The LIB outperform the lead-acid batteries. Specifically, the NCA battery chemistry has the lowest climate change potential. The main reasons for this are that the LIB has a higher energy density and a longer lifetime, which means that fewer battery cells are required for the same energy demand as lead-acid batteries. Fig. 4.
First, the study finds that the lead-acid battery has approximate environmental impact values (per kWh energy delivered): 2 kg CO 2eq for climate change, 33 MJ for resource use - fossil, 0.02 mol H + eq For acidification potential, 10 −7 disease incidence for particulate emission, and 8 × 10 −4 kg Sb eq for resource use – minerals and metals.
In general, lead-acid batteries generate more impact due to their lower energy density, which means a higher number of lead-acid batteries are required than LIB when they supply the same demand. Among the LIB, the LFP chemistry performs worse in all impact categories except minerals and metals resource use.
Compared to the lead-acid batteries, the credits arising from the end-of-life stage of LIB are much lower in categories such as acidification potential and respiratory inorganics. The unimpressive value is understandable since the recycling of LIB is still in its early stages.
Capacity degradation is the main failure mode of lead–acid batteries. Therefore, it is equivalent to predict the battery life and the change in battery residual capacity in the cycle. The definition of SOH is shown in Equation (1): where Ct is the actual capacity, C0 is nominal capacity.
The performance and life cycle of Sealed Lead Acid (SLA) batteries for Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) application is considered in this paper. Cyclic test and thermal accelerated aging test is performed to analyze the aging mechanism resulting in gradual loss of performance and finally to battery's end of service life.