IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v16y2023i19p6859-d1249749.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Study on the Life Cycle Assessment of Automotive Power Batteries Considering Multi-Cycle Utilization

Author

Listed:
  • Yongtao Liu

    (School of Automobile, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Chunmei Zhang

    (School of Automobile, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Zhuo Hao

    (CATARC New Energy Vehicle Test Center (Tianjin) Co., Ltd., Tianjin 300000, China)

  • Xu Cai

    (School of Automobile, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Chuanpan Liu

    (School of Automobile, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Jianzhang Zhang

    (School of Automobile, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Shu Wang

    (School of Automobile, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Yisong Chen

    (School of Automobile, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

Abstract

This article utilizes the research method of the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to scrutinize Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) batteries and Ternary Lithium (NCM) batteries. It develops life cycle models representing the material, energy, and emission flows for power batteries, exploring the environmental impact and energy efficiency throughout the life cycles of these batteries. The life cycle assessment results of different power battery recycling process scenarios are compared and analyzed. This study focuses on retired LFP batteries to assess the environmental and energy efficiency during the cascade utilization stage, based on a 50% Single-Cell Conversion Rate (CCR). The findings of the research reveal that, in terms of resource depletion and environmental emission potential, LFP batteries exhibit lower impacts compared to NCM batteries. The use of hydrometallurgy in recovering LFP power batteries leads to minimal life cycle resource consumption and environmental emission potential. During the cascade utilization stage of LFP batteries, significant benefits are noted, including a 76% reduction in mineral resource depletion (ADP e) and an 83% reduction in fossil energy depletion (ADP f), alongside notable reductions in various environmental impact factors. Simultaneously, considering the sensitivity of life cycle assessment indicators and their benefit percentages to different CCRs, it is observed that ODP exhibits the highest sensitivity to CCR changes, while evaluation indicators such as HTP, AP, and GWP show relatively lower sensitivity. This study can provide an effective reference for the establishment of an energy saving and emission reduction evaluation system of power batteries.

Suggested Citation

  • Yongtao Liu & Chunmei Zhang & Zhuo Hao & Xu Cai & Chuanpan Liu & Jianzhang Zhang & Shu Wang & Yisong Chen, 2023. "Study on the Life Cycle Assessment of Automotive Power Batteries Considering Multi-Cycle Utilization," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-24, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:19:p:6859-:d:1249749
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/19/6859/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/19/6859/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christos S. Ioakimidis & Alberto Murillo-Marrodán & Ali Bagheri & Dimitrios Thomas & Konstantinos N. Genikomsakis, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment of a Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) Electric Vehicle Battery in Second Life Application Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-14, May.
    2. Ahmadi, Pouria & Raeesi, Mehrdad & Changizian, Sina & Teimouri, Aidin & Khoshnevisan, Alireza, 2022. "Lifecycle assessment of diesel, diesel-electric and hydrogen fuel cell transit buses with fuel cell degradation and battery aging using machine learning techniques," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    3. Han Hao & Zhexuan Mu & Shuhua Jiang & Zongwei Liu & Fuquan Zhao, 2017. "GHG Emissions from the Production of Lithium-Ion Batteries for Electric Vehicles in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-12, April.
    4. Heymans, Catherine & Walker, Sean B. & Young, Steven B. & Fowler, Michael, 2014. "Economic analysis of second use electric vehicle batteries for residential energy storage and load-levelling," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 22-30.
    5. Arminda Almeida & Nuno Sousa & João Coutinho-Rodrigues, 2019. "Quest for Sustainability: Life-Cycle Emissions Assessment of Electric Vehicles Considering Newer Li-Ion Batteries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    6. Andrea Temporelli & Maria Leonor Carvalho & Pierpaolo Girardi, 2020. "Life Cycle Assessment of Electric Vehicle Batteries: An Overview of Recent Literature," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-13, June.
    7. Sanfélix, Javier & Messagie, Maarten & Omar, Noshin & Van Mierlo, Joeri & Hennige, Volker, 2015. "Environmental performance of advanced hybrid energy storage systems for electric vehicle applications," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 925-930.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emanuele Michelini & Patrick Höschele & Florian Ratz & Michael Stadlbauer & Werner Rom & Christian Ellersdorfer & Jörg Moser, 2023. "Potential and Most Promising Second-Life Applications for Automotive Lithium-Ion Batteries Considering Technical, Economic and Legal Aspects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-21, March.
    2. Yash Kotak & Carlos Marchante Fernández & Lluc Canals Casals & Bhavya Satishbhai Kotak & Daniel Koch & Christian Geisbauer & Lluís Trilla & Alberto Gómez-Núñez & Hans-Georg Schweiger, 2021. "End of Electric Vehicle Batteries: Reuse vs. Recycle," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Nenming Wang & Guwen Tang, 2022. "A Review on Environmental Efficiency Evaluation of New Energy Vehicles Using Life Cycle Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-35, March.
    4. Marmiroli, Benedetta & Venditti, Mattia & Dotelli, Giovanni & Spessa, Ezio, 2020. "The transport of goods in the urban environment: A comparative life cycle assessment of electric, compressed natural gas and diesel light-duty vehicles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    5. Christian Aichberger & Gerfried Jungmeier, 2020. "Environmental Life Cycle Impacts of Automotive Batteries Based on a Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-27, December.
    6. Picatoste, Aitor & Justel, Daniel & Mendoza, Joan Manuel F., 2022. "Circularity and life cycle environmental impact assessment of batteries for electric vehicles: Industrial challenges, best practices and research guidelines," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    7. Sathre, Roger & Gustavsson, Leif, 2021. "A lifecycle comparison of natural resource use and climate impact of biofuel and electric cars," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    8. Youssef Amry & Elhoussin Elbouchikhi & Franck Le Gall & Mounir Ghogho & Soumia El Hani, 2022. "Electric Vehicle Traction Drives and Charging Station Power Electronics: Current Status and Challenges," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-30, August.
    9. Gur, K. & Chatzikyriakou, D. & Baschet, C. & Salomon, M., 2018. "The reuse of electrified vehicle batteries as a means of integrating renewable energy into the European electricity grid: A policy and market analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 535-545.
    10. Mattia Rapa & Laura Gobbi & Roberto Ruggieri, 2020. "Environmental and Economic Sustainability of Electric Vehicles: Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing Evaluation of Electricity Sources," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-16, November.
    11. Kuang, Yanqing & Chen, Yang & Hu, Mengqi & Yang, Dong, 2017. "Influence analysis of driver behavior and building category on economic performance of electric vehicle to grid and building integration," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 427-437.
    12. Tang, Yanyan & Zhang, Qi & Li, Yaoming & Li, Hailong & Pan, Xunzhang & Mclellan, Benjamin, 2019. "The social-economic-environmental impacts of recycling retired EV batteries under reward-penalty mechanism," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 251(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Balakumar Balasingam & Mostafa Ahmed & Krishna Pattipati, 2020. "Battery Management Systems—Challenges and Some Solutions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, June.
    14. Qingshi Tu & Edgar G. Hertwich, 2022. "A mechanistic model to link technical specifications of vehicle end‐of‐life treatment with the potential of closed‐loop recycling of post‐consumer scrap alloys," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(3), pages 704-717, June.
    15. Wu, Wei & Lin, Boqiang, 2018. "Application value of energy storage in power grid: A special case of China electricity market," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PB), pages 1191-1199.
    16. Briac Baudais & Hamid Ben Ahmed & Gurvan Jodin & Nicolas Degrenne & Stéphane Lefebvre, 2023. "Life Cycle Assessment of a 150 kW Electronic Power Inverter," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-18, February.
    17. Li Chen & Yuqi Tong & Zuomin Dong, 2020. "Li-Ion Battery Performance Degradation Modeling for the Optimal Design and Energy Management of Electrified Propulsion Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-19, April.
    18. Rahmani, Ebrahim & Moradi, Tofigh & Ghandehariun, Samane & Naterer, Greg F. & Ranjbar, Amirhossein, 2023. "Enhanced mass transfer and water discharge in a proton exchange membrane fuel cell with a raccoon channel flow field," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    19. Requia, Weeberb J. & Adams, Matthew D. & Arain, Altaf & Koutrakis, Petros & Ferguson, Mark, 2017. "Carbon dioxide emissions of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles: A life-cycle analysis in eight Canadian cities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1390-1396.
    20. Jay N. Meegoda & Sarvagna Malladi & Isabel C. Zayas, 2022. "End-of-Life Management of Electric Vehicle Lithium-Ion Batteries in the United States," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-13, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:19:p:6859-:d:1249749. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.