3.1. Methodology
In relation to secondary batteries, we collect data on patents from Korea, China, and the United States for batteries, secondary batteries, electrorods, lithium-ion, anodes, cathodes, waste, cycle, etc. and analyze patent trends.
Through quantitative analysis, multiple technology trends were analyzed based on the effective population searched in the waste battery technology field, setting future technology development directions and future development areas and patent portfolio analysis of major players and market analysis were performed. In quantitative analysis, it is possible to grasp the recent market status of the technology field from various angles through the analysis of the following items, and detailed technology classification is also performed for more detailed technology classification. Through this, we intended to extract major patents and explore the direction of discovering promising technologies in the future.
A patent analysis was conducted based on patent applications for battery recycling in three countries: Korea, China, and the United States. Patents were selected based solely on application and registration criteria. These data were searched with Wintelips (
wintelips.com) and Energy Patent House (
energypatenthouse.com) that gather patent data.
In this study, the analysis of patents was limited to companies. This is because the purpose of the study was to measure how companies in each country innovate battery recycling technology through the tool of patents. Therefore, the patents of individual researchers were not analyzed in this study. For reference, the proportion of individual patents for battery recycling in South Korea, China, and the United States was not significant. In South Korea, there were 16 out of a total of 65 patents (24.6%), in China, there were 748 out of 3496 patents (21.3%), and in the United States, there were 247 out of 548 patents (45.0%).
Table 1 shows a topic analysis of patent abstracts for each country to identify the top three types of patents for battery recycling in Korea, China, and the United States.
In Korea, the primary focus is on devices and methods for recycling materials from used batteries, separation methods for battery components, and systems specifically designed for recycling electric vehicle batteries. Examples include patents on devices and methods for recycling battery materials and systems for separating battery cell components.
In China, patents emphasize the creation and recycling of high-nickel cathode materials, lithium recovery processes, and methods for recovering nickel, cobalt, and manganese from used batteries. This focus reflects China’s commitment to developing advanced battery materials to maintain a competitive edge in battery technology.
In the United States, the focus is on patents detailing battery crushing and recycling plants, safety mechanisms for the recycling process, and methods for recovering valuable metals from batteries. The emphasis on safety mechanisms highlights the importance of preventing hazards during the recycling process.
This result provides a concise overview of the top three patent types for each country, highlighting the different technological focuses and priorities in battery recycling patents across Korea, China, and the United States.
3.3. Comparative Analysis of Major Players and IP Comparativeness
Table 2 shows a comparison of different companies regarding their intellectual property (IP) holdings, specifically patents, in the context of battery recycling technology. This is a kind of snapshot of the patent landscape among key players in battery recycling technology, which is useful for understanding the competitive environment and innovation trends.
Table 2 presents data on patents related to battery recycling, specifically organized by country (Korea, China, and United States) and the IPC keywords associated with the patents. The analysis reveals a strong emphasis on battery recycling technologies (H01M-010) across various countries and companies, indicating a global trend towards improving battery recycling processes. Companies in Korea and China also show significant interest in metal extraction and material preparation processes, while those in the United States focus on intelligent control systems and data management in recycling. The details of the IPCs in
Table 2 can be obtained from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) [
31].
In the United States, the keyword H01M-010 shows consistent activity over the years, indicating ongoing research and patent filings in battery recycling technologies. Keywords C22B-003 and C22B-007 also exhibit significant activity, reflecting the importance of metal recovery in the recycling process. The keywords B01J-035, B02C-003, and B02C-004 display variability in trends, with some years showing higher activity related to chemical processes and material crushing. Additionally, G06Q-010 and G05D-001 have noticeable activity in recent years, highlighting the integration of smart technologies in recycling operations.
In Korea, H01M-010 shows a steady increase in activity, reflecting a growing focus on battery recycling technologies. Keywords C22B-003 and C22B-007 show some activity, indicating efforts in metal recovery from recycled materials. The keywords B01J-035 and B09B-003 exhibit variable trends, suggesting an interest in chemical processes and waste disposal technologies. B02C-003 and B02C-004 are less prominent but still present, indicating activities related to material crushing and preparation.
In China, the keyword H01M-010 shows significant and increasing activity, demonstrating a strong focus on battery recycling. Keywords C22B-003 and C22B-007 show high activity, highlighting extensive efforts in metal recovery. The keywords B01J-035, B09B-003, B02C-003, and B02C-004 exhibit substantial activity, indicating a broad approach to recycling involving chemical processes and material crushing. Additionally, H01M-004 has a notable presence, suggesting innovations in primary cell technologies.
All three countries show strong and consistent activity in battery recycling (H01M-010), with China leading in the number of patents. Significant efforts in metal recovery (C22B-003, C22B-007) are observed in the US and China, with Korea also contributing. Chemical processes and material crushing show variable but present trends in all three countries, indicating ongoing research in optimizing recycling processes. Smart technologies (G06Q-010, G05D-001) have a more recent focus, particularly in the US, reflecting the integration of data processing and control systems in recycling.
Table 3 reveals varying levels of patent activity and impact across the three countries from 2007 to 2024. CPP stands for “citations per patent” and represents the average number of times a patent is cited by other patents or publications. It is a metric used to assess the impact and influence of a company’s or institution’s patents on further research and technological development. CPP is calculated by dividing the total number of citations by the total number of patents.
A high CPP indicates that the patents are frequently cited, suggesting that the technology is innovative and significantly contributes to the field. Conversely, a low CPP implies that the patents are less frequently cited, which could mean they are less influential, newer, or not yet widely recognized. For example, if a company has filed 10 patents and these patents have been cited 50 times, the CPP would be 5. Thus, CPP serves as a vital indicator of the qualitative impact of patents.
China leads in the number of patents, particularly in battery recycling and metal recovery, though the citation impact (CPP) varies significantly among players. Korea shows a growing focus on battery recycling, with some companies demonstrating high CPPs indicating influential patents. The United States exhibits strong activity in both the number and impact of patents, particularly in smart technologies and data processing related to recycling operations.
In Korea, Umicore has a moderate number of patents (9) with a relatively low citation count (6), resulting in a CPP of 0.7. Recycle Cooperation stands out with a higher CPP of 2.8 from 10 patents and 28 citations, indicating that their patents are well-regarded and frequently referenced. BASF SE shows similar characteristics to Umicore with seven patents and a CPP of 0.7. RD Solution, with five patents and a CPP of 0.4, shows lower impact, while ED Engineering, despite having only three patents, has a high CPP of 2.7, suggesting highly regarded contributions.
In China, Anhui Nandu Huabo New Material Technology leads with 34 patents but has a low CPP of 0.4 from 15 citations, indicating extensive patenting activity with limited citation impact. Anhui Lvwo Recycling Energy Technology and Guizhou Zhongwei Resources Recycling Industry Development have similar profiles, with moderate patent activity and low CPPs of 0.4 and 0.3, respectively. Guangdong Haozhi Technology has the lowest CPP of 0.1 with eight patents and one citation. However, Changsha Research Institute of Mining and Metallurgy stands out with a high CPP of 4.5 from 19 patents and 85 citations, indicating highly influential patents.
In the United States, Strong Force VCN shows substantial patent activity with 61 patents and a high CPP of 3.6 from 220 citations, indicating influential patents. Grst International Limited has nine patents but no citations, resulting in a CPP of 0. Guangdong Brunp Recycling Technology has 29 patents and a balanced CPP of 1.0 from 30 citations. Hunan Brunp Recycling Technology has a moderate number of patents (27) with a low CPP of 0.4 from seven citations. Worcester Polytechnic Institute exhibits the highest CPP of 6.9 with 17 patents and 118 citations, highlighting their significant contributions to recycling technologies.
Furthermore,
Table 3 provides PII, TS, and PFS information of players in Korea, China, and the United States. The patent impact index (PII) is a measure that compares the average number of citations per patent of a specific entity to the average number of citations per patent of all entities in a given dataset. It is calculated as follows:
A higher PII indicates that an entity’s patents are cited more frequently compared to the average, suggesting a greater impact or influence in the field.
Technology strength (TS) quantifies the overall impact of an entity’s patent portfolio. It is calculated as the product of the number of patents and the average number of citations per patent (CPP):
A higher TS indicates a stronger technological position, reflecting both the quantity and the quality (impact) of the patents.
Patent family size (PFS) indicates the average number of countries in which a patent is filed within the same patent family. It is calculated as follows:
A larger PFS suggests that the patents have wider geographical coverage, which can imply broader market protection and greater potential for commercialization.
In Korea, Umicore has a moderate patent count with a low patent impact index (PII) of 0.34, reflecting less impact compared to the average, and a technology strength (TS) of 6.0, with an average patent family size (PFS) of 2.22. Recycle Cooperation, however, shows significant impact with a high PII of 1.41, a TS of 28.0, and a broad geographic coverage indicated by a PFS of 3.00. BASF SE has a low PII of 0.36 and a TS of 5.0, indicating moderate technology strength, with a PFS of 2.14. RD Solution has minimal impact with a PII of 0.20 and low technology strength (TS of 2.0), with a PFS of 2.00. ED Engineering shows strong impact with a high PII of 1.34, a TS of 8.0, and good geographic coverage (PFS of 2.67).
In China, Anhui Nandu Huabo New Material Technology and Anhui Lvwo Recycling Energy Technology both have a low PII of 0.22, indicating limited impact, with TS values of 15.0 and 7.0, and narrow geographic coverage with PFS values of 1.32 and 1.56, respectively. Guizhou Zhongwei Resources Recycling Industry Development also has a minimal impact with a PII of 0.18 and low TS of 6.0, with a PFS of 1.29. Guangdong Haozhi Technology has very limited impact with a PII of 0.06, minimal TS of 1.0, and narrow geographic coverage (PFS of 1.25). In contrast, Changsha Research Institute of Mining and Metallurgy has significant impact with a high PII of 2.25, strong TS of 85.0, and good geographic coverage indicated by a PFS of 3.16.
In the United States, Strong Force VCN shows significant impact with a high PII of 1.82, very strong technology strength (TS of 220.0), and broad geographic coverage (PFS of 2.46). Grst International Limited has no impact, as indicated by a PII of 0.00, no technology strength (TS of 0.0), and narrow geographic coverage (PFS of 1.00). Guangdong Brunp Recycling Technology shows moderate impact with a PII of 0.52, a TS of 30.0, and narrow geographic coverage (PFS of 1.72). Hunan Brunp Recycling Technology has limited impact with a low PII of 0.13, low technology strength (TS of 7.0), and narrow geographic coverage (PFS of 1.00). Worcester Polytechnic Institute, on the other hand, has significant impact with a high PII of 3.50, very strong technology strength (TS of 118.0), and broad geographic coverage (PFS of 3.53).
Figure 3 shows a scatter plot and this provides a clear picture of patent influence (CPP) and geographic coverage (PFS) across key players in Korea, China, and the United States. Players like Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Changsha Research Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, and Recycle Cooperation are leaders in terms of influential patents with wide geographic coverage. Conversely, some players in China and the US exhibit lower influence and narrower coverage, highlighting areas for potential improvement or strategic focus.
Korea exhibits a diverse range of patent influences across its key players, with a general trend towards moderate to high influence and decent geographic coverage. Notably, Recycle Cooperation and ED Engineering stand out for their exceptional citations per patent (CPP) and large patent family size (PFS). Recycle Cooperation, with a CPP of 2.8 and a PFS of 3, demonstrates substantial influence in the field, indicating that their patents are both highly impactful and widely recognized across different regions. Similarly, ED Engineering, with a CPP of 2.7 and a PFS of 2.67, shows a strong patent influence and good geographic reach, underscoring their significant contributions to battery recycling technologies. Other players like Umicore and BASF SE maintain a steady presence with moderate CPP values of 0.7, reflecting a consistent, if not outstanding, impact in the field. RD Solution, with a lower CPP of 0.4 and a PFS of 2, indicates less influential patents, suggesting room for growth in both impact and reach.
In China, the range of patent influences varies widely among the key players. The standout performer is Changsha Research Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, which boasts a remarkable CPP of 4.5 and a PFS of 3.16. This indicates that their patents are highly influential and enjoy extensive geographic coverage, making significant contributions to the industry. On the other end of the spectrum, companies like Guangdong Haozhi Technology exhibit a very low CPP of 0.1 and a narrow PFS of 1.25, reflecting minimal impact and limited geographic reach. Other Chinese players, such as Anhui Nandu Huabo New Material Technology and Anhui Lvwo Recycling Energy Technology, maintain low CPP values of 0.4 with varying geographic coverage, indicating that while they have a presence in the market, their patents are less influential. Guizhou Zhongwei Resources Recycling Industry Development, with the lowest CPP of 0.3, further underscores the disparity in influence among Chinese companies, highlighting a broad spectrum from highly influential to minimally impactful patents.
The United States features a wide range of patent influences, from very high to virtually nonexistent. Worcester Polytechnic Institute is the leader, with an impressive CPP of 6.9 and a PFS of 3.53, indicating exceptional influence and extensive geographic coverage. This demonstrates that their patents are not only highly impactful but also widely recognized and adopted across different regions. Strong Force VCN also shows a strong presence with a CPP of 3.6 and a PFS of 2.46, reflecting significant influence and good geographic reach. In contrast, Grst International Limited exhibits no patent citations, resulting in a CPP of 0 and a PFS of 1, indicating that their patents have no discernible impact or geographic reach. Guangdong Brunp Recycling Technology and Hunan Brunp Recycling Technology fall in the middle, with CPP values of 1.0 and 0.4, respectively, and varying PFS, showing moderate influence and geographic coverage. This wide range illustrates the diversity in patent influence among US players, from leading innovators to those with minimal impact.
Overall, Korea, China, and the United States each display distinct characteristics in their patent influences and geographic coverages. Korea’s key players generally exhibit moderate to high influence with decent coverage, with standout performers like Recycle Cooperation and ED Engineering. China’s landscape is more varied, with Changsha Research Institute of Mining and Metallurgy leading in influence, while other players lag significantly. The United States presents a broad spectrum, with Worcester Polytechnic Institute achieving exceptional influence and others like Grst International showing no impact, reflecting a diverse range of patent efficacy and reach.
3.4. Patent Transaction Analysis
Figure 4 shows that the trends in patent transactions in Korea (KR), China (CN), and the United States (US) from 2007 to 2024. China has shown a significant and consistent increase in patent transactions over the years, especially from 2014 onwards, with the number of transactions peaking in 2023. This suggests that China has been rapidly intensifying its patent activities, indicating a strong focus on intellectual property.
Korea, in contrast, has had relatively fewer patent transactions compared to China and the US, with notable activity starting from 2018. The highest number of transactions in a single year was five in 2018, showing moderate activity with a slight increase in recent years. This indicates that while Korea is engaged in patent transactions, its activity level is more modest.
The United States displays a steady but less pronounced increase in patent transactions, with occasional peaks, the highest being 17 transactions in 2022. This steady level of activity reflects an ongoing but stable approach to patent transactions, indicating a consistent engagement in maintaining and managing intellectual property without significant fluctuations.
Based on the analysis of patent transactions, several key insights emerge regarding the most frequently traded patents. The patent titled “METHOD FOR COMPOSITE DELAMINATION” appears the most frequently, with seven transactions. This suggests a high market interest in technologies related to the delamination process, which is crucial in the recycling and recovery of composite materials from batteries.
Another highly traded patent is “Battery recycling system for electric vehicle,” which appears four times. This reflects the growing importance of developing efficient recycling systems specifically tailored for electric vehicle batteries. The transition to electric vehicles has heightened the need for effective recycling technologies to manage the increasing volume of used batteries.
Additionally, patents related to comprehensive battery management and recycling systems also appear, such as “Secondary battery module, battery information management device, battery information management system, secondary battery reuse system, secondary battery recovery and sales system, secondary battery reuse method, and secondary battery recovery and sales method,” which appears four times. This indicates significant interest in integrated systems that handle the entire lifecycle of secondary batteries, from usage to recycling and resale.
Furthermore, patents focusing on specific materials recycling, such as “RECYCLING OF LEAD- AND TIN-BASED MATERIALS,” show a focused interest in recovering valuable materials from batteries. Other frequently traded patents include those related to non-aqueous electrolyte secondary batteries and lithium battery recycling equipment, reflecting ongoing advancements in battery technology and safety mechanisms during the recycling process. Overall, the data highlight the market’s priority on innovations that enhance the efficiency, safety, and comprehensiveness of battery recycling systems, particularly for electric vehicle batteries.
Analysis of frequently sold patents reveals several key technology trends in the battery recycling sector. There is a significant focus on delamination processes, which are essential for efficiently separating and recovering materials from batteries. Additionally, specialized recycling systems for electric vehicles are highly sought after, reflecting the industry’s emphasis on developing sustainable solutions for the increasing number of electric vehicle batteries.
Comprehensive battery management and recycling systems are also prevalent, indicating a trend towards integrated solutions that cover the entire lifecycle of batteries, from use to recycling and resale. Material-specific recycling technologies, such as those for lead, tin, and lithium, highlight the market’s interest in efficient recovery of valuable materials. Safety mechanisms during the recycling process, particularly in handling non-aqueous electrolyte secondary batteries and protection during crushing, are crucial areas of innovation.
Overall, the analysis shows that the market prioritizes technologies that enhance the efficiency, sustainability, and safety of battery recycling processes. These trends align with broader industry goals of improving resource recovery and reducing environmental impact.