iScience ll

OPEN ACCESS

Review
Direct recycling of spent Li-ion
batteries: Challenges and opportunities
toward practical applications
Gaolei Wei,1,2,9 Yuxuan Liu,1,2,9 Binglei Jiao,2,3 Nana Chang,4 Mengting Wu,4 Gangfeng Liu,5 Xiao Lin,5
XueFei Weng,6 Jinxing Chen,7 Liang Zhang,7 Chunling Zhu,1 Guiling Wang,1,* Panpan Xu,2,* Jiangtao Di,2,8,*
and Qingwen Li2,8

SUMMARY
With the exponential expansion of electric vehicles (EVs), the disposal of Li-ion batteries (LIBs) is poised to
increase significantly in the coming years. Effective recycling of these batteries is essential to address
environmental concerns and tap into their economic value. Direct recycling has recently emerged as a
promising solution at the laboratory level, offering significant environmental benefits and economic
viability compared to pyrometallurgical and hydrometallurgical recycling methods. However, its commer-
cialization has not been realized in the terms of financial feasibility. This perspective provides a compre-
hensive analysis of the obstacles that impede the practical implementation of direct recycling, ranging
from disassembling, sorting, and separation to technological limitations. Furthermore, potential solutions
are suggested to tackle these challenges in the short term. The need for long-term, collaborative en-
deavors among manufacturers, battery producers, and recycling companies is outlined to advance fully
automated recycling of spent LIBs. Lastly, a smart direct recycling framework is proposed to achieve
the full life cycle sustainability of LIBs.

INTRODUCTION
The reduction of carbon footprints has become as a global objective in recent years, leading to a growing interest in electric vehicles (EVs) as a
sustainable alternative to traditional internal combustion engine vehicles.1–4 It is projected that approximately 140 million EVs will be in service
worldwide by 2030. However, it is crucial to consider the proper management of end-of-life (EOL) Li-ion batteries (LIBs) used in EVs. Due to the
high concentration of valuable metals present in spent LIBs, recycling is the most sustainable method, offering the potential to address envi-
ronmental concerns and alleviate resource scarcity within the LIBs industry.5,6
Pyrometallurgical (pyro) and hydrometallurgical (hydro) technologies are commonly employed for the recycling of spent LIBs.7,8 Pyro re-
cycling involves high-temperature smelting, which is a straightforward process but consumes a significant amount of energy.9,10 Hydro recy-
cling relies on leaching with acids or bases to dissolve cathodes to metal ions, requiring substantial quantities of chemicals and generating
considerable wastewater.11,12 Although metallurgy-based recycling is economically viable due to the high market value of metals such as Li,
Co, Ni, etc., it can be influenced by metal price fluctuations and changes in cathode compositions.13 Moreover, it is not applicable for recy-
cling of cathodes without valuable metals, such as LiFePO4 (LFP) and LiMn2O4 (LMO). Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop cost-
effective, energy-efficient, environmentally friendly, and more sustainable recycling methods.14
Direct recycling, based on chemical relithiation, presents a promising approach that can address compositional and structural defects in
degraded cathodes without sacrificing the embedded energy in materials.15,16 This method enables the production of cathodes that can be
directly used in battery assembly, eliminating the need to resynthesize cathodes from precursors. Compared to pyro- and hydro-recycling
routes, direct recycling offers significant advantages in terms of energy consumption, safety, cost, flexibility, and economic returns, attracting

1Key Laboratory of Superlight Materials and Surface Technology of Ministry of Education, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Harbin Engineering University,

Harbin 150001, China

2Advanced Materials Division, Suzhou Institute of Nano-Tech and Nano-Bionics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Suzhou 215123, China
3Department of Chemistry College of Science Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China
4Gusu Laboratory of Materials, Suzhou 215123, China
5Suzhou Botree Cycling Sci & Tech Co., Ltd, Suzhou 215128, China
6Vacuum Interconnected Nanotech Workstation, Suzhou Institute of Nano-Tech and Nano-Bionics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Suzhou 215123, China
7Institute of Functional Nano & Soft Materials (FUNSOM), Jiangsu Key Laboratory for Carbon-Based Functional Materials & Devices, Soochow University, Suzhou 215123,

Jiangsu, P. R.China
8School of Nano-Tech and Nano-Bionics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China
9These authors contributed equally

*Correspondence: guilingwang@hrbeu.edu.cn (G.W.), panpanxu2021@sinano.ac.cn (P.X.), jtdi2009@sinano.ac.cn (J.D.)

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.107676

iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023 ª 2023 The Author(s). 1

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
 ll iScience
OPEN ACCESS Review

Figure 1. Challenges and potential solutions for the initial industrialization of direct recycling in short term (Target I), as well as the future battery
design (Target II), toward a smart recycling of spent LIBs in long term (Final target)

considerable attention from academia and industry. Recently, some researchers reviewed the state-of-the-art direct recycling technologies of
spent LIBs, placing significant emphasis on the various relithiation routes and the importance of sustainable recycling in comparison to con-
ventional metallurgical methods.6,17,18 However, the critical obstacles that hinder the practical implementation of direct recycling have been
overlooked.
In this context, our focus has been on analyzing the technical limitations that hinder the industrialization of direct recycling at various
stages, spanning from the retirement to the regeneration of LIBs. Additionally, we proposed potential solutions to address these challenges,
taking into account both short-term and long-term perspectives (Figure 1). In the short term, addressing the challenges related to disas-
sembly, sorting, and technological limitations is crucial to achieve the initial industrialization of this process. Looking ahead, stakeholders
in the LIBs chain can collaborate to establish industry-wide standards for LIBs at the pack, module, and cell levels. Alongside advancements
in automated facilities, a smart recycling model for spent batteries is expected to be achieved. Ultimately, by addressing the remaining chal-
lenges, promoting collaboration, establishing industry standards, and leveraging automated facilities, the industrialization of direct recycling
can advance, which will contribute to the full life cycle sustainability of LIBs.

EVALUATION OF DIRECT RECYCLING MARKET

Due to the widespread adoption of EVs, there is a surge in demand for LIBs in these years. In 2022, it is estimated that approximately 700 GW-
hours (GWh) of batteries will be required, and this figure is expected to rise to 4.7 TW-hours (TWh) by 2030 (Figure 2A).19 As the service life of
LIBs typically ranges from 8 to 10 years, there will be a growing number of retired LIBs from EVs. If we consider 2015 as the onset of rapid
marketization for EVs,20 a significant quantity of LIBs is expected to reach the end of their service life and retire around 2025. It is estimated
that by this time, there will be 900 kilotons (kt) of spent battery materials, encompassing both production scrap and EOL batteries. (Fig-
ure 2B).20 These retired LIBs are predominantly composed of LFP, LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2 (NCM111), and LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2 (NCM523) (Fig-
ure 2C).21,22 Cathodes with higher Ni content, such as LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 (NCM622), LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 (NCM811), and LiNi1-x-yCoxAlyO2
(NCA), make up only 13% of the retired cathode materials due to the relative immaturity of the technology at the early stage. Additionally, the
LiCoO2 (LCO) primarily sourced from portable electronics accounts for 23%.
Assuming all these retired cathode materials can be recycled, we primarily conducted the life-of-cycle analysis (LCA) of pyro, hydro, and
direct recycling with the EverBatt Model developed by Argonne National Lab (Figure 2D).23 It was found that a total of 2.48 3 1010 MJ of
energy would be consumed for pyro recycling, leading to the generation of 3.39 3 1013 kg of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). The hydro
recycling was estimated to consume 4.14 3 1010 MJ of energy and produce 4.12 3 1014 kg of GHGs, which are slightly higher compared to
pyro recycling. In contrast, direct recycling was found to be a more energy-efficient and environmentally friendly option, which would consume
0.72 3 1010 MJ of energy and generate 5.55 3 1012 kg of GHGs, corresponding to only 16% and 1.34% of the energy consumption and GHG
emissions of hydro recycling, respectively. Importantly, due to the low recycling cost and high value of cathode production, the direct recycling
could create a profit of 1.71 billion dollars, nearly double that of metallurgy-based recycling. These findings highlight the necessity of industrial
application of direct recycling, considering its favorable environmental impact, energy efficiency, and economic benefits. However, several
challenges need to be addressed for the industrialization of direct recycling, which will be discussed in detail in the following content.

CHALLENGES OF DIRECT RECYCLING

Manual disassembly
The initial step in the recycling process is the separation of the battery pack from the vehicle, followed by meticulous dismantling to access the
individual cells. This ensures safe transportation and enables subsequent recycling operations. However, this process is still highly dependent
on manual labor.24 Although researchers and industry stakeholders are actively exploring automated disassembly technologies to improve
the efficiency and scalability of the recycling process, the variability in battery designs, sizes, electrical connections, and packaging formats
presents ongoing challenges in the development and implementation of automated disassembly solutions.25 Unlike highly structured
environments where robots can perform repetitive tasks on known objects in fixed positions, the LIBs present a range of uncertainties and
variables at different stages of disassembly.

2 iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023

iScience ll
Review OPEN ACCESS

Figure 2. The enviornmental and economic impacts of recyling market

(A) Global LIBs demand from 2022 to 2030; (B) Available battery materials for recycling from 2020 to 2040; (C) The battery chemistries of the retired LIBs by 2025;
(D) Comparison of the energy consumption, GHG emissions, revenue and cost of pyro, hydro, and direct recycling methods.

During the initial stage of disassembling, when the vehicle case is removed, the battery packs exhibit varying shapes due to the diverse
range of EVs models available in the market (Figure 3A).26 Additionally, battery packs contain complex battery manage systems, cooling sys-
tems, and insulation packages.27 The arrangement of these components varies among different manufacturers. Furthermore, modules and
cells within the battery pack are arranged and interconnected in specific ways to achieve the desired voltage and capacity. Series and parallel
connections are commonly used, but the exact configurations may differ between EV models and manufacturers.28,29 Figure 3B illustrates
some of the methods used for assembly the battery cells, including connectors, laser welding, templating, and glue irrigation.30–32 After
removing all the connections in the battery pack, the cells present three types: prismatic, pouch, and cylindrical cells (Figure 3C).26,33 The spe-
cific cell type used is determined by the battery chemistry and the design choices made by the manufacturer.
Overall, the complex and diverse nature of LIBs has hindered the adoption of automated disassembly solutions. As a result, manual labor
remains the primary approach for LIB disassembly in the short term. It should be noted that prioritization of the protection and training of
workers to prevent the safety issues associated with the disassembling process is critically important (Figure 3D).34,35 The LIBs disassembly
involves potential hazards such as chemical leaks, thermal runaway, and exposure to toxic materials.10,29 To ensure worker safety, strict safety
protocols must be implemented, and workers should be provided with appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE). Additionally,
specialized and insulated tools should be used during the disassembly process. Moreover, workers should receive comprehensive training
on the proper handling techniques, potential risks associated with LIBs, emergency response procedures, as well as the importance of
adhering to environmental regulations. To resolve the time-communing issue, a practical approach could involve the implementation of a
hybrid human-robot workstation. In this setup, robots would handle routine and repetitive tasks, while humans would focus on more complex
and demanding activities.

Accurate sorting
Accurate sorting is an essential part for spent LIBs recycling, particularly in the context of direct regeneration, where only a single cathode type
can be processed to recover high-quality materials.36 The market demand for LIBs varies across different application scenarios, leading to the
popularity of various cathode materials such as LFP, LMO, LCO, and NCM.37,38 During the electrochemical cycling process, different cathode
materials undergo specific chemical and structural changes that result in unique failure mechanisms (Figure 4A).39,40 While the performance
decay is primarily caused by the loss of Li+ ions, the resulting side reactions differ depending on the material. For instance, the loss of Li+ in LFP

iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023 3

 ll iScience
OPEN ACCESS Review

Figure 3. Battery disassembling challenges

(A) Different frameworks of battery packs; (B) Connection methods in battery modules; (C) Different types of battery cells; (D) Potential solutions to resolve issues
related to manual disassembling.

leads to the formation of Fe-Li anti-site defects.41 For LMO, the decline in performance decline is also attributed to the dissolution of Mn
besides Li+ loss. In layered cathodes such as LCO and NCM, the appearance of Li vacancies promotes the migration of transition metals
to Li position, resulting in phase transitions. If the Ni content is higher than 50%, microcracks within cathode particles can even be formed
in the process.
In addition to the various degradation mechanisms between cathode materials, considering the structural integrity of cathode materials
during regeneration is crucial as well. Different cathode materials exhibit varying levels of stability in different environments, and the regen-
eration process needs to be adjusted accordingly. For example, a reductive atmosphere is needed for solid-state regeneration of LFP, and an
oxidative atmosphere is necessary for sintering layered cathode. Aqueous solution is not suitable for regenerating cathodes with Ni content
higher than 60% due to the high sensitivity to protons.42,43 By accurately identifying and segregating batteries with different cathode chem-
istries, it becomes possible to tailor the recycling processes and treatment conditions to the specific materials being recovered, allowing for
better control in maintaining the desired properties of the cathode materials, such as their crystalline structure, particle morphology, and
electrochemical activity.44
However, accurate sorting without damaging batteries is still challenging primarily due to the lack of easily accessible chemistry informa-
tion labeled outside the batteries. Disassembling a large quantity of spent LIBs for chemical characterization is costly and inefficient, espe-
cially in an industrial context. Advancements in battery characterization techniques are being explored to develop non-destructive methods
for identifying cathode materials. Zan et al. proposed a laboratory-based high-resolution and high-throughput X-ray microcomputer tomog-
raphy method, which is capable of in situ visualization of industry-related pouch batteries with excellent detection fidelity, resolution, and
reliability (Figure 4B).45 The virtual imaging of the cathode and anode electrodes (Figures 4C and 4D) can primarily indicate the battery chem-
istry information based on the morphological features of different cathodes. However, it can be challenging to distinguish materials with
similar morphological characteristics, such as polycrystalline NCM111, NCM523, or NCM622.
In order to achieve more efficient and accurate classification of cathode materials, scientists have proposed building artificial intelligence
(AI) models that leverage input parameters such as shape, size, current, voltage, and internal resistance to identify different cathode mate-
rials.46 By training these models on a large dataset containing known cathode materials, they can learn to classify and differentiate between
various compositions. The integration of AI techniques with other characterization methods, such as spectroscopic techniques or elemental
analysis, may further improve the accuracy and reliability of cathode material classification. Ongoing research and advancements in AI algo-
rithms, data collection, and model development are expected to contribute to the future development of more efficient and accurate clas-
sification methods for distinguishing specific cathode materials.
Another practical option for effective sorting of spent LIBs, especially in the absence of clear labeling, can be implemented through differ-
entiated collection strategies (Figure 4E). End users, such as EV owners or device users, often possess important information regarding the
batteries they are disposing of, including the battery manufacturer, purchase time, driving years, and accumulated mileages. This information
can be relayed to the collectors responsible for gathering the spent LIBs, who can then differentiate and segregate the batteries based on the

4 iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023

iScience ll
Review OPEN ACCESS

Figure 4. Battery sorting challenegs

(A) Comparison of degradation mechanisms and stability of different cathode materials; (B) A schematic illustration of the developed micro-CL setup for in situ
visualizations of a Li-ion pouch cell; (C and D) Representative slices of the NMC cathode and graphite anode; (E) Potential solution for effective sorting of spent
LIBs in short term.

information received from the end users. Finally, collectors can transport the classified batteries to qualified recycling facilities. To make this
approach successful, it is important to ensure proper education and training of awareness among end users to encourage their active partic-
ipation in providing accurate information about the retired batteries.

Materials separation
LIBs are typically composed of cathodes, anodes, electrolytes, separators, and casings. Achieving effective separation of battery components
is desirable to maximize the recovery of valuable materials and promote the closed-loop development of LIBs. However, it is still challenging
at present. While manual disassembling by labor can achieve precise separation of materials, it comes with inherent risks and challenges. For
instance, the electrolyte used in LIBs often contains toxic solvents, which poses health risks during the disassembly process.47 Additionally, the
decomposition of LiPF6 electrolyte in humid air can lead to the generation of toxic gases like hydrogen fluoride (HF).48 Moreover, there is a risk
of combustion or explosion when the anode is exposed to air due to the high activity of LiCx.49
To reduce the reliance on manual labor and minimize associated risks, researchers have made efforts to develop automatic facilities to
open cell and separate materials, but these facilities often require customization based on battery type and size, which results in high costs
and lower throughput, limiting the scalability of this technology.50 As an alternative approach, it has been suggested to integrate the pre-
treatment steps used in the hydro-recycling method, such as mechanical crushing, separation, and sieving, into the direct recycling of spent
LIBs in the short term. However, it’s important to note that the implementation and feasibility of this approach would require further research
and advancement. Factors such as the structural stability and morphological integrity of cathode particles, as well as the residual impurity
content in cathode powder after pretreatment, need to be thoroughly investigated and optimized as they have great impacts on the down-
stream direct regeneration.
Mechanical crushing (M), thermomechanical (TM), and electrohydraulic fragmentation (EHF) are the primary methods developed for
breaking down the robust battery cell casing, in which active materials can be liberated from current collectors (Figures 5A–5C).51 In the M pro-
cess, intact LIBs are fed into the system and crushed into small particle fragments under mechanical sheer force.52 The high tensile strength of
the metal current collector allows for effective delamination of the active particles during the deformation of the metal foils. The TM process
involves vacuum pyrolysis at 500–650 C before mechanical crushing to pre-remove polymetric binder. In the following mechanical crushing,
individual active materials particles without virtually aggregation can be obtained. The EHF process uses thousands of high-voltage pulsations
(40 kV) in water bath to destroy batteries. The presence of water-soluble anode binder, such as carboxymethylcellulose (CMC),

iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023 5

 ll iScience
OPEN ACCESS Review

Figure 5. Materials seperation challenges

(A–C) Schematical illustration of the state-of-the-art crushing methods (M, TM, and EHF); (D) Mass distribution and losses of LIB materials after three different
crushing routes; (E) Composition of the BM (<1000 mm) after the three processes; (F) Composition of the BM with fine fraction (<63 mm) after the three
processes; (G) Schematic illustration of froth flotation; (H) Grade and recovery of the graphite particles in the overflow product (O/F) and cathode particles in
the underflow product (U/F); (I) Morphological characterization of the graphite anode and cathode, respectively. Copyright 2018, Elsevier.

styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR), or polyacrylic acid (PAA), aids in the delamination of graphite particles from Cu foils, while most of cathode
particles remain attached to Al foils.53
The differences of the above liberation processes result in variations in the quantity of obtained black mass (BM), as well as other charac-
teristics such as materials yield, size distribution, and impurity composition and content, which determines the selection and optimization of
the following recycling process. The M process effectively liberates active particles with minimal material loss, accounting for only 5.8% of the
total mass (Figure 5D).51 Moreover, the presence of metal impurities is low, comprising only 17.53% of the total mass (Figure 5E).51 However,
the residual polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) binder in the M process leads to serious particle aggregation, resulting in particle sizes distributed
above 1,000 mm. The TM process exhibits relatively high materials loss (24%) attributed to the decomposition and consumption of organic
materials during vacuum pyrolysis. Moreover, the thermal process increases the brittleness of Al, resulting in a small amount of Al metal res-
idues detected in the BM after mechanical crushing. In the EHF process, most of the active particles can well be liberated from the foils and
concentrated in the fraction below 1,000 mm.53
Upon a full liberation, the BM will be processed through milling and screening to separate it into coarse and fine fractions. The coarse
fraction contains Cu and Al metals, as well as separators, which are intended for further recycling. The fine fraction will undergo a froth flota-
tion process to separate the graphite anode and cathode. The composition of the fine fraction obtained from the three liberation processes is
depicted in Figure 5F. The presence of metal impurities is a critical consideration for direct recycling as leaving metals in the regenerated
cathode can pose significant safety concerns. Consequently, the M process is regarded as the optimal pretreatment option for direct regen-
eration due to its lower metal content. However, this method yields only 5.1% of BM smaller than 63 mm due to the presence of residual PVDF

6 iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023

iScience ll
Review OPEN ACCESS

Figure 6. Technology limitaions of dierct regeneration

(A) Schematical illustration of the developed relithiation methods; (B) Comparison of different relithiation methods in terms of energy consumption, chemical
waste, simplicity, and scalability; (C–E) Current limitations of direct regeneration of spent LIBs cathodes.

binder.51 To increase the yield, additional milling and thermal treatment can be integrated into the M process.51 Maintaining the structural
integrity during this process is crucial to prevent any adverse effects on the regeneration process.
The fine BM containing cathode and anode particles will be further separated by froth flotation, where graphite particles can be selectively
adsorbed on the bubbles due to the hydrophobic properties while cathode particles will present in the underflow product (Figure 5G).54–57
The presence of PVDF residues in the BM obtained from M process affects the hydrophilic property of cathode, leading to a low recovery of
graphite (63.2%) and cathode (66.6%) (Figure 5H). These recovery rates improve to 94.4% and 89.4% for the TM process as the PVDF binder is
pre-removed.51 Thus, it is reasonable to assume that a thermal treatment step following the M process can also enhance the recovery effi-
ciency of froth flotation separation. Additionally, Pan et al. demonstrated that excessive grinding before froth flotation and increasing the
oily kerosene collector dosage can improve the graphite recovery to 100%, while maintaining the morphology of the collected graphite
anode and LCO cathode intact (Figure 5I).57 However, due to the challenges in completely removing the binders in cathodes, around 10%
of cathode materials are floated and mixed in the froth graphite products, resulting in noticeable loss of cathode materials.
To extract the maximum value from spent LIBs, acid leaching can be employed to treat the recovered powders. This process helps dissolve
the entrapped cathodes and residual lithium compounds in the graphite anode, allowing for the recycling of valuable metals and the puri-
fication of graphite. Through further annealing processing, the graphite can be regenerated and reused for battery assembling alongside the
regenerated cathode.58 This approach effectively reduces the dependence on raw materials of LIBs manufacturing. Additionally, it is impor-
tant to highlight that the challenges related to materials separation mainly stem from the use of the robust PVDF binder. Hence, it is crucial to
develop a water-soluble binder that can replace PVDF. Such an alternative would greatly enhance the recycling efficiency of LIBs and promote
a more sustainable approach to battery manufacturing.

Technology limitations
After a series of pretreatment processing, the cathode powder obtained from spent LIBs can be regenerated through various relithiation
methods, typically followed by a short annealing step. There are several state-of-the-art relithiation methods available, including solid-state
sintering (SS),59 electrochemical relithiation (ECR),60 organic relithiation (OR), ionothermal relithiation (IR),61 aqueous relithiation (AR),62 and
molten salt relithiation (MR),63 as illustrated in Figure 6A. Among these methods, SS is the simplest regeneration approach, where the spent
cathode materials are directly annealed with additional Li sources. It is important to control the amount of the Li salt precisely in this process.

iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023 7

 ll iScience
OPEN ACCESS Review

ECR allows Li+ intercalation from electrolyte to repair Li deficiencies in cathodes under a specific potential. This method is environmentally
friendly but may increase operational complexity when collecting regenerated cathode powder. OR utilizes organic Li salts to replenish the
lost Li+ in cathode. Zhou et al. used 3,4-dihydroxybenzonitrile delithium to restore spent LFP cathode, where the cyano groups create a reduc-
tive atmosphere, improving relithiation kinetics.64 Dai et al. developed an IR regeneration method using ionic liquids as the relithiation me-
dium.65 However, the high cost of ionic liquids may not be suitable for large-scale processing. The MR process employs a mixture of Li salts
that can melt at low temperatures of 200 C–300 C to relithiate spent cathodes, but removing excess Li salts after the reaction can be chal-
lenging. AR, which utilizes an aqueous solution typically composed of LiOH, has been successfully used to relithiate spent cathodes and has
demonstrated effectiveness in regenerating various cathode materials, including LFP, LMO, LCO, NCM111, NCM523, and NCM622.66–70 A
notable advantage of AR is that it can be conducted at temperatures below 100 C, highlighting its simplicity and scalability (Figure 6B). While
these methods have demonstrated promise in restoring the functionality of spent cathodes, there are still technological obstacles to over-
come for industrial-scale direct recycling.
A particular challenge is the presence of impurities in the collected cathode powder after pretreatment, including PVDF binder, conductive
carbon, metal scraps, and graphite particles (Figure 6C), which complicates the direct regeneration process. Nevertheless, recent findings by
Chen group indicate that the PVDF binder can be effectively removed during the hydrothermal relithiation process without compromising the
quantity and performance of the regenerated cathode materials. During the hydrothermal relithiation process, they used spent cathode pow-
der containing PVDF instead of using pure cathode powder. Surprisingly, they discovered that the PVDF binder undergoes a defluorination
reaction in an alkaline environment, leading to the formation of a fragile film. This film loses mechanical integrity and disintegrates into powder
during the washing process.62 As a result, they avoided the use of toxic organic solvents such as N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP),71 dimethyl-
formamide (DMF),72 and dimethylacetamide (DMAC),73 to pre-remove PVDF and conductive carbon prior to relithiation, making the entire
recycling process more efficient and environmentally friendly.62 Moreover, they achieved a successful operational demonstration of 100 g
per batch.62 In this demonstration, the electrochemical performance of the positive electrode active material was restored to 100% of its orig-
inal capacity, with a yield rate of 91%.62 These promising results indicate the potential for further scale-up of the recycling process.
This discovery significantly simplifies the hydrothermal direct recycling method, offering a potential solution for addressing the presence
of PVDF binder. Further investigations are needed to understand the effects of other impurities on the direct recycling process, and it is essen-
tial to develop more efficient separation processes to enhance the purity of the spent cathode materials.
In addition to impurities, another significant challenge in the direct recycling of LIBs is the limited scalability of the process (Figure 6D).
Scaling up from laboratory scale to pilot scale is hindered by the availability of materials. Obtaining a large quantity of high-purity spent cath-
ode powders is not easy in the current market. While individual cells can be manually disassembled, delaminating and purifying a substantial
amount of cathode powder are time consuming and labor intensive. Currently, the largest scale achieved in direct recycling is a batch size of
100 g, as reported by the Chen group, but this scale is still far from meeting the requirements for pilot demonstrations.62 To advance the direct
recycling technology, it is essential to address the challenges associated with materials accessibility. This may involve developing efficient
methods for collecting and processing spent LIBs on a larger scale, as well as establishing supply chains and infrastructure to support the
availability of high-purity cathode powders.
The complexities of materials in the market and the continuous advancement of battery materials present significant challenges for direct
recycling technologies (Figure 6E). The quest for high energy density and long life cycle has led to the modification of cathode materials, such
as coating and doping,74 which further complicates the direct recycling process. During the relithiation process, there is a risk of doped el-
ements leaching out or coating layers being destroyed, affecting the quality of the regenerated cathode materials. Additionally, cathodes
with high Ni content exhibit complex degradation mechanisms and are highly sensitive to the surrounding environment,75 requiring precise
control and careful design to ensure successful direct recycling of such materials. Furthermore, some manufacturers mix different cathode
materials, such as LFP and NCM, to achieve specific performance characteristics,76 posing challenges for both metallurgy-based recycling
and direct regeneration processes. Therefore, the current direct recycling technologies need to be further optimized and improved to
keep pace with the rapid evolution of cathode materials.

FUTURE DIRECT RECYCLING

As previously discussed, the direct recycling of LIBs has great potential for reducing environmental impacts and facilitating circular economy
within the LIBs industry. However, the industrial-scale implementation of this method has not yet been realized, primarily due to the fact that
modern LIBs were not originally designed with post-use recycling in mind. The lack of consideration for life cycle management and recycling-
friendly designs means that current LIBs cannot be recycled in an economically and environmentally sustainable manner. To enable automatic
battery recycling in the future, it is crucial to undertake a systematic reassessment of cell-manufacturing protocols and engineering manage-
ment to redesign LIBs.
Standardizing the dimensions, shape, and construction of battery packs and cells is a critical step toward advancing the automation of the
dismantling process (Figures 7A and 7B). When each EV model has its own unique chassis design, it can be challenging to establish standard-
ized formats for battery packing. Nevertheless, reducing the diversity of EV models and promoting commonality in battery pack designs can
facilitate the standardization process. In addition to physical standardization, it is essential to incorporate smart labeling on each cell with
embedded information such as electrochemistry materials, assembly procedure, and other pertinent details. By obtaining authorization
from manufacturers to access this labeling, recyclers can acquire valuable insights into the specific characteristics of the cells they are recy-
cling, which can enable them to customize recycling processes and improve recycling efficiency.

8 iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023

iScience ll
Review OPEN ACCESS

Figure 7. Future efforts directions of EV manufacturer (A), battery manufacturer (B), Support organization (C), and recycler (D); (E) Proposed working
flow of smart direct recycling in future

In order to promote sustainable development of LIBs, EV and battery manufacturers need to prioritize recycling feasibility alongside per-
formance and profit considerations. While it may be challenging to achieve complete standardization due to the varying requirements and
preferences of different vehicle manufacturers, ongoing collaboration among vehicle manufacturers, industry associations, and regulatory
bodies can foster progress in this area. The development of international standards and guidelines can provide a framework for harmonizing
battery pack specifications across different EV models, ultimately contributing to the standardization of LIBs industry and achievement of
automated dismantling processes.
Establishing a comprehensive battery management system (BMS) is also important for the recycling of spent LIBs (Figure 7C). The current
low recycling rate of less than 5% for spent LIBs is largely due to the lack of traceability. A full-life-cycle BMS can help systematic management
of batteries during their active use, refurbishment after use, and regeneration at the EOL stage. The BMS of LIBs should go beyond simply
monitoring the batteries’ condition; it should also have the capability to collect and upload valuable information to a cloud database for
centralized storage and analysis. By leveraging the BMS with high traceability and an online database, stakeholders involved in the LIBs value
chain, including manufacturers, users, refurbishes, and recyclers, can access accurate and up-to-date information about batteries to make
informed decisions at various stages of the battery’s life cycle.
It should be noted that protecting proprietary information while disclosing battery information is a crucial aspect to consider. Manufac-
turers and downstream facilities can establish agreements or protocols to confidentiality. Measures such as confidentiality agreements or
non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) can be put in place to safeguard trade secrets and maintain legal compliance. Encryption techniques
and secure communication protocols can also be employed to ensure that the embedded information remains secure and inaccessible to
unauthorized individuals; thus, the valuable information can be selectively disclosed to designated participants at different stages. By prior-
itizing recyclability, promoting standardization, and establishing appropriate protocols for information sharing, the battery industry can
contribute to more sustainable and efficient recycling practices.
For recyclers, the focus should be directed toward designing and achieving an automatic recycling system that encompasses identifica-
tion, sorting, disassembling, and separation based on the standardized batteries (Figure 7D). The future of efficient spent LIB recycling will rely
on an intelligent workflow (Figure 7E). In this envisioned process, the collected spent LIBs first undergo an identification step utilizing
advanced technologies like machine vision, barcode scanning, or radio frequency identification (RFID) to determine their battery composi-
tion.77,78 Once identified, batteries are automatically sorted based on their chemistry. Batteries with different chemistries are then directed to

iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023 9

 ll iScience
OPEN ACCESS Review

specific disassembling line, where robots precisely separate the casing, cathode, anode, and separator into different bins. Each component
then undergoes tailored regeneration procedures. For instance, the cathode may undergo a regeneration process involving Li+ supplemen-
tation, while the graphite anode may require Li+ removal. The separator might be subjected to a washing process to eliminate impurities. By
implementing this intelligent recycling approach, the recycling of spent LIBs can be fully automated and sustainable.

Conclusions
In summary, this perspective highlights the urgency to transition from laboratory-scale direct regeneration of spent LIBs to practical applica-
tions. The challenges hindering the commercialization of direct recycling have been extensively discussed, and potential solutions have been
proposed from both short-term and long-term perspectives. In the short term, efforts should be focused on establishing human-machine
hybrid workstations and developing effective separation approaches to enhance pretreatment efficiency and overcome impurity-related chal-
lenges. Furthermore, it is crucial to optimize direct recycling technologies and conduct pilot demonstrations to pave the way for practical
implementation in the near future. Looking toward the long term, it is important to establish industrial standards for LIBs and raise awareness
about designs that facilitate recycling during EV and battery manufacturing. Lastly, collaborative efforts among EV manufacturers, battery
producers, and recycling companies are deemed essential for achieving a smart recycling mode that minimizes environmental impacts
and maximizes economic benefits throughout the recycling process of spent LIBs.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
P. Xu acknowledges the funding from National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, 22208365), Natural Science Foundation of
Jiangsu Province (BK20220298), Gusu Innovation and Entrepreneur Leading Talents (ZXL2022463) and the Youth Promotion Association of
Chinese Academy of Sciences (2023000079). J. D. acknowledges the financial support obtained from the National Key Research and Devel-
opment Program of China (2020YFB1312900), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (21975281), Key Research Project of Zhejiang
lab (No. K2022NB0AC04), and Jiangxi Double Thousand Talent Program (No. jxsq2020101008). J. C. thanks the support from the Gusu Inno-
vation and Entrepreneurship Leading Talent Program (ZXL2022492). The authors are also grateful for the technical support for Nano-X from
Suzhou Institute of Nano-Tech and NanoBionics, Chinese Academy of Sciences.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
G. W. and Y. L. wrote the manuscript. B. J., N. C., and M. W. collected the data. Y. Z., J. L., and F. L. shared resources and gave guidance. X. L.,
J. C., and L. Z. assisted with the writing. C. Z., G. W., P. X., J. D., and Q. L. directed the project and assisted in the revision of the manuscript. All
authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
The authors declare no competing interests.

REFERENCES
1. Müller, L.J., Kätelhön, A., Bringezu, S., environmental issues of lithium-ion batteries: 11. Fu, Y., He, Y., Li, J., Qu, L., Yang, Y., Guo, X.,
McCoy, S., Suh, S., Edwards, R., Sick, V., Advances, challenges and opportunities. and Xie, W. (2020). Improved
Kaiser, S., Cuéllar-Franca, R., El Khamlichi, A., Energy Storage Mater. 37, 433–465. https:// hydrometallurgical extraction of valuable
Lee, J.H., et al. (2020). The carbon footprint of doi.org/10.1016/j.ensm.2021.02.032. metals from spent lithium-ion batteries via a
the carbon feedstock CO2. Energy Environ. 7. Georgi-Maschler, T., Friedrich, B., Weyhe, R., closed-loop process. J. Alloys Compd. 847,
Sci. 13, 2979–2992. https://doi.org/10.1039/ Heegn, H., and Rutz, M. (2012). Development 156489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.
d0ee01530j. of a recycling process for Li-ion batteries. J. 2020.156489.
2. Chu, S., Cui, Y., and Liu, N. (2016). The path Power Sources 207, 173–182. https://doi.org/ 12. Or, T., Gourley, S.W.D., Kaliyappan, K., Yu, A.,
towards sustainable energy. Nat. Mater. 16, 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.01.152. and Chen, Z. (2020). Recycling of mixed
16–22. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat4834. 8. Schmuch, R., Wagner, R., Hörpel, G., Placke, cathode lithium-ion batteries for electric
3. Chu, M., Liu, Y., Lou, X., Zhang, Q., and Chen, T., and Winter, M. (2018). Performance and vehicles: Current status and future outlook.
J. (2022). Rational design of chemical catalysis cost of materials for lithium-based Carbon Energy 2, 6–43. https://doi.org/10.
for plastic recycling. ACS Catal. 12, 4659– rechargeable automotive batteries. Nat. 1002/cey2.29.
4679. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal. Energy 3, 267–278. https://doi.org/10.1038/ 13. Chen, M., Ma, X., Chen, B., Arsenault, R.,
2c01286. s41560-018-0107-2. Karlson, P., Simon, N., and Wang, Y. (2019).
4. Chu, M., Tu, W., Yang, S., Zhang, C., Li, Q., 9. Sheng, O., Jin, C., Ding, X., Liu, T., Wan, Y., Recycling end-of-life electric vehicle lithium-
Zhang, Q., and Chen, J. (2022). Sustainable Liu, Y., Nai, J., Wang, Y., Liu, C., and Tao, X. ion batteries. Joule 3, 2622–2646. https://doi.
chemical upcycling of waste polyolefins by (2021). A decade of progress on solid-state org/10.1016/j.joule.2019.09.014.
heterogeneous catalysis. SusMat 2, 161–185. electrolytes for secondary batteries: 14. Dunn, J.B., Gaines, L., Sullivan, J., and Wang,
https://doi.org/10.1002/sus2.55. advances and contributions. Adv. Funct. M.Q. (2012). Impact of recycling on cradle-to-
5. Habib, K., Hansdóttir, S.T., and Habib, H. Mater. 31, 2100891. https://doi.org/10.1002/ gate energy consumption and greenhouse
(2020). Critical metals for electromobility: adfm.202100891. gas emissions of automotive lithium-ion
global demand scenarios for passenger 10. Harper, G., Sommerville, R., Kendrick, E., batteries. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 12704–
vehicles. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 154, 2015– Driscoll, L., Slater, P., Stolkin, R., Walton, A., 12710. https://doi.org/10.1021/es302420z.
2050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec. Christensen, P., Heidrich, O., Lambert, S., 15. Yang, T., Lu, Y., Li, L., Ge, D., Yang, H., Leng,
2019.104603. Abbott, A., et al. (2019). Recycling lithium-ion W., Zhou, H., Han, X., Schmidt, N., Ellis, M.,
6. Costa, C.M., Barbosa, J.C., Gonçalves, R., batteries from electric vehicles. Nature 575, and Li, Z. (2019). An effective relithiation
Castro, H., Campo, F.D., and Lanceros- 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019- process for recycling lithium-ion battery
Méndez, S. (2021). Recycling and 1682-5. cathode materials. Adv. Sustain. Syst. 4,

10 iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023

iScience ll
Review OPEN ACCESS

1900088. https://doi.org/10.1002/adsu. recycling retaining value and improving metal anodes with deep plating/stripping
201900088. circularity in LIB supply chains. Resour. properties for lithium and sodium batteries.
16. Xu, P., Tan, D.H., and Chen, Z. (2021). Conserv. Recycl. 175, 105741. https://doi.org/ Carbon Energy 3, 153–166.
Emerging trends in sustainable battery 10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105741. 45. Zan, G., Qian, G., Gul, S., Li, J., Matusik, K.,
chemistries. Trends Chem. 3, 620–630. 30. Wassiliadis, N., Ank, M., Wildfeuer, L., Kick, Wang, Y., Lewis, S., Yun, W., Pianetta, P., Vine,
17. Dobó, Z., Dinh, T., and Kulcsár, T. (2023). A M.K., and Lienkamp, M. (2021). Experimental D.J., Li, L., and Liu, Y. (2022). In situ
review on recycling of spent lithium-ion investigation of the influence of electrical visualization of multicomponents coevolution
batteries. Energy Reports 9, 6362–6395. contact resistance on lithium-ion battery in a battery pouch cell. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023.05.264. testing for fast-charge applications. Appl. S A 119, e2203199119. https://doi.org/10.
18. Lu, Y., Peng, K., and Zhang, L. (2022). Energy 295, 117064. 1073/pnas.2203199119.
Sustainable recycling of electrode materials 31. Schäfer, J., Singer, R., Hofmann, J., and 46. Zhang, G.Q., Li, L.M., and Choi, S. (2012).
in spent li-ion batteries through direct Fleischer, J. (2020). Challenges and solutions Robotic Automated Battery Sorting System
regeneration processes. ACS ES. T. Eng. 2, of automated disassembly and condition- (IEEE), pp. 117–120.
586–605. https://doi.org/10.1021/ based remanufacturing of lithium-ion battery 47. Diekmann, J., Hanisch, C., Froböse, L.,
acsestengg.1c00425. modules for a circular economy. Proc. Manuf. Schälicke, G., Loellhoeffel, T., Fölster, A.S.,
19. Breiter, A., Linder, M., Schuldt, T., Siccardo, 43, 614–619. and Kwade, A. (2016). Ecological recycling of
G., and Vekic, N. (2023). Battery recycling 32. Ali, H., Khan, H.A., and Pecht, M. (2022). lithium-ion batteries from electric vehicles
takes the driver’s seat. www.mckinsey.com/ Preprocessing of spent lithium-ion batteries with focus on mechanical processes. J.
industries/automotive-and-assembly/our- for recycling: need, methods, and trends. Electrochem. Soc. 164, A6184–A6191.
insights/battery-recycling-takes-the- Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev, 168, 112809. 48. Kawamura, T., Okada, S., and Yamaki, J.-i.
drivers-seat. 33. Mossali, E., Gentilini, L., Merati, G., and (2006). Decomposition reaction of LiPF6-
20. Fleischmann, J., Hanicke, M., Horetsky, E., Colledani, M. (2020). Methodology and based electrolytes for lithium ion cells. J.
Ibrahim, D., Jautelat, S., Linder, M., application of electric vehicles battery packs Power Sources 156, 547–554.
Schaufuss, P., Torscht, L., and van de Rijt, A.; redesign for circular economy. Procedia CIRP 49. Chen, Y., Kang, Y., Zhao, Y., Wang, L., Liu, J.,
IEA. Global EV outlook 2021 – analysis. 91, 747–751. Li, Y., Liang, Z., He, X., Li, X., Tavajohi, N., and
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/ 34. Yun, L., Linh, D., Shui, L., Peng, X., Garg, A., Li, B. (2021). A review of lithium-ion battery
automotive-and%20assembly/our-insights/ Le, M.L.P., Asghari, S., and Sandoval, J. safety concerns: The issues, strategies, and
battery-2030-resilient-sustainable-and- (2018). Metallurgical and mechanical testing standards. J. Energy Chem. 59, 83–99.
circular. methods for recycling of lithium-ion battery https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jechem.2020.
21. Xu, C., Dai, Q., Gaines, L., Hu, M., Tukker, A., pack for electric vehicles. Resour. Conserv. 10.017.
and Steubing, B. (2020). Future material Recyc. 136, 198–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/ 50. Lu, Y., Maftouni, M., Yang, T., Zheng, P.,
demand for automotive lithium-based j.resconrec.2018.04.025. Young, D., Kong, Z.J., and Li, Z. (2023). A
batteries. Commun. Mater. 1, 99. 35. Yang, Y., Okonkwo, E.G., Huang, G., Xu, S., novel disassembly process of end-of-life
22. Sonia Kerr, K.B., Lebbon, V., Markwell, A., Sun, W., and He, Y. (2021). On the lithium-ion batteries enhanced by online
Thomton, M., and Myat Mon, H. (2020). Wood sustainability of lithium ion battery industry – sensing and machine learning techniques. J.
mackenzie. https://www.woodmac.com/ A review and perspective. Energy Storage Intell. Manuf. 34, 2463–2475.
press-releases/lfp-to-overtake-nmc-as- Mater. 36, 186–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 51. Vanderbruggen, A., Hayagan, N., Bachmann,
dominant-stationary-storage-chemistry-by- ensm.2020.12.019. K., Ferreira, A., Werner, D., Horn, D., Peuker,
2030/. 36. Han, X., Ouyang, M., Lu, L., Li, J., Zheng, Y., U., Serna-Guerrero, R., and Rudolph, M.
23. Nguyen-Tien, V., Dai, Q., Harper, G.D., and Li, Z. (2014). A comparative study of (2022). Lithium-ion battery recycling influence
Anderson, P.A., and Elliott, R.J. (2022). commercial lithium ion battery cycle life in of recycling processes on component
Optimising the geospatial configuration of a electrical vehicle: Aging mechanism liberation and flotation separation efficiency.
future lithium ion battery recycling industry in identification. J. Power Sources 251, 38–54. ACS ES. T. Eng. 2, 2130–2141. https://doi.
the transition to electric vehicles and a 37. Ellis, B.L., Lee, K.T., and Nazar, L.F. (2010). org/10.1021/acsestengg.2c00177.
circular economy. Applied Energy 321, Positive electrode materials for Li-ion and Li- 52. Lyon, T., Mütze, T., and Peuker, U.A. (2022).
119230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy. batteries. Chem. Mater. 22, 691–714. Decoating of electrode foils from EOL
2022.119230. 38. An, S.J., Li, J., Daniel, C., Mohanty, D., lithium-ion batteries by electrohydraulic
24. Fan, B., Chen, X., Zhou, T., Zhang, J., and Xu, Nagpure, S., and Wood, D.L., III (2016). The fragmentation. Metals 12, 209. https://doi.
B. (2016). A sustainable process for the state of understanding of the lithium-ion- org/10.3390/met12020209.
recovery of valuable metals from spent battery graphite solid electrolyte interphase 53. Öhl, J., Horn, D., Zimmermann, J., Stauber,
lithium-ion batteries. Waste Manag. Res. 34, (SEI) and its relationship to formation cycling. R., and Gutfleisch, O. (2019). Efficient process
474–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/ Carbon 105, 52–76. for Li-ion battery recycling via
0734242X16634454. 39. Zhang, X., Li, L., Fan, E., Xue, Q., Bian, Y., Wu, electrohydraulic fragmentation. Mater. Sci.
25. Hellmuth, J.F., DiFilippo, N.M., and Jouaneh, F., and Chen, R. (2018). Toward sustainable Forum 959, 74–78. https://doi.org/10.4028/
M.K. (2021). Assessment of the automation and systematic recycling of spent www.scientific.net/MSF.959.74.
potential of electric vehicle battery rechargeable batteries. Chem. Soc. Rev. 47, 54. Vanderbruggen, A., Salces, A., Ferreira, A.,
disassembly. J. Manuf. Syst. 59, 398–412. 7239–7302. Rudolph, M., and Serna-Guerrero, R. (2022).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.03.009. 40. Chiovoloni, S., Moran, C., LeMaire, P.K., and Improving separation efficiency in end-of-life
26. Zwicker, M.F.R., Moghadam, M., Zhang, W., Singhal, R. (2017). Optimization of synthesis lithium-ion batteries flotation using attrition
and Nielsen, C.V. (2020). Automotive battery conditions of LiMn2–xFexO4 cathode pre-treatment. Minerals 12, 72. https://doi.
pack manufacturing – a review of battery to materials based on thermal characterizations. org/10.3390/min12010072.
tab joining. J. Adv. Join. Process. 1, 100017. Am. J. Analyt. Chem. 8, 51–59. 55. Xu, M., Vanderbruggen, A., Kupka, N., Zhang,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jajp.2020.100017. 41. Jia, K., Ma, J., Wang, J., Liang, Z., Ji, G., Piao, H., and Rudolph, M. (2022). Influence of MIBC
27. Ghaeminezhad, N., Wang, Z., and Ouyang, Z., Gao, R., Zhu, Y., Zhuang, Z., Zhou, G., and on the surface-air nucleation and bubble-
Q. (2022). A Review on lithium-ion battery Cheng, H. (2023). Long-life regenerated particle loading in graphite froth flotation.
thermal management system techniques: a LiFePO4 from spent cathode by elevating the Miner. Eng. 185, 107714. https://doi.org/10.
control-oriented analysis. Appl. Thermal Eng. d-band center of Fe. Adv. Mater. 35, 2208034. 1016/j.mineng.2022.107714.
219, 119497. 42. Sha, M., Liu, L., Zhao, H., and Lei, Y. (2020). 56. Salces, A.M., Bremerstein, I., Rudolph, M.,
28. Marshall, J., Gastol, D., Sommerville, R., Anode materials for potassium-ion batteries: and Vanderbruggen, A. (2022). Joint recovery
Middleton, B., Goodship, V., and Kendrick, E. current status and prospects. Carbon Energy of graphite and lithium metal oxides from
(2020). Disassembly of Li ion cells— 2, 350–369. spent lithium-ion batteries using froth
characterization and safety considerations of 43. Su, S., Ma, J., Zhao, L., Lin, K., Li, Q., Lv, S., flotation and investigation on process water
a recycling scheme. Metals 10, 773. https:// Kang, F., and He, Y.B. (2021). Progress and re-use. Miner. Eng. 184, 107670. https://doi.
doi.org/10.3390/met10060773. perspective of the cathode/electrolyte org/10.1016/j.mineng.2022.107670.
29. Thompson, D., Hyde, C., Hartley, J.M., interface construction in all-solid-state lithium 57. Zhan, R., Oldenburg, Z., and Pan, L. (2018).
Abbott, A.P., Anderson, P.A., and Harper, batteries. Carbon Energy 3, 866–894. Recovery of active cathode materials from
G.D. (2021). To shred or not to shred: A 44. Wang, J., Kang, Q., Yuan, J., Fu, Q., Chen, C., lithium-ion batteries using froth flotation.
comparative techno-economic assessment of Zhai, Z., Liu, Y., Yan, W., Li, A., and Zhang, J. Sustain. Mater. Technol. 17, e00062. https://
lithium ion battery hydrometallurgical (2021). Dendrite-free lithium and sodium doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2018.e00062.

iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023 11

 ll iScience
OPEN ACCESS Review

58. Liu, J., Shi, H., Hu, X., Geng, Y., Yang, L., Shao, organic lithium salt. Nat. Commun. 14, 584. method. RSC Adv. 7, 4783–4790. https://doi.
P., and Luo, X. (2022). Critical strategies for https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-36197-6. org/10.1039/c6ra27210j.
recycling process of graphite from spent 65. Wang, T., Luo, H., Bai, Y., Li, J., Belharouak, I., 73. Wang, Y., Yu, H., Liu, Y., Wang, Y., Chen, Z.,
lithium-ion batteries: A review. Sci. Total and Dai, S. (2020). Direct recycling of Spent Tang, D., Li, W., and Li, J. (2022). Sustainable
Environ. 816, 151621. https://doi.org/10. NCM cathodes through ionothermal regenerating of high-voltage performance
1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151621. lithiation. Adv. Energy Mater. 10, 2001204. LiCoO2 from spent lithium-ion batteries by
59. Meng, X., Hao, J., Cao, H., Lin, X., Ning, P., https://doi.org/10.1002/aenm.202001204. interface engineering. Electrochim. Acta 407,
Zheng, X., Chang, J., Zhang, X., Wang, B., and 66. Wang, T., Luo, H., Bai, Y., Li, J., Belharouak, I., 139863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.
Sun, Z. (2019). Recycling of LiNi1/3Co1/ and Dai, S. (2020). Direct recycling of spent 2022.139863.
3Mn1/3O2 cathode materials from spent NCM cathodes through ionothermal
lithium-ion batteries using mechanochemical lithiation. Adv. Energy Mater. 10, 2001204. 74. Zhang, X., Zhang, P., Zeng, T., Yu, Z., Qu, X.,
activation and solid-state sintering. Waste 67. Shi, Y., Chen, G., Liu, F., Yue, X., and Chen, Z. Peng, X., Zhou, Y., Duan, X., Dou, A., Su, M.,
Manag. 84, 54–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. (2018). Resolving the compositional and and Liu, Y. (2021). Improving the structure
wasman.2018.11.034. structural defects of degraded LiNi x Co y Mn stability of LiNi0. 8Co0. 15Al0. 05O2 by
60. Lv, H., Huang, H., Huang, C., Gao, Q., Yang, z O2 particles to directly regenerate high- double modification of tantalum surface
Z., and Zhang, W. (2021). Electric field driven performance lithium-ion battery cathodes. coating and doping. ACS Appl. Energy
de-lithiation: A strategy towards ACS Energy Lett. 3, 1683–1692. Mater. 4, 8641–8652.
comprehensive and efficient recycling of 68. Xu, P., Dai, Q., Gao, H., Liu, H., Zhang, M., Li, 75. Jiang, M., Danilov, D.L., Eichel, R.A., and
electrode materials from spent lithium ion M., Chen, Y., An, K., Meng, Y.S., Liu, P., et al. Notten, P.H.L. (2021). A review of
batteries. Appl. Catal. B-Environ. 283, (2020). Efficient direct recycling of lithium-ion degradation mechanisms and recent
119634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb. battery cathodes by targeted healing. Joule achievements for Ni-rich cathode-based
2020.119634. 4, 2609–2626. Li-ion batteries. Adv. Energy Mater. 11,
61. Ji, Y., Kpodzro, E.E., Jafvert, C.T., and Zhao, F. 69. Yang, T., Lu, Y., Li, L., Ge, D., Yang, H., Leng, 2103005.
(2021). Direct recycling technologies of W., Zhou, H., Han, X., Schmidt, N., Ellis, M., 76. Liebmann, T., Heubner, C., Schneider, M.,
cathode in spent lithium-ion batteries. Clean and Li, Z. (2020). An effective relithiation and Michaelis, A. (2021). Understanding
Technol. Recycl. 1, 124–151. https://doi.org/ process for recycling lithium-ion battery kinetic and thermodynamic properties of
10.3934/ctr.2021007. cathode materials. Adv. Sustain. Syst. 4, blended cathode materials for lithium-ion
62. Gupta, V., Yu, X., Gao, H., Brooks, C., Li, W., 1900088. batteries. Mater. Today Energy 22, 100845.
and Chen, Z. (2022). Scalable direct recycling 70. Gao, H., Tran, D., and Chen, Z. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtener.2021.
of cathode black mass from spent lithium-ion Seeking direct cathode regeneration for 100845.
batteries. Adv. Energy Mater. 13. https://doi. more efficient lithium-ion battery recycling.
org/10.1002/aenm.202203093. Curr. Opin. Electrochem. 31, 100875. 77. Lu, Y., Han, X., and Li, Z. (2021). Enabling
63. Shi, Y., Zhang, M., Meng, Y.S., and Chen, Z. 71. Liu, Y., Yu, H., Wang, Y., Tang, D., Qiu, W., Li, intelligent recovery of critical materials from
(2019). Ambient-pressure relithiation of W., and Li, J. (2022). Microwave hydrothermal Li-ion battery through direct recycling
degraded LixNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2 (0 < x < 1) renovating and reassembling spent lithium process with internet-of-things. Materials
via eutectic solutions for direct regeneration cobalt oxide for lithium-ion battery. Waste (Basel) 14, 7153. https://doi.org/10.3390/
of lithium-ion battery cathodes. Adv. Energy Manag. 143, 186–194. https://doi.org/10. ma14237153.
Mater. 9, 1900454. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 1016/j.wasman.2022.02.024. 78. Zheng, M., Salim, H., Liu, T., Stewart, R.A., Lu,
aenm.201900454. 72. Song, X., Hu, T., Liang, C., Long, H., Zhou, L., J., and Zhang, S. (2021). Intelligence-assisted
64. Ji, G., Wang, J., Liang, Z., Jia, K., Ma, J., Song, W., You, L., Wu, Z.S., and Liu, J.W. predesign for the sustainable recycling of
Zhuang, Z., Zhou, G., and Cheng, H.M. (2023). (2017). Direct regeneration of cathode lithium-ion batteries and beyond. Energy
Direct regeneration of degraded lithium-ion materials from spent lithium iron phosphate Environ. Sci. 14, 5801–5815. https://doi.org/
battery cathodes with a multifunctional batteries using a solid phase sintering 10.1039/d1ee01812d.

12 iScience 26, 107676, September 15, 2023