Comparative Life Cycle Environmental Impact Analysis of Lithium-Ion (LiIo) and Nickel-Metal Hydride (NiMH) Batteries

Abstract

Batteries have been extensively used in many applications; however, very little is explored regarding the possible environmental impacts for their whole life cycle, even though a lot of studies have been carried out for augmenting performance in many ways. This research paper addresses the environmental effects of two different types of batteries, lithium-ion (LiIo) and nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) batteries, in terms of their chemical constituents. Life cycle impact analysis has been carried out by the CML, ReCiPe, EcoPoints 97, IPCC, and CED methods. The impacts are considered in categories such as global warming, eutrophication, freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity, human toxicity, marine aquatic ecotoxicity and terrestrial ecotoxicity. The results reveal that there is a significant environmental impact caused by nickel-metal hydride batteries in comparison with lithium-ion batteries. The reason behind these impacts is the relatively large amount of toxic chemical elements which are present as constituents of NiMH batteries. It can be anticipated that a better environmental performance can be achieved through optimization, especially by cautiously picking the constituents, taking into account the toxicity aspects, and by minimizing the impacts related to these chemicals.

Life Cycle Assessment of Foam Concrete Production in Latvia

“…The human-toxicity value from one Lithium-Ion battery is 7.38 kg 1.4-DB eq. [23], and from 1 kg of foam concrete it is 0.0163 kg 1.4-DB eq.…”

A Review on Battery Market Trends, Second-Life Reuse, and Recycling

“…According to McManus's studies on the environmental consequences of the use of the different types of battery chemistries, NiMH and LIBs are the most energy intensive batteries to produce [60]. Recently Mahmud et al [61] compared the environmental impact of LIBs and NiMH batteries over the whole life-cycle by considering the global warming, eutrophication, freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity, human toxicity, marine aquatic ecotoxicity, and terrestrial ecotoxicity. The results revealed that there is a significant environmental impact caused by NiMH batteries compared to LIBs, largely due to the use of relatively large amounts of toxic chemicals in their production.…”

Life Cycle Assessment of Stationary Storage Systems within the Italian Electric Network

“…In the graph, the geographical suitability is defined according to the data source (e.g., used electricity mix), while dotted lines indicate different locations (IT: Italia; EU: Europe; USA; United States of America; and CN: China). Two studies dated back to before 2010 [8,9] and most of the studies referred to Far East scenarios [10][11][12] or to production in the United States [13][14][15][16]. Many studies did not use very up-to-date information and employed secondary data.…”

“…Global Warming was found to be the most investigated impact category, and LCA results showed great variability across the reviewed studies due to different assumptions and databases used, as well as battery chemistry considered. Depending on the different technologies, the greenhouse gas emissions of a Li-ion kWh stationary battery's capacity could range from 16 to 157 kg CO 2 eq/kWh; the authors of [11] reported 16 kg CO 2 eq/kWh for lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) and 28 kg CO 2 eq/kWh for lithium-manganese (LMB) batteries, the authors of [12] reported 64 kg CO 2 eq/kWh for lithium-manganese oxide (LMO) batteries, the authors of [14] reported 129 kg CO 2 eq/kWh for Li-ion batteries, and the authors of both [5] and [13] reported 157 kg CO 2 eq/kWh for Li-ion batteries. The same variability was observed for traction batteries: CO 2 eq emissions per kWh of battery capacity were found to range from 50 to 313 kg CO 2 eq/kWh [17].…”