Cited by 220Membrane-based Ion Separation TechniquesExtraction and Separation ProcessesMolten salt chemistry and electrochemical processes

Lithium Recovery Using Electrochemical Technologies: Advances and Challenges

Wu, Lei, Zhang, Changyong, Kim, Seoni, Hatton, T. Alan, Mo, Hengliang, Waite, T. David·2022·Water Research

Abstract

Driven by the electric-vehicle revolution, a sharp increase in lithium (Li) demand as a result of the need to produce Li-ion batteries is expected in coming years. To enable a sustainable Li supply, there is an urgent need to develop cost-effective and environmentally friendly methods to extract Li from a variety of sources including Li-rich salt-lake brines, seawater, and wastewaters. While the prevalent lime soda evaporation method is suitable for the mass extraction of Li from brine sources with low Mg/Li ratios, it is time-consuming (>1 year) and typically exhibits low Li recovery. Electrochemically-based methods have emerged as promising processes to recover Li given their ease of management, limited requirement for additional chemicals, minimal waste production, and high selectivity towards Li. This state-of-the-art review provides a comprehensive overview of current advances in two key electrochemical Li recovery technologies (electrosorption and electrodialysis) with particular attention given to advances in understanding of mechanism, materials, operational modes, and system configurations. We highlight the most pressing challenges these technologies encounter including (i) limited electrode capacity, poor electrode stability and co-insertion of impurity cations in the electrosorption process, and (ii) limited Li selectivity of available ion exchange membranes, ion leakage and membrane scaling in the electrodialysis process. We then systematically describe potentially effective strategies to overcome these challenges and, further, provide future perspectives, particularly with respect to the translation of innovation at bench-scale to industrial application.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.watres.2022.118822

Cites

149 of 149 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 150 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wu, L., Zhang, C., Kim, S., Hatton, T. A., Mo, H., & Waite, T. D.
Affiliations
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • OriginWater (China) (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Zhang, Changyong
  • Waite, T. David
Venue
Water Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-08
Volume
221
Pages
118822
ISSN
0043-1354 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4283803784
Cited by
214
References
150
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 82 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 2
FWCI
3.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2023-02-15)
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Water Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Membrane-based Ion Separation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Extraction and Separation Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Fluid Flow and Transfer Processes › Molten salt chemistry and electrochemical processes
Keywords
lithium recovery, electrochemical lithium extraction, electrosorption, electrodialysis, lithium-rich brines, ion exchange membranes, electrode stability, membrane scaling, electrolyte leakage, lithium-ion batteries, electric vehicles
MeSH terms
Cations, Electricity, Electrodes, Ion Exchange, Lithium

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