Nanotechnology for environmentally sustainable electromobility

Journal name:
Nature Nanotechnology
Volume:
11,
Pages:
1039–1051
Year published:
DOI:
doi:10.1038/nnano.2016.237
Received
Accepted
Published online
Corrected online

Abstract

Electric vehicles (EVs) powered by lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) or proton exchange membrane hydrogen fuel cells (PEMFCs) offer important potential climate change mitigation effects when combined with clean energy sources. The development of novel nanomaterials may bring about the next wave of technical improvements for LIBs and PEMFCs. If the next generation of EVs is to lead to not only reduced emissions during use but also environmentally sustainable production chains, the research on nanomaterials for LIBs and PEMFCs should be guided by a life-cycle perspective. In this Analysis, we describe an environmental life-cycle screening framework tailored to assess nanomaterials for electromobility. By applying this framework, we offer an early evaluation of the most promising nanomaterials for LIBs and PEMFCs and their potential contributions to the environmental sustainability of EV life cycles. Potential environmental trade-offs and gaps in nanomaterials research are identified to provide guidance for future nanomaterial developments for electromobility.

At a glance

Figures

  1. Early life-cycle environmental screening of lithium-ion batteries and proton exchange membrane hydrogen fuel cells for electric vehicles.
    Figure 1: Early life-cycle environmental screening of lithium-ion batteries and proton exchange membrane hydrogen fuel cells for electric vehicles.

    Solid lines denote intrinsic aspects of the material itself. Dotted lines denote properties that are attributes of the value-chain aspects or embodied activities related to the material's production. Red lines denote production aspects, black lines use-phase aspects and the blue line end-of-life aspects.

  2. Anode materials for lithium-ion batteries.
    Figure 2: Anode materials for lithium-ion batteries.

    Nanoarchitectured materials are given by a circle. Background colours reflect characteristics of bulk materials. Green denotes relative strength, red relative weakness, yellow intermediate characteristics and white no data. Absence of circle indicates no data for the nanomaterial. The grey background denotes the 'baseline' material. LTO, lithium titanium oxide. See Supplementary Information for the sources of the data in this figure.

  3. Cathode materials for lithium-ion batteries.
    Figure 3: Cathode materials for lithium-ion batteries.

    Circles and colour coding are as defined in Fig. 2. NCA, lithium nickel cobalt aluminium oxide; NMC, lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide; LCO, lithium cobalt oxide; LMR, lithium/manganese rich transition metal oxide; LFP, lithium iron phosphate; LVP, lithium vanadyl phosphate; LMO, lithium manganese oxide. See Supplementary Information for the sources of the data in this figure.

  4. Cathode catalyst materials for polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells.
    Figure 4: Cathode catalyst materials for polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells.

    Circles and colour coding are as defined in Fig. 2. PGM, platinum group metals; *, material on non-carbon black support. See Supplementary Information for the sources of the data in this figure.

  5. Catalyst support materials for polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells.
    Figure 5: Catalyst support materials for polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells.

    Circles and colour coding are as defined in Fig. 2. See Supplementary Information for the sources of the data in this figure.

Change history

Corrected online 14 December 2016
In the original version of this Analysis Christine Roxanne Hung should have been acknowledged as a corresponding author. This has been corrected in the online versions of the Analysis.

References

  1. Gabriel, B. et al. in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) 351412 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
  2. Sims, R. et al. in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) 1115 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
  3. Shepard, S. & Jerram, L. Executive Summary: Transportation Forecast: Light Duty Vehicles (Navigant Consulting, 2015).
  4. Global EV Outlook 2016: Beyond One Million Electric Cars (International Energy Agency, 2016).
  5. European Automobile Manufacturers' Association Overview of Purchase and Tax Incentives for Electric Vehicles in the EU 17 (European Automobile Manufacturers' Association, 2016).
  6. Crabtree, G., Kócs, E. & Trahey, L. The energy-storage frontier: lithium-ion batteries and beyond. MRS Bull. 40, 10671078 (2015).
  7. Samaras, C. & Meisterling, K. Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from plug-in hybrid vehicles: implications for policy. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42, 31703176 (2008).
  8. Szczechowicz, E., Dederichs, T. & Schnettler, A. Regional assessment of local emissions of electric vehicles using traffic simulations for a use case in Germany. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 17, 11311141 (2012).
  9. Helmers, E. & Marx, P. Electric cars: technical characteristics and environmental impacts. Environ. Sci. Eur. 24, 115 (2012).
  10. Simons, A. & Bauer, C. A life-cycle perspective on automotive fuel cells. Appl. Energy 157, 884896 (2015).
  11. Hellweg, S. & Milà i Canals, L. Emerging approaches, challenges and opportunities in life cycle assessment. Science 344, 11091113 (2014).
  12. Kushnir, D. & Sandén, B. a. Energy requirements of carbon nanoparticle production. J. Ind. Ecol. 12, 360375 (2008).
  13. Kushnir, D. & Sandén, B. A. Multi-level energy analysis of emerging technologies: a case study in new materials for lithium ion batteries. J. Clean. Prod. 19, 14051416 (2011).
  14. Bartolozzi, I., Rizzi, F. & Frey, M. Comparison between hydrogen and electric vehicles by life cycle assessment: a case study in Tuscany, Italy. Appl. Energy 101, 103111 (2013).
  15. Bauer, C., Hofer, J., Althaus, H.-J., Del Duce, A. & Simons, A. The environmental performance of current and future passenger vehicles: Life Cycle Assessment based on a novel scenario analysis framework. Appl. Energy 157, 871883 (2015).
  16. Dunn, J. B., Gaines, L., Kelly, J. C., James, C. & Gallagher, K. G. The significance of Li-ion batteries in electric vehicle life-cycle energy and emissions and recycling's role in its reduction. Energy Environ. Sci. 8, 158168 (2015).
  17. Faria, R., Moura, P., Delgado, J. & de Almeida, A. T. A sustainability assessment of electric vehicles as a personal mobility system. Energy Convers. Manag. 61, 1930 (2012).
  18. Ellingsen, L. A.-W., Singh, B. & Strømman, A. H. The size and range effect: lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of electric vehicles. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 054010 (2016).
  19. Hawkins, T. R., Singh, B., Majeau-Bettez, G. & Strømman, A. H. Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of conventional and electric vehicles. J. Ind. Ecol. 17, 5364 (2012).
  20. Miotti, M., Hofer, J. & Bauer, C. Integrated environmental and economic assessment of current and future fuel cell vehicles. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0986-4 (2015).
  21. Notter, D. A., Kouravelou, K., Karachalios, T., Daletou, M. K. & Haberland, N. T. Life cycle assessment of PEM FC applications: electric mobility and μ-CHP. Energy Environ. Sci. 8, 19691985 (2015).
  22. Notter, D. A. et al. Contribution of Li-ion batteries to the environmental impact of electric vehicles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 65506556 (2010).
  23. Li, B., Gao, X., Li, J. & Yuan, C. Life cycle environmental impact of high-capacity lithium ion battery with silicon nanowires anode for electric vehicles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 30473055 (2014).
  24. Majeau-Bettez, G., Hawkins, T. R. & Strømman, A. H. Life cycle environmental assessment of lithium-ion and nickel metal hydride batteries for plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 45484554 (2011).
  25. Zackrisson, M., Avellan, L. & Orlenius, J. Life cycle assessment of lithium-ion batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles — critical issues. J. Clean. Prod. 18, 15191529 (2010).
  26. Singh, B., Guest, G., Bright, R. M. & Strømman, A. H. Life cycle assessment of electric and fuel cell vehicle transport based on forest biomass. J. Ind. Ecol. 18, 176186 (2014).
  27. Othman, R., Dicks, A. L. & Zhu, Z. Non precious metal catalysts for the PEM fuel cell cathode. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 37, 357372 (2012).
  28. Debe, M. K. Electrocatalyst approaches and challenges for automotive fuel cells. Nature 486, 4351 (2012).
  29. Wu, J. et al. A review of PEM fuel cell durability: degradation mechanisms and mitigation strategies. J. Power Sources 184, 104119 (2008).
  30. Shiau, C.-S. N., Samaras, C., Hauffe, R. & Michalek, J. J. Impact of battery weight and charging patterns on the economic and environmental benefits of plug-in hybrid vehicles. Energy Policy 37, 26532663 (2009).
  31. Iwan, A., Malinowski, M. & Pasciak, G. Polymer fuel cell components modified by graphene: electrodes, electrolytes and bipolar plates. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 49, 954967 (2015).
  32. Aricò, A. S., Bruce, P., Scrosati, B., Tarascon, J.-M. & van Schalkwijk, W. Nanostructured materials for advanced energy conversion and storage devices. Nat. Mater. 4, 366377 (2005).
  33. Bruce, P. G., Scrosati, B. & Tarascon, J.-M. Nanomaterials for rechargeable lithium batteries. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 47, 29302946 (2008).
  34. Goriparti, S. et al. Review on recent progress of nanostructured anode materials for Li-ion batteries. J. Power Sources 257, 421443 (2014).
  35. Nie, Y., Li, L. & Wei, Z. Recent advancements in Pt and Pt-free catalysts for oxygen reduction reaction. Chem. Soc. Rev. 44, 2168201 (2015).
  36. Whittingham, M. S. Inorganic nanomaterials for batteries. Dalton Trans. 2008, 54245431 (2008).
  37. Whittingham, M. S. Ultimate limits to intercalation reactions for lithium batteries. Chem. Rev. 114, 1141411443 (2014).
  38. Obrovac, M. N. & Chevrier, V. L. Alloy negative electrodes for Li-ion batteries. Chem. Rev. 114, 1144411502 (2014).
  39. Liu, C., Li, F., Ma, L.-P. & Cheng, H.-M. Advanced materials for energy storage. Adv. Mater. 22, E28E62 (2010).
  40. Gallagher, K. G. et al. Quantifying the promise of lithium–air batteries for electric vehicles. Energy Environ. Sci. 7, 15551563 (2014).
  41. Graedel, T. E., Allenby, B. R. & Cοmrie, P. R. Matrix approaches to abridged life cycle assessment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 29, 134A139A (1995).
  42. Graedel, T. E. Streamlined Life-Cycle Assessment (Prentice Hall, 1998).
  43. Todd, J. A. et al. Streamlined Life-Cycle Assessment: A Final Report from the SETAC North America Streamlined LCA Workgroup (Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 1999).
  44. Anastas, P. T. & Warner, J. C. Green Chemistry: Theory and Practice (Oxford Univ. Press, 1998).
  45. Anastas, P. T. & Eghbali, N. Green chemistry: principles and practice. Chem. Soc. Rev. 39, 301312 (2010).
  46. Ellingsen, L. A.-W. et al. Life cycle assessment of a lithium-ion battery vehicle pack. J. Ind. Ecol. 18, 113124 (2014).
  47. Nitta, N., Wu, F., Lee, J. T. & Yushin, G. Li-ion battery materials: present and future. Mater. Today 18, 252264 (2015).
  48. Whittingham, M. S. History, evolution, and future status of energy storage. Proc. IEEE 100, 15181534 (2012).
  49. Yoshino, A. in Lithium-Ion Batteries: Advances and Applications (ed. Pistoia, G.) 120 (Elsevier, 2014).
  50. ReCiPe Mid/Endpoint Method, version 1.11 (ReCiPe, 2015).
  51. Ecoinvent Data and Reports 3.2 (Ecoinvent Centre, 2015).
  52. Hudak, N. S. in Lithium-Ion Batteries: Advances and Applications (ed. Pistoia, G.) 5782 (Elsevier, 2014).
  53. Ohta, N., Nagaoka, K., Hoshi, K., Bitoh, S. & Inagaki, M. Carbon-coated graphite for anode of lithium ion rechargeable batteries: graphite substrates for carbon coating. J. Power Sources 194, 985990 (2009).
  54. Latorre-Sanchez, M., Primo, A. & Garcia, H. Green synthesis of Fe3O4 nanoparticles embedded in a porous carbon matrix and its use as anode material in Li-ion batteries. J. Mater. Chem. 22, 2137321375 (2012).
  55. Lahiri, I. & Choi, W. Carbon nanostructures in lithium ion batteries: past, present, and future. Crit. Rev. Solid State Mater. Sci. 38, 128166 (2013).
  56. Safety Data Sheet – Carbon Nanostructures (US Research Nanomaterials, 2015).
  57. Material Safety Data Sheets (ESPI Metals, accessed 22 April 2016); www.espimetals.com/index.php/msds
  58. Kim, H. C. & Fthenakis, V. Life cycle energy and climate change implications of nanotechnologies. J. Ind. Ecol. 17, 528541 (2013).
  59. Gutowski, T. G. et al. Thermodynamic analysis of resources used in manufacturing processes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 15841590 (2009).
  60. Şengül, H., Theis, T. L. & Ghosh, S. Toward sustainable nanoproducts. J. Ind. Ecol. 12, 329359 (2008).
  61. De Volder, M. F. L., Tawfick, S. H., Baughman, R. H. & Hart, A. J. Carbon nanotubes: present and future commercial applications. Science 339, 535539 (2013).
  62. Charitidis, C. A., Georgiou, P., Koklioti, M. A., Trompeta, A.-F. & Markakis, V. Manufacturing nanomaterials: from research to industry. Manuf. Rev. 1, 11 (2014).
  63. Sharifi, S. et al. Toxicity of nanomaterials. Chem. Soc. Rev. 41, 23232343 (2012).
  64. Bystrzejewska-Piotrowska, G., Golimowski, J. & Urban, P. L. Nanoparticles: their potential toxicity, waste and environmental management. Waste Manag. 29, 25872595 (2009).
  65. Köhler, A. R., Som, C., Helland, A. & Gottschalk, F. Studying the potential release of carbon nanotubes throughout the application life cycle. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 927937 (2008).
  66. Graedel, T. E., Harper, E. M., Nassar, N. T., Nuss, P. & Reck, B. K. Criticality of metals and metalloids. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 42574262 (2015).
  67. Lee, W. W. & Lee, J.-M. Novel synthesis of high performance anode materials for lithium-ion batteries (LIBs). J. Mater. Chem. A 2, 15891626 (2014).
  68. Reddy, M. V., Subba Rao, G. V. & Chowdari, B. V. Metal oxides and oxysalts as anode materials for Li ion batteries. Chem. Rev. 113, 53645457 (2013).
  69. Ma, Y., Ding, B., Ji, G. & Lee, J. Y. Carbon-encapsulated F-doped Li4Ti5O12 as a high rate anode material for Li+ batteries. ACS Nano 7, 1087010878 (2013).
  70. Anderman, M. The Tesla Battery Report (Total Battery Consulting, 2016).
  71. Safety Data Sheet – Lithium Titanium Oxide 16 (NEI Corporation, 2014).
  72. Gan, L. et al. A facile synthesis of graphite/silicon/graphene spherical composite anode for lithium-ion batteries. Electrochim. Acta 104, 117123 (2013).
  73. Zamfir, M. R., Nguyen, H. T., Moyen, E., Lee, Y. H. & Pribat, D. Silicon nanowires for Li-based battery anodes: a review. J. Mater. Chem. A 1, 95669586 (2013).
  74. Scrosati, B. & Garche, J. Lithium batteries: status, prospects and future. J. Power Sources 195, 24192430 (2010).
  75. Su, X. et al. Silicon-based nanomaterials for lithium-ion batteries: a review. Adv. Energy Mater. 4, 123 (2014).
  76. Ge, M., Rong, J., Fang, X. & Zhou, C. Porous doped silicon nanowires for lithium ion battery anode with long cycle life. Nano Lett. 12, 23182323 (2012).
  77. Jia, H. et al. Novel three-dimensional mesoporous silicon for high power lithium-ion battery anode material. Adv. Energy Mater. 1, 10361039 (2011).
  78. Safety Data Sheet — Silicon Nanopowder/Nanoparticles (US Research Nanomaterials, 2016).
  79. Material Safety Data Sheet — Monodispersed silicon nanowires (Sigma Aldrich, 2010).
  80. Safety Data Sheet — Tin Oxide Nanopowder (American Elements, 2015).
  81. Material Safety Data Sheet — Germanium Nanoparticles (US Research Nanomaterials, accessed 22 April 2016).
  82. Dong, Z. et al. The anode challenge for lithium-ion batteries: a mechanochemically synthesized Sn-Fe-C composite anode surpasses graphitic carbon. Adv. Sci. 3, 18 (2016).
  83. Sony's new nexelion hybrid lithium ion batteries to have thirty-percent more capacity than conventional offering. Sony (15 February 2005); http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/200502/05-006E/
  84. Fan, Q., Chupas, P. J. & Whittingham, M. S. Characterization of amorphous and crystalline tin–cobalt anodes. Electrochem. Solid State Lett. 10, A274A278 (2007).
  85. Safety Data Sheet — Iron(II, III) Oxide Nanopowder (American Elements, 2015).
  86. SDS | LTS (LTS Chemical, accessed 22 April 2016); https://www.ltschem.com/msds/
  87. Material Safety Data Sheet — Cobalt (II) Oxide Nanoparticles (CoO) (US Research Nanomaterials, accessed 22 April 2016).
  88. Safety Data Sheet — Chromium Oxide Nanopowder (American Elements, 2015).
  89. Safety Data Sheet — Molybdenum Oxide Nanopowder (American Elements, 2015).
  90. Wang, B., Chen, J. S., Wu, H. B., Wang, Z. & Lou, X. W. Quasiemulsion-templated formation of alpha-Fe2O3 hollow spheres with enhanced lithium storage properties. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 133, 1714617148 (2011).
  91. Etacheri, V., Marom, R., Elazari, R., Salitra, G. & Aurbach, D. Challenges in the development of advanced Li-ion batteries: a review. Energy Environ. Sci. 4, 32433262 (2011).
  92. Li, Q. et al. Balancing stability and specific energy in Li-rich cathodes for lithium ion batteries: a case study of a novel Li–Mn–Ni–Co oxide. J. Mater. Chem. A 3, 1059210602 (2015).
  93. Rosenman, A. et al. Review on Li-sulfur battery systems: an integral perspective. Adv. Energy Mater. 5, 121 (2015).
  94. Bruce, P. G., Freunberger, S. A., Hardwick, L. J. & Tarascon, J.-M. Li–O2 and Li–S batteries with high energy storage. Nat. Mater. 11, 1929 (2012).
  95. Safety Data Sheet — Lithium Cobalt Oxide Nanopowder (American Elements, 2015).
  96. Whittingham, M. S. Lithium batteries and cathode materials. Chem. Rev. 104, 42714301 (2004).
  97. Hanisch, C., Diekmann, J., Stieger, A., Haselrieder, W. & Kwade, A. in Handbook of Clean Energy Systems http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118991978.hces221 (2015).
  98. Material Safety Data Sheet — Lithium Manganese Nickel Cobalt Oxide Powder (NEI Corporation, 2014).
  99. Safety Data Sheet — Lithium Nickel Cobalt Aluminum Oxide (NEI Corporation, 2014).
  100. Liu, J., Wang, R. & Xia, Y. Degradation and structural evolution of xLi2MnO3·(1−x)LiMn1/3Ni1/3Co1/3O2 during cycling. J. Electrochem. Soc. 161, A160A167 (2013).
  101. Safety Data Sheet — LMR (Pfaltz & Bauer, 2013).
  102. Yu, H. & Zhou, H. High-energy cathode materials (Li2MnO3–LiMO2) for lithium-ion batteries. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 4, 12681280 (2013).
  103. Liu, J. et al. General synthesis of xLi2MnO3·(1−x)LiMn1/3Ni1/3Co1/3O2 nanomaterials by a molten-salt method: towards a high capacity and high power cathode for rechargeable lithium batteries. J. Mater. Chem. 22, 2538025387 (2012).
  104. Croy, J. R., Balasubramanian, M., Gallagher, K. G. & Burrell, A. K. Review of the US Department of Energy's 'deep dive' effort to understand voltage fade in Li- and Mn-rich cathodes. Acc. Chem. Res. 48, 28132821 (2015).
  105. Ellis, B. L., Lee, K. T. & Nazar, L. F. Positive electrode materials for Li-ion and Li-batteries. Chem. Mater. 22, 691714 (2010).
  106. Pampal, E. S., Stojanovska, E., Simon, B. & Kilic, A. A review of nanofibrous structures in lithium ion batteries. J. Power Sources 300, 199215 (2015).
  107. Song, M. K., Park, S., Alamgir, F. M., Cho, J. & Liu, M. Nanostructured electrodes for lithium-ion and lithium-air batteries: the latest developments, challenges, and perspectives. Mater. Sci. Eng. R Rep. 72, 203252 (2011).
  108. Satyavani, T. V. S. L., Srinivas Kumar, A. & Subba Rao, P. S. V. Methods of synthesis and performance improvement of lithium iron phosphate for high rate Li-ion batteries: a review. Eng. Sci. Technol. Int. J. 19, 178188 (2015).
  109. Lin, Y.-C. et al. Thermodynamics, kinetics and structural evolution of ε-LiVOPO4 over multiple lithium intercalation. Chem. Mater. 28, 17941805 (2015).
  110. Safety Data Sheet — Lithium Manganese Oxide Nanoparticles (American Elements, 2015).
  111. Cheng, F. et al. Porous LiMn2O4 nanorods with durable high-rate capability for rechargeable Li-ion batteries. Energy Environ. Sci. 4, 36683675 (2011).
  112. Li, W. et al. A sulfur cathode with pomegranate-like cluster structure. Adv. Energy Mater. 5, 1500211 (2015).
  113. Xu, R., Lu, J. & Amine, K. Progress in mechanistic understanding and characterization techniques of Li-S batteries. Adv. Energy Mater. 5, 122 (2015).
  114. Cai, K., Song, M.-K., Cairns, E. J. & Zhang, Y. Nanostructured Li2S–C composites as cathode material for high-energy lithium/sulfur batteries. Nano Lett. 12, 64746479 (2012).
  115. Wu, S., Ge, R., Lu, M., Xu, R. & Zhang, Z. Graphene-based nano-materials for lithium-sulfur battery and sodium-ion battery. Nano Energy 15, 379405 (2015).
  116. Son, Y., Lee, J. S., Son, Y., Jang, J. H. & Cho, J. Recent advances in lithium sulfide cathode materials and their use in lithium sulfur batteries. Adv. Energy Mater. 5, 114 (2015).
  117. Manthiram, A., Chung, S.-H. & Zu, C. Lithium–sulfur batteries: progress and prospects. Adv. Mater. 27, 19802006 (2015).
  118. Safety Data Sheet — Sulfur Nanopowder (American Elements, 2015).
  119. MSDS Information (American Polymer Standards Corporation, accessed 22 April 2016); www.ampolymer.com/I5-MSDS.html
  120. Sicherheitsdatenblatt — Polyaniline (Globale EHS-Manages, 2012).
  121. Nan, C. et al. Durable carbon-coated Li2(S) core–shell spheres for high performance lithium/sulfur cells. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 136, 46594663 (2014).
  122. Yang, Y. et al. High-capacity micrometer-sized Li2S particles as cathode materials for advanced rechargeable lithium-ion batteries. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134, 1538715394 (2012).
  123. Georgi-Maschler, T., Friedrich, B., Weyhe, R., Heegn, H. & Rutz, M. Development of a recycling process for Li-ion batteries. J. Power Sources 207, 173182 (2012).
  124. Reuter, M. A. et al. Metal Recycling: Opportunities, Limits, Infrastructure. A Report of the Working Group on the Global Metal Flows to the International Resource Panel (UNEP, 2013).
  125. Gratz, E., Sa, Q., Apelian, D. & Wang, Y. A closed loop process for recycling spent lithium ion batteries. J. Power Sources 262, 255262 (2014).
  126. Xu, J. et al. A review of processes and technologies for the recycling of lithium-ion secondary batteries. J. Power Sources 177, 512527 (2008).
  127. Som, C. et al. The importance of life cycle concepts for the development of safe nanoproducts. Toxicology 269, 160169 (2010).
  128. Scofield, M. E., Liu, H. & Wong, S. S. A concise guide to sustainable PEMFCs: recent advances in improving both oxygen reduction catalysts and proton exchange membranes. Chem. Soc. Rev. 44, 58365860 (2015).
  129. Duan, H. & Xu, C. Nanoporous PtPd alloy electrocatalysts with high activity and stability toward oxygen reduction reaction. Electrochim. Acta 152, 417424 (2015).
  130. Chen, Z., Higgins, D., Yu, A., Zhang, L. & Zhang, J. A review on non-precious metal electrocatalysts for PEM fuel cells. Energy Environ. Sci. 4, 31673192 (2011).
  131. Shao, M., Chang, Q., Dodelet, J.-P. & Chenitz, R. Recent advances in electrocatalysts for oxygen reduction reaction. Chem. Rev. 116, 35943657 (2016).
  132. Morozan, A., Jousselme, B. & Palacin, S. Low-platinum and platinum-free catalysts for the oxygen reduction reaction at fuel cell cathodes. Energy Environ. Sci. 4, 12381254 (2011).
  133. Zhang, W. & Pintauro, P. N. High-performance nanofiber fuel cell electrodes. ChemSusChem 4, 17531757 (2011).
  134. Brodt, M. et al. Fabrication, in-situ performance, and durability of nanofiber fuel cell electrodes. J. Electrochem. Soc. 162, F84F91 (2014).
  135. Alia, S. M. et al. Platinum-coated nickel nanowires as oxygen-reducing electrocatalysts. ACS Catal. 4, 11141119 (2014).
  136. Wang, C., Markovic, N. M. & Stamenkovic, V. R. Advanced platinum alloy electrocatalysts for the oxygen reduction reaction. ACS Catal. 2, 891898 (2012).
  137. Choi, S.-I. et al. Synthesis and characterization of 9 nm Pt–Ni octahedra with a record high activity of 3.3 A/mg(Pt) for the oxygen reduction reaction. Nano Lett. 13, 34203425 (2013).
  138. Guo, S. et al. FePt and CoPt nanowires as efficient catalysts for the oxygen reduction reaction. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 52, 34653468 (2013).
  139. Tseng, C.-J., Lo, S.-T., Lo, S.-C. & Chu, P. P. Characterization of Pt–Cu binary catalysts for oxygen reduction for fuel cell applications. Mater. Chem. Phys. 100, 385390 (2006).
  140. Liu, J. et al. Impact of Cu–Pt nanotubes with a high degree of alloying on electro-catalytic activity toward oxygen reduction reaction. Electrochim. Acta 152, 425432 (2015).
  141. Nuss, P. & Eckelman, M. J. Life cycle assessment of metals: a scientific synthesis. PLOS One 9, 112 (2014).
  142. Proietti, E. et al. Iron-based cathode catalyst with enhanced power density in polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells. Nat. Commun. 2, 416 (2011).
  143. Choi, C. H., Chung, M. W., Jun, Y. J. & Woo, S. I. Doping of chalcogens (sulfur and/or selenium) in nitrogen-doped graphene–CNT self-assembly for enhanced oxygen reduction activity in acid media. RSC Adv. 3, 1241712422 (2013).
  144. Wei, Q. et al. Nitrogen-doped carbon nanotube and graphene materials for oxygen reduction reactions. Catalysts 5, 15741602 (2015).
  145. Zhan, Y. et al. Iodine/nitrogen co-doped graphene as metal free catalyst for oxygen reduction reaction. Carbon N. Y. 95, 930939 (2015).
  146. Li, H. et al. A review of water flooding issues in the proton exchange membrane fuel cell. J. Power Sources 178, 103117 (2008).
  147. Higgins, D. et al. Development and simulation of sulfur-doped graphene supported platinum with exemplary stability and activity towards oxygen reduction. Adv. Funct. Mater. 24, 43254336 (2014).
  148. Shahgaldi, S. & Hamelin, J. Improved carbon nanostructures as a novel catalyst support in the cathode side of PEMFC: a critical review. Carbon 94, 705728 (2015).
  149. Sharma, S. & Pollet, B. G. Support materials for PEMFC and DMFC electrocatalysts — a review. J. Power Sources 208, 96119 (2012).
  150. Higgins, D. C., Meza, D. & Chen, Z. Nitrogen-doped carbon nanotubes as platinum catalyst supports for oxygen reduction reaction in proton exchange membrane fuel cells. J. Phys. Chem. C 114, 2198221988 (2010).
  151. Yee, R. S. L., Rozendal, R. A., Zhang, K. & Ladewig, B. P. Cost effective cation exchange membranes: a review. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 90, 950959 (2012).
  152. Hongsirikarn, K., Goodwin, J. G., Greenway, S. & Creager, S. Influence of ammonia on the conductivity of Nafion membranes. J. Power Sources 195, 3038 (2010).
  153. Tripathi, B. P. & Shahi, V. K. Organic–inorganic nanocomposite polymer electrolyte membranes for fuel cell applications. Prog. Polym. Sci. 36, 945979 (2011).
  154. Kraytsberg, A. & Ein-Eli, Y. Review of advanced materials for proton exchange membrane fuel cells. Energy Fuels 28, 73037330 (2014).
  155. Ballengee, J. B., Haugen, G. M., Hamrock, S. J. & Pintauro, P. N. Properties and fuel cell performance of a nanofiber composite membrane with 660 equivalent weight perfluorosulfonic acid. J. Electrochem. Soc. 160, F429F435 (2013).
  156. Tanaka, M. Development of ion conductive nanofibers for polymer electrolyte fuel cells. Polym. J. 48, 5158 (2015).
  157. Wycisk, R., Pintauro, P. N. & Park, J. W. New developments in proton conducting membranes for fuel cells. Curr. Opin. Chem. Eng. 4, 7178 (2014).
  158. Ballengee, J. B. & Pintauro, P. N. Composite fuel cell membranes from dual-nanofiber electrospun mats. Macromolecules 44, 73077314 (2011).
  159. Subianto, S. Recent advances in polybenzimidazole/phosphoric acid membranes for high-temperature fuel cells. Polym. Int. 63, 11341144 (2014).
  160. Safety Data Sheet Product — Phosphotungstic Acid (Ted Pella, 2015).
  161. Jun, Y., Zarrin, H., Fowler, M. & Chen, Z. Functionalized titania nanotube composite membranes for high temperature proton exchange membrane fuel cells. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 36, 60736081 (2011).
  162. Wang, Y., Jin, J., Yang, S., Li, G. & Qiao, J. Highly active and stable platinum catalyst supported on porous carbon nanofibers for improved performance of PEMFC. Electrochim. Acta 177, 181189 (2015).
  163. Chalkovaa, E. et al. Composite proton conductive membranes for elevated temperature and reduced relative humidity PEMFC. ECS Trans. 25, 11411150 (2009).
  164. Kalappa, P. & Lee, J.-H. Proton conducting membranes based on sulfonated poly(ether ether ketone)/TiO2 nanocomposites for a direct methanol fuel cell. Polym. Int. 56, 371375 (2007).
  165. Chandan, A. et al. High temperature (HT) polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells (PEMFC) — a review. J. Power Sources 231, 264278 (2013).
  166. Lu, J., Lu, S. & Jiang, S. P. Highly ordered mesoporous Nafion membranes for fuel cells. Chem. Commun. 47, 32163218 (2011).
  167. Zarrin, H., Higgins, D., Jun, Y., Chen, Z. & Fowler, M. Functionalized graphene oxide nanocomposite membrane for low humidity and high temperature proton exchange membrane fuel cells. J. Phys. Chem. C 115, 2077420781 (2011).
  168. Patel, A. & Dawson, R. Recovery of platinum group metal value via potassium iodide leaching. Hydrometallurgy 157, 219225 (2015).
  169. Safety Data Sheet — Chlorine 16 (Airgas 2015).
  170. Safety Data Sheet — Sodium Cyanide (Columbus Chemical Industries, 2014).
  171. Safety Data Sheet — Aqua Regia (Columbus Chemical Industries, 2013).
  172. Handley, C., Brandon, N. P. & Van Der Vorst, R. Impact of the European Union vehicle waste directive on end-of-life options for polymer electrolyte fuel cells. J. Power Sources 106, 344352 (2002).
  173. Shiroishi, H. et al. Dissolution rate of noble metals for electrochemical recycle in polymer electrolyte fuel cells. Electrochemistry 80, 898903 (2012).
  174. Xu, F., Mu, S. & Pan, M. Recycling of membrane electrode assembly of PEMFC by acid processing. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 35, 29762979 (2010).

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Industrial Ecology Programme and Department of Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Sem Sælands vei 7, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway

    • Linda Ager-Wick Ellingsen,
    • Christine Roxanne Hung,
    • Guillaume Majeau-Bettez,
    • Bhawna Singh &
    • Anders Hammer Strømman
  2. CIRAIG, École Polytechnique de Montréal, 3333 chemin Queen-Mary, Bureau 310, CP 6079 succ. Centre-ville, Montréal, Québec H3C 3A7, Canada

    • Guillaume Majeau-Bettez
  3. Department of Chemical Engineering and Department of Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering, E6-2006, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1, Canada

    • Zhongwei Chen
  4. NorthEast Center for Chemical Energy Storage, Binghamton University, 4400 Vestal Parkway East, Binghamton, New York 13902, USA

    • M. Stanley Whittingham

Competing financial interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to:

Author details

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. Supplementary information (1.57 MB)

    Supplementary information

  2. Supplementary information (327 KB)

    Data sources for Figures 2–5

Excel files

  1. Supplementary information (3.07 KB)

    Supplementary Text

Additional data