Researchers at RMIT University have developed a battery recycling process that recovers valuable metals from lithium-ion batteries at room temperature, avoiding the energy-intensive high-temperature smelting used by most recycling facilities.

The process uses selective chemical leaching to dissolve and separate lithium, cobalt, nickel, and other metals from battery electrodes. Recovery rates exceed 95% for all major metals, comparable to conventional recycling but with 70% lower energy consumption.

Dr. Rachel Thompson, who leads RMIT’s materials recovery research, said reducing energy use is critical for battery recycling economics. “Recycling shouldn’t use more energy than mining virgin materials. Low-temperature processes help ensure recycling is genuinely sustainable.”

Australia is approaching a battery waste crisis. Electric vehicle adoption is accelerating, and the first generation of EVs from the early 2020s will start reaching end of life in the next few years. Current recycling capacity is minimal, meaning most dead batteries end up in landfills or shipped overseas for processing.

The federal government’s Battery Stewardship Scheme, launched in 2022, requires battery manufacturers and importers to fund recycling programs. But domestic recycling infrastructure hasn’t kept pace with collection volumes. Australia collects thousands of tonnes of batteries annually but can only process a small fraction locally.

The RMIT process addresses several limitations of existing recycling methods. Pyrometallurgy, which uses high-temperature smelting, requires substantial energy and produces toxic emissions. Hydrometallurgy, using chemical leaching, typically requires heating to 60-90°C and uses harsh acids.

The new method works at room temperature and uses relatively benign organic acids rather than sulfuric or nitric acid. That simplifies safety requirements and reduces chemical waste treatment costs.

The process involves shredding batteries, separating components mechanically, then using sequential leaching steps to selectively dissolve different metals. Each metal is recovered as a pure compound suitable for manufacturing new batteries.

Lithium recovery has been particularly challenging for recyclers. Unlike cobalt and nickel, which are valuable enough to justify complex recovery processes, lithium prices have historically been too low to make recovery economical. That’s changing as lithium prices rise, but recovery technology hasn’t caught up.

The RMIT method recovers lithium carbonate at a purity level suitable for direct use in battery manufacturing. That creates a closed-loop system where materials from old batteries can go directly into new ones without requiring virgin materials.

Whether recycled battery materials can truly substitute for mined materials depends on performance. Some battery manufacturers worry that recycled materials contain impurities that degrade performance or reduce cycle life. The RMIT process produces materials meeting industry purity standards, but manufacturers want long-term testing data before committing to recycled content.

The research received funding from the Recycling Modernisation Fund and several Australian battery recycling companies. Those companies are exploring licensing the technology for commercial operations that could begin in 2027.

Economics remain challenging. The RMIT process reduces operating costs compared to conventional recycling, but capital costs for a commercial-scale facility are still substantial, probably $50-80 million for a plant processing 10,000 tonnes annually.

That scale is needed for economic viability, but Australia’s current battery waste volumes are much smaller. A commercial facility would need to import waste batteries from overseas or process multiple battery chemistries and other metal-containing waste streams to achieve sufficient throughput.

One possibility is co-locating recycling with battery manufacturing. Several companies have announced plans to build battery manufacturing facilities in Australia, partly driven by government incentives. Integrating recycling with manufacturing could reduce logistics costs and create circular material flows.

The research team is now working on adapting the process for different battery chemistries. The initial development focused on NMC (nickel-manganese-cobalt) batteries common in EVs, but LFP (lithium iron phosphate) batteries are gaining market share. LFP batteries contain no cobalt, changing the economics and technical requirements of recycling.

Emerging battery chemistries like sodium-ion and solid-state batteries will eventually need recycling processes too. Developing recycling methods early in a technology’s lifecycle, rather than waiting until waste volumes create urgent problems, is a better approach.

The RMIT technology is also being tested for recycling consumer electronics batteries from laptops and smartphones. Those batteries are smaller and more varied than EV batteries, creating different handling challenges. But the chemistry is similar, so the leaching process should work with modifications.

Australia’s battery recycling capacity needs to increase by at least tenfold over the next decade to handle projected waste volumes. That requires both technological development and policy support to create economic conditions where recycling is viable.

Extended producer responsibility schemes that require manufacturers to pay for end-of-life battery management help, but they work better in countries with larger markets and established recycling infrastructure. Australia’s small, geographically dispersed market makes achieving economies of scale difficult.

International coordination might help. If Australian recyclers could import battery waste from Asian markets, process it using low-cost renewable energy, and export recovered materials, that could support viable operations. Whether trade rules and international agreements allow that remains unclear.

The RMIT process represents the kind of applied research that could enable domestic recycling industries. Whether it translates to commercial success depends on factors beyond the technology, including policy, economics, and market development.