In　order　to　assess　the　differences　in　environmental　impact　of　the　two　recycling　processes　(pyrometallurgical　and　hydrometallurgical)　and　different　allocation　methods　(EoL　and　CFF)　for　lithium　cobalt　oxide　(LCO)　batteries　used　in　mobile　phones,　when　considering　the　environmental　benefits　of　the　waste　battery　recycling　and　setting　the　functional　unit　to　be　the　energy　supply　of　1　kWh　from　lithium　cobalt　oxide　batteries,　a　cradle-to-grave　life　cycle　assessment　(LCA)　was　carried　out　for　the　LCO　batteries,　while　the　results　were　compared　for　the　application　of　End-of-Life　(EoL)　and　Circular　Footprint　Formula　(CFF)　allocation　methods　in　the　scenario　of　hydrometallurgical　recycling　process.　The　results　indicated　that　the　environmental　benefits　of　hydrometallurgical　recycling　process　were　significantly　greater　than　those　of　pyrometallurgical　recycling　process,　which　were　about　2.89　times.　Regarding　Global　Warming　Potential　and　Fossil　Resource　Scarcity　as　well　as　three　end　points　environmental　damage　indicators,　the　environmental　benefits　of　EoL　allocation　were　much　lower　than　those　of　CFF　allocation.　The　main　reason　was　that　the　EoL　allocation　method　counted　all　recycling　benefits　into　the　initial　life　cycle,　compared　to　the　CFF　allocation　method,　which　reasonably　divided　the　environmental　benefits　of　recycling　into　the　life　cycles　of　manufacturing　recyclable　materials　and　utilizing　recycled　materials　according　to　the　market　situation.　The　CFF　method　proved　to　be　more　efficacious　in　mitigating　the　arbitrary　disappearance　of　environmental　impacts　and　avoiding　the　multi-counting　of　environmental　benefits,　which　notably　affected　the　accuracy　of　scientific　quantification　of　environmental　impacts,　including　the　carbon　emission　assessment.　It　was　also　recommended　to　establish　domestic　localisation　policy　guidelines　with　reference　to　the　lithium　battery　related　standards　(CFF)　in　the　EU　PEF　to　ensure　the　comparability　of　related　lithium　battery　research.　©　2024　Science　Press.　All　rights　reserved.