Quantifying EV battery end-of-life through analysis of travel needs with vehicle powertrain models
Open accessAbstract
Electric vehicles enable clean and efficient transportation, however concerns about range anxiety and battery degradation hinder EV adoption. The common definition for battery end-of-life is when 70–80% of original energy capacity remains, however little analysis is available to support this retirement threshold. By applying detailed physics-based models of EVs with data on how drivers use their cars, we show that EV batteries continue to meet daily travel needs of drivers well beyond capacity fade of 80% remaining energy storage capacity. Further, we show that EV batteries with substantial energy capacity fade continue to provide sufficient buffer charge for unexpected trips with long distances. We show that enabling charging in more locations, even if only with 120 V wall outlets, prolongs useful life of EV batteries. Battery power fade is also examined and we show EVs meet performance requirements even down to 30% remaining power capacity. Our findings show that defining battery retirement at 70–80% remaining capacity is inaccurate. Battery retirement should instead be governed by when batteries no longer satisfy daily travel needs of a driver. Using this alternative retirement metric, we present results on the fraction of EV batteries that may be retired with different levels of energy capacity fade.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Range is sufficient for about 85%-98% of drivers, depending on various criteria.
“as is also noted in the literature suggesting they are adept for about 85%-98% of drivers, depending on various criteria”
From Understanding the socio-technical nexus of Nordic electric vehicle (EV) barriers: A qualitative discussion of range, price, charging and knowledge (2020) · cites this paper as Saxena et al., 2015
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 27 · Cited by 363
- Authors
- Saxena, S., Le Floch, C., MacDonald, J., & Moura, S.
- Affiliations
- Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
- University of California, Berkeley (US)
- Corresponding author
- Saxena, Samveg
- Venue
- Journal of Power Sources
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-05
- Volume
- 282
- Pages
- 265-276
- ISSN
- 0378-7753 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2067437271
- Cited by
- 363
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 10
- FWCI
- 25.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Power Sources (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
- Office of Science
- U.S. Department of Energy
- Laboratory Directed Research and Development
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Advanced Battery Technologies Research
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electric Vehicles and Infrastructure
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
- Keywords
- electric vehicle batteries, battery end-of-life, travel needs, vehicle powertrain modeling, charging infrastructure, range anxiety, battery degradation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review