[SMM Analysis] Maximizing Resource Utilization in Battery Recycling  

Published: Dec 16, 2024 10:57
Source: SMM
In recent years, the topic of "replacing a battery being more expensive than buying a new car" has been widely discussed in China's NEV sector.

In recent years, the topic of "replacing a battery being more expensive than buying a new car" has been widely discussed in China's NEV sector. Many NEV owners have expressed concerns about battery lifespan on social media. The first batch of NEV owners who purchased pure EVs in China have successively shared their battery replacement bills, from early Tesla owners to recent Mercedes-Benz owners. These discussions have drawn widespread attention to the lifespan and residual value of NEV batteries. Since 2016, China has implemented an 8-year or 120,000-kilometer warranty standard for passenger car power batteries, and this year marks the eighth year. This means that starting this year, a certain number of power batteries will reach the end of their warranty period annually.

Currently, there are three main recycling models in the industry: led by power battery producers, automakers, or third-party companies. Each model has its advantages and disadvantages. Recycling led by battery producers facilitates targeted resource recycling of used batteries, automakers benefit from significant channel advantages that can lower overall recycling costs, while third-party companies can help maximize battery resource utilization.

According to a research report by the Development Research Center of the State Council, as of 2023, the standardized recycling rate of NEV power batteries in China is less than 25%. The power battery recycling industry has only issued over 10 national standards and 14 industry standards. Although there are numerous enterprise standards, their authority and versatility remain weak. Therefore, the development of the used power battery industry still faces challenges such as technical difficulties and inefficient recycling channels, which require improvements in laws, regulations, and standard systems.

Currently, end-of-life power batteries are mainly utilized in two ways: cascade utilization and regeneration. When the capacity of NEV batteries is between 20% and 80%, cascade utilization is the preferred option. This involves testing, classifying, disassembling, and reassembling the batteries for use in low-speed EVs, and later in energy storage, communication base stations, streetlights, or power banks. Once the battery capacity falls below 20%-30%, it no longer holds value for cascade utilization. At this stage, the batteries are regenerated through processes such as disassembly, crushing, sorting, and smelting to extract recyclable components like precious metals and plastics. However, the cascade utilization process is highly complex and requires technological advancements and new application scenarios to improve its economic viability. On the other hand, disassembly and recycling primarily generate profits from processing, with technology and channels being the core influencing factors.

From a channel perspective, power battery recycling mainly comes from the following sources: old cars from 4S shops, scrap cars from repair shops, accident cars from insurance companies, old cars from automakers, experimental batteries from automakers, and batteries awaiting disposal from electronics factories. Such diverse sources of batteries naturally pose challenges for one-stop recycling and processing. One of the biggest difficulties in cascade utilization of end-of-life batteries is ensuring "consistency." Many companies have stated that the goal of cascade utilization is to create products, but the wide variety of brands and models of batteries makes it challenging to standardize them into uniform products. Additionally, some unqualified companies profit from crude processing of old batteries, which not only creates safety hazards but also complicates traceability management.

Amid declining profitability and severe challenges in the power battery recycling industry, representative companies of the three recycling models are currently striving to achieve profitability through technological innovation and business model transformation. In the future, industry chain alliances involving deep collaboration across the upstream and downstream of the industry chain are expected to become the mainstream model for battery recycling.

Data Source Statement: Except for publicly available information, all other data are processed by SMM based on publicly available information, market communication, and relying on SMM's internal database model. They are for reference only and do not constitute decision-making recommendations.

For any inquiries or for more information, please contact: lemonzhao@smm.cn
For more information on how to access our research reports, please contact:service.en@smm.cn
Related News
Chery Group Sees 15.4% Sales Growth in August, Exports and New Energy Vehicles Surge
13 hours ago
Chery Group Sees 15.4% Sales Growth in August, Exports and New Energy Vehicles Surge
Read More
Chery Group Sees 15.4% Sales Growth in August, Exports and New Energy Vehicles Surge
Chery Group Sees 15.4% Sales Growth in August, Exports and New Energy Vehicles Surge
[Chery Group's August sales hit 280,000 units, up 15.4% YoY] In August 2026, Chery Group sold 280,128 vehicles, up 15.4% YoY. Of this total, the group exported 196,984 units, up 52.1% YoY, and sold 120,909 new energy vehicles, up 69.8% YoY, surpassing the 100,000-unit mark for the fifth consecutive month.
13 hours ago
SMM Daily Review: Spot Prices for Lithium Carbonate Fluctuated Higher on 1 September
13 hours ago
SMM Daily Review: Spot Prices for Lithium Carbonate Fluctuated Higher on 1 September
Read More
SMM Daily Review: Spot Prices for Lithium Carbonate Fluctuated Higher on 1 September
SMM Daily Review: Spot Prices for Lithium Carbonate Fluctuated Higher on 1 September
Today, SMM’s spot prices for battery-grade lithium carbonate fluctuated higher compared with the previous working day. The lithium carbonate 2701 contract opened lower today at 160,800 yuan per tonne. Following the opening, it quickly dipped to around 158,900 yuan per tonne, before bullish capital stepped in to drive a volatile rebound; during the morning session, prices fluctuated on a relatively firm note within the 160,500–162,500 yuan per tonne range, reaching a high of 162,900 yuan per tonne; Around midday, bulls and bears engaged in a seesaw battle above the moving average line; in the afternoon, short sellers intensified their selling pressure, causing the price to plummet to 157,200 yuan per tonne, after which it consolidated weakly at lower levels. Although there were minor rebounds during this period, they failed to break through the resistance of the moving average line. The market weakened again towards the close, eventually closing down 1.64 per cent at 157,900 yuan per tonne, with open interest increasing by 1,885 contracts. In the spot market, downstream material manufacturers took the opportunity to buy on the dip, with both enquiries and actual transactions remaining relatively active; upstream lithium salt producers saw a slight slowdown in the pace of spot sales, whilst deliveries under long-term contracts began in earnest at the start of the month. Furthermore, some lithium salt producers maintained spot quotations at 165,000 yuan per tonne or higher. Overall, a divergence in price expectations between upstream and downstream players persists.
13 hours ago
[SMM Analysis]Higher Cobalt Tetroxide Production Lifted China’s Cobalt Sulphate Output by Nearly 7% MoM in August
16 hours ago
[SMM Analysis]Higher Cobalt Tetroxide Production Lifted China’s Cobalt Sulphate Output by Nearly 7% MoM in August
Read More
[SMM Analysis]Higher Cobalt Tetroxide Production Lifted China’s Cobalt Sulphate Output by Nearly 7% MoM in August
[SMM Analysis]Higher Cobalt Tetroxide Production Lifted China’s Cobalt Sulphate Output by Nearly 7% MoM in August
16 hours ago