Shuyuan Chen , Mengjun Chen , Jiancheng Shu , Yi Deng
{"title":"基于扩展生产者责任原则的动力电池回收模式比较分析","authors":"Shuyuan Chen , Mengjun Chen , Jiancheng Shu , Yi Deng","doi":"10.1016/j.cec.2022.100013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>To improve the effectiveness of recycling, echelon utilization, and recovery mechanism of waste power batteries (WPBs), 12 recycling modes were proposed based on extended producer-responsibility principle. By employing profit and sensitivity analyses, we found that resource-recovery companies (Rs) are the key for recycling, echelon utilization, and recovery mechanism. For R, the high resale price of waste LiNi<sub><em>x</em></sub>Mn<sub><em>y</em></sub>Co<sub>1−<em>x</em>−<em>y</em></sub>O<sub>2</sub> batteries was not conducive to recovering waste batteries. However, the recycling behavior of R was beneficial for resisting the risk of high resale price of waste LiNi<sub><em>x</em></sub>Mn<sub><em>y</em></sub>Co<sub>1−<em>x</em>−<em>y</em></sub>O<sub>2</sub> batteries. This condition increased the profits by saving on the buying cost and reselling of WPBs to echelon-utilization companies. Following the decrease in the number of recyclers in the recycling system, the profits of R also increased. However, when the proportion of recycled waste LiNi<sub><em>x</em></sub>Mn<sub><em>y</em></sub>Co<sub>1−<em>x</em>−<em>y</em></sub>O<sub>2</sub> batteries was 100%, the profits of R faced risks due to the high resale price of waste LiNi<sub><em>x</em></sub>Mn<sub><em>y</em></sub>Co<sub>1−<em>x</em>−<em>y</em></sub>O<sub>2</sub> batteries. For other recyclers, only the power-battery manufacturers (Ms) were willing to reduce the resale price of waste LiNi<sub><em>x</em></sub>Mn<sub><em>y</em></sub>Co<sub>1−<em>x</em>−<em>y</em></sub>O<sub>2</sub> batteries to let R earn profit because R supplied regenerated materials to M at a lower price than the material companies. This condition created a cycle for WPB recovery and reduced the use of raw materials. Thus, Mode M–R was considered as the optimal recycling mode.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100245,"journal":{"name":"Circular Economy","volume":"1 2","pages":"Article 100013"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773167722000139/pdfft?md5=996fa7ef34d37fcfdb9ae549cb6bc055&pid=1-s2.0-S2773167722000139-main.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative analysis of recycling modes of power batteries based on extended producer-responsibility principle\",\"authors\":\"Shuyuan Chen , Mengjun Chen , Jiancheng Shu , Yi Deng\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cec.2022.100013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>To improve the effectiveness of recycling, echelon utilization, and recovery mechanism of waste power batteries (WPBs), 12 recycling modes were proposed based on extended producer-responsibility principle. By employing profit and sensitivity analyses, we found that resource-recovery companies (Rs) are the key for recycling, echelon utilization, and recovery mechanism. For R, the high resale price of waste LiNi<sub><em>x</em></sub>Mn<sub><em>y</em></sub>Co<sub>1−<em>x</em>−<em>y</em></sub>O<sub>2</sub> batteries was not conducive to recovering waste batteries. However, the recycling behavior of R was beneficial for resisting the risk of high resale price of waste LiNi<sub><em>x</em></sub>Mn<sub><em>y</em></sub>Co<sub>1−<em>x</em>−<em>y</em></sub>O<sub>2</sub> batteries. This condition increased the profits by saving on the buying cost and reselling of WPBs to echelon-utilization companies. Following the decrease in the number of recyclers in the recycling system, the profits of R also increased. However, when the proportion of recycled waste LiNi<sub><em>x</em></sub>Mn<sub><em>y</em></sub>Co<sub>1−<em>x</em>−<em>y</em></sub>O<sub>2</sub> batteries was 100%, the profits of R faced risks due to the high resale price of waste LiNi<sub><em>x</em></sub>Mn<sub><em>y</em></sub>Co<sub>1−<em>x</em>−<em>y</em></sub>O<sub>2</sub> batteries. For other recyclers, only the power-battery manufacturers (Ms) were willing to reduce the resale price of waste LiNi<sub><em>x</em></sub>Mn<sub><em>y</em></sub>Co<sub>1−<em>x</em>−<em>y</em></sub>O<sub>2</sub> batteries to let R earn profit because R supplied regenerated materials to M at a lower price than the material companies. This condition created a cycle for WPB recovery and reduced the use of raw materials. Thus, Mode M–R was considered as the optimal recycling mode.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100245,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Circular Economy\",\"volume\":\"1 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 100013\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773167722000139/pdfft?md5=996fa7ef34d37fcfdb9ae549cb6bc055&pid=1-s2.0-S2773167722000139-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Circular Economy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773167722000139\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circular Economy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773167722000139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative analysis of recycling modes of power batteries based on extended producer-responsibility principle
To improve the effectiveness of recycling, echelon utilization, and recovery mechanism of waste power batteries (WPBs), 12 recycling modes were proposed based on extended producer-responsibility principle. By employing profit and sensitivity analyses, we found that resource-recovery companies (Rs) are the key for recycling, echelon utilization, and recovery mechanism. For R, the high resale price of waste LiNixMnyCo1−x−yO2 batteries was not conducive to recovering waste batteries. However, the recycling behavior of R was beneficial for resisting the risk of high resale price of waste LiNixMnyCo1−x−yO2 batteries. This condition increased the profits by saving on the buying cost and reselling of WPBs to echelon-utilization companies. Following the decrease in the number of recyclers in the recycling system, the profits of R also increased. However, when the proportion of recycled waste LiNixMnyCo1−x−yO2 batteries was 100%, the profits of R faced risks due to the high resale price of waste LiNixMnyCo1−x−yO2 batteries. For other recyclers, only the power-battery manufacturers (Ms) were willing to reduce the resale price of waste LiNixMnyCo1−x−yO2 batteries to let R earn profit because R supplied regenerated materials to M at a lower price than the material companies. This condition created a cycle for WPB recovery and reduced the use of raw materials. Thus, Mode M–R was considered as the optimal recycling mode.