Procedure for Assessing the Suitability of Battery Second Life Applications after EV First Life
, Maite Etxandi-Santolaya 1, Josh Eichman 1,2, Victor José Ferreira 1, Lluís Trilla 1 and Cristina Corchero 1,3Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript proposes an approach to assess the implementation of the used batteries for second life within some applications. here are some comments for improving the paper:
1- The main contribution of the paper is not clear, the paper looks like a literature review with a minor contribution in combining the different approaches used to assess and evaluate the feasibility of battery second-life applications. So, the paper should highlight the main contribution of the paper.
2- proofreading is required for the paper
3- The quality and the accuracy of Figure1 need improvements: for example, how the battery after the assessment can be returned to the same application again without any refurbishing/repair, then what are the reasons behind removing it initially from the application to assess?
4-data in table2 is a bit confusing, why is the cost of removing the battery from the EV has value for both modules and cell levels (which are the same for pack, module and cells), also why the cost of disassembly to modules has same values for both modules and cells and why they are identical. please review or clarify
Author Response
"Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
There are vast numbers of publications that present conjecture on the economics, reliability, installation problems, etc. for 2nd life EC batteries. This paper is just another one of these, i.e. there is virtually nothing new here.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper is very well written and provides very interesting insight on the matter. I just have some minor comments to the authors:
- On section 4.2, another option could be added. Between 4.2.1 and 4.2.2. the option of using used EV packs connected via DCDC power converters could be analized. In this case the problems regarding balancing could be solved at expense of a much more complex system. A cost analysis on this could be interesting as well.
- In the same line, the table in this section could be expanded.
- In this very same table, I miss the issue with balancing stacked packs in the Disadvantages column.
- I consider the following cite relevant for point #2 in section 3.
I. Sanz-Gorrachategui et al., "Remaining Useful Life Estimation for LFP Cells in Second-Life Applications," in IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 70, pp. 1-10, 2021, Art no. 2505810, doi: 10.1109/TIM.2021.3055791.
Some minor format issues:
- Line 61 is missing a period after [12]
- I would reconsider the size of Fig1. It is too large and it appears pixelated.
- I would reconsider the size of the text in tables 1 and 3. It could be compressed a little more.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Concerns have been adequately addressed.
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper has been suficiently improved and I recommend to accept in present form.
