ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
The Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling Trilemma: Bridging the Gap Between Material Science, Economic Reality, and Regulatory Policy.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The electric vehicle revolution has created an urgent need for lithium-ion battery (LIB) recycling, with projections exceeding 11 million tons of end-of-life batteries annually by 2030. However, progress toward a circular economy remains fragmented. This perspective article introduces the concept of a 'Recycling Trilemma,' arguing that technological advancements in material separation are systematically undermined by economic volatility and regulatory fragmentation. While current literature focuses on isolated domains-chemistry, business models, or policy-this work provides a systems-level synthesis. By analyzing the friction points between material science (e.g., binder removal, impurity sensitivity), economic realities (e.g., logistics costs, LFP profitability), and regulatory frameworks (e.g., EU vs. US divergence), we propose that true circularity requires synchronized design-for-recycling, market stabilization mechanisms, and harmonized digital product passports. The paper concludes that overcoming the trilemma demands a shift from isolated fixes to integrated, cross-sectoral coordination.
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.