The class-wide restriction proposal on perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the European Union is expected to affect a wide range of commercial sectors, including the lithium-ion battery (LIB) industry, where both polymeric and low molecular weight PFAS are used. The PFAS restriction dossiers currently state that there is weak evidence for viable alternatives to the use of PFAS in LIBs. In this Perspective, we summarize both the peer-reviewed literature and expert opinions from academia and industry to verify the legitimacy of the claims surrounding the lack of alternatives. Our assessment is limited to the electrodes and electrolyte, which account for the most critical uses of PFAS in LIB cells. Companies that already offer or are developing PFAS-free electrode and electrolyte materials were identified. There are also indications that PFAS-free electrolytes are in development by at least one other company, but there is no information regarding the alternative chemistries being proposed. Our review suggests that it is technically feasible to make PFAS-free batteries for battery applications, but PFAS-free solutions are not currently well-established on the market. Successful substitution of PFAS will require an appropriate balance among battery performance, the environmental effects associated with hazardous materials and chemicals, and economic considerations.

Recycling of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) is a rapidly growing industry, which is vital to address the increasing demand for metals, and to achieve a sustainable circular economy. Relatively little information is known about the environmental risks posed by LIB recycling, in particular with regards to the emission of persistent (in)organic fluorinated chemicals. Here we present an overview on the use of fluorinated substances – in particular per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) – in state-of-the-art LIBs, along with recycling conditions which may lead to their formation and/or release to the environment. Both organic and inorganic fluorinated substances are widely reported in LIB components, including the electrodes and binder, electrolyte (and additives), and separator. Among the most common substances are LiPF₆ (an electrolyte salt), and the polymeric PFAS polyvinylidene fluoride (used as an electrode binder and a separator). Currently the most common LIB recycling process involves pyrometallurgy, which operates at high temperatures (up to 1600 °C), sufficient for PFAS mineralization. However, hydrometallurgy, an increasingly popular alternative recycling approach, operates under milder temperatures (<600 °C), which could favor incomplete degradation and/or formation and release of persistent fluorinated substances. This is supported by the wide range of fluorinated substances detected in bench-scale LIB recycling experiments. Overall, this review highlights the need to further investigate emissions of fluorinated substances during LIB recycling and suggests that substitution of PFAS-based materials (i.e. during manufacturing), or alternatively post-treatments and/or changes in process conditions may be required to avoid formation and emission of persistent fluorinated substances.