Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Experimental study demonstrates dual-domain stabilization of spent lithium cobalt oxide via lithium cysteinate sintering, highlighting a viable route for high-voltage cathode upcycling.
The increasing volume of spent lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) has triggered severe resource and environmental issues, making the environmentally friendly, high-value regeneration of spent LiCoO2 (SLCO) imperative in the new energy field. Upcycling SLCO into high-voltage lithium cobalt oxide (LCO) potentiates its high-value-added utilization; however, single-functional lithium sources in existing regeneration processes only achieve basic lithium compensation and fail to simultaneously address the bottlenecks of bulk structural degradation and uncontrolled interfacial side reactions under 4.6 V high-voltage cycling, which hinders the stable upcycling of SLCO into high-voltage LCO. Herein, a bulk-interface and dual-domain stabilization strategy is proposed via one-step solid-state sintering with lithium cysteinate (Li-Cys). The preferential cleavage of Li–S bonds in Li-Cys first enables targeted lithium compensation for spent LiCoO2, followed by the introduction of NaOH to provide a mild alkaline environment, thereby simultaneously achieving Na/S co-doping in the bulk and the in situ construction of a Li2SO4/LiNxOy coating at the interface. Na+ stabilized the layered structure as an interlayer pillar, S enhanced the lattice oxygen stability, and the coating suppressed interfacial side reactions, jointly improving the structural stability and ion transport kinetics. The regenerated NS-RLCO cathode delivered an initial capacity of 205 mAh/g at 0.1C, 91.9% capacity retention after 100 cycles at 1C, and 158.9 mAh/g reversible capacity at 3C. Economic and life-cycle analyses confirmed its superior cost and environmental benefits over traditional recycling processes, providing a novel route for environmentally friendly, high-value regeneration of spent LCO.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: