A new framework to help stakeholders in the electric vehicle battery industry navigate the trade-offs between cost, performance and sustainability has been developed by researchers at the University of Michigan.
The framework, which was developed alongside car companies, battery developers and policy makers, aims to help stakeholders ‘navigate toward a future with better, more affordable and more sustainable electric vehicles’. It was published in the Journal of Energy Storage.
‘Complex puzzle’
“I think of it as a break-out story,” commented Greg Keoleian, professor at the U-M School for Environment and Sustainability, or SEAS. “How do we break out of this complex puzzle where we’re trying to benefit the environment, to help the industry compete and to be cost-effective for consumers?
“You have all of these interested parties that can have different goals and objectives, so how do you align those? Our framework helps stakeholders consider a holistic set of factors to achieve better outcomes for batteries and electric vehicles.”
The study assessed the economic, environmental and social trade-offs and outlooks from the perspective of stakeholders across the entire battery life cycle, from raw material extraction through to recycling and end-of-life management. Firms including Ford, General Motors, Toyota, Dow, battery manufacturer Clarios, and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and US Geological Survey contributed to the report.
While the EV industry has faced challenges from a myriad of perspectives – including from an oil industry with a vested interest in maintaining the traditional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle landscape – Keoleian added that he was optimistic that the framework could accelerate the EV transition.
“There are multiple problems that need to be addressed in this journey, but ultimately these vehicles outperform internal combustion engine vehicles,” he said. “They are quieter. They don’t have tailpipe pollution and they’re better for the environment. You get better acceleration, you have less maintenance costs, lower operating costs and the lowest total cost of ownership. We know that they are the future.”
Battery formats
The study examined the strengths and limitations of various different battery formats, noting that lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries, widely used in China, offer lower manufacturing costs because they avoid expensive nickel and cobalt. However, said batteries require larger, heavier battery packs.
Elsewhere, nickel manganese cobalt (NMC) batteries deliver greater energy density and longer range but rely on more costly raw materials, while lithium manganese-rich (LMR) batteries, currently under development, have the potential to ‘marry the low cost of LFPs with the longer range of NMCs’.
“There are a lot of different trade-offs, and this framework helps elucidate what they are from different stakeholder perspectives,” Keoleian added “If you have blinders on, you can think you’re really improving sustainability and performance, but you may actually be causing problems somewhere upstream or downstream.”
Read the full study, Framework and drivers for sustainable life cycle management of electric vehicle batteries, here.
