Recycling & Circularity Developed 2024 · C11 4 min
How Policy Can Advance the Circular Battery Economy for EVs
Building a circular battery economy for EVs depends as much on smart policy as on technology, especially in developing economies balancing tight capital against competing priorities. This case study takes the perspective of a multi-disciplinary government committee tasked with designing a regulatory framework to drive the circularity of electric vehicle batteries, spanning supply-side and demand-side measures, incentives, enforcement, and standardisation.
Why Circularity Matters Now
Transport accounts for about 17 percent of global energy-related greenhouse gas emissions, and falling lithium-ion battery costs have accelerated EV adoption across countries and vehicle types. That shift creates its own waste challenge. EVs sold in 2019 alone will generate around 500,000 tonnes of unprocessed battery pack waste at end of life. Volumes reaching end of first life stay modest to 2030, near 100 gigawatt-hours, then grow rapidly to between 450 gigawatt-hours and 1.3 terawatt-hours by 2040, more than 20 percent of new battery requirements that year. Circularity also protects access to critical minerals such as lithium, nickel, cobalt, manganese, copper, and graphite. If all EV batteries were recycled and reused between now and 2050, the need for mining to support the transition could fall by up to 64 percent. Without circularity, the environmental gains of switching to EVs are undermined.
The Roadblocks a Framework Must Address
The committee identifies structural barriers that currently limit reuse and recycling. Battery volumes reaching end of life are still small because battery EVs have only sold widely for five to ten years, which weakens the business case for recycling infrastructure. Battery packs are not designed for easy disassembly, and a lack of manufacturing standards creates ambiguity about specific cell chemistries. There is insufficient data to track batteries and assign responsibility across the value chain. Collection logistics are costly and operationally difficult, and safety adds further complexity. Financial support for technology development lags, as does the development and enforcement of policies that encourage circularity. For a developing economy, these barriers intersect with capital constraints and the need to serve several strategic goals at once, including energy security, environmental protection, job creation, cross-border trade, and building indigenous supply chain capability.
Designing Interventions Across the Life Cycle
The framework applies a full life-cycle view, from design and manufacturing through first life, end of first life, and second life, moving away from the take-make-dispose model. Production is the most energy-intensive stage, while the use phase dominates overall environmental impact. A battery's first life in a vehicle typically runs five to ten years, with gradual capacity loss, after which many packs retain enough capacity for second-life applications such as stationary storage. Effective policy therefore has to act at multiple points: encouraging designs that are easier to disassemble, mandating traceability so batteries can be tracked and responsibilities assigned, standardising chemistries and data, and combining financial and non-financial incentives with credible enforcement. Priority interventions should be measurable, judged by expected increases in recycling rates, the penetration of second-life products, or cost savings, so the committee can tell whether a regulation is working rather than assuming it is.
What It Means for the Industry
The distinctive contribution of this case is the policymaker's lens. Policymakers do little physical work in the circular ecosystem, yet they are the enablers who move the whole system in a chosen direction. The framework stresses that public and private roles must be defined clearly: the public sector sets standards, enforcement, and traceability requirements and provides early-stage support, while the private sector invests, innovates, and operates collection and recycling at scale. For developing economies in particular, circularity is not only an environmental measure but a route to energy security and reduced dependence on imported critical minerals. The core message is that a functioning circular battery economy will not emerge on its own; it needs coordinated regulation that spans supply, demand, incentives, and enforcement, timed ahead of the coming surge in end-of-life volumes.
Key Takeaways
Transport contributes about 17 percent of energy-related emissions, and EV growth creates a large end-of-life battery challenge.
End-of-life volumes could reach 450 gigawatt-hours to 1.3 terawatt-hours by 2040, over 20 percent of new battery demand.
Full recycling and reuse could cut mining needs for the EV transition by up to 64 percent by 2050.
Key roadblocks include low current volumes, packs not designed for disassembly, missing standards, and weak traceability.
Priority interventions should be measurable through recycling rates, second-life penetration, or cost savings.
Developing economies gain energy security and critical mineral access alongside environmental benefits.
Clear public and private roles, with the state enabling and the private sector operating at scale, are essential.
Disclaimer: This case study was developed and presented by BatteryMBA participants as part of the Case Study Track. Views, analysis and recommendations are the authors' own. BatteryMBA does not take responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the content and it should not be relied upon as investment, engineering or legal advice.
This is the public summary, the full case study lives inside the programme
Every BatteryMBA cohort runs the Case Study Track: small teams build the full recommendation, backed by a written document and a live presentation, supported by the BatteryMBA team. Full case study documents are not shared outside the programme. programme.