Table A2 Challenges of the transitional...

Table A2

Challenges of the transitional period for CLSC processes and the four CLSC configurations

Challenges of transitional period	CLSC processes ^a							CLSC configurations
Challenges of transitional period	BPP	RT	HD	RM/RF	RP	RC	RL	1	2	3	4
Upstream supply chain is located outside the EU (high cost of transport and CO2 emission)	x						x	x	x	x	x
Challenge of dealing with multiple battery types (technology, generations and different suppliers)	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
Challenge of managing technological shifts across generations of batteries	x			x	x	x			x	x	x
Uncertainty of the degree of technology improvement and change in performance	x			x	x	x		x	x	x	x
Key focus of battery technology development on passenger vehicles requires additional effort for heavy-duty vehicles (late adopters of the technology)	x						x	x	x
Risk of low residual value of returned batteries for further recovery				x	x				x	x	x
Absence of the service contract conditions for batteries already installed in vehicles		x		x					x	x
Difficult to develop cost-effective contractual agreements with customers		x							x	x	x
Due to low volume of returned batteries, refurbished or remanufactured batteries might not be readily available for the exchange; the use of new battery modules in recovery processes would lead to higher costs of contractual agreements with customers		x							x	x
High costs of introducing internal HD under low volume of returned batteries			x					x	x	x
Resistance of battery pack suppliers to transfer knowledge and technology for battery disassembling and diagnostics	x		x					x	x
Unstandardized battery design prevents automatization of battery dismantling process and increase the recovery cost			x	x	x	x		x	x	x	x
Lack of operational capacity for transportation, storage and handling of returned batteries			x	x	x		x	x	x	x
Uncertainty about the business model (selling vs. leasing) for batteries for second life applications, demand for repurposed batteries					x					x
Resistance of battery pack suppliers to enable the OEM’s repurposing activities (intention to repurpose own batteries)					x					x
Unclear EOL management and service support (warranty) responsibilities in battery second life between battery pack supplier and the OEM		x			x					x
RC technology needs to adapt to evolving battery technology						x		x	x	x	x
Rapid scale-up of RC facilities leads to requirement for high volumes of returned batteries to justify economic feasibility of the process						x		x	x	x
Rapid scale-up of RC facilities leads to high risk of technology obsolescence						x		x	x	x
Resistance from battery suppliers to share bill of materials due to the fear of battery cell manufacturing by recyclers	x					x
Uncertainty on the OEM’s commitment to RC due to the interest in RF/RM/RP of returned batteries.						x			x	x
Costly transportation of damaged batteries (hazardous wastes) by the third party (logistics providers or recyclers)							x	x	x	x	x
High variance of RL flows due to multiple battery types employed in vehicles increase the costs of RL							x	x	x	x	x
The diverse locations and long distances between current recovery facilities increase the cost of RL							x	x	x	x	x
Few RL providers available at the market leads to high service costs							x	x	x	x	x
Uncertainty of battery return volumes results in unclear RL planning and development (routes, type of trucks, etc.)							x	x	x	x	x
The high cost of RL can constraint economic feasibility of RM/RF/RP				x	x	x			x	x	x

Challenges of transitional period	CLSC processes ^a							CLSC configurations
Challenges of transitional period	BPP	RT	HD	RM/RF	RP	RC	RL	1	2	3	4
Upstream supply chain is located outside the EU (high cost of transport and CO2 emission)	x						x	x	x	x	x
Challenge of dealing with multiple battery types (technology, generations and different suppliers)	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x	x
Challenge of managing technological shifts across generations of batteries	x			x	x	x			x	x	x
Uncertainty of the degree of technology improvement and change in performance	x			x	x	x		x	x	x	x
Key focus of battery technology development on passenger vehicles requires additional effort for heavy-duty vehicles (late adopters of the technology)	x						x	x	x
Risk of low residual value of returned batteries for further recovery				x	x				x	x	x
Absence of the service contract conditions for batteries already installed in vehicles		x		x					x	x
Difficult to develop cost-effective contractual agreements with customers		x							x	x	x
Due to low volume of returned batteries, refurbished or remanufactured batteries might not be readily available for the exchange; the use of new battery modules in recovery processes would lead to higher costs of contractual agreements with customers		x							x	x
High costs of introducing internal HD under low volume of returned batteries			x					x	x	x
Resistance of battery pack suppliers to transfer knowledge and technology for battery disassembling and diagnostics	x		x					x	x
Unstandardized battery design prevents automatization of battery dismantling process and increase the recovery cost			x	x	x	x		x	x	x	x
Lack of operational capacity for transportation, storage and handling of returned batteries			x	x	x		x	x	x	x
Uncertainty about the business model (selling vs. leasing) for batteries for second life applications, demand for repurposed batteries					x					x
Resistance of battery pack suppliers to enable the OEM’s repurposing activities (intention to repurpose own batteries)					x					x
Unclear EOL management and service support (warranty) responsibilities in battery second life between battery pack supplier and the OEM		x			x					x
RC technology needs to adapt to evolving battery technology						x		x	x	x	x
Rapid scale-up of RC facilities leads to requirement for high volumes of returned batteries to justify economic feasibility of the process						x		x	x	x
Rapid scale-up of RC facilities leads to high risk of technology obsolescence						x		x	x	x
Resistance from battery suppliers to share bill of materials due to the fear of battery cell manufacturing by recyclers	x					x
Uncertainty on the OEM’s commitment to RC due to the interest in RF/RM/RP of returned batteries.						x			x	x
Costly transportation of damaged batteries (hazardous wastes) by the third party (logistics providers or recyclers)							x	x	x	x	x
High variance of RL flows due to multiple battery types employed in vehicles increase the costs of RL							x	x	x	x	x
The diverse locations and long distances between current recovery facilities increase the cost of RL							x	x	x	x	x
Few RL providers available at the market leads to high service costs							x	x	x	x	x
Uncertainty of battery return volumes results in unclear RL planning and development (routes, type of trucks, etc.)							x	x	x	x	x
The high cost of RL can constraint economic feasibility of RM/RF/RP				x	x	x			x	x	x

Note(s): ^aBPP = Battery purchasing & production; RT= Return of EOL batteries; HD= Health diagnostics; RM = Remanufacturing; RF= Refurbishment; RP= Repurposing; RC= Recycling; RL= Reverse logistics

Source(s): Authors’ own work

[ViewLarge]

Sharing Unavailable