(Invited) Recycling and Upcycling Electrode Materials from Spent Lithium-Ion and Alkaline Batteries
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) and alkaline batteries have been widely used in electric vehicles and portable electronics, dominating the energy storage market for decades, [1] but their recycling/upcycling has lagged far behind. Re/up-cycling batteries is urgently needed because it can not only preserve raw materials such as Li, Co, Ni, Mn, Al, and Cu for LIBs as well as Zn, Mn, Fe for alkaline batteries but also reduce hazardous wastes towards the environment. [2] Despite previous efforts made on re/up-cycling LIBs and alkaline batteries, there remains an urgent demand for simple, economic, environmentally benign, and energy-saving approaches. For LIB recycling, the dominated recycling methods including pyrometallurgy and hydrometallurgy are destructive and criticized of high energy consumption, undesirable economic outputs, and water contamination. By contrast, non-destructive methods such as solid-state sintering [3] and hydrothermal treatment coupled with short annealing (HT-SA) [4-5] are more promising. However, these emerged direct recycling approaches are deficient at regenerating outdated cathode materials to meet current market need. As such, upcycling (i.e., upgraded regeneration of cathodes) through surface engineering (coating [6] and doping [7-9] ) or bulk reconstruction [10] has been developed. In our work, we demonstrate one upcycling approach to regenerate LiCoO 2 cathode through an improved HT-SA approach in which a coating layer is prepared accompanied with the regeneration process. The upcycled cathode material shows improved electrochemical performance surpassing the pristine electrode materials. For alkaline battery recycling, the major recycling still focuses on hydrometallurgy and pyrometallurgy. Hydrometallurgical processes generally follow different steps of pre-treatment and subsequent leaching and separation of different metals by electrolysis, extraction or precipitation. [11] Another approach for treating spent alkaline battery materials is upcycling towards other applications such as supercapacitors, [12] catalysis [13] , micronutrient fertilizer, [14] Mn alloy fabrication. [14] In our work, for the first time, we directly upcycle both zinc anode and Mn-based cathode for their use in rechargeable Zn-MnO 2 batteries by a simple yet efficient annealing procedure. Zn was regenerated in a reductive atmosphere and the regenerated Zn shows high Coulombic efficiency and long life in symmetric cells while the regenerated Mn-based cathode shows superior performance than fresh MnO 2 with regards to capacity, rate, and life. Under optimized N/P ratio, the regenerated Zn and MnO 2 was paired to make rechargeable Zn-MnO 2 batteries delivering excellent performance, comparable or even superior to state-of-the-art Zn-MnO 2 batteries. Reference [1] Li, M.; Lu, J.; Chen, Z.; Amine, K. Advanced Materials 2018, 30 , 1800561. [2] Rarotra, S.; Sahu, S.; Kumar, P.; Kim, K.-H.; Tsang, Y. F.; Kumar, V.; Kumar, P.; Srinivasan, M.; Veksha, A.; Lisak, G. ChemistrySelect 2020, 5 , 6182. [3] Fan, M.; Chang, X.; Guo, Y.-J.; Chen, W.-P.; Yin, Y.-X.; Yang, X.; Meng, Q.; Wan, L.-J.; Guo, Y.-G., Energy Environ. Sci. 2021, 14 (3), 1461-1468. [4] Xu, P.; Dai, Q.; Gao, H.; Liu, H.; Zhang, M.; Li, M.; Chen, Y.; An, K.; Meng, Y. S.; Liu, P.; Li, Y.; Spangenberger, J. S.; Gaines, L.; Lu, J.; Chen, Z., Joule 2020, 4 (12), 2609-2626. [5] Shi, Y.; Chen, G.; Liu, F.; Yue, X.; Chen, Z., ACS Energy Lett. 2018, 3 (7), 1683-1692. [6] Meng, X.; Cao, H.; Hao, J.; Ning, P.; Xu, G.; Sun, Z., ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2018, 6 (5), 5797-5805. [7] Wu, J.; Lin, J.; Fan, E.; Chen, R.; Wu, F.; Li, L., ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 2021, 4 (3), 2607-2615. [8] Fan, X.; Tan, C.; Li, Y.; Chen, Z.; Li, Y.; Huang, Y.; Pan, Q.; Zheng, F.; Wang, H.; Li, Q. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 410 , 124610. [9] Xu, B.; Dong, P.; Duan, J.; Wang, D.; Huang, X.; Zhang, Y., Ceram. Int. 2019, 45 (9), 11792-11801. [10] Gaines, L.; Dai, Q.; Vaughey, J. T.; Gillard, S. Recycling 2021, 6 (2). [11] Ferella, F.; De Michelis, I.; Vegliò, F. Journal of Power Sources 2008, 183 , 805. [12] Farzana, R.; Hassan, K.; Sahajwalla, V. Scientific Reports 2019, 9 , 8982. [13] Gallegos, M. V.; Falco, L. R.; Peluso, M. A.; Sambeth, J. E.; Thomas, H. J. Waste Management 2013, 33 , 1483. [14] Hu, X.; Robles, A.; Vikström, T.; Väänänen, P.; Zackrisson, M.; Ye, G., Journal of Hazardous Materials 2021, 411 , 124928.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».