LCA and LCC of a Li-ion Battery Pack for Automotive Application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lithium Ion (Li-ion) batteries have emerged as the dominant technology for electric mobility due to their performance, stability, and long cycle life. Nevertheless, there are emerging environmental and economic issues from Li-ion batteries related to depleting critical resources and their potential shortage. This paper focuses on developing the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC) of a generic Li-ion battery pack with a Nickel-Manganese-Cobalt (NMC) cathode chemistry, being the most used, and a capacity of 95 kWh as an average between different carmakers. The LCA and LCC include all the relevant phases of the life cycle of the product. The costs related to the LCC assessment have been taken as secondary data. Lastly, the same system boundary has been chosen both for the LCA and LCC. The results of the LCA and LCC show that the carbon footprint is 119.7 kgCO2eq/kWh while the economic impact is 147.3 €/kWh if Europe is assumed as the production, use and recycling location. The assumed location significantly affects the analysis, and a sensitivity analysis has been conducted on both the LCA and LCC considering four different locations for the battery pack life cycle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".