Samsung’s Cobalt Recycling Strategy: A Deep Dive into the 2025 Circular Battery Supply Chain

Industry Adoption: How Samsung Moved from Broad ESG Goals to a Strategic Circular Supply Chain for Cobalt

Between 2021 and 2024, Samsung’s circular economy strategy was characterized by foundational investments and broad initiatives. The company established its strategic framework with a landmark pledge of over $5 billion for green initiatives by 2030 and the 2022 creation of a dedicated Circular Economy Lab to research material recycling. During this period, activities focused on building a global e-waste collection infrastructure through partnerships with recyclers like ERI and expanding consumer take-back programs with partners such as Orange. The application of recycled materials was visible but focused on less critical components, such as repurposed fishing nets in Galaxy devices. The strategy was about setting ambitious targets, building R&D capabilities, and expanding end-of-life collection, but it lacked a specific, high-value focus. A key inflection point occurred in July 2024 with Samsung Ventures’ investment in Princeton NuEnergy, a specialist in direct lithium-ion battery recycling, signaling a strategic pivot towards the high-value, complex challenge of battery materials.

The period from January 2025 to today marks a dramatic acceleration and operationalization of this strategy, shifting from broad goals to a targeted, commercially-driven model focused on critical minerals. The centerpiece of this shift is the formal launch of the “Circular Battery Supply Chain” in Vietnam. This initiative, announced in early 2025, created a closed-loop system to recover cobalt, a critical and volatile battery material, from manufacturing scrap and end-of-life devices. This was not a pilot program; it was a commercial-scale operation validated by the launch of the Galaxy S25, the first Samsung product to incorporate this recycled cobalt. The commercial and technical viability of this approach was further validated when the product earned the 2025 ReMA Design for Recycling Award. This evolution demonstrates a significant leap in maturity: Samsung is no longer just collecting e-waste but is now vertically integrating recycling of high-value materials directly into its flagship product manufacturing, creating a powerful ESG narrative while simultaneously addressing tangible supply chain risks associated with virgin cobalt.

Table: Samsung’s Strategic Investments in Circular Economy Infrastructure

Table: Samsung’s Key Circular Economy Partnerships

Geography: Samsung’s Shift from Global Exploration to a Focused Hub in Vietnam

Between 2021 and 2024, Samsung’s circular economy activities were geographically diverse, reflecting a period of building broad capabilities. The company established partnerships for device lifecycle management in Europe with Orange and Foxway, expanded its well-established e-waste recycling programs in the U.S. with ERI, and even conducted scoping missions in Africa with KOICA to assess e-waste management in Rwanda. This widespread approach was about creating a global network for collection and exploring different regional models for circularity. While foundational, this strategy lacked a central, operational nucleus for high-value material recovery.

In 2025, the geographic focus sharpened dramatically with the launch of the Circular Battery Supply Chain in Vietnam. This marks a pivotal shift from a decentralized collection strategy to a concentrated, vertically integrated operational model. By co-locating a sophisticated cobalt recycling loop with its major manufacturing facilities, Samsung is creating a hyper-efficient, closed-loop system that minimizes logistical costs and enhances traceability. This targeted approach in Southeast Asia represents the company’s blueprint for a scalable, regional circular economy. However, this progress is contrasted by significant challenges in other key growth markets. In April 2025, Samsung initiated legal action in India to contest new e-waste recycling rules and their associated costs. This highlights a critical geographic risk: the success of its centralized model in a controlled environment like Vietnam may be difficult to replicate globally, where varying and unpredictable regulatory landscapes can impede the economic viability of circular initiatives.

Technology Maturity: Samsung’s Journey from R&D to Commercial-Scale Cobalt Recycling

From 2021 to 2024, Samsung’s technology for a circular economy was primarily in the R&D and early implementation stages. The creation of the Circular Economy Lab in 2022 formalized its commitment to developing new recycling technologies from the ground up. During this time, product integrations were limited to more accessible materials, such as post-consumer plastics and repurposed fishing nets. For high-value battery materials, the focus was on scouting and investment rather than in-house deployment. The 2024 investment in Princeton NuEnergy, with its novel direct lithium-ion recycling process, shows that Samsung was actively evaluating next-generation external technologies to solve the battery challenge. The Galaxy Upcycling program, which turns old phones into IoT devices, represented a clever software-based approach to lifecycle extension but did not address the core challenge of material recovery.

The year 2025 marks the point where Samsung’s battery recycling technology achieved commercial maturity. The establishment of the “Circular Battery Supply Chain” and its multi-phase process to recover cobalt from used batteries is a definitive move from the lab to a scaled industrial process. The successful integration of this recycled cobalt into the Galaxy S25 is the most critical validation point—the technology is no longer theoretical but is robust enough for a flagship product, meeting the rigorous quality and performance standards of the consumer electronics market. This was externally recognized with the 2025 ReMA Design for Recycling Award, which specifically honored the Galaxy S25 for its use of recycled cobalt sourced through this new system. This rapid progression from R&D to a commercially validated, award-winning application in under a year signals that Samsung has successfully cracked a key technological barrier in critical mineral circularity.

Table: SWOT Analysis of Samsung’s Circular Battery Strategy

Forward-Looking Insights and Summary

The data from 2025 signals a clear and decisive shift in Samsung’s strategy: the company is moving beyond generalized ESG commitments and is now executing a pragmatic, high-value circular supply chain model. The focus on cobalt is not just an environmental initiative; it is a strategic hedge against supply chain volatility and a powerful differentiator in a market increasingly scrutinized by investors and consumers. This pivot from broad goals to a targeted, commercially integrated system is the most important signal for the year ahead.

Market actors should watch for three key developments. First, monitor for attempts to replicate the Vietnam closed-loop model in other key manufacturing regions, particularly the U.S., where Samsung is making multi-billion dollar investments in semiconductor facilities. Second, track the expansion of this material-specific approach from cobalt to other critical battery materials like lithium and rare earth elements. Success here would cement Samsung’s leadership in sustainable technology manufacturing. Finally, the outcome of the legal challenge in India will be a critical bellwether. A negative result could force a retreat or a costly redesign of its producer-responsibility models in emerging markets, while a favorable outcome could pave the way for a more standardized global rollout. The future of Samsung’s circular economy ambitions hinges less on its global collection targets and more on its ability to scale these targeted, high-value recovery systems across complex geopolitical and regulatory landscapes.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main change in Samsung’s recycling strategy as of 2025?
In 2025, Samsung shifted from broad, global ESG goals to a focused, commercially-driven model centered on high-value materials. The centerpiece of this shift is the launch of the “Circular Battery Supply Chain” in Vietnam, a closed-loop system specifically designed to recover critical minerals like cobalt from manufacturing scrap and end-of-life devices for direct use in new products.

Is the recycled cobalt from this new strategy actually being used in Samsung products?
Yes. The commercial and technical viability of the new system was validated with the launch of the Galaxy S25, which is the first Samsung product to incorporate recycled cobalt sourced directly from the “Circular Battery Supply Chain.” The success of this integration was recognized when the product won the 2025 ReMA Design for Recycling Award.

Why is Samsung’s new Circular Battery Supply Chain located specifically in Vietnam?
Samsung chose Vietnam to create a hyper-efficient, vertically integrated operational hub. By co-locating the sophisticated cobalt recycling loop with its major manufacturing facilities, Samsung minimizes logistical costs and enhances material traceability. This represents a strategic shift from a decentralized global collection network to a concentrated, regional closed-loop model.

What was the key turning point that signaled Samsung’s shift towards high-value battery recycling?
The key inflection point occurred in July 2024 with Samsung Ventures’ investment in Princeton NuEnergy, a company specializing in direct lithium-ion battery recycling. This investment signaled a strategic pivot from broader initiatives to tackling the complex and high-value challenge of recycling critical battery materials, directly preceding the 2025 launch of the cobalt-focused supply chain.

What is a major risk or threat to Samsung’s circular economy strategy?
A significant threat is facing regulatory and financial friction in major growth markets. The article highlights that in April 2025, Samsung initiated legal action in India to contest new, costly e-waste recycling rules. This shows that the success of its centralized model in a controlled environment like Vietnam may be difficult and expensive to replicate globally due to varying and unpredictable regulatory landscapes.