Search for: All records

The electronic structure and local coordination of binary (Mo 6 T 8 ) and ternary Chevrel Phases (M x Mo 6 T 8 ) are investigated for a range of metal intercalant and chalcogen compositions. We evaluate differences in the Mo L 3 -edge and K-edge X-ray absorption near edge structure across the suite of chalcogenides M x Mo 6 T 8 (M = Cu, Ni, x = 1–2, T = S, Se, Te), quantifying the effect of compositional and structural modification on electronic structure. Furthermore, we highlight the expansion, contraction, and anisotropy of Mo 6 clusters within these Chevrel Phase frameworks through extended X-ray absorption fine structure analysis. Our results show that metal-to-cluster charge transfer upon intercalation is dominated by the chalcogen acceptors, evidenced by significant changes in their respective X-ray absorption spectra in comparison to relatively unaffected Mo cations. These results explain the effects of metal intercalation on the electronic and local structure of Chevrel Phases across various chalcogen compositions, and aid in rationalizing electron distribution within the structure. 

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.