environmental life cycle assessment first life and second ...environmental life cycle assessment...

Towards competitive European batteries

GC.NMP.2013-1 Grant. 608936

2020

1

Environmental Life Cycle

Assessment – First Life and Second Life Analysis

External WorkshopBrussels, 23rd of May 2016

GC.NMP.2013-1 Grant. 608936

2020

Luis Miguel Oliveira - VUB

CONTENTS

• Environmental assessment of project developed cells

• Manufacturing

• Use stage in EV

• Second Life

• End-of-Life/Recycling

Task description:

• System Boundaries and Assumptions

• Functional Units Choice/Description

• Life Cycle Inventory

• Results

• Discussion and Conclusions

Highlights:

3

System Boundaries and AssumptionsM

anu

fact

uri

ng

& A

sse

mb

ly

Stag

e

Raw materials Refining and production

Distribution

Energy

Raw materials Production of components

Assembly and

distribiution

Battery pack/cellsU

se S

tage

2n

dLi

fe

Recycling

functional unit is a quantified description of the performance of the product systems, for use as a reference unit.

Bo Weidema, 2004

Define and quantify the functional unit, in terms of the obligatory product properties required by the market segment.

What about when we analyze two market segments? EV use and PV backup? Km driven?

Back to the product’s physical specifities

1 kWh of delivered energy

4

Functional Unit – How to select adequately

Functional Unit:1 kWh of Energy

Delivered

5

Life Cycle Inventory – Battery Structure and Value Chain

Electrolyte

Separator

Positive

Electrode

Substrate

Negative

Electrode

Substrate

Cell

Container

Battery

Management

System

Packaging

Battery at

Factory Gate

Positive

Electrode

Paste

Negative

Electrode

Paste

Second Life

IntegrationVehicle

Integration

End-of-Life,

Recycling

and Disposal

Assumptions:

- Vehicle battery pack level

- Pack efficiency of 95%

- Electrical efficiency at cell level 96,5%

- 97 cells, 364V at pack level

- Total pack capacity ~24 kWh

- Energy consumption 186 Wh/km (real world)

- 150.000 km (over 10 years)

- 120 km range +/-10 km

6

Life Cycle Inventory & BOM

Battery/Cell Elements Mass Percentage

Positive electrode paste 23,2 %

Negative electrode paste 9,4 %

Separator 3,3 %

Substrate, positive electrode 3,6 %

Substrate, negative electrode 8,3 %

Electrolyte 12 %

Cell container, tab and terminals 20,1 %

Module and battery packaging 17 %

Battery management system (BMS) 3 %

Benchmark “G1” Gen 2

NMC 4:4:2 NMC 6:2:2

174 Wh/kg 174 Wh/kg*

Manufacturing Impact Assessment Results Overview

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

G1 G2 G1 G2 G1 G2 G1 G2 G1 G2

Climate change Human toxicity Photochemical oxidant formation

Metal depletion Fossil depletion

Re

lati

ve C

on

trib

uti

on

Impact Category

Transport, assembly energy and infrastructure

(BMS)

Module and Battery Packaging

Cell container, tab and terminals

Separator

Electrolyte

Negative electrode substrate

Positive electrode substrate

Negative electrode paste

Positive electrode paste

7

8

Impact Assessment – Manufacturing Stage

0

0,005

0,01

0,015

0,02

0,025

0,03

0,035

0,04

0,045

0,05

G1 G2 G1 G2 G1 G2 G1 G2 G1 G2 G1 G2 G1 G2 G1 G2 G1 G2 G1 G2





Electrolyte Separator Cell container, tab and

terminals

Module and Battery

Packaging

(BMS) Transport, assembly

energy and infrastructure

kg C

O2

Eq

. / k

Wh

Climate change Contributions per kWh deliveredManufacturing of G1 and G2 Cells, Battery pack level

9


0

0,00002

0,00004

0,00006

0,00008

0,0001

0,00012

0,00014

0,00016







terminals

Module and Battery

Packaging



kg N

MV

OC

/ k

Wh

Photochemical Oxidant Form. Contributions per kWh deliveredManufacturing of G1 and G2 Cells, Battery pack level

10


0

0,02

0,04

0,06

0,08

0,1

0,12

0,14







terminals

Module and Battery

Packaging



Kg

1,4

DB

eq

./ k

Wh

Human Toxicity Contributions per kWh deliveredManufacturing of G1 and G2 Cells, Battery pack level

11


0

0,005

0,01

0,015

0,02

0,025

0,03

0,035







terminals

Module and Battery

Packaging



Kg

Fe E

q /

kW

h

Metal Resource Depletion Contributions per kWh deliveredManufacturing of G1 and G2 Cells, Battery pack level

12


0

0,001

0,002

0,003

0,004

0,005

0,006

0,007







terminals

Module and Battery

Packaging



Kg

Oil

Eq /

kW

h

Fossil Resource Depletion Contributions per kWh deliveredManufacturing of G1 and G2 Cells, Battery pack level

13

First and Second Life – Use Stage

First Life, Multiple EU Countries

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Climate change

Human toxicity

Photochemical oxi. formation

Metal depletion

Fossil depletion

Relative Contributions to Impact Categories, per Country

Belgium Italy Germany Denmark Spain

Kg CO2 Eq. /kWh

Kg 1,4 DB Eq. /kWh

Kg NMVOC / kWh

Kg Fe Eq. / kWh

Kg Oil Eq. / kWh

14

Second Life – Use Stage

http://www.aladdinsolar.com/pvsystems.html

15


ES

DEBE

IT

DK

EC: Joint Research Center, PVGIS DB

16


EC: Joint Research Center – PVGIS Database

650 kWh/m2 ≠

17

First and Second Life Comparative results Use Stage

0,00

0,10

0,20

0,30

0,40

0,50

0,60

0,70

0,80

First Life Second Life First Life Second Life First Life Second Life First Life Second Life First Life Second Life


Kg

CO

2 e

q /

kWh

Use Stage - First and Second Life Climate Change Impacts

0,00

0,10

0,20

0,30

0,40

0,50

0,60

First Life Second Life First Life Second Life First Life Second Life First Life Second Life First Life Second Life


Kg1

,4 D

B e

q /

kWh

Use Stage - First and Second Life Human Toxicity Impacts

18

End of Life – Pyro metallurgical Processing

Recycling through pyro metallurgy is driven by present market value of recovered materials.Not environmentally driven.

The main recovered materials from Lithium-ion NMC batteries are:

SteelCobaltAluminumManganese oxideCopperNickelOthers…

Umicore. N.d.

19

End of Life Results – Pyrometallurgicalrecycling

-0,016 -0,0155 -0,015 -0,0145 -0,014 -0,0135 -0,013 -0,0125

G1

G2

Rec

yclin

g P

yro

Met

allu

rgic

kg CO2 Eq. \ kWh

Recycling EOL - CLimate Change Impacts - Pyro Metallurgic Process

0,0316 0,0318 0,032 0,0322 0,0324 0,0326 0,0328 0,033 0,0332 0,0334

G1

G2

Rec

yclin

g P

yro

Met

allu

rgic

kg 1,4 DB eq. \ kWh

Recycling EOL – Human Toxicity- Pyro Metallurgic Process

20

End of Life Results – Pyrometallurgicalrecycling

-0,00012 -0,0001 -0,00008 -0,00006 -0,00004 -0,00002 0

G1

G2

Rec

yclin

g P

yro

Met

allu

rgic

kg NMVOC / kWh

Recycling EOL – Photochemical Oxidant Formation Impacts

-0,0182 -0,0181 -0,018 -0,0179 -0,0178 -0,0177 -0,0176 -0,0175 -0,0174

G1

G2

Rec

yclin

g P

yro

Met

allu

rgic

Kg F2 Eq. /kWh

Recycling EOL – Metal Depletion Impacts

Dominated mostly by the anode material processing, all impact categories;

BMS has significance regarding Human Toxicity – Mining operations for precious metals;

The electricity mix production portfolio determines the extent of the impacts;

Might not be the best “use” for some Li based battery systems;

Neighborhood applications need less battery manipulation (capacity matches application);

Repurposing impacts not accounted;

Recycling is driven by market prices. Still manages to mitigate impacts on all impact categories but human toxicity. Relevance to the role playing in resource security. Lithium not recovered (yet).

Manufacturing

Use Stage

Second Life

Recycling/EOL

21

Conclusions

Promote transmaterialization of selective components seen as “traditional”;

Promote further more second life application scenarios through robust business models while having small/reduced environmental burdens;

Increased Energy Density tends to dilute environmental impacts;

Assess the potential for hybrid electricity storage systems through the use of different cell types for added demand response flexibility;

Reduce the energy intensiveness of the manufacturing processes?

22

Suggestions

23

The End

[email protected]

http://mobi.vub.ac.be/

environmental life cycle assessment first life and second ...environmental life cycle assessment...

Documents