Rechargeable and Non-Recahrgeable batteries comparison

From UBC Wiki

Project

  • Rechargeable battery vs. non-rechargeable battery (same brand) vs. another brand of rechargeable battery
  • Team members: Andrey Abushakhmanov, Asli Tuncer, M.Berke Karadayi, Yousef Mohamed
  • VE2, Team 5

Abstract

The battery is a device in electricity and electrochemistry that converts chemical energy into electrical energy [1]. Batteries can be used for powering electrical devices such as controllers, maintenance tools, weight scales. The main objective of the research is investigating the batteries in terms of rechargeable battery (Duracell) vs. non-rechargeable battery (Duracell) vs. another brand of rechargeable battery (Energizer). The analysis is divided into three sections and these are social, environmental and economic aspects. Survey and literature studies were one of the analysis techniques that helped the research. The most sustainable type of battery, according to the result of the WDM, is Duracell Rechargeable what coincides with the respondent's opinion, based on the survey results. This shows that the public chooses the best option and cares about the environment and their wallets.  

Introduction

Batteries are used to convert chemical energy into electrical energy and store energy when needed. As society progressed, rechargeable batteries were increasingly being used in laptops, phones, and other electronic devices. Non-rechargeable batteries are used in low energy consuming applications such as alarms. Non-rechargeable batteries are generally of higher capacity and easily accessible. There are always pros and cons of the variety of batteries available. The first thing to consider is its application when purchasing the most suitable battery for any device [1].

Social Aspect

List of indicators for social aspect:

-Quality of Life

-Practicality

-Safety

The survey was conducted and approximately 40 respondents attended the survey and they were mostly UBC students and their parents who are highly educated people.

Question 1 Survey.png

Figure 1: Question 1

Question 2 Survey.png

Figure 2: Question 2

Question 3 Survey.png

Figure 3: Question 3

Question 4 Survey.png

Figure 4: Question 4

Question 5 Survey.jpg

Figure 5: Question 5

Practicality is the most important indicator, and safety and quality of life are equal to each other for buying batteries. As practicality is the most important thing, there is a comparison between the different brands of rechargeable and non-rechargeable batteries. Duracell rechargeable batteries are more practical than Duracell non-rechargeable batteries. The other indicator was the safety and responses thought that Duracell rechargeable batteries are safer than non-rechargeable batteries. As can be seen, Duracell rechargeable batteries are more sustainable than non-rechargeable from the perspective of 2 indicators. Then, there is a comparison between rechargeable vs. non-rechargeable (same brand) vs. another brand of rechargeable batteries in terms of price. The survey shows that Energizer and Duracell rechargeable batteries can save the money and also are better than non-rechargeable batteries, according to the results.

Indicators Weight Duracell rechargeable battery Duracell non-rechargeable battery Energizer rechargeable battery
Quality of life 20% 2 4 2
Practicality 50% 4 2 3
Safety 30% 3 1 2
Total points 100% 3.3 2.1 2.5

Table 1: WDM of Social aspect

Order of preferred battery (Social Aspect)

1) Duracell rechargeable battery -- 2) Energizer rechargeable battery-- 3) Duracell non-rechargeable battery

On a group discussion, we reached an agreement that safety is a more important indicator than quality of life for a battery.

As can be seen in the WDM, the Duracell rechargeable battery has more overall points than other batteries with consideration to social aspects.

Environmental Aspect

Figure 6. Potential impact on the environment of disposal batteries compared to rechargeable ones (in times) [2].

List of indicators for environmental aspect:

-Toxicity

-Recyclability

-Resources used for production

Figure 6 shows how many times rechargeable batteries are less harmful to the environment and its different fields compared to the disposal ones. As can be seen, the biggest impact is on the air pollution and global warming. However, all benefits and smaller potential impacts can only be obtained by using the rechargeable batteries about 50 times [2].

Figure 7. Amount of carbon dioxide emitted by production and transportation of raw materials of different types of reachable batteries [5].

According to the Uniross research on the South Africa recycling market, it was found that discarding disposal batteries into general household refuse creates approximately 2.5 million kilograms of harmful toxic chemical per year [4]. Proper recycling process and using rechargeable batteries can reduce the numbers by 90%.

Figure 7 illustrates the life cycle of carbon dioxide (CO2) emission associated with rechargeable batteries. As can be seen, Ni-Cd batteries emit more than other types of batteries by both production and transportation.

The life-cycle CO2 emissions from Li-Ion Polymer batteries are derived from operational or production and upstream emissions in approximately equal measures. In contrast, for Ni–Cd and ZEBRA batteries the vast majority of life-cycle CO2 emissions arise during the processing of the raw materials. During this process phase, the main CO2 emissions emanate from the amount of energy used and the chemical reactions during the refining of the ores. After the ores have been ‘beneficiated’ at the mine, the main stages of processing are smelting and refining. Smelting removes the metal from its ore, whilst refining converts the metal oxide product of roasting to commercially pure metal [5].

Indicators Weight Duracell rechargeable battery Duracell non-rechargeable battery Energizer rechargeable battery
Toxicity 35% 3 1 3
Recyclability 40% 3 1 3
Resources used 25% 3 1 3
Total points 100% 3 1 3

Table 2: WDM of Environmental Aspect


On a group discussion, we reached an agreement that all the indicators are important. However, recyclability is the most important indicator and toxicity comes after with small percentage differences between each indicator.

In a nutshell, rechargeable batteries have the same points as they are made of similar materials. The debate in the environmental aspect will be between rechargeable and non-rechargeable batteries.

Economic Aspect

List of indicators for economic aspect:

-Cost

-Lifespan

Figure 8. Price producing for different types of rechargeable and non-rechargeable batteries.

Primary batteries with high specific energy, long storage times and remote transport, instant readiness, readily available and environmentally friendly, are more advantageous than other power sources. They are practical for occasional power draw applications, but become expensive with constant use. Price is a further issue when the packs are replaced after each mission, regardless of length of use. Discarding partially used batteries is common, especially in fleet applications and critical missions as it is convenient to simply issue fresh packs with each assignment rather than estimating the usage.   

The economic differences between disposable and reusable batteries provide a clear parallel to the environmental differences. Rechargeable batteries are less expensive, but only if they are used regularly.

The lifespan is as important as price what is proved by the survey. Table 3 represents the lifespan for both rechargeable and non-rechargeable batteries. As can be seen, the lifespan of the non-rechargeable batteries is longer, however, they cannot be used many times so that is why they can handle a smaller number of energies in total what indicates their potential inefficiency compared to rechargeable batteries.

Type Lifespan Cycle Life
Alkaline 5-10 Years None
Carbon Zinc 3-5 Years None
Lithium Non-Rechargeable 10-12 Years None
Nickel Cadmium 1.5-3 Years 1,000 +
Nickel Metal Hydride 3-5 Years 700-1,000
Lithium Rechargeable 2-4 Years 600-1,000

Table 3. Lifespan and cycle life of different types of rechargeable and non-rechargeable batteries [6].


Indicators Weight Duracell rechargeable battery Duracell non-rechargeable battery Energizer rechargeable battery
Cost 50% 5 1 4
Lifespan 50% 2 4 2
Total points 100% 3.5 2 3

Table 4: WDM of Economic Aspect

Order of preferred battery (Economic Aspect)

1) Duracell non-rechargeable battery -- 2) Energizer rechargeable battery-- 3) Duracell rechargeable battery

With reference to the survey done on these indicators, according to Figure 5, votes are equally distributed on both indicators what means that they are equally important. In addition, the cost may vary depending on the frequency of the usage of the battery. The points for the cost in WDM are on a single purchase.

In conclusion, Duracell non-rechargeable battery is more economic than both Duracell rechargeable battery and Energizer rechargeable battery.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Aspects Weight Duracell rechargeable battery Duracell non-rechargeable battery Energizer rechargeable battery
Economic 25% 3.5 2 3
Social 40% 3.3 2.1 2.5
Environmental 35% 3 1 3
Total 100% 3.25 1.7 2.8

Table 5: TBL conclusion for Batteries

Order of preferred battery

1) Duracell rechargeable battery -- 2) Energizer rechargeable battery-- 3) Duracell non-rechargeable battery

The analysis revealed that Duracell Rechargeable is the most sustainable type of battery in all social, based on the survey results, economic and environmental aspects. This observation is not surprising, because brand Duracell has proven itself in the technology market worldwide. The results of the research suggest the public to continue to choose this type of battery and care about the environment and their wallet.

Limitations

1.    Insufficient number of responses (39) of the survey that does not show a full-fledged result.

2.    Limited variety of survey respondents (mostly UBC students) who do not represent other groups of potential users of the batteries.

3.    Limited variety of product brands.

4.    Restricted number of times for implementation of the research in deeper fields of aspects.

References

[1] Schumm, B.  “Battery”. Britannica. 5 March 2021 [Online] Available: https://www.britannica.com/technology/battery-electronics

[2]  “Which battery is better: Rechargeable or disposable?”, Yale Climate Connections, 29 November 2016. [Online]. Available: https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2016/11/which-battery-is-better-rechargeable-or-disposable/#:~:text=Rechargeable%20batteries%20can%20be%20better,used%20to%20their%20full%20potential.&text=Charging%20batteries%20requires%20energy%2C%20and,Another%20variable%20is%20human%20behavior.

[3] “Ademe Directive”, Uniross, 2007. [Online]. Available: http://www.uniross.co.za/bio_ademeSurvey.html

[4] “Battery Recycling,” Uniross, 2013. [Online] Available: http://www.uniross.co.za/recycling.html

[5] G. Hammond, & T. Hazeldine, “Indicative energy technology assessment of advanced rechargeable batteries” Science Direct, 4, November, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267870633_Indicative_energy_technology_assessment_of_advanced_rechargeable_batteries

[6] “How long should batteries last?” Battery universe blog. 13 January 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.batteryuniverse.com/blog/tags/lifespan/