Gasgoo Munich-When a battery's carbon footprint can be scanned, graded, and used to determine whether it enters the market, "zero carbon" is no longer just an environmental slogan—it is a ticket to entry.
Not long ago, CATL Chairman Robin Zeng made a stark pronouncement at the company’s carbon neutrality launch for core operations: "I believe that, in the future, batteries that aren't zero-carbon will be eliminated by the times."
On the same day, CATL announced it would achieve carbon neutrality in core operations by the end of 2025, setting a 2035 deadline for carbon neutrality across its entire value chain.
This is not merely an environmental stance from a single company.
The day after Zeng’s remarks, the European Union’s new battery regulation forced carbon footprint labeling into effect on August 18: all power batteries exported to the EU must now carry a label declaring their total lifecycle carbon emissions.
A low carbon data rating means a significant disadvantage in EU procurement bidding. By February 2028, batteries that exceed the maximum carbon footprint threshold will be banned outright.
A battery's carbon footprint is shifting from a "bonus feature" to a "matter of survival."
So the questions arise: Where does this carbon footprint come from, and how can it be incrementally reduced to zero?
Why Have Zero-Carbon Batteries Become a Matter of Survival?
Zeng’s judgment rests on a compliance timeline that is rapidly tightening.
The milestones in the EU’s new battery regulation are tightly interlinked:
Starting in February 2026, industrial and energy storage batteries must submit carbon footprint declarations verified by a third party; from August 18, 2026, all batteries exported to the EU must bear a carbon footprint rating label.
By August 2027, the "battery passport" will be fully implemented, equipping every battery with a unique digital identity that records its composition, carbon footprint, and proportion of recycled materials.
Starting in 2029, products that exceed carbon emission limits will be banned outright. According to EU planning, carbon footprint limits for energy storage batteries will gradually tighten (reports suggest the limit will be around 100 kgCO₂e/kWh), with specific implementation timelines awaiting confirmation in detailed EU rules.
The pressure is not coming solely from regulations.
Leading global automakers have already begun incorporating carbon performance into their procurement standards, making carbon footprint data a bidding parameter alongside range and energy density.
CATL has gone further, explicitly requiring suppliers to provide carbon footprint data starting in 2027, offering preferential terms to those with better carbon performance. Clearly, top battery manufacturers are transmitting this pressure upstream, dragging the entire supply chain into the race toward zero carbon.
Image source: CATL
At the 2026 World Power Battery Conference, Ouyang Minggao, an academician at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, identified full-lifecycle green and low-carbon practices as one of the three major trends in the power battery industry.
Wan Gang, honorary president of the China Association for Science and Technology, also called for accelerating the implementation of a digital ID system for power batteries, ensuring that every battery’s data—from production to retirement—is recorded and traceable.
This mirrors the EU’s "battery passport": once carbon footprints are queryable, verifiable, and traceable, "zero carbon" transforms from a vague concept into a quantifiable competitive metric.
The EU carbon footprint label is not a simple "pass/fail" but divides carbon performance into five grades, A through E. The lower the grade—meaning the lower the carbon footprint—the greater the competitiveness.
For Chinese battery companies, this threshold is particularly urgent.
Europe is the largest overseas market for Chinese power batteries, with more than 30% of exports flowing to the EU.
A low carbon data rating places a company at a significant disadvantage in EU procurement bidding, directly impacting the ability to secure orders.
So, why batteries? According to industry research data, power battery production accounts for roughly 40% to 50% of carbon emissions during the manufacturing stage of new energy vehicles.
A battery's carbon footprint largely determines the "green credentials" of an electric vehicle. And battery emissions are heavily concentrated upstream—the mining and refining of lithium, nickel, and cobalt are the most carbon-intensive segments of the entire chain.
How Can a Battery’s Carbon Footprint Be Reduced to Zero?
To reach zero, one must first see where the carbon comes from.
The full lifecycle carbon footprint of a power battery is distributed across four main stages: upstream mining and material refining, cell manufacturing, usage, and retirement recycling.
Specifically, upstream mining and refining account for about 40% to 50% of lifecycle emissions, cell manufacturing for roughly 20% to 30%, and the usage phase for about 10% to 20%. The recycling stage, meanwhile, contributes "negative" emissions.
This means that simply using green power in the factory is not enough—if the upstream lithium is refined using coal power, the carbon footprint of the entire battery pack will not come down.
The first path to decarbonization is the substitution of green power in manufacturing.
CATL’s announcement of carbon neutrality in core operations hinges on the large-scale use of renewable energy during the manufacturing process.
Panasonic has set even more specific targets: by fiscal year 2028, all global production sites must achieve substantial zero emissions with 100% renewable energy power generation; by 2030, the carbon footprint of battery manufacturing is to be reduced by 50%.
Domestically, Sichuan province has leapt to first place in the comprehensive ranking of the "Power Battery Industry Development Index (2026)" thanks to its green energy resources and complete industrial base. Clearly, low-carbon manufacturing is becoming a new dimension of regional competition.
The second path is the closed-loop use of recycled materials.
Research indicates that power batteries produced using recycled materials can reduce full lifecycle carbon emissions by approximately 60% compared to those made with virgin materials.
CATL’s subsidiary, Brunp Recycling, has already achieved recovery rates of 99.6% for nickel, cobalt, and manganese, and 96.5% for lithium, establishing a collection network through 1,200 service centers globally.
Building a full lifecycle system—from cascade utilization and material regeneration to closed-loop recycling—can reduce carbon emissions in the reproduction process by 40% to 60%.
Ouyang Minggao predicted at the conference that by 2030, retired batteries in China will exceed 20 million tons, making recycling a 100-billion-yuan blue ocean. Recycling is not just business; it is a crucial link in decarbonization.
Recycling is not the end point, but the starting point for a "second reduction" in a battery's carbon footprint. And cascade utilization is the first checkpoint on the recycling chain.
Retired power batteries typically retain about 80% of their usable capacity. After screening and reassembly, they can be used in scenarios such as backup for communication base stations, photovoltaic energy storage, and micro-grid peak shaving—effectively giving a battery a "second life" and reducing the carbon emissions allocated to the manufacturing stage by about 15%.
Only after cascade utilization does the process enter material regeneration—using hydrometallurgy to re-extract nickel, cobalt, and lithium, with recovery rates reaching 99.6% for nickel and cobalt, and 96.5% for lithium. Compared to pyrometallurgy, the hydrometallurgical route has lower carbon emissions and is currently the most widely used recycling method.
The third path is source-level innovation in material systems.
Because sodium-ion batteries do not rely on scarce minerals like lithium, cobalt, and nickel, their full lifecycle carbon emissions can be up to 60% lower than lithium batteries, making them a crucial direction for source-level decarbonization.
It is reported that CATL is vigorously developing and applying sodium batteries, with applications in the energy storage sector beginning in 2026.
The fourth path is extending decarbonization pressure upstream.
For high-energy consumption links like lithium smelting, policy authorities now require new and expanded smelting projects to build supporting renewable energy generation facilities covering no less than 60% of annual electricity consumption, or to directly purchase green power. Otherwise, products will be assigned the highest-tier fossil energy emission factors during carbon accounting. Integrated "source-grid-load-storage" projects are accelerating construction in mining areas.
With these four paths superimposed, the technological roadmap for zero-carbon batteries is clear.
Of course, the difficulty of advancing these four paths varies—green power substitution and closed-loop recycling are relatively mature, while decarbonizing upstream mining and smelting remains an industry-wide challenge. The direction is set; the rest is just a matter of time.
But the real difficulty lies not in technology, but in coordination across the entire chain.
The Zero-Carbon Race: Who Is Running, and Who Is Falling Behind?
Zero carbon is not the concern of a single company, but a collective exam for the entire supply chain.
CATL is one of the fastest-moving players. It has not only achieved carbon neutrality in its own core operations but has also written carbon requirements into supplier contracts: starting in 2027, suppliers must provide carbon footprint data.
This "leader-driven" model is transmitting zero-carbon pressure to every upstream material factory and smelter.
Envision AESC took a different path: it equips every battery with a "zero-carbon green code," allowing customers to scan a QR code to see how much green power was used and how much CO₂ was emitted during production. Making the carbon footprint transparent is, in itself, a form of competitiveness.
Easpring built its factory in Finland, where its overseas base uses nearly 100% clean energy, facilitating the construction of a supply chain due diligence system that meets EU standards.
Under the triple threshold of "carbon footprint + battery passport + due diligence" in the EU, establishing overseas zero-carbon factories is becoming a required course for Chinese material companies.
During the 2026 World Power Battery Conference, the Green Supply Chain Construction Action for the battery industry and the National Highway 318 Sichuan Zero-Carbon Transport Corridor project were launched simultaneously—showing that the scope of zero carbon is extending from factories to broader links like transportation and the supply chain.
But the challenges are equally real.
Many small and medium-sized upstream suppliers lack the capacity to collect carbon data, with many companies unable to even calculate their own emissions clearly. The stability and cost of recycled materials still need verification, and green power supply remains unstable in some regions.
Image source: CATL
A more subtle challenge lies in the power to set standards—currently, carbon footprint accounting mainly adopts the EU’s PEF (Product Environmental Footprint) methodology, which uses factory-level data rather than industry averages. This means Chinese companies must establish their own carbon data collection systems rather than relying on "industry averages" to get by.
The zero-carbon race is not about "running fast enough," but ensuring that "no link in the chain is left behind."
Furthermore, zero carbon is spawning new business opportunities.
Carbon footprint accounting, carbon management software, green power trading, and recycled material certification—a new industrial chain centered on zero-carbon batteries is taking shape.
For companies, zero carbon is not merely a cost expense but an opportunity for a reshuffle: those who proactively layout green power, recycling, and material innovation will gain cost advantages and brand premiums in the next generation of competition.
One clear trend is emerging: zero carbon is redefining the competitive rules of the battery industry.
In the past, the competition was over energy density, cost, and production capacity; in the future, it will also be over carbon footprints. Whoever masters zero-carbon manufacturing first and establishes zero-carbon standards will define "what kind of batteries can enter the next-generation market."
Returning to Robin Zeng’s words: "Batteries that aren't zero-carbon will be eliminated by the times."
Of course, zero carbon is a gradual process. CATL itself is aiming for carbon neutrality in core operations by 2025 before moving toward value chain neutrality by 2035.
But the starting gun for the race has already been fired.
This is not a threat, but a warning.
Image source: Doubao Work
When the EU’s carbon footprint label is affixed to every exported battery, when automakers write carbon data into procurement contracts, and when suppliers are required to submit carbon footprint reports by 2027, zero carbon has shifted from an "option" to a "mandatory requirement."
For a battery's carbon footprint to reach zero, the solution does not lie in a single link but in the entire chain: green power manufacturing, recycling loops, material innovation, and upstream decarbonization—all are indispensable.
Robin Zeng said, "Zero carbon is a mission, but even more so, a capability." The subtext of this statement is that zero carbon is not about buying certificates with money, but establishing genuine decarbonization capabilities in every link—manufacturing, materials, recycling, and upstream.
When more and more battery factories write "zero carbon" into their strategies, and when every battery can be scanned to reveal its carbon footprint, the green transition of the power battery industry will have truly begun.
The finish line of this zero-carbon race is not the carbon neutrality of a single company, but the green transformation of the entire power battery industry.
