Technologies for Sustainable Recycling and Disposal of LiB for EVs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transition to electric vehicles (EVs) is important for mitigating the issue of global warming. Greenhouse gas emissions by road transportation which is 11.9% of all sectors is significantly reduced by electric vehicle usage. The increasing need of lithium ion batteries (LiB), arise from the growing usage of EVs, underscores the predominant requirement of sustainable and efficient LiB recycling framework. Estimates suggest that only 5% to 8% of LiB batteries are currently recycled worldwide and 95% of them are going to land fill. This comprehensive work examines the overall state of Li-ion battery recycling from the perspective of LiB recycling technologies, environmental aspect, regulatory frameworks, recycling challenges, opportunities and economic considerations. It covers existing recycling methods such as mechanical, pyrometallurgical, hydrometallurgical processes, and electrochemical along with their benefits. The environmental implications such as resource depletion, greenhouse gases release and release of hazardous substance at the end of battery life are assessed. Regulatory frameworks of LiB recycling are analyzed for their strengths, weaknesses, and improvement areas. The critical aspects of recycling which includes market dynamics, value recovery, collection of batteries, logistics, battery design complexity, and the need for standardized processes are discussed. This work also explores innovation opportunities, collaboration, and the integration of circular economy principles into recycling practices. The insights into the current Li-ion battery recycling landscape, knowledge gaps, future research directions, and the importance of holistic approach for societal benefit is discussed.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".