Back in my day, I worked at Bestbuy and if you have ever been in one, you may notice that we have a "recycle" area in the front of the store. It is a separated bin, labelled with "wires", "cds", "batteries", etc. The one that always confused me the most was "batteries" since almost EVERY time they would empty that bin into our recycle bin in the back, they would dump the batteries into the trash because almost all of them were non-lithium-ion. My manager said we couldn't recycle regular batteries so they needed thrown away and sorting through the absolute mound of batteries was too much to do.
I know we would receive laptop batteries, phone batteries, and other rechargeables but they never made it into the bin. I hear now, anything with a screen costs money to recycle at Bestbuy. They really seem to be taking a step in the wrong direction. Better labelled bins, and easier access to recycling areas will make it easier for the average person to recycle, which in my opinion, is a net gain for us all.
Have you tried replacing a phone battery recently? It involves using hot air to soften the glue, a lot of manual labor, unplugging wires, and carefully replacing the battery. Then you need to glue everything back together and pray the device works.
There's a straightforward solution to this and the recycling problem:
1. Mandate that every mass produced device with a li-ion battery have a simple mechanism to remove the battery
2. Add a very small tax to each device with such battery (in the order of cents)
3. Pay the same amount back to whoever brings the battery to a recycling plant
There you go. This system has only one knob (the amount paid per battery) and by tweaking it you can adjust the incentive to recycle. You sit back and let the market sort out the details.
Not to mention that this would extend the lifetime of phones by making it easy to replace the battery.
Your story highlights a common issue with recycling: so much of it is virtue signalling bullshit. I get to feel good about separating my trash (and somehow like my consumerism wasn't a net negative anyway), but it still goes all to the same dump.
Of course not all recycling is BS as this article shows. But we should change the automatic narrative of "recycling=good, landfill=bad" because it encourages practices that are wasteful both for the economy and environment.
This only applies to New Yorkers but there is a law on the books that requires retailers to accept used batteries of the same type they sell for recycling. I bring mine to a local Apple store and they gladly take them every time. Often I have a PC battery or two in the bag too.
This actually might be a sign of improvement... I think increasingly we are putting restrictions on recycling so that we actually do recycle them.
Until recently, I think quite a bit of recycling is a sham. I've spent a bit of time as a hobby tracking down recycling (in my high school growing up, etc) and effectively none of it made it to actually being recycled.
You're not supposed to even throw alkaline batteries into normal trash AFAIK so giving it to someone who can throw it into the 'right kind of trash' is useful. Most people, including me, don't want to figure out whatever special place we are supposed to drive to drop off our batteries, so it's nicer to do it while your shopping.
In Canada we have a recycling fee for computer stuff and tires for example. In some cases (tire "recycle" centre) it was found they were just dumping them. (Please somebody correct me if I remember this wrong).
Gentle reminder "recycle" is the last thing to do in the "reduce, reuse, recycle".
The truth nobody wants to hear is that you can recycle all the batteries you want but the planet is still fucked.
Live in a small home/apartment, don’t eat meat or dairy products, don’t drive or fly in planes, and don’t have kids. That’s how someone who lives in a modern developed nation can “do their part” for the planet. I live that way but almost nobody else is willing.
Wringing your hands that batteries get thrown out instead of recycled is like complaining the toilet is running when the house is on fire.
The story is unfortunately sparse on the details of how the recycling works (whether there is any truly new idea).
Based on the "furnace" picture and language about melting down the batteries, it seems like their approach is to just treat the incoming batteries as "enriched ore" and proceed with an energy-intensive, standard, metal extraction process.
So what they save is the huge amount of energy and dirtiness required to dig in the earth (in the few suitable places on the earth) for rocks with <.5% metal content and crush those rocks into dust, which is substantial, but not revolutionary?
Does it matter if it is revolutionary? A lot of things that tesla does are not revolutionary but a very large number of small improvements that end up resulting in a qualitative change.
E.g. everybody is talking about exotic battery chemistries while Tesla is able to wring out significantly more performance from their existing chemistry by doing tabless electrodes.
You could argue that the focus on revolutionary progress versus incremental improvements is sometimes holding us back.
If they can establish the supply and demand for recycling using non-revolutionary methods, revolutionary ideas can be developed and progressively swapped in as they become feasible.
>To JB Straubel, one of the brains behind Tesla Inc., TSLA -1.13%▲ that refuse holds the key to driving the electric car revolution forward—and making the vehicles affordable enough for everyone to own one.
Could someone help?
>Mr. Straubel said in his first in-depth interview about his new venture since it was formed in 2017 while still at Tesla.
Does anyone know what the price is for bulk e-waste a company like this would pay? Or how to find it?
I’ve been interested in setting up some free local e-waste collection for recycling, but it seems like the cost of collection and sorting is more than the price I can get for it.
Currently anything Li-ion is around $1.50 per pound (Midwest US prices) to be accepted for hazardous waste recycling. This means it costs you the consumer to have your laptop battery recycled.
I work with a company that recycles older hybrid batteries from Toyota, Honda, Ford. Most of these are NiMH and pay $0.40-$0.80 per pound for the Nickel value alone.
So a NiMH hybrid battery is worth $50 for the core from a Prius, but a lithium battery from a Nissan Leaf would cost you ~$700 to recycle.
Not many technical engineering leaders have a passion for leaving the world better than they found it, especially in an area where they consumed a lot of raw materials to make their life's greatest work.
Very few companies are doing more than lip service on the very difficult (sometimes impossible) task of dirty work to get recycled materials into the supply chain as a viable (and someday better) alternative than new raw materials from the earth.
This has so many implications if successful – you can compete with mining 1:1. It allows a company to handle disruptions in the traditional supply chain, etc. But, today this is hard to do and you often only see post-consumer recycled materials used behind-the-scenes (e.g. a plastic frame holding a non-essential chamber) or in packaging (e.g. bamboo ink, cardboard boxes without white paint), but it's rarely used in what the consumer sees (notable exception: The Google Nest Mini "fabric" is made from plastic bottles).
As more devices rely on batteries, we need to think about how we can start harvesting those materials for re-use ourselves and not just shipping overseas and closing our eyes. It's much more expensive to intentionally source recycled materials today and that is, unfortunately, a losing proposition for most manufacturers.
interesting timing...considering there’s a lot of scrutiny from whistleblowers and short sellers around scrap inventory on Tesla’s balance sheet and Tesla’s real relationship with this company.
will need to dig around but recall seeing a screenshot of either an analyst call or archived page that suggested someone let it slip this was a Tesla subsidiary and not a completely unrelated entity.
Why is battery disposal such a municipality-dependent shitshow in the US? The vast majority of cities I've lived in, with the exception of san francisco, essentially encourage people to throw their batteries directly in the trash by providing no disposal mechanism via municipal waste collection. This is much, much more dangerous in the short term with lithium ion batteries.
Get the word out. Batteries are bad hydrogen is good. Current hydrogen gas will have more energy than batteries at peak technology growth. This matters because hydrogen cars are cheaper, more scalable, and more inclusive than battery cars. Rich people get battery cars, you get a battery bike.
The claim that hydrogen cars are cheaper and that battery cars are just for the rich in comparison is entirely unfounded. I have no idea where this idea came from as it is not borne by reality.
Compare two vehicles of the same overall type. A Toyota Mirai, one of the only hydrogen cars available, with a Long-Range Model 3.
Msrp: $58,550 for the Mirai, $46,990 for the LR Model 3.
Range: 312 miles for the Mirai, 322 for Model 3 LR.
Curb weight (!): 4075lbs for the Mirai, 4072lbs for the Model 3 LR.
Top speed, 0-60mph: 111mph and 9s for the Mirai; 145mph and 4.4s Model 3 LR
About $0.05 per mile for the Tesla Model 3 LR (19 cents per kWh in LA for households average, ~4 miles per kWh) for home charging and $0.07 per mile for Model 3 LR with Supercharging (about 28 cents per kWh).
Battery-electric cars are basically cheaper and more convenient and more efficient and better in virtually every single way. (Even lighter for more range, which I was surprised at.)
Also, the article you quoted treats energy density as the only deciding factor when choosing energy storage.
It ignores both the cost and environmental damage of each energy source.
If we discover a way to extract energy from little kittens more efficiently than from oil, according to you we should start building kitten farms for fuel. This is absurd :)
Ah the old hydrogen fool cell idiocy has still not died out. No matter that end to end its less then half as efficient and more expensive. Doing basic efficiency calculation to going from a solar pannel to forward movement on a car, is so overwhelming that I really don't see how anybody can sill argue for it. And if we are talking about green hydrogen only, the fuel cost compared to electricity is like 50 times higher.
There is basically no infrastructure either. Additionally hydrogen infrastructure is incredibly expensive to deploy and to keep running. Using the already existing power infrastructure is just so much smarter its not even close.
Add to all that that nobody has ever produced fuel cells at that scale at anywhere the price you would need. It also contains lots of expensive metals that would make scaling to millions of cars very challenging. Compared to batteries that consists of lithium, nikel, graphite and silicon, with maybe some cobalt but that will be gone soon. All easily available materials that can scale.
Any automaker that is still perusing fuel cells will be dealt harsh kicks by the market over and over again. At least they can keep sucking in government money to continue development, instead the government funding sulfer-lithium batteries that have way more potential.
Hydrogen infrastructure suffers from huge energy losses. Unless you are powering aircraft, heavy industry, large scale grid storage or hybrid cars there is not much point in choosing hydrogen. You get much more mileage out of a single kWh with a BEV.
hydrogen keeps status quo - big corporations supplying fuel stations. battery drives help with decentralisation - you can charge your car back at home from your own solar.
[+] [-] apacheCamel|5 years ago|reply
I know we would receive laptop batteries, phone batteries, and other rechargeables but they never made it into the bin. I hear now, anything with a screen costs money to recycle at Bestbuy. They really seem to be taking a step in the wrong direction. Better labelled bins, and easier access to recycling areas will make it easier for the average person to recycle, which in my opinion, is a net gain for us all.
[+] [-] ckocagil|5 years ago|reply
There's a straightforward solution to this and the recycling problem:
1. Mandate that every mass produced device with a li-ion battery have a simple mechanism to remove the battery
2. Add a very small tax to each device with such battery (in the order of cents)
3. Pay the same amount back to whoever brings the battery to a recycling plant
There you go. This system has only one knob (the amount paid per battery) and by tweaking it you can adjust the incentive to recycle. You sit back and let the market sort out the details.
Not to mention that this would extend the lifetime of phones by making it easy to replace the battery.
[+] [-] hn_throwaway_99|5 years ago|reply
Of course not all recycling is BS as this article shows. But we should change the automatic narrative of "recycling=good, landfill=bad" because it encourages practices that are wasteful both for the economy and environment.
[+] [-] CalChris|5 years ago|reply
Doing it myself would require $34 in parts plus tools and skill I don’t have.
https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iPhone+SE+Battery+Replacement/6...
[+] [-] schoolornot|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MiroF|5 years ago|reply
Until recently, I think quite a bit of recycling is a sham. I've spent a bit of time as a hobby tracking down recycling (in my high school growing up, etc) and effectively none of it made it to actually being recycled.
[+] [-] ZeroGravitas|5 years ago|reply
In other places they just mandate this stuff.
[+] [-] novok|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lazyant|5 years ago|reply
Gentle reminder "recycle" is the last thing to do in the "reduce, reuse, recycle".
[+] [-] pbhjpbhj|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] myself248|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Consultant32452|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] paulcole|5 years ago|reply
Live in a small home/apartment, don’t eat meat or dairy products, don’t drive or fly in planes, and don’t have kids. That’s how someone who lives in a modern developed nation can “do their part” for the planet. I live that way but almost nobody else is willing.
Wringing your hands that batteries get thrown out instead of recycled is like complaining the toilet is running when the house is on fire.
[+] [-] abhv|5 years ago|reply
Based on the "furnace" picture and language about melting down the batteries, it seems like their approach is to just treat the incoming batteries as "enriched ore" and proceed with an energy-intensive, standard, metal extraction process.
So what they save is the huge amount of energy and dirtiness required to dig in the earth (in the few suitable places on the earth) for rocks with <.5% metal content and crush those rocks into dust, which is substantial, but not revolutionary?
[+] [-] rklaehn|5 years ago|reply
E.g. everybody is talking about exotic battery chemistries while Tesla is able to wring out significantly more performance from their existing chemistry by doing tabless electrodes.
You could argue that the focus on revolutionary progress versus incremental improvements is sometimes holding us back.
[+] [-] agumonkey|5 years ago|reply
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxCFDWMPu38
Apparently they use remaining electricity to power the crunching step.
[+] [-] imtringued|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sjwright|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nickik|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] X6S1x6Okd1st|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] merricksb|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] czottmann|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mauvehaus|5 years ago|reply
That's an interesting/unfortunate choice of words given the well-documented issues with lithium-ion batteries :-)
[+] [-] gibolt|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Jugurtha|5 years ago|reply
>To JB Straubel, one of the brains behind Tesla Inc., TSLA -1.13%▲ that refuse holds the key to driving the electric car revolution forward—and making the vehicles affordable enough for everyone to own one.
Could someone help?
>Mr. Straubel said in his first in-depth interview about his new venture since it was formed in 2017 while still at Tesla.
Was that with Tesla's blessing?
[+] [-] peteretep|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jhardy54|5 years ago|reply
(Prounuced 'ref-use', rhymes with 'refuge'.)
[+] [-] AndrewBissell|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] reco|5 years ago|reply
I’ve been interested in setting up some free local e-waste collection for recycling, but it seems like the cost of collection and sorting is more than the price I can get for it.
[+] [-] alvern|5 years ago|reply
I work with a company that recycles older hybrid batteries from Toyota, Honda, Ford. Most of these are NiMH and pay $0.40-$0.80 per pound for the Nickel value alone.
So a NiMH hybrid battery is worth $50 for the core from a Prius, but a lithium battery from a Nissan Leaf would cost you ~$700 to recycle.
[+] [-] aarreedd|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mymacbook|5 years ago|reply
Very few companies are doing more than lip service on the very difficult (sometimes impossible) task of dirty work to get recycled materials into the supply chain as a viable (and someday better) alternative than new raw materials from the earth.
This has so many implications if successful – you can compete with mining 1:1. It allows a company to handle disruptions in the traditional supply chain, etc. But, today this is hard to do and you often only see post-consumer recycled materials used behind-the-scenes (e.g. a plastic frame holding a non-essential chamber) or in packaging (e.g. bamboo ink, cardboard boxes without white paint), but it's rarely used in what the consumer sees (notable exception: The Google Nest Mini "fabric" is made from plastic bottles).
As more devices rely on batteries, we need to think about how we can start harvesting those materials for re-use ourselves and not just shipping overseas and closing our eyes. It's much more expensive to intentionally source recycled materials today and that is, unfortunately, a losing proposition for most manufacturers.
-----
https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/google-newest-nest...
https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/04/18/apples-2019-envir...
[+] [-] notatoad|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sukilot|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AndrewBissell|5 years ago|reply
What's new is Tim Higgins giving JB Straubel space in the pages of WSJ to run a PR campaign for his company.
[+] [-] neonate|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xoxoy|5 years ago|reply
will need to dig around but recall seeing a screenshot of either an analyst call or archived page that suggested someone let it slip this was a Tesla subsidiary and not a completely unrelated entity.
[+] [-] ianai|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] monadic2|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] afrojack123|5 years ago|reply
Get the word out. Batteries are bad hydrogen is good. Current hydrogen gas will have more energy than batteries at peak technology growth. This matters because hydrogen cars are cheaper, more scalable, and more inclusive than battery cars. Rich people get battery cars, you get a battery bike.
[+] [-] Robotbeat|5 years ago|reply
Compare two vehicles of the same overall type. A Toyota Mirai, one of the only hydrogen cars available, with a Long-Range Model 3.
Msrp: $58,550 for the Mirai, $46,990 for the LR Model 3.
Range: 312 miles for the Mirai, 322 for Model 3 LR.
Curb weight (!): 4075lbs for the Mirai, 4072lbs for the Model 3 LR.
Top speed, 0-60mph: 111mph and 9s for the Mirai; 145mph and 4.4s Model 3 LR
Cost per mile: $0.33 per mile for Toyota Mirai in LA https://www.toyotasantamonica.com/toyota-mirai-faqs/#:~:text....
About $0.05 per mile for the Tesla Model 3 LR (19 cents per kWh in LA for households average, ~4 miles per kWh) for home charging and $0.07 per mile for Model 3 LR with Supercharging (about 28 cents per kWh).
Battery-electric cars are basically cheaper and more convenient and more efficient and better in virtually every single way. (Even lighter for more range, which I was surprised at.)
[+] [-] kolinko|5 years ago|reply
It ignores both the cost and environmental damage of each energy source.
If we discover a way to extract energy from little kittens more efficiently than from oil, according to you we should start building kitten farms for fuel. This is absurd :)
[+] [-] nickik|5 years ago|reply
There is basically no infrastructure either. Additionally hydrogen infrastructure is incredibly expensive to deploy and to keep running. Using the already existing power infrastructure is just so much smarter its not even close.
Add to all that that nobody has ever produced fuel cells at that scale at anywhere the price you would need. It also contains lots of expensive metals that would make scaling to millions of cars very challenging. Compared to batteries that consists of lithium, nikel, graphite and silicon, with maybe some cobalt but that will be gone soon. All easily available materials that can scale.
Any automaker that is still perusing fuel cells will be dealt harsh kicks by the market over and over again. At least they can keep sucking in government money to continue development, instead the government funding sulfer-lithium batteries that have way more potential.
[+] [-] imtringued|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kolinko|5 years ago|reply
Also, hydrogen has how much - 60% energy loss?