ReviewiScience2023
Cost, energy, and carbon footprint benefits of second-life electric vehicle battery use.
Review in iScience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Second-Life Lithium-Ion Batteries for Circular Energy Systems: A Techno-Economic and Environmental Pathway to Affordable Grid-Connected Renewable Storage.Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ) · 2026Article
- System-level assessment of dynamic reconfiguration for lifetime and cost outcomes in electric vehicle battery packs.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Long-Term Sweat Testing Dataset for Second-Life Batteries.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Policies and actions for electric vehicle battery waste processing using an integrated QFD approach: A case study for Jordan.Heliyon · 2025Article
- Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling: Bridging Regulation Implementation and Technological Innovations for Better Battery Sustainability.Environmental science & technology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The manuscript reviews the research on economic and environmental benefits of second-life electric vehicle batteries (EVBs) use for energy storage in households, utilities, and EV charging stations. Economic benefits depend heavily on electricity costs, battery costs, and battery performance; carbon benefits depend largely on the electricity mix charging the batteries. Environmental performance is greatest when used to store renewable energy such as wind and solar power. Inconsistent system boundaries make it challenging to compare the life cycle carbon footprint across different studies. The future growth of second-life EVB utilization faces several challenges, including the chemical and electrical properties and states of health of retired EVBs, the rapidly decreasing costs of new batteries, and different operational requirements. Measures to mitigate these challenges include the development of efficient diagnostic technologies, comprehensive test standards, and battery designs suitable for remanufacturing. Further research is needed based on real-world operational data and harmonized approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.