Colorado’s new battery recycling bill is a start, but communities still need more protection

Because neither Colorado nor California currently has lithium-ion battery recycling facilities, much of the waste collected under these programs will likely be shipped and processed in Nevada, where Redwood Materials claims about 90% of all lithium-ion batteries in North America are processed.

A recent report from the nonprofit GAIA on battery recycling facilities in Nevada found that community right-to-know laws are outdated to monitor these new technologies, that publicly accessible environmental data is limited or otherwise deemed confidential, and that recent federal deregulation is leaving communities exposed to hazards and risks these facilities may pose.

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX.

That information gap matters now because Nevada’s “lithium loop” is the nation’s epicenter for the full electric vehicle battery supply chain. We’ve seen the harm a lead-acid battery recycling industry can cause at the former Exide facility in Vernon, California, which spewed lead over a 1.7-mile radius for over 20 years before it was shut down in 2015. It is considered one of the largest environmental cleanups of residential properties in California’s history, and to date, hasn’t gone so smoothly.

Whether lead-acid or lithium-ion, all batteries are chemically intensive products that use acids, solvents, and high heat in their recycling processes, which generate waste and pollution.

GAIA’s report examines modern lithium-ion battery recycling processes and found that existing federal transparency tools, including the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act and the Toxic Release Inventory, do not actually tell the public what it needs to know. These federal laws are outdated and have weak enforcement. While Colorado’s new law requires some recovery rate reporting, those provisions are limited. Overall, key information about PFAS emissions, hazardous waste generation, water use, energy consumption, and recycling recovery rates remains difficult to access. Recent federal deregulation has further weakened public access to information at the very moment this industry is scaling up.

Recycling companies are not required to publicly report PFAS releases or resource use, such as water consumption and energy consumption, that affect the region. This information is either opaque and voluntary or withheld by companies as proprietary. The GAIA report shows that hazardous waste generation is uneven, while materials-recovery rates are neither transparent nor reliable.

Batteries are essential to the shift away from fossil fuels, and they are an integral part of modern electricity grids, which are central to climate action strategies. But without clear, publicly available standards for reporting environmental impacts, responsible companies cannot be distinguished from risky ones and policymakers and investors lack the information they need to make sound decisions.

Colorado’s new battery recycling law is a welcome start, and California should follow suit to hold producers responsible for collecting spent large-format batteries and sending them for their next best use according to the waste management hierarchy.

But collection and recycling requirements alone will not guarantee a safe and responsible battery industry. As this sector scales up, states must ensure battery recycling facilities are subject to the highest environmental standards and review. Producer responsibility must be paired with stronger transparency, disclosure, and environmental health protections. Otherwise, an industry intended to solve one environmental challenge risks creating new ones.

A truly sustainable battery economy requires not only keeping materials in circulation but also ensuring that workers, communities, and regulators have the information and protections they need.

SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE