Millions of Tonnes of Waste Threaten Environment as Solar Panels Near End of Life
Millions of solar panels are reaching the end of their lifespan, but with no adequate recycling infrastructure in place to deal with them, an environmental disaster is looming. This is Moneyhas more on the potential polluting consequences of solar energy.
Tonnes of solar panels could end up on the scrap heap unless the Government acts now, experts have warned.
There are around 25 million solar panels in the U.K. and 2.5 billion globally. …
But as the first generation of solar panels are expected to die off in the coming years, experts have warned that many could end up in landfill rather than recycled because of a drastic lack of infrastructure.
Currently, there is only one recycling plant in the whole of the U.K. that specialises in recycling solar panels but this is a small operation in Scunthorpe.
However, the company is currently only stockpiling the panels and when they have “enough stock” then they will “invest in the equipment to recycle them”, a spokesman told MailOnline, adding that it was “early days in the industry”.
The only place in the entire world that will recycle solar panels on an industrial scale is the first Return of Silicon Plant (ROSI) in France, which was due to open last month.
At the moment, the number of dead solar panels is only a small scale.
But the first generation of solar panels is forecast to die within the next five or ten years and according to Professor Chris Sansom at the University of Derby, by 2050 we could have 300 million tonnes of scrap panels globally.
For comparison, the world currently produces a similar amount of plastic waste each year.
Currently, almost all photovoltaic (PV) panel waste goes into landfill and only very small numbers are recycled by labour-intensive and expensive means as they must be taken apart by hand, the professor added.
Speaking to the MailOnline, he clarified: “Well, I think I think it’s probably true to say that scrap panels at the moment do end up in landfill but there hasn’t been that many of them to be honest.
“The panels that people are putting on their homes and have put on their homes in the last five or 10 years, whatever it is, will still be there because they last for at least 20 years and possibly even 30 years.
“If they fail, whatever the reason, then they probably have gone to landfill but there’s a big question there about what to do because we can’t carry on doing that. So, there is a big issue.”
The report said that given the surge of solar panel deployment since 2010 and average lifetime and failure rates for panels, waste volumes are “certain to increase more rapidly after 2030”.
Europe is predicted to be the second largest solar panel waste market with projected waste of up to three million by 2030.
Asia will remain the largest waste producer with projections of up to 3.5 million accumulated waste, according to the report.
While the report said there is a huge potential for economic revenue for the disposal of PVs because of the valuable materials and the birth of a new industry, there is little sign that much action is currently being taken.
In 2018, a senior Chinese solar official and research scientist with the German Stuttgart Institute for Photovoltaics, warned that solar panel disposal “will explode with full force in two or three decades and wreck the environment”.
He also warned that there will be a huge amount of waste as they are not easy to recycle, adding: “The reality is that there is a problem now, and it’s only going to get larger, expanding as rapidly as the PV industry expanded 10 years ago.”
Business plan: buy Institutions, Universities. Promote green agenda. Close down domestic energy. Corner market in renewables. Undercut European companies with “cheap” labour, government support. Sell product which needs replacement in less than twenty years. Rinse and repeat.
If, in the interests of the environment, the Government introduced re-cycling regulations so that no green energy technology could be sold unless it had an agreed re-cycling and sustainable disposal policy it would have a significant impact on the rush to net-zero madness.
soundofreason
2 years ago
We ought to recycle for ourselves (as a country). If plastic recycling is such a great idea then we should do it for ourselves rather than sending it abroad where stuff may be dumped rather than actually recycled. I’m not a fan of the ban-hammer but we ought to check up on where our waste PVs end up going. If it’s too expensive to recycle them for ourselves there’s a clue that there are additional costs to consider..
I thought one of the main selling points used was that “after 25 years 80% or the original maximum power output would still be generated”. Not, will only live for 25 years?
Kit Knightly on top form as usual dissecting the ‘war on climate change.’
You gotta laugh 😃
7941MHKB
2 years ago
I moved into my house in 2006. It is ideally oriented for solar. The solar racket was well under way in 2006 although I live at 54°N latitude. Several of my new neighbours had them already on their roof and I was getting phone calls and salesmen at the door regularly.
So I think the ‘ten years ago’ is a stretch. I would guess nearer 20 than 10. Already.
The highly subsidised deals then were very attractive, but (as a Chartered Engineer and, as my wife puts it, likely to be the proudest man in the gutter), I told the salesmen to take a hike, Solar at 54°N made zero sense and I didn’t need some pensioner or single mother in a flat, to subside my electricity bill (still some coal generation at £35 / MWh compared to a peak of £10,000 / MWh for imports six months ago) And the end of life recycling bill was mentioned by realists even back then. It was obvious then that minimum generation would be when electricity was needed most.
I doubt that those responsible for this scam will ever be held to account.
debwestsussex
2 years ago
Hang on, the world only produces 380 tonnes of plastic a year, less than half of that goes into packaging, much of which is recycled, so how do we manage ‘300 million tonnes of waste annually’?
mikegle
2 years ago
Most installations also have large banks of lithium battery packs, another recycling nightmare.
DomTaylor
2 years ago
So no fracking, north sea oil or coal mining ‘because it causes climate change.’
No wind farms ‘because their harm bats ‘
No biofuels ‘because they use up farmland that could be usef for food production.’
No hydro-electricity ‘because of distruction of natural habitats.’
No solar panels ‘because “experts” say they threaten the environment.
Best keep sourcing our energy from France, Ukraine, Russia and the Middle East then everything will be fine, I think not.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Business plan: buy Institutions, Universities. Promote green agenda. Close down domestic energy. Corner market in renewables. Undercut European companies with “cheap” labour, government support. Sell product which needs replacement in less than twenty years. Rinse and repeat.
If, in the interests of the environment, the Government introduced re-cycling regulations so that no green energy technology could be sold unless it had an agreed re-cycling and sustainable disposal policy it would have a significant impact on the rush to net-zero madness.
We ought to recycle for ourselves (as a country). If plastic recycling is such a great idea then we should do it for ourselves rather than sending it abroad where stuff may be dumped rather than actually recycled. I’m not a fan of the ban-hammer but we ought to check up on where our waste PVs end up going. If it’s too expensive to recycle them for ourselves there’s a clue that there are additional costs to consider..
I thought one of the main selling points used was that “after 25 years 80% or the original maximum power output would still be generated”. Not, will only live for 25 years?
https://off-guardian.org/2023/08/03/the-war-on-climate-change-is-coming-again/
Kit Knightly on top form as usual dissecting the ‘war on climate change.’
You gotta laugh 😃
I moved into my house in 2006. It is ideally oriented for solar. The solar racket was well under way in 2006 although I live at 54°N latitude. Several of my new neighbours had them already on their roof and I was getting phone calls and salesmen at the door regularly.
So I think the ‘ten years ago’ is a stretch. I would guess nearer 20 than 10. Already.
The highly subsidised deals then were very attractive, but (as a Chartered Engineer and, as my wife puts it, likely to be the proudest man in the gutter), I told the salesmen to take a hike, Solar at 54°N made zero sense and I didn’t need some pensioner or single mother in a flat, to subside my electricity bill (still some coal generation at £35 / MWh compared to a peak of £10,000 / MWh for imports six months ago) And the end of life recycling bill was mentioned by realists even back then. It was obvious then that minimum generation would be when electricity was needed most.
I doubt that those responsible for this scam will ever be held to account.
Hang on, the world only produces 380 tonnes of plastic a year, less than half of that goes into packaging, much of which is recycled, so how do we manage ‘300 million tonnes of waste annually’?
Most installations also have large banks of lithium battery packs, another recycling nightmare.
So no fracking, north sea oil or coal mining ‘because it causes climate change.’
No wind farms ‘because their harm bats ‘
No biofuels ‘because they use up farmland that could be usef for food production.’
No hydro-electricity ‘because of distruction of natural habitats.’
No solar panels ‘because “experts” say they threaten the environment.
Best keep sourcing our energy from France, Ukraine, Russia and the Middle East then everything will be fine, I think not.