Comparative Life-Cycle Assessment of Li-Ion Batteries through Process-Based and Integrated Hybrid Approaches

Abstract

This paper analyzes and compares the life cycle environmental impacts of two major types of Li-ion batteries using process-based and integrated hybrid life-cycle assessment (LCA) approaches. The life cycle inventories (LCIs) of Li-ion battery contain component production, battery assembly, use phase, disposal and recycling and other related background processes. For process-based LCA, 17 ReCiPe midpoint environmental impact indicators and three end point environmental impact indicators are considered. As for the integrated hybrid LCA study, life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and energy consumption are emphasized. Furthermore, we perform sensitivity analysis of life cycle GHG emissions with respect to the uncertainties in product prices, mass of BMS and cooling system, and production efficiency. The integrated hybrid LCA results show that battery cell production is the most significant contributor to the life cycle GHG emissions and the economic input-output (EIO) systems contribute the largest part in life cycle energy consumption for both types of Li-ion batteries. The most significant difference between two Li-ion batteries lies in the disposal and recycling stage. For LiMn2O4 (LMO) battery, the disposal and recycling stage only makes up a small portion of less than 10% for life cycle GHG emissions and energy consumption. However, for Li­(Ni x Co y Mn z )­O2 (NCM) battery, it contributes a significant part at more than 20%.

Methodological Approaches to End-Of-Life Modelling in Life Cycle Assessments of Lithium-Ion Batteries

“…In contrast, Ahmadi et al [54], Li et al [18], and Zhao and You [70] make conservative estimations for a number of environmental impact categories by taking recycling procedures into account in both ends of the battery life cycle, i.e., including recycled content as well as modelling the Figure 2. Schematic illustration of how environmental impacts vary depending on the selection of EOL modelling approach, if the study uses the expected setup for cutoff (1) or EOL recycling (4), or apply a hybrid version (2, 3, or 5).…”

“…In contrast, Ahmadi et al [54], Li et al [18], and Zhao and You [70] make conservative estimations for a number of environmental impact categories by taking recycling procedures into account in both ends of the battery life cycle, i.e., including recycled content as well as modelling the material recovery processes in the EOL stage, but without giving any credits (see example 2 in Figure 2). At large, this is in line with the cutoff approach, but it violates the convention of setting the cutoff point before or at the place where recyclables and non-recyclables are separated, by also including material recovery and upgrading processes in the studied system.…”

Effects of micro heat pipe arrays on thermal management performance enhancement of cylindrical lithium‐ion battery cells

“…However, the frequent charging and discharging of Li‐ion battery cells are accompanied by complex exothermic chemical reactions and Joule heat effects. Therefore, the heat generation in a battery pack or module holding hundreds of battery cells can be notable, particularly under fast charge/discharge situations or under hot environmental conditions 5,6 . If the generated heat in a battery pack or module cannot be properly distributed or removed, it will result in gradual decomposition of the battery materials, degradation of capacity and power, and even thermal runaway and explosion 7‐9 .…”

Life cycle assessment of the U.S. beef processing through integrated hybrid approach

“…Most LCA studies on food products apply traditional process-based approaches to collect inventory data (Kim et al, 2013;Li et al, 2018a;Mogensen et al, 2016;Rotz et al, 2019). Integrated hybrid LCAs have been applied in other different systems (e.g., energy) to supplement the truncations of system boundary (Wiedmann et al, 2011;Zhao and You, 2019). However, those integrated hybrid LCAs are mainly focused on one or two environmental indicators (e.g., GHG, fossil fuel footprint), thus limiting our understanding of the wide spectrum of various environmental impacts available in LCA studies, such as eutrophication, human health, and ecotoxicity.…”