Exactly. Batteries are being recycled at scale today with 98-95% material recovery rates, depending on the company.
We are still early in the development cycle of recycling technology, which means we'll be closer to 99.x% in a decade when the first large wave of EV batteries (from the last decade) could start getting close to End of Life.
Batteries can be recycled at high rates of recovery, but most non-EV lithium batteries aren’t being recycled (basically because they aren’t sent to battery recycling centers given their small sizes). The anti-EV crowd then uses that statistic to deride EVS.
Most small batteries are sent to landfills, whether they have lithium or nickel. EV batteries and nickel car batteries are easier to recycle because there is an auto shop involved to collect and send the battery to a recycler. If you replace your NiMH 12V battery yourself (rather than having it done in the shop), you might be tempted to just throw it away in your garbage can also (even though you shouldn’t) simply because you have no idea how to get it to a recycler. You are unlikely to change the big battery in your Tesla on your own, so that isn’t a problem.
Battery recycling is really just a logistics problem.
In Canada at least, when you buy a car / ev battery depending on the chemistry you get a coupon that you redeem for a significant amount of money when you take your old replaced battery back to the place you bought the new battery. The vendor will take back any brand/regardless of where you got the old battery from.
There are people who "throw away" the coupon by not returning the old battery, but hey that's on them.
It is incredibly profitable to recycle an EV battery, so I’m not sure why the coupon is needed. The owner should get cash or a discount on their new battery.
> Battery recycling is really just a logistics problem
It’s also one of scale. We don’t yet have enough EV batteries being retired to merit the recycling infrastructure. China is just reaching the point where it does.
My reaction was not pro-fossil fuel but rather that I think the use of 'renewable' as a statement of general positivity is idiotic.
Sure there is a theoretical closable cycle in batteries, but guess what, the same can be said for fossil fuels. Just use energy to turn air and water back into fuel, boom cycle closed.
What matters is not if something is 'renewable' but if its a strategically correct thing to do in regards to climate and energy security.
Calling lithium 'renwable' is ridiculous. Its literally just a fixed resource on our plant like iron or copper or whatever.
> Sure there is a theoretical closable cycle in batteries, but guess what, the same can be said for fossil fuels.
On geological time scales involving massive deposition of organic material.
In contrast, lithium can be recovered from batteries with an industrial shredder and chemical processing.
Fossil fuels are non-renewable in a trivial sense but are grossly different in a practical sense; treating them as equivalent is a borderline specious argument.
Besides brushing off the difference in difficulty between refreshing our petroleum stock on the planet and recycling lithium, I think the point of the original use of "renewables" is the push toward renewable energy for all possible things, such as transport, and the part lithium currently plays in that plan.
Neither are photons [1] nor individual gusts of wind. Lithium has a theoretically closeable cycle in batteries in a way fossil fuels do not.
[1] If you want to be pedantic, the useful energy in a particular photon.