The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conversion Mechanisms of Selective Extraction of Lithium from Spent Lithium-Ion Batteries by Sulfation Roasting
Abstract
Abstract With the undergoing unprecedented development of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs), the recycling of end-of-life batteries has become an urgent task considering the demand for critical materials, environmental pollution, and ecological impacts. Selective recovery of targeted element(s) is becoming a topical field that enables metal recycling in a short path with highly improved material efficiencies. This research demonstrates a process of selective recovery of spent Ni–Co–Mn (NCM)-based lithium-ion battery by systematically understanding the conversion mechanisms and controlling the sulfur behavior during a modified-sulfation roasting. As a result, Li from complex cathode components can be selectively extracted with high efficiency by only using water. Notably, the sulfur driven recovery processes can be divided into two stages: (i) part of the structure of NCM523 was destroyed, and Ni, Co, and Mn were reduced to divalent in different degrees to form sulfate (NiSO4, CoSO4, MnSO4) when reacting with H2SO4 at ambient temperature; (ii) with increasing temperature, Li ions in the unstable layered structure are released and combined with SO42– in the transition metal sulfate to form Li2SO4, and the sulfates of transition metals react to form Ni0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O1.4. Studies have shown sulfur can be recirculated thoroughly in the form of SO42–, which in principle avoids secondary pollutions. By controlling the appropriate conversion temperature, we envisage that the sulfation selective roasting recovery technology could be easily applied to other spent lithium-ion battery materials. Besides, this work may also provide a unique platform for further study on the efficient extracting of other mineral resources.
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
Recycling End-of-Life Electric Vehicle Lithium-Ion Batteries
Chen, M., Ma, X., Chen, B., Arsenault, R., Karlson, P., Simon, N., & Wang, Y. (2019) · Joule · doi:10.1016/j.joule.2019.09.014 · Cited by 1,316
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
Self-citation
Cited by
Neumann, J., Petranikova, M., Meeus, M., Gamarra, J. D., Younesi, R., Winter, M., & Nowak, S. (2022) · Advanced Energy Materials · doi:10.1002/aenm.202102917 · Cited by 805
Mao, J., Ye, C., Zhang, S., Xie, F., Zeng, R., Davey, K., Guo, Z., & Qiao, S. (2022) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/d2ee00162d · Cited by 365
Windisch-Kern, S., Gerold, E., Nigl, T., Jandric, A., Altendorfer, M., Rutrecht, B., Scherhaufer, S., Raupenstrauch, H., Pomberger, R., Antrekowitsch, H., et al. (2022) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2021.11.038 · Cited by 284
Aspects of Spodumene Lithium Extraction Techniques
Nandihalli, N., Chouhan, R. K., Kuchi, R., & Hlova, I. Z. (2024) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su16198513 · Cited by 33
Metadata
- Authors
- Lin, J., Li, L., Fan, E., Liu, C., Zhang, X., Cao, H., Sun, Z., & Chen, R.
- Venue
- ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2020-03-30
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 18482-18489
- ISSN
- 1944-8244 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-8252
- OpenAlex
- W3013662428
- Cited by
- 252
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 12.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.