MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285035748 · doi:10.1149/1945-7111/ac801f

Conversion of LiFePO <sub>4</sub> to FePO <sub>4</sub> via Selective Lithium Bicarbonation: A Direct Pathway Towards Battery Recycling

2022· article· en· W4285035748 on OpenAlexafffund
François Larouche, Kamyab Amouzegar, Georges Houlachi, Patrick Bouchard, George P. Demopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityHydro-Québec
FundersMitacsFaculty of Engineering, McGill University
KeywordsOxidizing agentLithium (medication)Lithium iron phosphateElectrochemistryOrthorhombic crystal systemBattery (electricity)Extraction (chemistry)Lithium batteryReducing agentChemistryChemical engineeringMaterials scienceInorganic chemistryElectrodeCrystal structureChromatographyOrganic chemistryIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recycling of spent LiFePO 4 batteries represents a challenge due to their relatively low economic value. This paper proposes a novel direct recycling route that extracts selectively lithium while keeping the delithiated solid product electrochemically active. The innovative use of CO 2 , as a mild solubilization agent for lithium, in conjunction with an oxidizing agent such as H 2 O 2 allows to selectively extract from 85% to 95% of the lithium content from pristine active material at room temperature and 2 atm CO 2 partial pressure, while keeping intact the orthorhombic heterosite structure of the delithiated iron phosphate (FePO 4 ). Extensive characterization studies revealed the FePO 4 product to remain highly pure with its carbon coating electronically active. In fact, the delithiated product showed similar electrochemical performance as the pristine material with an initial capacity at around 154 mAh.g −1 for a 12 h discharge rate (C/12) and a capacity retention of 98% after 100 cycles. When applied to spent LiFePO 4 batteries, the new direct process provided high de-lithiation efficiency exceeding 90% lithium extraction despite somewhat slower kinetics.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207