27. [27] European Comission (2017) Study on the review of the list of critical raw materials - Non-critical raw materials factsheetsGoogle Scholar
  28. [28] European Comission (2017) Study on the review of the list of critical raw materials - Critical Raw Materials FactsheetsGoogle Scholar
  29. [29] Statista (2018) Graphite prices worldwide from 2011 to 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/452304/graphite-pricesworldwide-prediction-by-flake-grade. (Accessed: 23-Apr-2018)
  30. [30] Marscheider-Weidemann F, Langkau S, Hummen T, Erdmann L, Tercero Espinoza L (2016) Rohstoffe für Zukunftstechnologien 2016. Technical Report. DERA Rohstoffagentur, no. 28Google Scholar
  31. [31] Statista (2018) Durchschnittspreise ausgewählter mineralischer Rohstoffe in den Jahren 2010 bis 2016. https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/260427/umfrage/durchschnittspreise-ausgewaehlter-mineralischer-rohstoffe. (Accessed: 23-Apr-2018)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicolas Bognar
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Julian Rickert
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mark Mennenga
    • 1
    • 2
  • Felipe Cerdas
    • 1
    • 2
  • Christoph Herrmann
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Chair of Sustainable Manufacturing & Life Cycle Engineering, Institute of Machine Tools and Production Technology (IWF)Technische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigGermany
  2. 2.Battery LabFactory Braunschweig (BLB)Technische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigGermany

Personalised recommendations