IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i9p3876-d1389145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The InnoRec Process: A Comparative Study of Three Mainstream Routes for Spent Lithium-ion Battery Recycling Based on the Same Feedstock

Author

Listed:
  • Hao Qiu

    (Institute of Mineral and Waste Processing, Recycling and Circular Economy Systems (IFAD), Clausthal University of Technology, Walther-Nernst-Straße 9, 38678 Clausthal-Zellerfeld, Germany)

  • Daniel Goldmann

    (Institute of Mineral and Waste Processing, Recycling and Circular Economy Systems (IFAD), Clausthal University of Technology, Walther-Nernst-Straße 9, 38678 Clausthal-Zellerfeld, Germany)

  • Christin Stallmeister

    (Institute of Process Metallurgy and Metal Recycling (IME), RWTH Aachen University, Intzestr. 3, 52056 Aachen, Germany)

  • Bernd Friedrich

    (Institute of Process Metallurgy and Metal Recycling (IME), RWTH Aachen University, Intzestr. 3, 52056 Aachen, Germany)

  • Maximilian Tobaben

    (Institute for Particle Technology (iPAT), TU Braunschweig, Volkmaroder Str. 5, 38104 Braunschweig, Germany)

  • Arno Kwade

    (Institute for Particle Technology (iPAT), TU Braunschweig, Volkmaroder Str. 5, 38104 Braunschweig, Germany)

  • Christoph Peschel

    (MEET Battery Research Center, University of Münster, Corrensstr. 46, 48149 Münster, Germany)

  • Martin Winter

    (MEET Battery Research Center, University of Münster, Corrensstr. 46, 48149 Münster, Germany
    Helmholtz-Institute Münster, IEK-12, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Corrensstraße 46, 48149 Münster, Germany)

  • Sascha Nowak

    (MEET Battery Research Center, University of Münster, Corrensstr. 46, 48149 Münster, Germany)

  • Tony Lyon

    (Institute of Mechanical Process Engineering and Mineral Processing (MVTAT), TU Bergakademie Freiberg, 09599 Freiberg, Germany)

  • Urs A. Peuker

    (Institute of Mechanical Process Engineering and Mineral Processing (MVTAT), TU Bergakademie Freiberg, 09599 Freiberg, Germany)

Abstract

Among the technologies used for spent lithium-ion battery recycling, the common approaches include mechanical treatment, pyrometallurgical processing and hydrometallurgical processing. These technologies do not stand alone in a complete recycling process but are combined. The constant changes in battery materials and battery design make it a challenge for the existing recycling processes, and the need to design efficient and robust recycling processes for current and future battery materials has become a critical issue today. Therefore, this paper simplifies the current treatment technologies into three recycling routes, namely, the hot pyrometallurgical route, warm mechanical route and cold mechanical route. By using the same feedstock, the three routes are compared based on the recovery rate of the six elements (Al, Cu, C, Li, Co and Ni). The three different recycling routes represent specific application scenarios, each with their own advantages and disadvantages. In the hot pyrometallurgical route, the recovery of Co is over 98%, and the recovery of Ni is over 99%. In the warm mechanical route, the recovery of Li can reach 63%, and the recovery of graphite is 75%. In the cold mechanical route, the recovery of Cu can reach 75%, and the recovery of Al is 87%. As the chemical compositions of battery materials and various doping elements continue to change today, these three recycling routes could be combined in some way to improve the overall recycling efficiency of batteries.

Suggested Citation

  • Hao Qiu & Daniel Goldmann & Christin Stallmeister & Bernd Friedrich & Maximilian Tobaben & Arno Kwade & Christoph Peschel & Martin Winter & Sascha Nowak & Tony Lyon & Urs A. Peuker, 2024. "The InnoRec Process: A Comparative Study of Three Mainstream Routes for Spent Lithium-ion Battery Recycling Based on the Same Feedstock," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-28, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:9:p:3876-:d:1389145
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/9/3876/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/9/3876/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:9:p:3876-:d:1389145. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.