This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Biomass-derived biocarbon is emerging as a scalable, low-impact alternative to fossil carbons for battery electrodes in the context of rising electricity demand and strict climate targets. Converting agricultural and forestry residues into functional carbons supports circular-economy strategies while reducing dependence on mined graphite with about 9–10 kg CO 2 -eq per kg of emission. As battery markets expand across transportation, grid storage, and consumer electronics, there is a growing demand for electrode materials that combine high specific capacity, long cycle life, low production cost, and a reduced environmental footprint. Recent studies show that engineered biocarbon can meet these requirements across several chemistries while being produced from abundant, low-cost feedstocks. This review discusses different aspects of using biomass-derived biocarbons for battery electrodes. Thermochemical routes, e.g., pyrolysis and hydrothermal carbonization, enable quantitative control over porosity, graphitization, and heteroatom content, establishing clear structure-property relationships. Optimized biocarbon electrodes perform strongly across battery systems, with lithium-ion anodes reaching up to ∼700 mA·h/g, lithium-sulfur cathodes achieving > 1 500 mA·h/g initial discharge, and sodium-ion hard carbons delivering > 300 mA·h/g, while cycling stability often exceeds 500–1 000 cycles. Integrated techno-economic, life-cycle, and technology-readiness analyses indicate hard-carbon production costs of roughly 1.5–3.5 yuan (Euro dollar)/kg, global-warming potential reductions of 50%–60% relative to graphite, and pilot-to-pre-commercial deployment for the most mature biocarbon routes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Madadi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: