Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Silicon Nanowire and Silicon Nanotube Based Lithium Ion Batteries for Electric Vehicles

Wang, Fenfen; Deng, Yelin; Yuan, Chris

doi:10.1016/j.procir.2019.01.004

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the studied giga-factory, a combination of district heat and electrically generated steam is used to meet the heat demand. Several LCA studies on LIB production model heat demand through a combination of electricity, steam, and natural gas combustion Dunn et al 2015b;Sun et al 2020;Wang et al 2019;Deng et al 2018;Yuan et al 2017). Both Sun et al (2020) and point to dehumidification and drying in terms of heat use, with the former stating a 34-MJ/kWh steam requirement and latter 170 MJ/kWh, respectively, based on the GREET model (Dai et al 2017).…”

Section: Heat Demandmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ease of availability and periodic inventory updates (Wang et al 2018;Dai et al 2017Dai et al , 2018b makes GREET a convenient source of data for investigating novel battery components. However, this implies that several LCA studies using the GREET model Yuan et al 2017;Wang et al 2019;Deng et al 2018;Kelly et al 2019;Raugei and Winfield 2019) represent the same production facilities (and technical scopes) and rely on similar methodological assumptions. Another commonly used data source is the Ecoinvent database (Weidema et al 2013;Wernet et al 2016), which provides datasets for modelling background processes for a wide variety of technologies and processes, including, but not specific to LIB production.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Environmental life cycle implications of upscaling lithium-ion battery production

Chordia

Lundmark

Ellingsen

2021

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Life cycle assessment (LCA) literature evaluating environmental burdens from lithium-ion battery (LIB) production facilities lacks an understanding of how environmental burdens have changed over time due to a transition to large-scale production. The purpose of this study is hence to examine the effect of upscaling LIB production using unique life cycle inventory data representative of large-scale production. A sub-goal of the study is to examine how changes in background datasets affect environmental impacts. Method We remodel an often-cited study on small-scale battery production by Ellingsen et al. (2014), representative of operations in 2010, and couple it to updated Ecoinvent background data. Additionally, we use new inventory data to model LIB cell production in a large-scale facility representative of the latest technology in LIB production. The cell manufactured in the small-scale facility is an NMC-1:1:1 (nickel-manganese-cobalt) pouch cell, whereas in the large-scale facility, the cell produced in an NMC-8:1:1 cylindrical cell. We model production in varying carbon intensity scenarios using recycled and exclusively primary materials as input options. We assess environmental pollution–related impacts using ReCiPe midpoint indicators and resource use impacts using the surplus ore method (ReCiPe) and the crustal scarcity indicator. Results and discussion Remodelling of the small-scale factory using updated background data showed a 34% increase in greenhouse gas emissions — linked to updated cobalt sulfate production data. Upscaling production reduced emissions by nearly 45% in the reference scenario (South Korean energy mix) due to a reduced energy demand in cell production. However, the emissions reduce by a further 55% if the energy is sourced from a low-carbon intensity source (Swedish energy mix), shifting almost all burden to upstream supply chain. Regional pollution impacts such as acidification and eutrophication show similar trends. Toxic emissions also reduce, but unlike other impacts, they were already occurring during mining and ore processing. Lastly, nickel, cobalt, and lithium use contribute considerably to resource impacts. From a long-term perspective, copper becomes important from a resource scarcity perspective. Conclusions Upscaling LIB production shifts environmental burdens to upstream material extraction and production, irrespective of the carbon intensity of the energy source. Thus, a key message for the industry and policy makers is that further reductions in the climate impacts from LIB production are possible, only when the upstream LIB supply chain uses renewable energy source. An additional message to LCA practitioners is to examine the effect of changing background systems when evaluating maturing technologies.

show abstract

Section: Heat Demandmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental life cycle implications of upscaling lithium-ion battery production

Chordia

Lundmark

Ellingsen

2021

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To improve the environmental efficiency of battery production, the core strategy is to improve the heat dissipation rate [103]. Using ultracapacitors [57,117], optimizing the number of battery packs [118] or material ratio [25,39], using new materials for batteries [39,119], and optimizing the battery management system [103] can improve the environmental efficiency of the battery system to a certain extent.…”

Section: Equipment Manufacturingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review on Environmental Efficiency Evaluation of New Energy Vehicles Using Life Cycle Analysis

Wang

Tang

2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New energy vehicles (NEVs), especially electric vehicles (EVs), address the important task of reducing the greenhouse effect. It is particularly important to measure the environmental efficiency of new energy vehicles, and the life cycle analysis (LCA) model provides a comprehensive evaluation method of environmental efficiency. To provide researchers with knowledge regarding the research trends of LCA in NEVs, a total of 282 related studies were counted from the Web of Science database and analyzed regarding their research contents, research preferences, and research trends. The conclusion drawn from this research is that the stages of energy resource extraction and collection, carrier production and energy transportation, maintenance, and replacement are not considered to be research links. The stages of material, equipment, and car transportation and operation equipment settling, and forms of use need to be considered in future research. Hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (HFCEVs), vehicle type classification, the water footprint, battery recovery and reuse, and battery aging are the focus of further research, and comprehensive evaluation combined with more evaluation methods is the direction needed for the optimization of LCA. According to the results of this study regarding EV and hybrid power vehicles (including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV), fuel-cell electric vehicles (FCEV), hybrid electric vehicles (HEV), and extended range electric vehicles (EREV)), well-to-wheel (WTW) average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have been less than those in the same period of gasoline internal combustion engine vehicles (GICEV). However, EV and hybrid electric vehicle production CO2 emissions have been greater than those during the same period of GICEV and the total CO2 emissions of EV have been less than during the same period of GICEV.

show abstract

“…Nanostructured anodes are more porous than the typical graphite in order to allow for fluctuation (Baasner et al., 2020; Zuo et al., 2017), although the added required area leads to the loss of energy density provided by silicon (Piwko et al., 2017). Recent LCAs have found in some cases these anodes increase the environmental impacts due to (1) this lack of density improvement, and (2) the impact of processing silicon into a nanostructured anode (Wang et al., 2019; Wu & Kong, 2018). Research has shown that nanostructured anodes have potential environmental benefits if produced at industrial scale, but at current scale are still lacking (Deng et al., 2019; Li et al., 2014) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Should high‐cobalt EV batteries be repurposed? Using LCA to assess the impact of technological innovation on the waste hierarchy

Dunn

Ritter

Velázquez

et al. 2023

J of Industrial Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lithium‐ion batteries (LIBs) are a key technology in decarbonizing the transportation and electricity sectors, yet the use of critical materials, such as cobalt, nickel, and lithium, lead to environmental and social impacts. Reusing, repurposing, and recycling mitigate battery impacts by extending their lifespan and reducing reliance on virgin materials. Innovation that reduces demand for these problematic materials and increases battery efficiency also reduces impacts. Two examples of this technological innovation include, (1) the development of energy dense cathode chemistry containing less cobalt, a material with high social and environmental impacts; and (2) the use of columnar silicon thin film anode, which results in increased energy density compared to the commonly used graphite anode. This research assesses whether these technological innovations change the currently understood waste hierarchy, which prioritizes reuse or repurposing prior to recycling. This is of interest because retired high‐cobalt batteries could supply their constituent materials sooner if recycled immediately and be used in low‐cobalt, higher‐performing batteries. The assessment considers the life cycle environmental impacts of two end‐of‐life management routes for a high‐cobalt LIB: first, recycling the battery immediately after the first use life to produce a new, and less material intensive battery, and second, repurposing the battery for a stationary storage application followed by recycling. Findings show that battery reuse reduces life cycle environmental impacts relative to immediate recycling. Thus, from an environmental perspective, the waste hierarchy holds, and steps to retain the batteries in their highest value use, such as through repurposing, should still be prioritized.

show abstract

Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Silicon Nanowire and Silicon Nanotube Based Lithium Ion Batteries for Electric Vehicles

Cited by 13 publications

References 9 publications

Environmental life cycle implications of upscaling lithium-ion battery production

Environmental life cycle implications of upscaling lithium-ion battery production

A Review on Environmental Efficiency Evaluation of New Energy Vehicles Using Life Cycle Analysis

Should high‐cobalt EV batteries be repurposed? Using LCA to assess the impact of technological innovation on the waste hierarchy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About