Introduction

Given China’s substantial environmental and energy security constraints, new energy vehicles, especially electric vehicles (EVs), have developed rapidly (Du et al. 2019; Xu et al. 2017). Statistics from the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers (CAAM) show 2019 production and sales of new energy vehicles reached 1.25 and 1.21 million, respectively (Wu et al. 2020). According to the “Road Map of Energy Conservation and New Energy Vehicle Technology” released by China Society of Automotive Engineers (CSAE), the annual sales of EVs in China is expected to exceed 15.2 million by 2030 (CSAE 2016).

Battery technology is key to the development of EVs. The steady growth of EVs benefits from the reduction of the manufacturing cost of electric vehicle batteries (EVBs) (Naumanen et al. 2019). At present almost all EV battery technology is based on lithium. Lithium is a geochemically scarce metal in nature. With the popularization of EVs, the demand for lithium in EVB production continues to increase (Prior et al. 2019). China has witnessed the large-scale retirement of EVBs since 2018, and the analysis of secondary use and recycling potential is a topic of wide concern. For example, material flow analysis (MFA) and mathematical methods have been used to estimate and predict EVB retirement amounts (Richa et al. 2014; Ai et al. 2019; He et al. 2019; Song et al. 2016). Other studies to understand secondary use EVB recycling potential have included quantitative analysis of technical feasibility (Xu et al. 2019), environmental feasibility (Yang et al. 2020; Ahmadi et al. 2014), and environmental performance (Pellow et al. 2020; Yu et al. 2014; Wang et al. 2016). Material recycling technology was studied based on composition analysis (Almeida et al. 2019; Zeng and Li 2019). Overall, few studies have focused on the in-use metal stocks in EVBs. In fact, after retiring from EVs, EVBs still have a secondary application potential in energy storage, which increases their lifespan. Secondary use applications clearly impact EVB stocks and flows (Bobba et al. 2019). In China, the stock of EVBs is in a rapid growth period with a large amount of valuable metal stock in the primary and secondary use stages. In general, data of the amount of stock of EVBs in primary use stage can be obtained indirectly based on EV ownership, while the number of EVBs entering the secondary-use stage is difficult to ascertain. Thus, it is necessary to analyze the in-use stock of EVBs and the metals they contain.

Regarding in-use stock, recent research focuses on infrastructure, lead-acid batteries, plastics, and electrical, and electronic products. Guo and Zhang (2017) analyzed the material stock and dynamic changes of island infrastructure. Han and Xiang (2013) discussed the stock of ten types of materials contained in four major infrastructures (residential building, roads, railways, and water pipelines) in China from 1978 to 2008. Liu et al. (2016) studied the evolution of in-use lead stocks in lead-acid batteries by using a bottom-up method, and predicted the demand and supply of lead-acid batteries toward 2030. Eheliyagoda et al. (2019) used the linear regression method to predict stock generation and recycling potential of gallium in China. Finally, a few studies of in-use stock focused on the environmental impact of electrical products (Zhu et al. 2017; Zhuang et al. 2018) and plastics (Ciacci et al. 2017; Jiang et al. 2018; Liu et al. 2020b).

This study used a bottom-up method to estimate China’s EVB in-use metal stocks from 2009 to 2019 to reveal the distribution of metal stocks by cascaded use stage and battery type. By analyzing key parameters such as the market penetration of new energy vehicles and the proportion of different EVB types in the coming years, we predicted the evolutionary characteristics of EVB in-use metal stocks from 2020 to 2030. Combined with recycling potential analysis, the results can support material flow optimization and life cycle management of critical materials in EVBs.

Methods and data

Scope definition

As shown in Fig. 1, the life cycle of EVBs mainly includes production, sales, primary use, secondary use, end-of-life, and material recycling. From an application scenario, EVBs are primarily used in EVs. After retirement, EVBs can be tested, classified, repaired, or reassembled for secondary use in the field of energy storage. The combination of both parts, that is, primary and secondary uses, constitute in-use EVB stocks.

Fig. 1
figure 1

The life cycle of the EVB

Full size image

At present, most EVs in China adopt a lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide battery (NMC) or lithium iron phosphate battery (LFP), while other battery types, such as lithium manganese oxide battery (LMO), are used least frequently (Qiao et al. 2019). All EVB types contain abundant valuable resources(Zeng et al. 2015). Based on the material composition of EVBs and several existing analysis results (Song et al. 2019; Habib et al. 2020), this study focused on the NMC, LFP, and LMO EVB battery types and on nickel, cobalt, manganese, lithium, copper, aluminum, and iron metals. This study aimed to reveal the in-use metal stocks in EVBs in China from 2011 to 2019 and conduct a scenario analysis focused on EVB in-use stocks and their metal content from 2020 to 2030.

Estimation of in-use EVB stocks

The EVB stock in the primary use stage refers to the number of EVBs in use in EVs. This number was represented by the difference between the cumulative sales volume and the cumulative scrap volume of EVs. The method can be expressed as Eq. (1).

$$ {\mathrm{MS}}_{\mathrm{IU}}={Q}_{\mathrm{IU}}-{O}_{\mathrm{CS}} $$
(1)

where MSIU is the in-use stock of EVB used on EVs, QIU is the cumulative sales volume of EVs, and OCS is the cumulative scrap volume of EVs.

The EVB stock in the secondary use stage refers to the number of EVBs used for energy storage after retiring from EVs. We first calculated the number of retired EVBs from EVs entering the secondary use stage and the scrap amount after secondary use was subtracted from it. The method can be expressed as Eq. (2).

$$ {MS}_{CU}={O}_{IU}\cdot {P}_{CU}-{O}_{CU} $$
(2)

where MSCU is the in-use stock of EVB in the secondary use stage, OIU is the retirement amount of EVBs from the primary use stage, OCU is the retirement amount of EVBs from secondary use stage, and PCU refers to the proportion of EVBs retired from the primary use stage and used in a secondary application.

OIU can be calculated by Eq. (3).

$$ {O}_{\mathrm{IU}}=\sum \limits_1^t\sum \limits_{T=1}^{T\max }I\left(t-T\right)\cdot f(T) $$
(3)

where OIU is the cumulative retirement amount of EVBs from the primary-use stage up to year t, I(t − T) is the number of EVBs entering the primary use stage of EVs in (t − T) years, and f(T) refers to the retirement probability of EVBs with the lifetime of T in the primary use stage in a certain year.

Weibull distribution is widely used in reliability analysis and failure prediction and has been used to estimate EVB life distribution in electrical and electronic products (Ai et al. 2019; Habuer et al. 2014; He et al. 2018; Zhuang et al. 2018). Here, a Weibull distribution was used to determine the retirement probability of EVBs in a certain year. The calculation of f(T) can be expressed as Eq. (4).

$$ f(T)=\frac{k}{\lambda}\cdot {\left(\frac{T}{\lambda}\right)}^{k-1}\cdot {e}^{-{\left(\frac{T}{\lambda}\right)}^k} $$
(4)

where k is the shape parameter and λ is the scale parameter, of which the value is related to the EVB lifetime and can be determined by Eqs. (5) and (6).

$$ {\left(\frac{T_{\mathrm{ave}}}{T_{\mathrm{max}}}\right)}^k=\frac{k-1}{k\cdot \ln 100} $$
(5)
$$ \lambda ={T}_{\mathrm{ave}}\cdot {\left(1-\frac{1}{k}\right)}^{-\frac{1}{k}} $$
(6)

where Tave is the average lifetime of EVBs and Tmax corresponds to the time when 99% of the EVBs have been retired. In this study, we assumed that the Tmax is twice the corresponding Tave.

Referring to Eq. (3), the retirement amount of EVBs in the secondary use stage can be calculated according to Eq. (7).

$$ {O}_{\mathrm{CU}}=\sum \limits_1^{t^{\prime }}\sum \limits_{T^{\prime }=1}^{T^{\prime}\max }{I}^{\prime}\left({t}^{\prime }-{T}^{\prime}\right)\cdot f\left({T}^{\prime}\right) $$
(7)

where OCU is the cumulative retirement amount of EVBs in the secondary use stage and f(T′) is the retirement probability of EVBs with the lifetime of T′ in the secondary use stage in that year.

Estimation of in-use metal stocks in EVBs

In order to further estimate the in-use metal stocks in NMC, LFP, and LMO EVBs, this study focused on the seven main metals in the primary and secondary use stages, namely, nickel, cobalt, manganese, lithium, copper, iron, and aluminum. Equation (8) is used to calculate the weight of different types of EVBs.

$$ {\mathrm{MS}}_{{\mathrm{BT}}_i}=\left({\mathrm{MS}}_{\mathrm{BT}{\left(\mathrm{IU}\right)}_i}+{\mathrm{MS}}_{\mathrm{BT}{\left(\mathrm{CU}\right)}_i}\right)\cdot {\overline{W}}_i $$
(8)

where MSBTi is the EVB stock of type I, MSBT(IU)i is the EVB stock of type i in the primary use stage, MSBT(CU)i is the EVB stock of type i in the secondary use stage, and \( {\overline{W}}_i \) is the average weight of a single set of EVBs.

As the metal category and content contained in diverse types of EVBs are different, we developed a metal list based on the composition of different types of EVBs, and further calculated the in-use metal stocks in each type of EVB. The calculation formula is shown in Eq. (9).

$$ {\mathrm{MS}}_{\mathrm{TOTAL}}=\sum \limits_{j=1}^7\sum \limits_{i=1}^3{\mathrm{MS}}_{{\mathrm{MT}}_{ij}}=\sum \limits_{j=1}^7\sum \limits_{i=1}^3{\mathrm{MS}}_{{\mathrm{BT}}_i}\cdot {P}_{{\mathrm{MT}}_{ij}} $$
(9)

where MSTOTAL is the total in-use metal stocks in all types of EVBs, MSMTij is the stock of the metal j contained in the EVB type i, and PMTij is the proportion of the metal j in the EVB type i.

Scenario design

In China’s new energy vehicle market, LFPs were used in EVs before NMCs. LFP has a stable performance and low cost. Recently, NMCs have gradually become the main power battery technology due to their higher energy density. Tesla, who originally adopted the NMC, has entered the Chinese market and adopted LFP in new MODEL 3 (MIIT 2020). In the long run, the LFP and NMC will continue to coexist with their respective advantages. To analyze the evolutionary characteristics of in-use metal stocks in EVBs from 2020 to 2030, we took the current 2019 China EVB market as the baseline scenario. China’s EV growth trend and the technological direction of EVBs were then used to propose the NMC-dominated and LFP-dominated scenarios.

Data collection and sources

Since China’s launch of the 1,000 EVs in 10 Cities Project in 2009, new energy vehicles were piloted in 13 major cities, including Beijing, Wuhan, Chongqing, and Shenzhen, and then were gradually popularized in additional cities. Due to the late start of China’s new energy vehicle market, data related to EVB estimation are scattered. Data sources used in this study mainly include statistical data, research reports, published literature, and survey data. The main data sources are shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Key parameters and data sources of EVBs
Full size table

According to data released by The China Automotive Technology Research Center (CATRC) and The Association of Automobile Manufacturers (CAAM), the sales of EVs in China increased from 4 to 1206 thousand units between 2009 and 2019, as shown in Table 2. Besides, according to the China’s auto sales plan in the “Road Map of Energy Conservation and New Energy Vehicle Technology” relased by CSAE, the market penetration rate of EVs will increase from 7% to 15% from 2020 to 2025 and from 15% to 40% from 2025 to 2030, and annual EV sales will reach 2.1, 5.3, and 15.2 million, respectively.

Table 2 Sales data of EV in China from 2009 to 2019
Full size table

The EVB will no longer be suitable for EVs when its capacity is reduced to 80% of its initial capacity (Wang and Zhao 2015). It is generally believed that an EVB’s service lifetime in an EV is about 3–5 years further varying by EVB type (Gao et al. 2019; Wei et al. 2017). According to “Report on Lithium Battery Recycling Industry 2018” (Xincailiao Online 2018), and published survey data (Wang and Zhao 2015), the average lifetime of NMC, LFP, and LMO batteries are 2–4, 4–6, and 1–3 years, respectively. As shown in Table 3, a Weibull distribution function was used to estimate EVB lifetime distribution.

Table 3 Lifetime distribution of EVBs
Full size table

Before 2011 EVs in China were powered by LFPs with NMCs entering the market in 2012 (Wu et al. 2020). Therefore, baseline values for the NMC, LFP, and LMO batteries were set at 0%, 100%, and 0% between 2009 and 2011, respectively. In the “Report on EVB Industry of New Energy Vehicles in China,” market share data of NMCs and LFPs from 2016 to 2019 were colletecd (CATRC 2019). To account for missing data from 2012 to 2015, a quadratic polynomial fitting was performed to estimate the NMC and LFP market share based on known years. Table 4 details the remaining EVB market share from 2009 to 2019.

Table 4 Market share of different types of EVBs from 2009 to 2019 (%)
Full size table

In the scenario analysis, the market share of various EVBs in 2019 was used as the baseline scenario. In the NMC-dominated scenario, it was established that the market share of NMC will continue to increase with an annual growth rate of 3% from 2020 to 2030. The share of LFP will decrease correspondingly, whereas that of LMO will remain unchanged. In the LFP-dominated scenario, the market share of LMO was set to rise gradually against trend with an annual growth rate of 3%. The share of NMC was correspondingly reduced and the LMO share was unchanged. The market share of various EVBs under the three scenarios is shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Changes in market share of various EVBs under three scenarios: a baseline scenario, b NMC-dominated scenario, and c LFP-dominated scenario

Full size image

For the proportion of EVBs entering the secondary use stage there is a lack of accurate statistics. Based on field investigation and published work (Xiao 2019), it is considered that after an EVB is retired from an EV, about 90% of it can be used for energy storage excluding any incurring physical damage. As for the composition of EVB, the “Report on Recycling Technology and Industrial Development of Retired EVB in China” gathered the data of the metal composition of various EVBs, as shown in Table 5.

Table 5 Metal composition of various EVBs (%)
Full size table

EVs carry different EVB types and shapes. Thus, there are no standardized weight data available for reference. Based on the “Report on Recycling Technology and Industrial Development of Retired EVB in China,” this study combined the market share of different types of EVs and adopted a weighted average method to determine the average weight of the EVB that was 701 kg, as shown in Table 6. This approach was based on the average weight of EVBs following four types of new EVs: plug-in hybrid commercial vehicle (HECV), plug-in hybrid passenger vehicle (HEPC), pure electric passenger vehicle (BEPC), and pure electric commercial vehicle (BECV).

Table 6 Average weight of EVBs
Full size table

Results and discussion

In-use EVB stocks

Figure 3 shows the growth of EVB stocks in China from 2009 to 2019. Since the promotion of EVs in China in 2009, the total in-use stocks of EVBs reached 3.2 kt in 2019 resulting from the in-use stock of NMC, LFP, and LMO at 1.6 Mt, 1.5 Mt, and 0.1 Mt, accounting for 50.0%, 46.9%, and 3.1%, respectively. Analysis of the two use stages found that EVB stock in the primary use stage and secondary use stage was 2.9 Mt and 0.3 Mt, accounting for 90.6% and 9.4%, respectively.

Fig. 3
figure 3

In-use EVB stocks from 2009 to 2019

Full size image

In-use metal stocks in EVBs

Table 7 shows the in-use stocks of seven main metals in EVBs in both use stages and battery types from 2009 to 2019. Results show that the in-use metal stocks in EVBs reached 1.1 Mt in 2019, including 152.4 kt of nickel, 152.9 kt of cobalt, 170.0 kt of manganese, 38.0 kt of lithium, 245.6 kt of copper, 181.3 kt of aluminum, and 144.0 kt of iron. At the use stage, the in-use metal stock in primary use was 997.1 kt, accounting for 92.0%, and secondary use was 87.1 kt, accounting for 8.0%. Across the three battery types, the in-use metal stock in NMC was 672.5 kt, among which nickel, cobalt, and manganese accounted for 22.7%, 22.7%, and 21.2%, respectively. The in-use metal stock in LFP was 379.3 kt, among which iron, copper, and aluminum accounted for 38.0%, 31.8%, and 25.5%, respectively. The in-use metals stock in LMO was 32.4 kt, among which manganese accounted for 84.3% followed by lithium at 6.5%.

Table 7 The in-use metal stocks in EVBs in 2019 (kt)
Full size table

The variation trend of in-use metal stocks from 2009 to 2019 was further analyzed. From the perspective of use stage, owing to the promotion of new energy vehicles in China, the in-use metal stock in the primary use stage increased from 0.7 kt to 997.1 kt. The in-use metal stock in the secondary use stage increased from 0 kt to 87.1 kt. As shown in Fig. 4, the in-use metal stock in the secondary use stage has been growing rapidly since 2016, indicating that EVBs have begun to enter energy storage and other related fields. From the view of EVB type, it is found that the in-use metal stock across EVBs presents an obvious growth trend. From 2009 to 2019, the in-use metal stock in NMC, LFP, and LMO has increased from 0 kt, 0.7 kt, and 0 kt to 672.5 kt, 379.3 kt, and 32.4 kt, respectively. During this period, the metal stock of LFP was the largest of the three EVB types between 2009 and 2016. Since 2017, the metal stock of NMC has exceeded that of LFP, as shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 4
figure 4

In-use metal stocks in EVBs in different use stages

Full size image
Fig. 5
figure 5

In-use metal stocks in different types of EVBs

Full size image

Scenario analysis of in-use metal stocks in EVBs

The evolution of in-use metal stocks was simulated under three scenarios. The results show that by 2030 the in-use metal stock under the baseline scenario, the NMC-dominated scenario, and the LFP-dominated scenario will reach 20.6 Mt, 23.2 Mt, and 17.9 Mt, respectively. The metal with the largest stock for each scenario is copper, cobalt, and copper, accounting for 21.1%, 21.3%, and 24.0%, respectively.

As shown in Fig. 6, across the three scenarios the in-use metal stock in the primary and secondary use stages of EVBs will continue to increase. By 2030, the in-use metal stock in the primary use stage will be 17.8 Mt (baseline), 19.8 Mt (NMC-dominated), and 15.7 Mt (LFP-dominated), which are 17.9, 19.9, and 15.7 times of 2019 baseline value, respectively. The secondary in-use EVB metal stock across scenarios will be 2.8 Mt (baseline), 3.4 Mt (NMC-dominated), and 2.2 Mt (LFP-dominated), respectively, corresponding to 32.1, 39.0, and 25.3 times the 2019 baseline value, indicating a gradual realization of the secondary use potential of EVBs. Specifically, in the baseline scenario, the proportion of metal stock in the primary use and secondary use stage is 86.3% and 13.7%, respectively. In the NMC-dominated scenario, the metal stock in the primary use and secondary use stage accounts for 85.4% and 14.6%, respectively. In the LFP-dominated scenario, the proportion of metal stock in the primary use and secondary use stage is 87.5% and 12.5%, respectively. There is no significant difference in the proportion of the metal stock in the primary use and secondary use stage among the three scenarios, illustrating that with the continuous promotion of new EVs in China, the EVB stocks are simultaneously increasing in both the primary use and secondary use stage.

Fig. 6
figure 6

Scenario analysis of metal stocks in EVBs in different use stages: a primary use stage and b secondary use stage

Full size image

Figure 7 shows EVB metal stocks by type for each scenario. By 2030, the in-use metal stock of NMC will be 15.8 Mt (baseline), 21.8 Mt (NMC-dominated), and 9.9 Mt (LFP-dominated), respectively, corresponding to 23.5, 32.4, and 14.7 times the 2019 baseline value. The in-use metal stock of LFP will be 4.5 Mt (baseline), 1.1 Mt (NMC-dominated), and 7.8 Mt (LFP-dominated), respectively, corresponding to 11.9, 2.9, and 20.6 times the 2019 baseline values. The proportion of LMO will stay the same across scenarios and the in-use metal stock will be 300.2 kt. Specifically in the baseline scenario, the proportion of metal stock in NMC, LFP, and LMO is 76.9%, 21.6%, and 1.5%, respectively. In the NMC-dominated scenario, the metal stock accounts for 93.8%, 4.9%, and 1.3%, respectively. In the LFP-dominanted scenario, the metal stock in NMC, LFP, and LMO accounts for 55.0%, 43.3%, and 1.7%, respectively. The proportion of metal stock in different battery types is significantly different under the three scenarios corresponding with the development trend of EVB technology across scenarios.

Fig. 7
figure 7

Scenario analysis of metal stocks in different types of EVBs: a NMC, b LFP, and c LMO

Full size image

Implied recycling potential of metal stocks in EVBs

Based on the in-use metal stocks, the implied recycling potential of EVBs after entering the end-of-life stage can be calculated. According to the recycling requirement in the “Industrial Standard Conditions for Comprehensive Utilization of Retired Power Batteries in New Energy Vehicles (2019 edition)” issued by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology of China, the recycling rate of nickel, cobalt, and manganese in waste EVBs is 98%; that of lithium is 85%; and that of other metals is 97% (MIIT 2019). The implied recycling potential of the seven metals in 2019 was calculated as 1.0 Mt on the basis of in-use stocks. The recycling potential of copper was 238.2 kt, accounting for 22.6% of the total amount of recycled metals. Aluminum, manganese, cobalt, nickel, and iron were followed by 175.9 kt (16.7%), 166.6 kt (15.8%), 149.8 kt (14.3%), 149.4 kt (14.2%), and 139.7 kt (13.3%), respectively. The recycling potential of lithium was only 32.3 kt, accounting for 3.1%. The growth of recycling potential under three scenarios can be further analyzed. As shown in Fig. 8, by 2030, the implied recycling potential under the baseline scenario, the NMC-dominated scenario, and the LFP-dominated scenario will reach 20.0 Mt, 22.6 Mt, and 17.4 Mt, which are 18.2, 20.5, and 15.8 times of 2019 baseline value, respectively.

Fig. 8
figure 8

Implied recycling potential of metal stocks in EVBs from 2019 to 2030

Full size image

The recycled metals can replace the corresponding primary metals, thus bringing environmental benefit and economic value. The abiotic depletion index of the corresponding primary metal production processes in the ecoinvent 3.3 database was used to calculate the recycling value caused by recycled metals, and the results show that the amount of recycling value (avoided abiotic depletion) reached 1.4 kt Sb-Equiv. in 2019. By 2030, the avoided abiotic depletion will be 24.8 kt Sb-Equiv (baseline scenario), 26.1 kt Sb-Equiv (NMC-dominated scenario), and 23.4 kt Sb-Equiv (LFP-dominated scenario), respectively.

In this study, we focused on lithium-ion batteries used in EVs and considered the secondary use stage as in-use stock. Due to the difference in boundary difinition, the retirement amount, metal stock, and recycling potential calculated in this paper are different from previous studies (Wu et al. 2020; Liu et al. 2021). Besides, in the part of scenario analysis, the future new energy vehicle market is affected by many factors. For example, the adjustment of a subsidy policy, the extension of EVB lifetime, or a change in consumer willingness toward EVs will lead to a change of the total amount and composition of future in-use metal stocks (Liu et al. 2020a; Li et al. 2020). Such factors contribute uncertainty in the analysis results generated, so the significance of these factors requires further research.

Conclusion

In this study, a bottom-up MFA method was adopted to realize the calculation and systematic analysis of EVB metal stocks in China. The in-use stocks of NMC and LFP increased rapidly, while the stocks of LMO remained low from 2009 to 2019. The in-use EVB stocks represent enormous potential for resource reallocation given calculation outcomes and metal stock increase from 0.7 kt in 2009 to 1.1 Mt in 2019. The metal stock in the primary use stage was 997.1 kt, and in the secondary use stage it was 87.1 kt. From the perspective of EVB type, the metal stock of NMC, LFP, and LMO was 672.5 kt, 379.3 kt, and 32.4 kt, respectively. Currently, in-use metal stocks are mainly in the primary use stage contained in NMC and LFP battery types.

Given the continuous expansion of new energy vehicles, the EVB market will continue to grow in China. According to the EVB technology trend, a baseline scenario, an NMC-dominated scenario, and an LFP-dominated scenario were proposed in this study to simulate EVB metal stocks from 2020 to 2030. It is estimated that by 2030, the in-use metal stocks in EVBs under the three scenarios will reach 20.6 Mt, 23.2 Mt, and 17.9 Mt, respectively. Among the three scenarios, the proportion of metal stocks in the primary use stage and secondary use stage has little difference, and the proportion of the three types of EVBs is closely related to the development trend of EVB technology in each corresponding scenario.

The in-use metal stocks in EVBs have high implied recycling potential. In 2019, the recycling potential of secondary metals is 1.0 Mt, and it will reach 20.0 Mt, 22.6 Mt, and 17.4 Mt, respectively, in 2030 under the three scenarios. At present, the critical metals such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt in the EVBs in China mainly depend on import. This study reveals the current status and evolution of in-use metal stocks in EVBs in China, providing data to support the recycling potential assesment and life-cycle management of EVBs. Hence, it is essential to explore and exploit the metal stocks in EVBs so as to realize resource recycling and sustainable development. Given the huge metal stocks of EVBs, how to realize their secondary use and recycling of EVBs will become a new opportunity.