From Battery Value to Battery Waste: China’s Next Challenge

Minh Anh Hoang*

Trade Union University, Hanoi, Vietnam

*Contact: anhhm@dhcd.edu.vn

© Davide Laverga

Electric vehicles (EVs) have become powerful symbols of the transition toward a cleaner future. Governments and industries increasingly promote them as solutions to climate change, air pollution, and fossil-fuel dependence. As millions of EVs enter roads worldwide, they promise quieter cities and lower carbon emissions. Yet behind this technological revolution lies a challenge that is receiving far less attention: what happens to the batteries when they die?

Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs), which power most EVs, are technological advances and environmental hazards at the same time. They contain valuable minerals such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt—materials critical for future industries and energy systems. However, they also contain hazardous substances that can contaminate ecosystems and threaten human health if handled improperly (Qiao et al., 2021; Richter, 2022). Consequently, the end of a battery’s life is not truly an end, but rather the beginning of a new environmental and economic question.

China sits at the center of this challenge. As the world’s largest EV market and battery producer, the country has attempted to establish formal systems for managing the growing wave of retired batteries. Since 2018, Chinese authorities have introduced pilot projects, recycling licenses, traceability programs, and extended producer responsibility (EPR) frameworks designed to encourage safer recycling systems.

Yet, these measures remain largely non-compulsory and costly. Formal recycling enterprises face substantial costs because they must invest in advanced facilities, environmental protection systems, safe storage, and tracking technologies. By contrast, informal recycling workshops often operate with lower expenses and fewer restrictions. Because they can offer higher immediate payments for used batteries, they frequently attract suppliers more successfully than formal facilities (Tang et al., 2023). As a result, more than 75% of retired EV batteries in China are estimated to continue flowing into informal recycling channels. These pathways may recover some materials, but they also create significant risks for ecosystems, worker safety, and resource efficiency.

A recent study by Wang and colleagues explored this problem using an integrated framework combining evolutionary game theory, system dynamics, stock-flow projections, and life-cycle assessment methods. Their findings suggest that under current conditions, formal battery recycling may stagnate at approximately 53% after 2030. However, stronger and better coordinated policies—including earlier enforcement, targeted incentives, and stronger market support—could increase formal recycling rates beyond 92% by 2060 while reducing environmental damage by 44–73%.

Encouraging steps have already begun. China recently introduced a “one battery, one code” policy that assigns a unique digital identity to each battery throughout its life cycle. Combined with stronger producer responsibility systems and improved traceability, such measures could gradually transform battery recycling from a fragmented market into a more coordinated circular system.

Technologies are not widely adopted solely because of their engineering advantages. They become integrated into societies through shared values, beliefs, and cultural narratives (Khuc, 2026). As electric vehicles increasingly symbolize not only cleaner transportation but also broader aspirations for healthier environments and more sustainable ways of living, they can become powerful catalysts for positive societal change, gradually fostering stronger recycling behaviors, deeper environmental awareness, and wider acceptance of circular economy principles.

From this perspective, the growing challenge of battery waste may also present an opportunity to broaden our understanding of sustainability itself (Vuong, 2025; Nguyen & Ho, 2026). Rather than focusing only on cleaner products or lower emissions, societies may increasingly move toward viewing sustainability as a shared responsibility that spans the entire life cycle of technology—from resource extraction and manufacturing to use, reuse, and eventual recovery.

References

Khuc, V. Q. & Nguyen, M. H. (2026). Cultural Additivity Theory. https://books.google.com/books?id=Y4XZEQAAQBAJ

Nguyen, M. H., & Ho, M. T. (2026). The absurdist approach to unveiling possible paradoxical thinking for innovative socio-psychological research. MethodsX, 16, 103910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2026.103910

Qiao, D., et a. (2021). Potential impact of the end-of-life batteries recycling of electric vehicles on lithium demand in China: 2010–2050. Science of The Total Environment, 764, 142835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142835

Richter, J.L. (2022). A circular economy approach is needed for electric vehicles. Nature Electronics, 5, 5-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41928-021-00711-9

Tang, Y. et al. (2023). What influences residents’ intention to participate in the electric vehicle battery recycling? Evidence from China. Energy, 276, 127563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.127563

Vuong, Q. H. (2025). Wild Wise Weird. AISDL. https://books.google.com/books?id=C5dDEQAAQBAJ

Wang, H., et al. (2026). Strategic extended producer responsibility can double China’s formal electric vehicle battery recycling with improved sustainability. One Earth, 9(5), 101701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2026.101701