LOCATION/TYPE

NEWS HOME


[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]

Archive
RSS

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

WHAT TO DO
when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates
RSS

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

News Watch Home

Is clean energy powered by dirty batteries? 

Credit:  Arlene Blum · Dec 8, 2024, forbes.com ~~

Lithium-ion batteries are a linchpin of the clean energy transition. They power electric vehicles and allow us to harness wind and solar power even when the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing. They are also used widely in electronics most of us use daily, from smart phones to earbuds. Demand is anticipated to grow exponentially over the next decade.

Unfortunately, lithium-ion batteries themselves aren’t so clean. Even aside from much-discussed environmental issues with lithium and cobalt mining, these batteries are manufactured with harmful chemicals that end up in our environment, homes, and bodies.

One of the most concerning chemical classes is per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, nicknamed “forever chemicals” due to their extreme persistence in the environment. PFAS are associated with cancer, decreased fertility, endocrine disruption, immune system harms, adverse developmental effects, and other serious health problems. Some newer PFAS first claimed to be safe have been determined later to be harmful to our health.

Despite this, PFAS are used in the batteries as electrolytes and in battery components as binders or separators. And PFAS can leach from batteries during manufacturing, use, and disposal or recycling. Indeed, recent peer-reviewed research led by scientists at Texas Tech University and Duke University confirms that the use of PFAS in lithium-ion batteries is leading to significant air and water pollution.

Another growing problem is the use of harmful flame retardants in the plastic enclosures around batteries. Because the fire risks of this technology are very real, flammability standards are being implemented that aim to reduce them. Although most of these standards do not specifically require flame retardants, they are usually the least expensive and easiest way to meet flammability tests. Notably, there is no proven fire-safety benefit in adding flame retardants to enclosures in real-world scenarios. Flame-retarded plastic is unlikely to slow or stop highly energetic lithium-ion battery fires and can make such fires more toxic and dangerous.

In addition to a lack of proven effectiveness, flame retardants are known to pose serious health risks, including cancer, neurological harm, and reproductive issues. Flame retardants can migrate from products with batteries during use, contaminating homes, workplaces, and the broader environment. At the end of their useful life, flame-retarded plastics can contaminate the recycling stream and impede the circular economy. They can end up in black plastic soup spoons and in our soup, according to a recent study led by the organization Toxic-Free Future. Their disposal, either by burning or in landfills, leads to toxic emissions and can be harmful to the global environment and human health.

Many of these chemical uses may be replaceable. For example, Nanoramic and Dragonfly Energy are companies that have found ways around using PFAS to make cathodes in lithium-ion batteries. More effective and less harmful ways to make batteries fire-safe include better battery manufacturing practices, improved battery management systems, and transitioning to solid state batteries. Fire-safety benefits should be demonstrated before mandating standards that de facto lead to the use of flame retardants.

As we embrace the technologies that can lead us out of the fossil fuel era, we must also ensure that our path forward does not leave a trail of toxicity in its wake. The clean energy revolution should not exchange one form of environmental harm for another.

Arlene Blum is Director of the Green Science Policy Institute.

Source:  Arlene Blum · Dec 8, 2024, forbes.com

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)

Share:

e-mail X FB LI BS M TS TG Share


News Watch Home

Get the Facts
CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.

 Follow:

Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Bluesky Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab