Search for: All records

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.

An array of emerging technologies, from electric vehicles to renewable energy systems, relies on large‐format lithium ion batteries (LIBs). LIBs are a critical enabler of clean energy technologies commonly associated with air pollution and greenhouse gas mitigation strategies. However, LIBs require lithium, and expanding the supply of lithium requires new lithium production capacity, which, in turn, changes the environmental impacts associated with lithium production since different resource types and ore qualities will be exploited. A question of interest is whether this will lead to significant changes in the environmental impacts of primary lithium over time. Part one of this two‐part article series describes the development of a novel resource production model that predicts future lithium demand and production characteristics (e.g., timing, location, and ore type). In this article, part two, the forecast is coupled with anticipatory life‐cycle assessment (LCA) modeling to estimate the environmental impacts of producing battery‐grade lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE) each year between 2018 and 2100.

The result is a normalized life‐cycle impact intensity for LCE that reflects the changing resource type, quantity, and region of production. Sustained growth in lithium demands through 2100 necessitates extraction of lower grade resources and mineral deposits, especially after 2050. Despite the reliance on lower grade resources and differences in impact intensity for LCE production from each deposit, the LCA results show only small to modest increases in impact, for example, carbon intensity increases from 3.2 kg CO₂e/kg LCE in 2020 to 3.3 kg CO₂e/kg LCE in 2100.

Lithium is a critical energy material in part due to an array of emerging technologies from electric vehicles to renewable energy systems that rely on large‐format lithium ion batteries. Recent growth in demand for lithium is primarily from increased use in batteries, which comprised 46% of total lithium by end use in 2017. These technologies are often deployed to improve environmental sustainability, yet the environmental effects and sustainability of the resources they rely on are often not well understood, especially as demand increases over time.

This is the first in a two part article series that together quantify the lithium resource use and its environmental effects over time by coupling a resource production model and life cycle assessment model. In this first part, a novel resource production model is developed to create scenarios of future lithium demand and production characteristics (e.g., timing, location, and ore type). These scenarios are then used to create a life cycle assessment in part two that captures temporal and spatial changes in production systems over time.

Results of the resource production model show global lithium resources range from 293 to 527 million metric tons (Mt) of lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE). Global production will likely increase from 237,000 metric tons LCE in 2018 to 4.4–7.5 Mt LCE/year by 2100. Even with rapidly increasing demand, production from high‐grade brines may satisfy most lithium demand through 2035. Though resources can meet demand through 2100, development of lower grade and unfavorable deposits is likely required after 2050.

Life cycle assessment (LCA) has only had limited application in the geotechnical engineering discipline, though it has been widely applied to civil engineering systems such as pavements and roadways. A review of previous geotechnical LCAs showed that most studies have tracked a small set of impact categories, such as energy and global warming potential. Accordingly, currently reported environmental indicators may not effectively or fully capture important environmental impacts and tradeoffs associated with geotechnical systems, including those associated with land and soil resources. This research reviewed previous studies, methods, and models for assessment of land use and soil‐related impacts to understand their applicability to geotechnical LCA. The results of this review show that critical gaps remain in current knowledge and practice. In particular, further development or refinement of environmental indicators, impact categories, and cause–effect pathways is needed as they pertain to geotechnical applications—specifically those related to soil quality, soil functions, and the ecosystem services soils provide. In addition, many existing methods emerge from research on land use and land use change related to other disciplines (e.g., agriculture). For applicability to geotechnical projects, the resolution of many of these methods and resulting indicators need to be downscaled from the landscape/macro scale to the project scale. In the near term, practitioners of geotechnical LCA should begin tracking changes to soil properties and report impacts to land and soil resources qualitatively.