The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Environmental Impacts of Recycling Portable Lithium-Ion Batteries
Open accessAbstract
Waste from electronic and electrical equipment (WEEE) is one of the fastest growing waste streams, with its volume expected to increase by a third from 2013 to 2017. Lithium-ion batteries are the most common battery type used in portable electronic devices and their use is expected to double from 2013-14 to 2019-20. The recycling of lithium-ion batteries reduces energy consumption, reduces greenhouse gas emissions, and results in considerable natural resource savings when compared to landfill. However, it is unclear which recycling processes have the least impact on the environment. This paper will investigate the different processes that are currently used for recycling portable lithium-ion batteries, such as hydrometallurgy, pyrometallurgy, and combinations of processes. Surveys are carried out to understand the materials recovered from each process, and are obtained from several recycling companies around the world. A comparative life cycle assessment will be performed for two different recycling processes (hydrometallurgy and pyrometallurgy), in order to understand the associated environmental impacts. This study shows that the largest contributors to the environmental impacts are electricity generation, incineration of plastics, and landfilling of residue. In terms of environmental effects, it is suggested that the most beneficial processes are those that utilise low temperatures, and are capable of recovering plastic.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lithium Batteries: Status, Prospects and Future
Scrosati, B., & Garche, J. (2010) · Journal of Power Sources · doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2009.11.048 · Cited by 5,153
The rechargeable revolution: a better battery
Van Noorden, R. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/507026a · Cited by 1,047
Does WEEE recycling make sense from an environmental perspective?
Hischier, R., Wäger, P., & Gauglhofer, J. (2005) · Environmental Impact Assessment Review · doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2005.04.003 · Cited by 301 · cited 1×
“However it is not possible to recycle lithium-ion batteries without causing any environmental impacts [8].”
Background
Cited by
Toward sustainable and systematic recycling of spent rechargeable batteries
Zhang, X., Li, L., Fan, E., Xue, Q., Bian, Y., Wu, F., & Chen, R. (2018) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/c8cs00297e · Cited by 1,038
Mossali, E., Picone, N., Gentilini, L., Rodrìguez, O., Pérez, J. M., & Colledani, M. (2020) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110500 · Cited by 574
Krishnan, R., & Gopan, G. (2024) · Cleaner Engineering and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.clet.2024.100749 · Cited by 115
Islam, M. T., & Iyer-Raniga, U. (2023) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138082 · Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- Boyden, A., Soo, V. K., & Doolan, M.
- Venue
- Procedia CIRP
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016
- Volume
- 48
- Pages
- 188-193
- ISSN
- 2212-8271 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2501835989
- Cited by
- 210
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 11.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Environmental Impacts of Recycling Portable Lithium-Ion Batteries. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.procir.2016.03.100
- The paper
- Boyden, A., Soo, V. K., & Doolan, M. (2016). The Environmental Impacts of Recycling Portable Lithium-Ion Batteries. Procedia CIRP. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.03.100
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.