Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38650673›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in chemistry2024

Lithium-ion battery second life: pathways, challenges and outlook.

Anisha N Patel, Laura Lander, Jyoti Ahuja, James Bulman, James K H Lum, Julian O D Pople, Alastair Hales, Yatish Patel, Jacqueline S Edge

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Anisha N Patel *Department of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Laura Lander *Department of Engineering, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Jyoti AhujaBirmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
James BulmanDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
James K H LumDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Julian O D PopleDepartment of Engineering, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Alastair HalesDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Yatish Patel *Department of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Jacqueline S EdgeDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Net zero targets have resulted in a drive to decarbonise the transport sector worldwide through electrification. This has, in turn, led to an exponentially growing battery market and, conversely, increasing attention on how we can reduce the environmental impact of batteries and promote a more efficient circular economy to achieve real net zero. As these batteries reach the end of their first life, challenges arise as to how to collect and process them, in order to maximise their economical use before finally being recycled. Despite the growing body of work around this topic, the decision-making process on which pathways batteries could take is not yet well understood, and clear policies and standards to support implementation of processes and infrastructure are still lacking. Requirements and challenges behind recycling and second life applications are complex and continue being defined in industry and academia. Both pathways rely on cell collection, selection and processing, and are confronted with the complexities of pack disassembly, as well as a diversity of cell chemistries, state-of-health, size, and form factor. There are several opportunities to address these barriers, such as standardisation of battery design and reviewing the criteria for a battery's end-of-life. These revisions could potentially improve the overall sustainability of batteries, but may require policies to drive such transformation across the industry. The influence of policies in triggering a pattern of behaviour that favours one pathway over another are examined and suggestions are made for policy amendments that could support a second life pipeline, while encouraging the development of an efficient recycling industry. This review explains the different pathways that end-of-life EV batteries could follow, either immediate recycling or service in one of a variety of second life applications, before eventual recycling. The challenges and barriers to each pathway are discussed, taking into account their relative environmental and economic feasibility and competing advantages and disadvantages of each. The review identifies key areas where processes need to be simplified and decision criteria clearly defined, so that optimal pathways can be rapidly determined for each end-of-life battery.

Indexed as

end-of-lifelithium-ion batterypolicyregulationrepurposingsafetysecond lifestate-of-health

Identifiers

PMID38650673
PMCPMC11033388

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.