A Formulation Model for Computations to Estimate the Lifecycle Cost of NiZn Batteries

Ashwani Kumar Malviya (), Mehdi Zarehparast Malekzadeh, Francisco Enrique Santarremigia (), Gemma Dolores Molero, Ignacio Villalba-Sanchis and Victor Yepes
Additional contact information
Ashwani Kumar Malviya: Research & Innovation Projects, AITEC, Parque Tecnológico, C/Charles Robert Dawrin, 20, 46980 Paterna, Valencia, Spain
Mehdi Zarehparast Malekzadeh: Research & Innovation Projects, AITEC, Parque Tecnológico, C/Charles Robert Dawrin, 20, 46980 Paterna, Valencia, Spain
Francisco Enrique Santarremigia: Research & Innovation Projects, AITEC, Parque Tecnológico, C/Charles Robert Dawrin, 20, 46980 Paterna, Valencia, Spain
Gemma Dolores Molero: Research & Innovation Projects, AITEC, Parque Tecnológico, C/Charles Robert Dawrin, 20, 46980 Paterna, Valencia, Spain
Ignacio Villalba-Sanchis: Institute of Concrete Science and Technology (ICITECH), Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 Valencia, Spain
Victor Yepes: Institute of Concrete Science and Technology (ICITECH), Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 Valencia, Spain

Sustainability, 2024, vol. 16, issue 5, 1-22

Abstract: The increasing demand for electricity and the electrification of various sectors require more efficient and sustainable energy storage solutions. This paper focuses on the novel rechargeable nickel–zinc battery (RNZB) technology, which has the potential to replace the conventional nickel–cadmium battery (NiCd), in terms of safety, performance, environmental impact, and cost. The paper aims to provide a comprehensive and systematic analysis of RNZBs by modeling their lifecycle cost (LCC) from cradle to grave. This paper also applies this LCC model to estimate costs along the RNZB’s lifecycle in both cases: per kilogram of battery mass and per kilowatt hour of energy released. This model is shown to be reliable by comparing its results with costs provided by recognized software used for LCC analysis. A comparison of LCCs for three widely used battery technologies: lead–acid, Li-ion LFP, and NMC batteries, which can be market competitors of NiZn, is also provided. The study concludes that the NiZn battery was found to be the cheapest throughout its entire lifecycle, with NiZn Formulation 1 being the cheapest option. The cost per unit of energy released was also found to be the lowest for NiZn batteries. The current research pain points are the availability of data for nickel–zinc batteries, which are in the research and development phase, while other battery types are already widely used in energy storage. This paper recommends taking into account the location factor of infrastructures, cost of machinery, storage, number of suppliers of raw materials, amount of materials transported in each shipment, and the value of materials recovered after the battery recycling process to further reduce costs throughout the battery’s lifecycle. This LCC model can be also used for other energy storage technologies and serve as objective functions for optimization in further developments.

Keywords: sustainable energy; nickel–zinc battery; nickel–cadmium battery; lifecycle cost modeling; battery technologies (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/1965/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/1965/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:5:p:1965-:d:1347104

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().