Second-Life Storage

Second-Life EV Batteries for Grid Storage: Sorting & Certification Costs

As millions of EVs approach mid-life, used traction batteries are emerging as a potential source of low-cost stationary storage. This article focuses on the often-underestimated costs of sorting, testing, and certifying second-life EV packs and modules for grid applications.

22–26 min read Fleet & utility storage Reuse vs. new battery economics
Executive summary
Second-life EV storage is not “free batteries”—testing and integration costs matter

Repurposing EV batteries for grid storage can reduce capital costs and defer recycling, but the economics are highly sensitive to the costs of collecting, sorting, testing, and certifying used packs and modules. Treating second-life storage as “free batteries” ignores these realities and can lead to underperforming projects.

  • Second-life packs often arrive with unknown histories, varied chemistries, and uneven degradation—requiring systematic sorting and testing.
  • Per-kWh savings vs. new batteries can be significant, but sorting and certification costs can consume 30–60% of the apparent discount if not tightly managed.
  • Best-fit use cases are low-C-rate, mid-duration applications with flexible duty cycles and modest cycling intensity.
  • Industrial-scale reuse will likely be concentrated with OEMs, fleets, and specialist integrators, not ad-hoc projects.
Circular economy Safety & certification Sorting cost focus

1. Technology & lifecycle benchmarks

EV batteries are typically retired from traction when usable capacity falls to roughly 70–80% of nameplate. For many stationary applications, this remaining capacity is acceptable, but heterogeneity between modules and packs becomes a challenge.

Parameter EV pack at retirement (typical) Second-life stationary target New grid battery (LFP) reference
Remaining capacity 70–80% Screened to 65–80% 100%
Remaining cycle life 1,000–3,000 eq. cycles (high variance) 1,000–2,500 3,000–7,000
Typical chemistries NMC, NCA, LFP Reused as-is LFP / NMC optimized for stationary

The key question is whether the net cost of acquiring, reconfiguring, and certifying second-life batteries yields a meaningful advantage over new, factory-built grid packs once all risks and integration costs are accounted for.

2. Cost structure: from pack collection to certified stationary asset

A typical second-life value chain for EV packs involves several steps, each with its own cost component:

Step Description Indicative cost (USD/kWhusable)
Collection & logistics From dealers/fleets to testing facility 5–20
Initial triage Visual, BMS readout, basic functional checks 3–10
Detailed testing & sorting Capacity, impedance, self-discharge mapping 10–40
Reconfiguration & integration Module rearrangement, racks, BMS retrofit 30–80
Certification & warranty Standards testing, documentation, risk premium 5–25

Depending on geography and scale, sorting and certification-related costs alone can land in the 50–120 USD/kWh range, before adding the purchase price of the used pack and stationary balance-of-system (BoS) costs.

Indicative cost breakdown for second-life EV storage
Acquisition vs. sorting/certification vs. stationary BoS

3. Economics: when second-life beats new batteries

To understand second-life economics, it helps to compare the levelized cost of storage (LCOS) of second-life systems with new grid batteries under realistic assumptions.

Scenario New LFP (4h) Second-life (4h, moderate sorting) Second-life (4h, intensive sorting)
Installed CAPEX (USD/kWh) 250–400 180–300 200–330
Usable lifetime (equiv. full cycles) 3,000–7,000 1,500–3,000 1,500–3,000
LCOS (USD/MWh discharged, indicative) 120–190 110–185 115–195

These simplified numbers suggest that second-life can deliver modest LCOS advantages if acquisition and sorting costs are kept under control and if duty cycles are not too aggressive. However, the margin is often narrower than marketing suggests.

Indicative LCOS comparison: new vs second-life batteries
At 4–6h duration and moderate cycling (200–300 cycles/year)

Use Energy Solutions tools to model second-life vs new batteries

Our LCOS and degradation tools help fleets and utilities examine whether second-life projects truly deliver lower lifecycle costs, taking into account sorting, testing, and expected duty cycles.

4. Sorting and testing: what drives costs in practice

Sorting and testing operations typically involve:

  • Data acquisition from BMS logs if available (SoH, temperature history, fast charging events).
  • Electrical tests for capacity, internal resistance, and leakage.
  • Module and cell-level grading to group similar units together.
  • Safety screening for mechanical damage or suspected internal faults.

Operational insight: automated test lines and robust data-sharing from OEMs are critical to bringing second-life costs down. Manual, case-by-case testing is rarely economical at scale.

5. Certification, standards, and warranties

Certification frameworks for second-life batteries are evolving. Key questions include:

  • What standards (e.g., safety, performance) apply to repurposed packs?
  • Who provides the warranty—the OEM, the integrator, or the project owner?
  • How are residual risks (e.g., latent defects) priced into the project?

Risk note: lack of clear certification and warranty frameworks can shift risk back onto utilities and financiers, eroding the apparent cost advantage of second-life batteries.

6. Use cases: where second-life batteries make sense

The best early second-life projects focus on moderate duty cycles and tolerant applications:

  • Behind-the-meter C&I storage for demand charge reduction and limited backup.
  • Distribution-level grid storage where cycling is moderate and value comes from deferring upgrades.
  • Fleet depots where operators can reuse their own packs with known histories.

7. Outlook to 2035: scale and industrial organization

By 2035, second-life EV storage may be a substantial but specialized industry, likely dominated by:

  • OEM-led programs bundling EV sales, pack take-back, and stationary reuse.
  • Large fleets and leasing companies managing their own storage assets.
  • Specialist integrators operating automated sorting and repurposing facilities.

8. FAQ: common questions on second-life EV batteries

Are second-life batteries “free” once removed from vehicles?

No. Even if the initial purchase cost of a used pack is low, logistics, testing, sorting, integration, and certification all add meaningful costs that must be considered in project economics.

What duty cycles are best for second-life batteries?

Moderate C-rates and moderate cycling (for example, 100–250 full cycles per year) are generally more suitable than very aggressive duty cycles, which can quickly consume the remaining lifetime.

How important is access to OEM data?

Very important. Access to pack history (SoH, fast charging, temperature) can reduce testing costs and improve grading accuracy, which in turn improves economics and safety.

Will second-life storage undercut the market for new grid batteries?

Second-life storage is more likely to complement new batteries than fully displace them. New packs will remain preferable where high performance, high energy density, and long warranties are essential; second-life can serve more tolerant applications where cost is critical.

What should planners assume about future second-life availability?

Availability will depend on EV adoption, pack designs, and OEM policies. Planners can treat second-life as a growing but constrained resource rather than an unlimited supply of cheap batteries.