A comparative analysis of recycling technologies for sustainable extraction of cathodic materials from battery waste: Evaluation of energy, economic, and environmental performance

Abstract

The growing global demand for batteries, driven by the rise of electronic devices and electric vehicles, underscores the critical need for advanced recycling technologies to recover valuable cathodic materials from battery waste. This study introduces a novel Selection Index to holistically assess Direct, Pyrometallurgical, and Hydrometallurgical recycling technologies across various arrangements (Arr 1, Arr 2, and Arr 3), based on energy efficiency, economic feasibility, and environmental impact. Direct recycling (Arr 1a) is the most energy-efficient (510–760 KJ/Kg) but produces high CO₂ emissions (0.95–1.85 Kg/Kg). Hydrometallurgical recycling (Arr 3a) offers a balanced approach, with moderate CO₂ emissions (1.9–3.6 Kg/Kg) and higher costs ($39–$64/kg), achieving the greatest net economic benefit. Pyrometallurgical recycling (Arr 2b and 2c) demonstrates mid-level energy use (420–1120 KJ/Kg) and CO₂ emissions (1.3–3.8 Kg/Kg). The Selection Index identifies hydrometallurgical recycling as the most sustainable solution, offering the best trade-off between energy, cost, and environmental impact. This work contributes to the development of a comprehensive framework for selecting the most suitable recycling technology based on multi-dimensional performance metrics, enabling more informed decisions in the battery recycling industry. These findings highlight the potential of recycling technologies in mitigating environmental impacts, conserving resources, and fostering a circular economy for battery materials. • Analyzes Direct, Pyrometallurgical, and Hydrometallurgical recycling for cathodic material recovery. • Introduces a Selection Index, integrating energy efficiency, costs, and CO₂ emissions. • Direct recycling (Arr 1a) is energy-efficient but has high CO₂ emissions. • Hydrometallurgical (Arr 3a) offers moderate emissions, higher costs, and the best net economic benefit. • Pyrometallurgical method shows energy use (420–1120 KJ/Kg) and CO₂ (1.3–3.8 Kg/Kg).