Fig. 3: Economic performance of the three recycling technologies in the end-of-life (EOL) stage. | Nature Communications

Fig. 3: Economic performance of the three recycling technologies in the end-of-life (EOL) stage.

From: Pathway decisions for reuse and recycling of retired lithium-ion batteries considering economic and environmental functions

Fig. 3

a, b Unit battery profit of lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide (NMC) and lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries with 40%–90% state of health (SOH) using different recycling technologies at the EOL stage. c, d Unit battery costs and revenues of NMC and LFP batteries with 40%–90% SOH using different recycling technologies. e, f The cost and revenue proportions associated with using the optimal recycling technology (direct recycling) for NMC batteries with 40% and 90% SOH. g, h The cost and revenue proportion of using the optimal recycling technology (hydrometallurgical recycling) for LFP batteries with 40% and 90% SOH. The proportions of other recycling technologies are provided in Supplementary Figs. 15 and 16. Hydrometallurgical, direct, and pyrometallurgical recycling technologies are referred to as hydro-, direct, and pyro-, respectively. The black triangles in (a) and (b) may overlap, forming black hexagons. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Back to article page