Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 833

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Contribution of Li-Ion Batteries to the Environmental Impact of Electric Vehicles

Open access
Notter, Dominic A., Gauch, Marcel, Widmer, Rolf, Wäger, Patrick, Stamp, Anna, Zah, Rainer, Althaus, Hans-Jörg·2010·Environmental Science & Technology
DOI 10.1021/es903729a
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Battery-powered electric cars (BEVs) play a key role in future mobility scenarios. However, little is known about the environmental impacts of the production, use and disposal of the lithium ion (Li-ion) battery. This makes it difficult to compare the environmental impacts of BEVs with those of internal combustion engine cars (ICEVs). Consequently, a detailed lifecycle inventory of a Li-ion battery and a rough LCA of BEV based mobility were compiled. The study shows that the environmental burdens of mobility are dominated by the operation phase regardless of whether a gasoline-fueled ICEV or a European electricity fueled BEV is used. The share of the total environmental impact of E-mobility caused by the battery (measured in Ecoindicator 99 points) is 15%. The impact caused by the extraction of lithium for the components of the Li-ion battery is less than 2.3% (Ecoindicator 99 points). The major contributor to the environmental burden caused by the battery is the supply of copper and aluminum for the production of the anode and the cathode, plus the required cables or the battery management system. This study provides a sound basis for more detailed environmental assessments of battery based E-mobility.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/es903729a

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. Marsh R. A., J. Power Sources, 65, 133
  2. Dinger A., 2010, Batteries for Electric Cars: Challenges, Opportunities, and the Outlook to 2020
  3. Kitoh K., 1999, J. Power Sources, 81, 887, 10.1016/S0378-7753(99)00125-1 · DOI
  4. Wellbeloved D. B., 1997, Manganese and Manganese Alloys
  5. Thackeray M. M., 2005, J. Mater. Chem., 15, 2257, 10.1039/b417616m · DOI
  6. Frischknecht R. T. M., 2007, Sachbilanzen von Energiesystemen: Grundlagen für den ökologischen Vergleich von Energiesystemen und den Einbezug von Energiesystemen in Ökobilanzen für die Schweiz
  7. Jungbluth N., 2007, Life Cycle Inventories of Bioenergy
  8. Werner F., 2007, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 12, 160
  9. 2007, Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report
  10. Hischier R., 2009, Implementation of Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methods
  11. Goedkoop M., 2000, The Eco-indicator 99, A Damage Oriented Method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment
  12. Guinée J. B., 2001, Life Cycle Assessment: An Operational Guide to the ISO Standards
  13. Guinée J. B., 2001, Life Cycle Assessment: An Operational Guide to the ISO Standards
  14. Brodd R. J., 2002, Advances in Lithium-Ion Batteries
  15. Schweimer G. W., 2000, Life Cycle Inventory for the Golf A4
  16. MacLean H. L., 2003, Environ. Sci. Technol., 37, 5445, 10.1021/es034574q · DOI
  17. Samaras C., 2008, Environ. Sci. Technol., 42, 3170, 10.1021/es702178s · DOI · Paper page
  18. Skinner B. J., 1976, Am. Sci., 64, 258
  19. Ebensperger A., 2005, Resour. Policy, 30, 218, 10.1016/j.resourpol.2005.09.001 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Spielmann M., 2007, J. Cleaner Prod., 15, 1122, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.07.022 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.08.004 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 833

Metadata

Authors
Notter, D. A., Gauch, M., Widmer, R., Wäger, P., Stamp, A., Zah, R., & Althaus, H.-J.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Publisher
American Chemical Society (ACS)
Published
2010-08-09
Volume
44
Issue
17
Pages
6550-6556
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
DOI
10.1021/es903729a
OpenAlex
W2007477835
Cited by
833
References
1
Type
other
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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.