鋰離子電池回收市場（按電池來源、電池化學、回收製程、可回收組件和最終用途分類）－全球預測，2025-2032

預計到 2032 年，鋰離子電池回收市場將成長至 452.1 億美元，複合年成長率為 19.26%。

策略入門顯示鋰離子電池回收是供應鏈彈性、永續性和產業競爭力的關鍵能力

鋰離子電池回收已從一個小眾環境問題發展成為製造商、政策制定者和基礎設施營運商的戰略支柱。隨著電動車、可攜式電子設備和電網級儲能規模的擴大，鋰離子電池的報廢管理已成為一項緊迫的營運和監管挑戰。本報告首先將回收定位為建構富有彈性和競爭力的電池供應鏈的重要組成部分，並解釋了為何閉合迴路思維對於原料安全、排放和成本控制至關重要。

引言部分強調了收集物流、材料回收技術和監管獎勵的進步如何使回收不僅成為環境責任，更成為一項策略價值來源。引言部分強調了技術成熟度與制度獎勵之間的相互作用，並解釋了價值鏈上的相關人員（原始設備製造商、回收商、材料精煉商和下游製造商）如何調整其商業模式以獲取回收材料的價值。引言也將回收置於更廣泛的循環經濟目標和企業責任框架中，展示有效的回收計畫如何增強企業對大宗商品價格波動和地緣政治供應中斷的抵禦能力。

最後，引言概述了以下章節探討的關鍵主題：回收過程中的技術差異化、細分主導的需求動態、區域政策促進因素以及針對商業和公共部門相關人員的戰術性建議，使讀者能夠將回收不僅僅視為一個合規問題，而是一種具有可衡量的營運、環境和聲譽回報的戰略能力。

深入探討加速鋰離子電池回收系統轉型的技術、法規與商業性曲折點

該產業正在經歷變革時期，這場變革正在重塑相關人員處理報廢電池管理的方式，而這種轉變正受到技術、政策和商業策略的推動。技術創新正在拓展回收途徑：濕式冶金製程正在提高關鍵金屬的選擇性回收率，同時降低能源強度；機械製程則使異質電池組的預處理更加自動化和安全。同時，旨在保留正極材料結構的新型直接回收技術正日益受到關注，成為提高價值回收率和降低下游精煉要求的手段。

不斷變化的政策法規也是一個重要的曲折點。各國政府擴大設定更高的回收目標、生產者責任義務和材料可追溯性要求，以形成關鍵礦物的閉迴路。這些政策發展正在推動對本地回收基礎設施的投資，增強國內加工能力，並重組原始設備製造商和回收商之間的商業合約。同時，商業模式正在從一次性材料回收轉向包括回收設計、電池模組再製造和合約回收保障在內的一體化生命週期夥伴關係。

市場動態也在改變競爭動態。汽車製造商和電池製造商對回收能力的垂直整合，模糊了回收商和材料供應商之間的界限，而專業技術公司則透過專有的回收化學和製程效率實現差異化。同時，投資者對循環技術的興趣正在加速向大型設施和早期創新項目注入資金。總而言之，這些力量標誌著回收從探索性試點轉向策略性資本化，成為一項核心產業活動，這將對資產配置、人才策略和跨部門合作產生影響。

近期關稅和貿易政策調整如何改變電池回收生態系統中的跨境材料流動、資本配置和商業策略

2025年前後實施的關稅和貿易政策調整的累積效應為國際電池材料流動和整體循環經濟注入了新的動態。針對電池組件和關鍵原料的關稅增加了在岸加工的獎勵，並促使產業參與者重新評估跨境供應協議。因此，主要企業正在權衡海外加工的成本效益與國內回收能力的策略優勢，前者可以縮短前置作業時間，減少貿易摩擦的影響。

這些政策轉變也推動了整個回收價值鏈的營運變革。物流策略正在重新設計，優先考慮受關稅波動影響較小的區域材料收集中心，商業合約也在不斷更新，以確保在不斷變化的關稅制度下獲得長期材料供應。因此，回收設施的資金籌措模式通常包含政策風險評估和基於情境的回報，以反映潛在的關稅上調或下調。這些重新調整正在影響投資時間表和新加工設施的地理位置。

此外，關稅環境也影響夥伴關係與併購活動。相關人員正在尋求與本地企業建立更緊密的合作，建立合資企業以將跨境風險內部化，並建立策略聯盟以獲得合規的供應來源。這些轉變正在改變回收材料和最終前驅產品的國際貿易格局，激勵企業採取結構性應對措施，將監管合規性與商業性韌性和長期資源策略相結合。

細分主導的分析將電池來源、化學性質、回收過程、可回收組件和最終用途要求聯繫起來，為戰略性回收決策提供資訊

理解市場需要具備細分意識，能夠反映定義回收需求的各種來源、化學成分、製程、組件和最終用途。根據電池來源，細分市場包括消費性電子電池，例如筆記型電腦和智慧型手機電池，這些電池具有小組裝流程，回收複雜度高；工業電池，包括能源儲存系統和重型設備，具有更大、更均質的電池組，適合批量處理；以及手動變速箱車輛電池，這些電池在回收規劃中引入了傳統化學和基礎設施方面的考慮。區分這些來源非常重要，因為回收物流、報廢健康和預處理要求差異很大，會影響技術選擇和商業合約設計。

目錄

第1章：前言

第2章調查方法

第3章執行摘要

第4章 市場概況

第5章 市場洞察

• 擴大汽車製造商和電池回收商之間的封閉回路型回收夥伴關係，以確保原料的永續
• 直接回收技術的進步使得陰極材料只需經過最少的化學處理即可回收
• 使用機器人和人工智慧視覺的模組化電池拆卸系統的成長，以提高分類效率
• 電池到電網二次利用項目的出現，將再利用的電池整合到可再生能源儲存網路中
• 在主要電動車市場制定標準化的電池收集和標籤規例，以簡化回收流程
• 國內供應鏈安全措施和電動車強制規定推動本地回收設施投資激增
• 採用新型超臨界流體萃取方法減少鋰離子電池回收中的化學廢棄物

第6章：2025年美國關稅的累積影響

第7章：人工智慧的累積影響，2025年

第 8 章：鋰離子電池回收市場電池來源

• 家電電池
  • 筆記型電腦電池
  • 智慧型手機電池
• 工業電池
  • 能源儲存系統
  • 重型機械
• 手動車輛電池

9. 鋰離子電池回收市場 電池化學

• 鈷酸鋰
• 磷酸鋰鐵
• 錳酸鋰
• 鋰鎳鈷鋁氧化物
• 鋰鎳錳鈷

第 10 章鋰離子電池回收市場（依回收流程）

• 濕式冶金工藝
• 機械加工
• 火法冶金工藝

第 11 章鋰離子電池回收市場中的可回收組件

• 負極材料
• 正極材料
• 電解質

第 12 章：鋰離子電池回收市場（依最終用途）

• 車
• 電子和電氣
• 產業

第13章鋰離子電池回收市場（按地區）

• 美洲
  • 北美洲
  • 拉丁美洲
• 歐洲、中東和非洲
  • 歐洲
  • 中東
  • 非洲
• 亞太地區

第14章鋰離子電池回收市場（依類別）

• ASEAN
• GCC
• EU
• BRICS
• G7
• NATO

第15章 各國鋰離子電池回收市場

• 美國
• 加拿大
• 墨西哥
• 巴西
• 英國
• 德國
• 法國
• 俄羅斯
• 義大利
• 西班牙
• 中國
• 印度
• 日本
• 澳洲
• 韓國

第16章競爭格局

• 2024年市佔率分析
• 2024年FPNV定位矩陣
• 競爭分析
  • ACCUREC-Recycling GmbH
  • Akkuser Oy
  • American Battery Technology Company by Komatsu Ltd.
  • Aqua Metals, Inc.
  • Attero Recycling Pvt. Ltd.
  • Batrec Industrie AG
  • Battery Recyclers of America
  • Call2Recycle, Inc.
  • Cirba Solutions US, Inc
  • Contemporary Amperex Technology Co., Limited
  • Duesenfeld GmbH
  • Ecobat, LLC
  • Envirostream Australia Pty Ltd. by Lithium Australia NL
  • Fortum Corporation
  • Ganfeng Lithium Group Co., Ltd.
  • GEM Co., Ltd.
  • Li-Cycle Corp.
  • Lithion Technologies
  • Neometals Ltd.
  • OnTo Technology LLC
  • RecycLiCo Battery Materials Inc.
  • SMCI Group
  • Snam SpA
  • Stena Metall Group
  • SUEZ Group
  • Sumitomo Corporation
  • Suny Group
  • take-e-way GmbH
  • Tata Group
  • Umicore NV

The Lithium-ion Battery Recycling Market is projected to grow by USD 45.21 billion at a CAGR of 19.26% by 2032.

A strategic primer that frames lithium-ion battery recycling as an essential capability for supply chain resilience, sustainability, and industrial competitiveness

The lithium-ion battery recycling landscape has evolved from a niche environmental initiative into a strategic pillar for manufacturers, policymakers, and infrastructure operators. As electric mobility, portable electronics, and grid-scale energy storage have scaled, the end-of-life management of lithium-ion cells has become a pressing operational and regulatory challenge. This report opens by framing recycling as an integral part of a resilient and competitive battery supply chain, clarifying why closed-loop thinking matters for raw material security, emissions reduction, and cost containment.

Throughout the introduction, the narrative emphasizes how advances in collection logistics, material recovery technologies, and regulatory incentives are converging to make recycling not only an environmental imperative but also a source of strategic value. The introduction highlights the interplay between technological maturity and institutional incentives, explaining how actors across the value chain-OEMs, recyclers, material refiners, and downstream manufacturers-must align commercial models to capture recovered material value. It also situates recycling within broader circular economy goals and corporate responsibility frameworks, demonstrating how effective recycling programs strengthen resilience against commodity price volatility and geopolitical supply disruptions.

Finally, the introduction outlines the key themes explored in the subsequent sections: technological differentiation in recycling processes, segmentation-driven demand dynamics, regional policy drivers, and tactical recommendations for commercial and public-sector stakeholders. By doing so, it primes the reader to evaluate recycling not as an isolated compliance task but as a strategic capability with measurable operational, environmental, and reputational returns

An in-depth view of the technological, regulatory, and commercial inflection points that are accelerating the transformation of lithium-ion battery recycling systems

The industry is undergoing transformative shifts that are reshaping how stakeholders approach end-of-life battery management, and these shifts are driven by technology, policy, and commercial strategy. Technological innovation is broadening the palette of recovery pathways: hydrometallurgical processes are reducing energy intensity while improving selective recovery of critical metals; mechanical processes are becoming more automated and safer for pre-processing heterogeneous packs; and pyrometallurgical routes continue to be used where robustness and throughput are paramount. In parallel, emerging direct recycling techniques that aim to preserve cathode material structure are attracting attention as a means to improve value recovery and reduce downstream refining requirements.

Policy and regulatory evolution is another major inflection point. Governments are increasingly setting higher collection targets, producer responsibility obligations, and material traceability requirements to close the loop on critical minerals. These policy moves are incentivizing investments in local recycling infrastructure, enhancing domestic processing capabilities, and reshaping commercial agreements between OEMs and recyclers. At the same time, commercial models are shifting from one-off material salvage to integrated lifecycle partnerships that include design-for-recycling, remanufacturing of battery modules, and contractual recovery guarantees.

Market-making forces are also altering competitive dynamics. Vertical integration by vehicle manufacturers and battery producers into recycling capabilities is blurring the line between recycler and material supplier, while specialized technology firms are differentiating through proprietary recovery chemistries and process efficiencies. Meanwhile, investor interest in circular technologies is accelerating capital deployment into both scale-oriented facilities and early-stage innovation. Taken together, these forces signal a transition from exploratory pilots to strategic capitalization of recycling as a core industrial activity, with implications for asset allocation, talent strategy, and cross-sector collaboration

How recent tariff measures and trade policy adjustments have reshaped cross-border material flows, capital allocation, and operational strategies in the battery recycling ecosystem

The cumulative impact of tariff actions and trade policy adjustments implemented in and around 2025 has introduced new dynamics across international battery material flows and recycling economics. Tariff measures targeting battery components and critical raw materials have amplified incentives for onshore processing and encouraged industry participants to re-evaluate cross-border supply agreements. As a result, companies are increasingly weighing the trade-offs between cost advantages of offshore processing and the strategic benefits of domestic recycling capabilities that offer shorter lead times and reduced exposure to trade frictions.

These policy shifts have also prompted operational changes across the recycling value chain. Logistics strategies are being redesigned to prioritize regional feedstock aggregation hubs that reduce exposure to tariff volatility, and commercial contracts are being updated to secure long-term feedstock availability under changing tariff regimes. In turn, financing models for recycling facilities now more frequently incorporate policy risk assessments and scenario-based returns that reflect potential tariff escalations or relaxations. This recalibration is shaping investment timelines and the geographic placement of new processing assets.

Moreover, the tariff environment is influencing partnerships and M&A activity. Stakeholders are exploring closer cooperation with local players, joint ventures that internalize cross-border risks, and strategic alliances that provide access to compliant supply streams. These shifts are altering the calculus of international trade for recovered materials and finished precursor products, motivating a structural response that blends regulatory compliance with commercial resilience and long-term resource strategy

A segmentation-driven analysis that connects battery source, chemistry, recycling processes, recoverable components, and end-use requirements to inform strategic recycling decisions

Understanding the market requires a segmentation-aware lens that reflects the diverse sources, chemistries, processes, components, and end-uses that define recycling demand. Based on battery source, the landscape encompasses Consumer Electronics Batteries-where laptop batteries and smartphone batteries present small-form-factor streams with high collection complexity-Industrial Batteries that include energy storage systems and heavy machinery with larger, more homogeneous packs suitable for bulk processing, and Manual Vehicle Batteries that introduce legacy chemistries and infrastructure considerations into recovery planning. These source distinctions matter because collection logistics, state-of-health at end of life, and pre-processing requirements vary significantly across them, influencing technology choice and commercial contract design.

Based on battery chemistry, the market is segmented across lithium cobalt oxide, lithium iron phosphate, lithium manganese oxide, lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide, and lithium nickel manganese cobalt. Each chemistry has distinct value drivers and recovery challenges: some chemistries prioritize high nickel or cobalt content that commands focused recovery pathways, while others emphasize iron-based compositions that demand different hydrometallurgical approaches. Process selection is therefore tightly coupled to chemistry composition and expected material value.

Based on recycling process, the principal pathways are hydrometallurgical, mechanical, and pyrometallurgical processes. Hydrometallurgy is increasingly used for selective recovery and lower-temperature operations, mechanical pre-processing enables safer and more precise disassembly of complex packs, and pyrometallurgy provides throughput and robustness for mixed feedstocks. Based on recyclable components, recovery efforts target anode materials, cathode materials, and electrolytes, each of which requires tailored handling and refining approaches to preserve contained value. Finally, based on end-use, recycled materials feed back into automotive, electronics & electrical, and industrial markets, with each end-use imposing different purity, certification, and form-factor requirements that influence the economics of material recovery and qualification

A regional synthesis of policy, industrial capability, and infrastructure trends across the Americas, Europe Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific that influence recycling strategy

Regional dynamics shape both the pace and the modality of recycling adoption, with policy frameworks, industrial ecosystems, and demand centers diverging across geographies. In the Americas, the policy conversation emphasizes domestic capacity building, incentives for reshoring critical material processing, and collaboration between vehicle manufacturers and recyclers to internalize circularity. This region shows strong interest in integrating recycling into industrial strategy as a hedge against global supply disruptions and as a mechanism to meet corporate sustainability commitments.

In Europe, Middle East & Africa, regulatory frameworks are tightening around producer responsibility, traceability, and emissions associated with recycling processes. Europe in particular is pursuing harmonized standards and certification regimes that influence cross-border movement of end-of-life batteries and recovered materials, encouraging investment in compliant regional processing facilities. Meanwhile, parts of the Middle East and Africa are focusing on developing feedstock aggregation and export strategies while evaluating local processing options as downstream demand evolves.

In the Asia-Pacific region, high concentrations of battery manufacturing and raw material refining create an integrated ecosystem with both advantages and vulnerabilities. While established manufacturing hubs offer economies of scale for processing and refining, concentrated supply chains can be exposed to geopolitical and trade-policy shifts. Across all regions, the interplay between public policy, private investment, and infrastructure development determines where recycling capacity is sited, how feedstock is aggregated, and the extent to which recovered materials can be qualified for reuse in high-value applications

An assessment of company-level strategies showing how vertical integration, specialized technology leadership, and downstream partnerships are redefining competitive advantage in recycling

Key company dynamics within the recycling sector are defined by a mix of vertically integrated industrial players, technology-focused innovators, and large downstream consumers seeking secure material streams. Vertically integrated firms are pursuing end-to-end models that link collection, material recovery, and feedstock supply to cell and component manufacturers, enabling tighter control over quality and traceability. Technology-focused firms differentiate through proprietary recovery chemistries, advanced sorting and automation capabilities, and process innovations that enhance yields or reduce environmental footprint. Their competitive advantage often rests on the ability to scale pilot processes into reliable, regulated industrial operations.

At the same time, OEMs and large industrial end-users are forming strategic partnerships with recyclers to lock in circular supply chains and to co-develop qualification pathways for recovered materials. Financial sponsors and industrial investors are increasingly involved, bringing capital for facility build-outs and commercial deployments while also emphasizing governance, compliance, and performance metrics. Collectively, these company-level strategies reflect a maturing market where quality, traceability, and scalable operations are key differentiators. Firms that can demonstrate robust safety protocols, cost-effective logistics, and verifiable material provenance are positioned to capture long-term contracts and to support industrial users seeking to meet sustainability and security objectives

Actionable strategic moves for executives to build flexible processing capacity, formalize cross-sector partnerships, and embed policy scenario planning into investment decisions

Industry leaders must act decisively to translate policy signals and technological opportunity into durable competitive positions. First, companies should prioritize investments in modular processing capacity that allow for flexible handling of diverse feedstocks and enable iterative scaling as regulatory and commercial conditions evolve. Parallel to capacity investments, organizations should invest in design-for-recycling practices and supplier engagement to improve material recoverability and to reduce downstream sorting burdens. This combination of upstream design changes and downstream processing flexibility reduces overall cost-to-recycle and improves recovered material quality.

Second, firms should pursue multi-stakeholder partnerships that align OEMs, recyclers, refiners, and regulators around certification, traceability, and quality standards. Collaborative initiatives that standardize material passports and qualification protocols accelerate reuse pathways and lower market friction for recovered cathode and anode materials. Third, companies should integrate trade and policy scenario planning into capital allocation and supply-chain design to mitigate tariff exposures and to identify regional hubs that balance cost efficiency with regulatory compliance. Lastly, leadership teams must embed rigorous safety and environmental performance metrics into operational KPIs, demonstrating compliance while unlocking reputational and commercial benefits. These actions collectively position industry players to capture strategic value from recycling as the circular transition deepens

A transparent, multi-method research design combining interviews, technical validation, policy analysis, and supply-chain mapping to ensure robust and actionable insights

The research methodology underpinning this analysis uses a multi-disciplinary approach combining technology assessment, policy review, stakeholder interviews, and supply-chain mapping. Primary qualitative inputs were gathered through interviews with battery lifecycle operators, material refiners, technology providers, and procurement leaders across manufacturing and utilities sectors to surface operational constraints, technology adoption barriers, and partnership models. These insights were triangulated with public regulatory documents, technical whitepapers, and verified company disclosures to ensure accuracy and to capture emerging policy and commercial trends.

Technical evaluation of recycling pathways drew on process-level literature, pilot program reports, and independent lab validations to compare energy intensity, recovery specificity, and scalability of hydrometallurgical, mechanical, and pyrometallurgical approaches. Regional assessments combined policy scanning with industrial asset mapping to identify where collection networks, logistics hubs, and processing capacity align. The methodology emphasizes cross-validation: assertions were tested against multiple sources and grounded in documented operational practices, while scenario analysis explored the implications of policy shifts, tariff changes, and technology maturation. This layered approach ensures a balanced view that integrates empirical observation with forward-looking analysis

A conclusive synthesis emphasizing how integrated strategies across technology, policy engagement, and partnerships will determine leadership in the recycling-driven circular economy

In conclusion, lithium-ion battery recycling has moved from experimental programs to a strategic industrial agenda that intersects sustainability, supply-chain security, and commercial opportunity. Technological advances in recovery processes, coupled with evolving regulatory frameworks and shifting trade dynamics, are creating both challenges and openings for stakeholders across the value chain. Companies that adopt integrative strategies-combining design-for-recycling, flexible processing capabilities, and strategic partnerships-will be better positioned to capture the operational and reputational benefits of circular material flows.

As the market matures, success will be determined by an ability to operationalize traceability, to qualify recovered materials for high-value reuse, and to align capital deployment with policy and commercial realities. Stakeholders that proactively engage with regulators, standard-setting bodies, and supply-chain partners can accelerate the transition to efficient and verifiable recycling systems. Ultimately, recycling will be judged not only by its environmental outcomes but also by its capacity to deliver resilient supply chains and sustained industrial competitiveness

Table of Contents

1. Preface

• 1.1. Objectives of the Study
• 1.2. Market Segmentation & Coverage
• 1.3. Years Considered for the Study
• 1.4. Currency & Pricing
• 1.5. Language
• 1.6. Stakeholders

2. Research Methodology

3. Executive Summary

4. Market Overview

5. Market Insights

• 5.1. Expansion of closed-loop recycling partnerships between automakers and battery recyclers to secure sustainable raw materials
• 5.2. Advances in direct recycling technologies enabling recovery of cathode materials with minimal chemical processing
• 5.3. Growth of modular battery disassembly systems leveraging robotics and AI vision for improved sorting efficiencies
• 5.4. Emergence of battery-to-grid second-life programs integrating repurposed cells into renewable energy storage networks
• 5.5. Development of standardized battery collection and labeling regulations across major EV markets to streamline recycling
• 5.6. Investment surge in local recycling facilities driven by domestic supply chain security initiatives and EV mandates
• 5.7. Adoption of novel supercritical fluid extraction methods to reduce chemical waste in lithium-ion battery recycling

6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025

7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025

8. Lithium-ion Battery Recycling Market, by Battery Source

• 8.1. Consumer Electronics Batteries
  • 8.1.1. Laptop Batteries
  • 8.1.2. Smartphone Batteries
• 8.2. Industrial Batteries
  • 8.2.1. Energy Storage Systems
  • 8.2.2. Heavy Machinery
• 8.3. Manual Vehicle Batteries

9. Lithium-ion Battery Recycling Market, by Battery Chemistry

• 9.1. Lithium Cobalt Oxide
• 9.2. Lithium Iron Phosphate
• 9.3. Lithium Manganese Oxide
• 9.4. Lithium Nickel Cobalt Aluminum Oxide
• 9.5. Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt

10. Lithium-ion Battery Recycling Market, by Recycling Process

• 10.1. Hydrometallurgical Process
• 10.2. Mechanical Process
• 10.3. Pyrometallurgical Process

11. Lithium-ion Battery Recycling Market, by Recyclable Components

• 11.1. Anode Materials
• 11.2. Cathode Materials
• 11.3. Electrolytes

12. Lithium-ion Battery Recycling Market, by End-Use

• 12.1. Automotive
• 12.2. Electronics & Electrical
• 12.3. Industrial

13. Lithium-ion Battery Recycling Market, by Region

• 13.1. Americas
  • 13.1.1. North America
  • 13.1.2. Latin America
• 13.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
  • 13.2.1. Europe
  • 13.2.2. Middle East
  • 13.2.3. Africa
• 13.3. Asia-Pacific

14. Lithium-ion Battery Recycling Market, by Group

• 14.1. ASEAN
• 14.2. GCC
• 14.3. European Union
• 14.4. BRICS
• 14.5. G7
• 14.6. NATO

15. Lithium-ion Battery Recycling Market, by Country

• 15.1. United States
• 15.2. Canada
• 15.3. Mexico
• 15.4. Brazil
• 15.5. United Kingdom
• 15.6. Germany
• 15.7. France
• 15.8. Russia
• 15.9. Italy
• 15.10. Spain
• 15.11. China
• 15.12. India
• 15.13. Japan
• 15.14. Australia
• 15.15. South Korea

16. Competitive Landscape

• 16.1. Market Share Analysis, 2024
• 16.2. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2024
• 16.3. Competitive Analysis
  • 16.3.1. ACCUREC-Recycling GmbH
  • 16.3.2. Akkuser Oy
  • 16.3.3. American Battery Technology Company by Komatsu Ltd.
  • 16.3.4. Aqua Metals, Inc.
  • 16.3.5. Attero Recycling Pvt. Ltd.
  • 16.3.6. Batrec Industrie AG
  • 16.3.7. Battery Recyclers of America
  • 16.3.8. Call2Recycle, Inc.
  • 16.3.9. Cirba Solutions US, Inc
  • 16.3.10. Contemporary Amperex Technology Co., Limited
  • 16.3.11. Duesenfeld GmbH
  • 16.3.12. Ecobat, LLC
  • 16.3.13. Envirostream Australia Pty Ltd. by Lithium Australia NL
  • 16.3.14. Fortum Corporation
  • 16.3.15. Ganfeng Lithium Group Co., Ltd.
  • 16.3.16. GEM Co., Ltd.
  • 16.3.17. Li-Cycle Corp.
  • 16.3.18. Lithion Technologies
  • 16.3.19. Neometals Ltd.
  • 16.3.20. OnTo Technology LLC
  • 16.3.21. RecycLiCo Battery Materials Inc.
  • 16.3.22. SMCI Group
  • 16.3.23. Snam S.p.A.
  • 16.3.24. Stena Metall Group
  • 16.3.25. SUEZ Group
  • 16.3.26. Sumitomo Corporation
  • 16.3.27. Suny Group
  • 16.3.28. take-e-way GmbH
  • 16.3.29. Tata Group
  • 16.3.30. Umicore N.V.