The first review of the various electrolytes currently used and developed for sodium-ion batteries (SIBs), both in terms of materials and concepts, is presented. In contrast to the Li-ion battery (LIB), which is a mature technology for which a more or less unanimously accepted "standard electrolyte" exists: 1 M LiPF 6 in EC/DMC, the electrolyte of choice for SIBs has not yet fully conformed to a standard. This is true for both materials: salts, solvents, or additives, and concept, using the main track of organic solvents or aiming for other concepts. SIB research currently prospers, benefitting from using know-how gained from 30 years of LIB R&D. Here the currently employed electrolytes are emphasized and their effects on practical SIB performance are outlined, scrutinizing the rationale for specific choices made, salts, solvents, additives, concentrations, etc. for each specific cell set-up and usage conditions.

No abstract

No abstract

a b s t r a c tThere is a societal need for using monetary estimates of social impacts of CO 2 and other greenhouse gases in different assessment tools, such as cost-benefit analysis and life-cycle assessment. A number of estimates are available in the literature. Since these differ by several orders of magnitude, there is ambiguity and confusion about which to use. This review aims to give some guidance on this issue. The variation in carbon value estimates depends on several uncertain aspects e which will remain uncertain e including climate sensitivity, assumptions about future emissions, and decision makers' ethical standpoints. Hence, there is no single correct monetary value for CO 2 : it will depend on the ethical standpoint of the user. Due to this, estimates of social costs of CO 2 emissions cannot be used for calculating an optimal emission level, although they can inform such assessments. It is suggested that marginal abatement cost values are used for emissions capped by binding targets in short-term assessments, and that social cost of carbon values should be used for all other emissions. Benchmark principles for choosing a monetary carbon value are suggested along with associated estimates. Depending on the choices made with regard to ethical standpoints and assumptions about future emissions and climate sensitivity, estimates can be significantly higher than the ones typically used in assessment tools today. The estimates need continuous updating, and there is need for better understanding and communication around the limitations and uncertainties involved.

PurposeFrom a methodological point of view, life cycle costing (LCC) is well developed with respect to conventional costs. However, when it comes to costs related to environmental issues, neither the items nor their estimation have been well developed. This paper aims at investigating the possibilities of using life cycle assessment (LCA) results to identify and estimate environmental costs or benefits in an LCC.Design/methodology/approachThe paper begins by looking at the driving forces for introducing environmental costs in companies, continues by identifying external and internal environmental cost issues, and concludes with an attempt to estimate the internal costs.FindingsSome of the items of an LCC have to do with increased/decreased sales, others with good will. Both are difficult to estimate, but LCA or LCA‐like investigations may be helpful in identifying relevant issues. Future costs to the product system may also be estimated, for example, with a distance‐to‐target type of weighting. LCA may be helpful in roughly estimating risks, especially together with those LCA impact assessment methods that model damage. Such an item in LCC can be dealt with as an insurance fee or, if the risk is too high, as a way of including necessary preventive actions.Research limitations/implicationsThe literature on the subject is limited and not sufficient to aid in estimation of environmental costs and benefits for a company. It seems reasonable to begin an improvement of the methodology by looking at future costs and benefits.Practical implicationsThis paper may help in structuring the task of using LCA information for estimating environmental costs in LCC.Originality/valueThere has been increased interest recently in the integration of LCA and LCC, such as in the SETAC (Society for Ecotoxicology and Chemistry) working group on LCC. This paper contributes with new outlooks and structures for that work.