Companies are currently changing their traditional role in society and transforming it into a proactive role in which their operations generate social and environmental positive impacts. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has evolved from simple philanthropy to a more theoretical concept with a new corporate philosophy that takes all the interests of all stakeholders into consideration. The financial market is pushing the development of Socially Responsible Investment (SRI), which has led to the rise of Corporate Sustainability Systems (CSS). These CSSs are tools that rate corporate performance on sustainability. However, they constitute a chaotic universe, with instruments of different nature. This paper identifies and groups the common characteristics of the CSSs into three different typologies: Indexes, Rankings and Ratings. Despite this classification, and although the fundamental pillar of CSR is the “Stakeholder Theory”, CSSs are still not ideal tools to be used by all stakeholders. From the magma of CSSs, this article identifies and describes, through a comparative analysis, those which best comply with the “Stakeholder Theory”. This paper facilitates the work of researchers and stakeholders by exposing the differential characteristics of the most important CSSs.

Aqueous zinc ion batteries (AZIBs) are gaining widespread scientific and industrial attention thanks to their safety and potential environmental sustainability in comparison with other battery chemistries relying on organic electrolytes. AZIBs are good candidates for sustainable stationary storage, covering household energy needs or smoothing the intermittency associated with wind and solar energy. In spite of their potential as a sustainable energy storage technology, the study of their environmental repercussions remains unexplored. The environmental impacts associated with the fabrication of AZIBs are quantified using a cradle‐to‐gate life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. Six laboratory‐scale battery designs offering high delivered capacity, energy density and operating lifespan are selected. The contribution of different battery components to eighteen environmental impact indicators is shown. An average value of 45.1 kg CO₂ equiv per 1 kWh is obtained considering the metallic Zn anode, the cathode, the separator, the aqueous electrolyte and the electricity required for cell assembly. AZIBs are environmentally competitive with lithium‐ion, lithium‐oxygen, lithium‐sulfur, and sodium‐ion battery technologies and are attractive from a Circular Economy viewpoint given the potential of renewable materials as separators and the high recycling rates of electrodes. The obtained results prove the suitability of zinc ion batteries as a sustainable stationary energy storage solution.

Aprotic lithium–oxygen (Li–O₂) batteries are a prominent example of ultrahigh energy density batteries. Although Li–O₂ batteries hold a great potential for large-scale electrochemical energy storage and electric vehicles, their implementation is lagging due to the complex reactions occurring at the cathode. Great effort has been applied to find practical cathodes through the incorporation of different materials acting as catalysts. Here we tap into the quantification of the environmental footprint of seven high-performance Li–O₂ batteries. The batteries were standardized to feed a 60 kWh electric vehicle. Life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology is applied to determine and compare how different batteries and respective components contribute to environmental footprints, categorized in 18 groups. To get a bigger picture, results are compared with the environmental burdens of a reference lithium ion battery, reference sodium ion battery, and the average value of lithium–sulfur batteries. Overall, Li–O₂ batteries present lower environmental burdens in 9 impact categories, with similar impacts in 5 categories in comparison with lithium–sulfur and lithium ion batteries. With an average value of 55.76 kg·CO₂ equiv in Global Warming Potential for the whole Li–O₂ battery, the cathode is the major contributor, with a relative weight of 44.5%. These results provide a road map to enable the practical design of sustainable aprotic Li–O₂ batteries within a circular economy perspective.