Solar Industry Creates Scheme to Recycle Solar Panels in Europe
by Michael Graham Richard, Ottawa, Canada 
on 05.15.08
The Solar Industry Tries to Stay One Step Ahead of Regulators
As solar panels become more mainstream and a higher volume of them is produced, they are bound to attract more attention from regulators. Many of the biggest companies that make solar panels have decided to preempt that wave of regulation by voluntarily joining up and creating the first large-scale scheme to recycle solar panels in Europe. The goal is to have the system in place by the end of this year.
"We will be the first in Europe to establish such a system. And I could well imagine that it will become a model for other countries," said PV Cycle President Karsten Wambach, who also heads SolarWorld's Solar Material division.
The new PV Cycle association embraces about 17 solar companies including Q-Cells, SolarWorld, Sharp, Kyocera and First Solar, as well as German solar industry association BSW and the European Photovoltaic Industry Association (EPIA).
Recycling of solar panels should stay pretty low for a while, though. Solar cells have a useful life of many decades if nothing out of the ordinary happens to them, and so far most recycled panels have been flawed or damaged modules.
But these numbers are bound to trend up. About 16,000 tonnes are expected to be sent back in Europe by 2015, compared to 2,000 tonnes last year.
Turning Old Solar Panels into New Solar Panels?
The cost of making a solar panel from a recycled one is about the same as from new materials, but on the energy side, it only takes about 1/3 of the energy. We can also expect that as recycling volume goes up, a cost advantage will develop.
Photovoltaic Solar Power
::Hairy Solar Panels Could Result From Nanowire Breakthrough
::Turning Big Box Stores into Solar Power Plants in California
::1366 Technologies is Bringing Solar Power Closer to $1/Watt
::19.9%: New Thin Film Solar Efficiency Record
Solar Thermal Power
::Acciona Energia to Build Two 50-Megawatt Solar Thermal Power Plants in Spain
::Solar Thermal Power in North-Africa: How Much Land to Power the World?
::Torresol to Build 3 Solar Thermal Power Plants in Spain for $1.24 Billion
::Ausra: Solar Power Around the Clock, Enough for 90% of U.S. Grid
More on Recycling Solar Panels
::Solar firms team up on recycling to beat regulators
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- 7 Great Weekend Solar Power Projects
- 5 Reuses for Altoid Tins
- Forget Going Green Because It's the Right Thing to Do—Go Green to Make Your Neighbors Jealous
- How to Use a Solar Oven: Beans and Rice Recipe
- Meet Green Business Consultant Tyler Moorehead, of GreenUnlimited
- Burn More Calories, Use Less Energy with Self-Powered Cardio Machines
Would that other power creators - nuclear in particular - were as responsible in working out the long term plan.
Well done to all the companies involved in being so far sighted; or did they have to do it as the oil producers use their legislative powers to add expense to solar?
It sounds more like they did it to prevent government bureaucrats from dragging the industry down with their own ill-conceived regulations.
"It sounds more like they did it to prevent government bureaucrats from dragging the industry down with their own ill-conceived regulations."
Sounds about right.
I would suspect they were more interested in the valuable material used to make the panels. Refined silicon, gold, copper and such are not cheap.
@weee recycling
I fail to see why nuclear should be singled out over coal for failure to plan long term. I mean, chemists predicted the effects of rising CO2 back in the 19th century, and in 150 years no one tried anything to change it. And most of the nuclear waste we have exists because of government regulations, not because of a lack of them. America built its reactors not to minimize radioactive waste or produce cheap energy but to prevent Russia from getting fissile material.
it has seemed that affordable solar panels were not going to happen in the foreseeable future; however, a breakthrough from the HelioVolt Corporation has raised the possibility that we just might. HelioVolt has managed to produce thin film solar panels with a 12.2% conversion rate.
it has seemed that affordable solar panels were not going to happen in the foreseeable future; however, a breakthrough from the HelioVolt Corporation has raised the possibility that we just might. HelioVolt has managed to produce thin film solar panels with a 12.2% conversion rate.
Hi Anthony
The current estimates for decommissioning the nuclear power stations - the ones scheduled for decommissioning, not all - is now looking to be over £100 billion (I'm assuming it's a US billion - if it's a UK billion we're really stuffed!) so it's around £2,000 per man, woman and child.
And I think we all know from past experience the actual cost will be higher.
I don't have a problem with nuclear per se; the problem is more of government duplicitously selling tax payers a pup.
The German/Chinese pebble bed reactors appear to be more efficient and safer (given consideration to less predictable water supplies) but the UK is rushing to use home-grown technology - another pup.
I don't quite see how America building reactors was ever going to prevent Russia from getting fissile material... encourage yes, prevent no.
We need to look at the relationship between Roosevelt and Stalin, and how Churchill perceived Russia as being a growing threat. Roosevelt, I think quite rightly, understood that the US people would not want more aggression so shortly after WW2 - so the idea that the US could tell the USSR not to develop a nuclear capacity is misguided.
@ Anthony
last I checked, the byproducts of a coal-fired plant cannot cause cancer and literally burn whole populations. CO2 can be processed by trees and turned into O2 (oxygen). that is why they call this TreeHugger.com