{"id":33866,"date":"2019-12-09T12:13:20","date_gmt":"2019-12-09T01:43:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.solarquotes.com.au\/blog\/?p=33866"},"modified":"2024-12-31T13:50:44","modified_gmt":"2024-12-31T04:20:44","slug":"recycling-solar-panel-waste","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.solarquotes.com.au\/blog\/recycling-solar-panel-waste\/","title":{"rendered":"Tossing Old Solar Panels Into Landfill Is Greener Than Recycling Them"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Is

The conventional response to criticism of solar waste is panels can simply be recycled. But is that the greenest option?<\/p><\/div>\n

Recycling is a good thing.\u00a0 Most of the time.\u00a0 Humans have been reusing material for thousands of years, probably beginning on a large scale when early agriculturalists noticed poo is good for plants.\u00a0 Ancient Greeks didn’t let pieces of broken pottery<\/a> go to waste and used them like notepaper, while my father would collect (steal?) rubber bands because a dozen were worth a few cents back in 1950.<\/p>\n

Recycling reduces the need for raw materials. Normally that’s a good thing for the environment, but not always.\u00a0 If it involves an environmentally destructive process or requires a lot of energy — which mostly comes from fossil fuels right now — then recycling can be a bad idea.<\/p>\n

Because recycling solar panels requires a considerable amount of energy and expense, and because they are mostly harmless when put into landfill, I’m certain recycling solar panels is a clear environmental negative. This is likely to change in the future but until then I believe we should simply stack and\/or bury them.<\/p>\n

\"\"

The inscription on this Ancient Greek pottery shard reads, “Keanu’s not immortal.” (Image: Wikipedia)<\/p><\/div>\n

Appearances Vs. Reality<\/h2>\n

Recycling has a pretty good rep.\u00a0 But instead of treating…<\/p>\n

“Recycling = Good”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

…as a simple rule of thumb, some elevate it into an iron law of the universe regardless of whether or not it benefits the environment.<\/p>\n

This kind of thinking leads to ridiculous outcomes.\u00a0 One example is a couple who arrive at the supermarket and discover they’ve forgotten their reusable shopping bags, so they drive back home to get them because they don’t want to commit the sin of using plastic shopping bags.<\/p>\n

Please don’t be these people.\u00a0 It doesn’t matter if you have a Commodore V8, a Toyota hybrid, or an electric car,1<\/a><\/sup> you will cause more damage to the environment driving just one kilometer than using a couple of plastic bags.<\/p>\n

Modern plastic shopping bags that are made to be used multiple times only weigh 7 grams.\u00a0 Using one and then burning it may release less CO2 than using 10 millilitres of petrol, which will get the average Australian car less than 100 metres.\u00a0 Also, assuming you put the bags in the rubbish when you’re done with them and don’t swim out to sea and personally stuff them down a whale’s blowhole, those particular bags are very unlikely to harm marine life.<\/p>\n

\"reusuable

These reusable plastic bags are 7.3 grams each and made of high-density polyethylene<\/a> (HDPE). They can be created in the Minecraft computer game by combining ethylene gas<\/a> with a stupid parrot. (Image: Qis Packaging)<\/p><\/div>\n

While an over-attachment to canvas shopping bags isn’t the worst problem in the world, counter-productive behavior based on the idea that recycling is always good should be avoided to prevent the world getting worse.<\/p>\n

I think it would be a good idea if I came up with a catchy term for when recycling does more harm than good.<\/p>\n

Recycling Vs. Miscycling<\/h2>\n

When I decided to come up with a term for recycling that’s environmentally counter-productive, I was originally going to call it Wank-cycling after the German Engineer, Felix Wankel<\/a>.\u00a0 But then I found out he managed to get kicked out of the Nazi Party for being too much of a dick,2<\/a><\/sup> so that idea went right out the window.<\/p>\n

I toyed with the terms re-wasting and fritter-cycling and going through the ScoMotions<\/a>,3<\/a><\/sup> but I didn’t think any of them were better than mis-cycling and so miscycling it is.<\/p>\n

Obvious Miscycling Vs. Economic Miscycling<\/h2>\n

There are two main types of miscycling:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Obvious Miscycling:<\/strong>\u00a0 Recycling that results in measurably more harm to the environment than not recycling.<\/li>\n
  2. Economic Miscycling:<\/strong>\u00a0 Recycling that doesn’t necessarily cause more harm to the environment than not recycling, but the cost is so high there is a clear alternative with a greater environmental benefit.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    At this point in time, as far as I can tell, recycling solar panels is both obvious and economic miscycling.<\/p>\n

    Does It Pay For Itself?<\/h2>\n

    If recycling saves a great deal of energy then it is likely to:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Be environmentally beneficial.<\/li>\n
    2. Pay for itself.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Generally speaking, traditional methods of recycling that have been around for a long time because they make money, such as reusing scrap metal, are a net environmental benefit.\u00a0 Recycling that requires a financial or legal incentive may not save enough energy to be environmentally worthwhile.\u00a0 Any time recycling requires more energy than extracting and refining more raw materials it’s likely to be a net environmental minus.<\/p>\n

      This is just a rule of thumb and each case needs to be considered on its merits.\u00a0 But if recycling doesn’t pay for itself it’s not a good sign.<\/p>\n

      Recycling’s Environmental Benefit Will Improve<\/h2>\n

      Just because something may be miscycling now doesn’t mean it will always be miscycling.\u00a0 Processes can improve and energy is becoming greener.\u00a0 This means things that aren’t worth recycling now may make sense 10 years down the line.\u00a0 So rather than dumping stuff into landfill and forgetting about it, we should keep records so people in the future can benefit from our junk if technology advances enough to make it worthwhile.<\/p>\n

      Recycling Solar Panel Frames Is Easy<\/h2>\n

      When I say solar panels don’t appear to be worth recycling I’m not referring to their frames.\u00a0 They’re aluminium and definitely worth ripping off and giving a second life.\u00a0 It’s actually worth giving aluminium more lives than a box full of cats<\/a>, because recycling supposedly only takes 5% of the energy needed to smelt it from bauxite<\/a>.<\/p>\n

      It’s also a good idea to pull off junction boxes from the backs of panels.\u00a0 The cables connected to them are worth recycling and it allows stripped panels to stack neatly on top of each other.<\/p>\n

      It’s only what’s left after a solar panel has been stripped that – at this time – isn’t worth recycling.<\/p>\n

      There’s Not Much Value In A Stripped Solar Panel<\/h2>\n

      Without the aluminium frame and copper cables on the junction boxes there’s not a lot of value in a stripped solar panel.\u00a0 What it does contain, in order from the mostest to the leastest for a standard sized 60 cell panel, is:<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Glass — Around 12+ kilograms.<\/li>\n
      2. Plastic — The backsheet is around 400 grams and there is also epoxy glue that holds the panel together.<\/li>\n
      3. Silicon — Roughly 140 grams per modern solar panel.<\/li>\n
      4. Grams of metals — The most valuable being the roughly 8 grams of silver per panel.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Glass:<\/strong>\u00a0 By weight, the largest component of a solar panel is glass.\u00a0 Unfortunately, scrap glass is not very valuable and so Australia only recycles around 56% of its glass bottles<\/a>.\u00a0 Because recyclers can easily get bottles that don’t have solar cells stuck to them, they aren’t going to accept stripped solar panels as is.\u00a0 The glass will have to be extracted with a minimal amount of contamination and this is a difficult process.\u00a0 Once it’s done, scrap glass can be sold for $30 a tonne<\/a>, which comes to about 40 cents per panel.<\/p>\n

        Plastic:<\/strong>\u00a0 To pull apart a solar panel, the epoxy holding it together has to be destroyed, so I don’t see how that can be recycled.\u00a0 The plastic backsheet weighs around 400 grams and if stripped away would be mixed plastic waste, as it’s made of various types.\u00a0 It could be sold for perhaps $225 per tonne or 9 cents per panel.<\/p>\n

        Silicon:<\/strong>\u00a0 There’s around 140 grams of silicon in the form of solar cells in a modern panel.\u00a0 While I’m not sure what its grade of silicon waste would be, it may be worth $1,500 per tonne or around 21 cents per panel.<\/p>\n

        Silver:<\/strong>\u00a0 There are small amounts of metal in a solar panel and the most valuable is silver.\u00a0 There’s around 8 grams<\/a> in a modern panel.\u00a0 At $1.47 a gram<\/a> that’s $11.76 per panel.<\/p>\n

        Copper:<\/strong>\u00a0 I don’t have a good figure for the amount of copper in a stripped panel4<\/a><\/sup> but even if there is 100 grams, which I think is an over estimate, that’s only going to be worth about 85 cents at today’s prices<\/a> for high purity copper.<\/p>\n

        Other Metals:<\/strong>\u00a0 After the frame is removed there is still some aluminium in a solar panel, but only around 80 grams<\/a>.\u00a0 At the current prices<\/a> that’s about 20 cents worth.\u00a0 I don’t think any other metals, such as tin, would be worth any significant amount.<\/p>\n

        If we list my estimated values for the materials in a modern panel below we get:<\/p>\n