A life cycle assessment of a Li-ion urban electric vehicle battery

Genikomsakis, Konstantinos N.; Murillo, Alberto; Trifonova, Atanaska; Šimić, Dragan

doi:10.1109/evs.2013.6914907

Cited by 18 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, as mentioned in the introduction section, the EV fabrication entails higher environmental impact than the fabrication of ICEV. This fabrication impact is stated in the literature and in different projects such as CCEM, FSEM or EVREST, (Helms et al, 2010;N.Genikomakis et al, 2013;Eiber and Grassmann, 2012;Held and Baumann, 2011;Messagie et al, 2014) to be c.a. 11000 kgCO 2 e., which is added for the calculation of the total GWP.…”

Section: Energy Use-phasementioning

confidence: 87%

Sustainability analysis of the electric vehicle use in Europe for CO2 emissions reduction

Casals

Martinez-Laserna²,

García

et al. 2016

Journal of Cleaner Production

292

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electric vehicles are considered the most promising alternative to internal combustion engine vehicles towards a cleaner transportation sector. Having null tailpipe emissions, electric vehicles contribute to fight localized pollution, which is particularly important in overpopulated urban areas. However, the electric vehicle implies greenhouse gas emissions related to its production and to the electricity generation needed to charge its batteries. This study focuses the analysis on how the electric vehicle emissions vary when compared to internal combustion engine vehicles, depending on the electric power plant fleet and the efficiency during the use-phase. For this to be done, the GWP associated to the electricity generation on the electric vehicle most selling European countries are calculated. Similarly, electric vehicle’s use-phase energy efficiency is calculated under a wide range of driving conditions using the Monte Carlo method. The results from energy production and energy use-phases are compared to the GWP calculated for internal combustion engine vehicles for six different driving cycles, to obtain the threshold values for which electric vehicles provide GWP reduction. These threshold values are then matched with the current electricity power plant fleet and the electric vehicle promotion incentives of the European countries considered in the study, showing that some countries (e.g. France or Norway) are better-suited for electric vehicles adoption, while countries like Spain or Portugal should boost electric vehicle promotion policies. Furthermore, other countries in Europe, such as Germany or the UK that are doing an effort on decarbonizing their power plant fleet, do not offer immediate greenhouse gas emission reductions for the uptake of electric vehicles instead of conventional cars.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

show abstract

Section: Energy Use-phasementioning

confidence: 87%

Sustainability analysis of the electric vehicle use in Europe for CO2 emissions reduction

Casals

Martinez-Laserna²,

García

et al. 2016

Journal of Cleaner Production

292

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…; Genikomsakis et al. ). Additionally, reuse pathways would provide economic advantages by potentially reducing upfront costs of EV adoption, providing resale value for used batteries (Viswanathan and Kintner‐Meyer ; Neubauer and Pesaran ; Neubauer et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Eco‐Efficiency Analysis of a Lithium‐Ion Battery Waste Hierarchy Inspired by Circular Economy

Richa

Babbitt

Gaustad

2017

J of Industrial Ecology

183

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A circular economy (CE)-inspired waste management hierarchy was proposed for end-oflife (EOL) lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) from electric vehicles (EVs). Life cycle eco-efficiency metrics were then applied to evaluate potential environmental and economic trade-offs that may result from managing 1,000 end-of-life EV battery packs in the United States according to this CE hierarchy. Results indicate that if technology and markets support reuse of LIBs in used EVs, the net benefit would be 200,000 megajoules of recouped cumulative energy demand, which is equivalent to avoiding the production of 11 new EV battery packs (18 kilowatt-hours each). However, these benefits are magnified almost tenfold when retired EV LIBs are cascaded in a second use for stationary energy storage, thereby replacing the need to produce and use less-efficient lead-acid batteries. Reuse and cascaded use can also provide EV owners and the utility sector with cost savings, although the magnitude of future economic benefits is uncertain, given that future prices of battery systems are still unknown. In spite of these benefits, waste policies do not currently emphasize CE strategies like reuse and cascaded use for batteries. Though loop-closing LIB recycling provides valuable metal recovery, it can prove nonprofitable if high recycling costs persist. Although much attention has been placed on landfill disposal bans for batteries, results actually indicate that direct and cascaded reuse, followed by recycling, can together reduce eco-toxicity burdens to a much greater degree than landfill bans alone. Findings underscore the importance of life cycle and eco-efficiency analysis to understand at what point in a CE hierarchy the greatest environmental benefits are accrued and identify policies and mechanisms to increase feasibility of the proposed system. Keywords:circular economy eco-efficiency industrial ecology lithium-ion battery waste management hierarchy waste policy Supporting information is linked to this article on the JIE website Conflict of interest statement: The authors have no conflict to declare.

show abstract

“…A few recent LCA studies by Ahmadi et al (2014a), Cicconi et al (2012), and Genikomsakis et al (2013) demonstrated that a net reduction in CO 2 emissions can be achieved by reusing EV LIBs, particularly due to their utility for smart grid or renewable energy applications and the attendant reduction of fossil fuel use. Building upon these LCAs, this study analyzes the environmental performance of post-EV LIBs against basic feasibility criteria for reuse (e.g., battery life span in secondary application), thus attempting to provide an enhanced perspective of environmental implications of battery reuse.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Environmental trade-offs across cascading lithium-ion battery life cycles

Richa

Babbitt

Nenadic

et al. 2015

Int J Life Cycle Assess

151

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study was to analyze the environmental trade-offs of cascading reuse of electric vehicle (EV) lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) in stationary energy storage at automotive end-of-life. Methods Two systems were jointly analyzed to address the consideration of stakeholder groups corresponding to both first (EV) and second life (stationary energy storage) battery applications. The environmental feasibility criterion was defined by an equivalent-functionality lead-acid (PbA) battery. A critical methodological challenge addressed was the allocation of environmental impacts associated with producing LIBs across the EV and stationary use systems. The model also tested sensitivity to parameters such as the fraction of battery cells viable for reuse, service life of refurbished cells, and PbA battery efficiency. Results and discussion From the perspective of EV applications, cascading reuse of an LIB in stationary energy storage can reduce net cumulative energy demand and global warming potential by 15 % under conservative estimates and by as much as 70 % in ideal refurbishment and reuse conditions. When post-EV LIB cells were compared directly to a new PbA system for stationary energy storage, the reused cells generally had lower environmental impacts, except in scenarios where very few of the initial battery cells and modules could be reused and where reliability was low (e.g., life span of 1 year or less) in the secondary application. Conclusions These findings demonstrate that EV LIB reuse in stationary application has the potential for dual benefit-both from the perspective of offsetting initial manufacturing impacts by extending battery life span as well as avoiding production and use of a less-efficient PbA system. It is concluded that reuse decisions and diversion of EV LIBs toward suitable stationary applications can be based on life cycle centric studies. However, technical feasibility of these systems must still be evaluated, particularly with respect to the ability to rapidly analyze the reliability of EV LIB cells, modules, or packs for refurbishment and reuse in secondary applications.

show abstract

A life cycle assessment of a Li-ion urban electric vehicle battery

Cited by 18 publications

References 7 publications

Sustainability analysis of the electric vehicle use in Europe for CO2 emissions reduction

Sustainability analysis of the electric vehicle use in Europe for CO2 emissions reduction

Eco‐Efficiency Analysis of a Lithium‐Ion Battery Waste Hierarchy Inspired by Circular Economy

Environmental trade-offs across cascading lithium-ion battery life cycles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About