Profitable Recycling of Low-Cobalt Lithium-Ion Batteries Will Depend on New Process Developments
Open accessIntegrity 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?
Recycling technologies differ in recycled materials, chemical forms, recovery efficiencies, and economic prospects.
“Recycling technologies differ in recycled materials, chemical forms, recovery efficiencies, and economic prospects 46,67,68 (Fig. 5).”
From Future material demand for automotive lithium-based batteries (2020) · cites this paper as [68]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 5 · Cited by 75
- Authors
- Gaines, L.
- Affiliations
- Argonne National Laboratory (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gaines, Linda
- ORCID
- Gaines, Linda
- Venue
- One Earth
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-12
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 413-415
- ISSN
- 2590-3322 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2994717044
- Cited by
- 75
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 5
- FWCI
- 4.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- One Earth (publishedVersion)
- OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Argonne National Laboratory
- University of Chicago
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Extraction and Separation Processes
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Advanced Battery Technologies Research
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Recycling and Waste Management Techniques
- Keywords
- lithium-ion battery recycling, electric vehicles, recycling profitability, cobalt recovery
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