recell –modeling and analysis for recycling
TRANSCRIPT
RECELL – MODELING AND ANALYSIS FOR RECYCLING
QIANG DAIArgonne National Laboratory
Project ID: bat382
This presentation does not contain any proprietary, confidential, or otherwise restricted information
2021 DOE Vehicle Technologies OfficeAnnual Merit ReviewJune 21-25, 2021
PROJECT OVERVIEW
2
Partners§ Argonne National Laboratory§ National Renewable Energy Laboratory§ Oak Ridge National Laboratory§ University of California, San Diego§ Worcester Polytechnic Institute§ Michigan Technological University
Timeline§ Project start: October 2018§ Project end: September 2021§ Percent complete: ~90%
Barriers§ Recycling and Sustainability
– Cost to recycle is currently 5-15% of battery cost
– Material shortage (Li, Co, and Ni)– Varying chemistries result in
variable backend value
Budget
FY19 $4,615k
FY20 $5,150k
FY21 $4,915k
By 2025, reduce the cost of EV battery packs to less than $100/kWhwith technologies that significantly reduce or eliminate the dependency on critical
materials (such as cobalt) and utilize recycled material feedstocks.
RELEVANCE
4
DUMMY
§ Lower cost of batteries
§ Enable lower environmental impacts
§ Increase our country’s energy security
RELEVANCE
5
Direct recycling minimizes steps back to use
ReCell’s Mission: Decrease the cost of recycling lithium-ion batteries to ensure
future supply of critical materials and decrease
energy usage compared to raw material production
APPROACH
www.ReCellCenter.org
APPROACH
Program does not include battery dismantling, transportation, or 2nd use
6
Year 1 – Bench scale testing:Powder-to-Cell
Year 2 – Start to scale up unit operations
Year 3 – Finish scale up and show cell-to-cell recycling
§ Multiple processes investigated to mitigate risk
§ Continual review of new project ideas
§ End projects that are not showing promise in cost and performance
§ These processes can benefit other recycling processes
Typical Direct Recycling Process FlowAPPROACH
LIBRA: LITHIUM-ION BATTERY RESOURCE ASSESSMENT MODEL
8
LIBRA is a system-dynamics model that evaluates the macro-economic viability of the battery manufacturing, reuse, and recycling industries across the global supply chain under differing dynamic conditions.
LIBRA ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND PROGRESSLIBRA v1.0 was completed at the end of FY2020. Example LIBRA Supply Chain Insights:
9
Recycling 90% of US LIBscan meet a significant
fraction of US demand for battery metals Ni and Co
Recycling consumer electronics can have a big impact on
profitability, leading to more plants being built.
Battery sorting to select for minimum cobalt-content improves recycling profitability and
increases the number of plants constructed. LIBRA helps define sorting requirements.
LIBRA ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND PROGRESS
10
• Input-output model projected economic impacts (jobs and GDP) of investing in manufacturing domestic LIB supply chain: extraction/manufacturing/recycling
• Economic impacts include:• direct payments to firms building the
facilities• 2nd order effects from other industries’
increased demand and • higher household disposable income
• Investment amount is sufficient to meet demand for batteries in xEVs and stationary storage (2025-2040)
Data Sources: Input-output tables: OECD’s input-output table database; Worker Earnings: Bureau of Economic Analysis wage; Capital investments: Bloomberg New Energy Finance BattMan v2.0 model, ANL EverBatt model and NREL internal estimates. X-EV demand and Battery Chemistry: BNEF 2020. Long Term Electric Vehicle Outlook 2020. CE Demand: Pillot, C. 2018. “The rechargeable battery market 2017-2025”, Avicenne Energy, The Battery Show, Germany, May 15; Stationary Storage Demand and Battery Chemistry: BNEF 2019. Long Term Energy Storage Outlook.Notes: 45% of all domestic LIBs are recycled starting in 2025, rising to 90% in 2030 and beyond; Domestic recycling and reserves can meet all of xEV/SS Co and Li demands; US Ni reserves are insufficient to meet demand and so investment in Ni/Co mines is not included
Investing $430 billion across the battery supply chain (2025-2040) can increase GDP by more than 50% to almost $675 billion and add an average of 315,000 jobs per year
EverBatt: Techno-economic Assessment and Life Cycle Analysis of Closed-loop Battery Recycling
Available for download at:https://www.anl.gov/egs/everbatt
The project’s goal is to evaluate the cost and environmental impacts of different battery recycling technologies to inform recycling R&D.
Key functions:• Pinpoint process and supply
chain hotspots, and identify opportunities for improvement.
• Identify barriers to commercialization.
• Provide a holistic picture of battery sustainability over the life cycle.
EVERBATT ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND PROGRESS
12
Inert shredFeed Submersion Conveyor Crystallizer Dryer
Froth Float Anode
Thermal Binder
Removal
RelithiationCathode Product
Salt
Metal foilAnode
Powder/foilSeparation
Aspirator
Separator
$0.76 $0.17 $0.20 $0.23
$0.63 $0.35
$0.16 $0.36
$0.18 $-
MaterialsLabor
UtilitiesOther direct cost
DepreciationOther fixed costPlant overhead
General expensesProfit
Battery fee
$- $0.50 $1.00
Cell Recycling Cost Breakdown
Preliminary analysis shows that if technologically proven and successfully scaled up, direct recycling will be economically viable.
$5.84
$0.93
$0.05
$0.40
$- $5.00 $10.00
NMC(111)
Copper
Graphite
LiPF6
Cell Recycling Revenue Breakdown
EVERBATT ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND PROGRESS
13
$(20.00) $(15.00) $(10.00) $(5.00) $- $5.00 $10.00
Cathode manufacturing scraps
Electrode manufacturing scraps
Rejected cells
Spent cellsCostRevenue
Direct recycling of manufacturing scraps is promising because
• Manufacturing scraps contain more valuable materials by mass.
• Recovered cathode material does not need to be relithiated and thereby saving processing cost.
• Novel processes are under development to recycle additional materials.
SUMMARY AND FUTURE WORK
14
§ LIBRA evaluates the macro-economic viability of the battery supply chain– Informs economic investments and research progress to grow the LIB recycling
industry– Identifies potential of recycling to offset mineral imports– Released LIBRA 1.0 and completed preliminary analysis of major factors underpinning
economically viable battery recycling industry
§ EverBatt evaluates cost and environmental impacts of processes– Ensures environmentally-sound, economic processes are developed– Helps down-select processes to minimize scale-up costs – Completed preliminary analysis of material separations processes, conceptual direct
recycling process designs, and manufacturing scraps recycling
§ Both teams will work with Battery Recycling Prize winners to inform their process development
Support for this work from the Office of Vehicle Technologies, DOE-EERE, is gratefully acknowledged –
Samm Gillard, Steven Boyd, and David Howell
16
Shabbir Ahmed (Argonne)Yaocai Bai (ORNL)Jon Becker (NREL)Ilias Belharouak (ORNL)Ira Bloom (Argonne)Anthony Burrell (NREL)Zheng Chen (UCSD)Andrew Colclasure (NREL)Jaclyn Coyle (NREL)Qiang Dai (Argonne)Sheng Dai (ORNL)Alison Dunlop (Argonne)Jessica Durham (Argonne)Rachid Essehli (ORNL)Kae Fink (NREL)Tinu Folayan (MTU)Linda Gaines (Argonne)
Andy Jansen (Argonne)Sergiy Kalnaus (ORNL)Matt Keyser (NREL)Greg Krumdick (Argonne)Michael LeResche (Argonne)Jianlin Li (ORNL)Albert Lipson (Argonne)Huimin Luo (ORNL)Josh Major (NREL)Margaret Mann (NREL)Tony Montoya (Argonne)Helio Moutinho (NREL)Lei Pan (MTU)Kyusung Park (NREL)Haruka Pinegar (Argonne)Bryant Polzin (Argonne)Kris Pupek (Argonne)
Vicky Putsche (NREL)Shriram Santhanagopalan (NREL)Jeff Spangenberger (Argonne)Venkat Srinivasan (Argonne)Nathaniel Sunderlin (NREL)Steve Trask (Argonne)Jack Vaughey (Argonne)Patrick Walker (NREL)Tao Wang (ORNL)Yan Wang (WPI)Dustin Weigl (NREL)Olumide Winjobi (Argonne)Zhenzhen Yang (Argonne)Jiuling Yu (NREL)Xiaolu Yu (UCSD)Ruiting Zhan (MTU)
COLLABORATION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
E-Mail: [email protected]: www.recellcenter.org