Wind Turbine Blades Not Recyclable

[ronwagn + 6,290]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2020-01-10/renewable-green-energy-myth-50000-tons-non-recyclable-wind-turbine-blades-dumped

THE RENEWABLE GREEN ENERGY MYTH: 50,000 Tons Of Non-Recyclable Wind Turbine Blades Dumped In The Landfill

 

[remake it + 288]

Commercial opportunities are only now beginning to open up as there really was not a great deal to work with until recently.

Decommissioned turbine blade recycling

[Meredith Poor + 883]

This post needs to be retitled:

"Wind Turbine Blades Not [Economically] Recyclable"

Epoxy can be recycled by heating it up and breaking it down with sodium hydroxide. NaOH will also react with silica, as in fiberglass.

Giving 200 foot turbine blades hot baths in lye is a bit of a stretch as matters stand now, although eventually such infrastructure is likely to be built out.

[NickW + 2,714]

5 hours ago, ronwagn said:

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2020-01-10/renewable-green-energy-myth-50000-tons-non-recyclable-wind-turbine-blades-dumped

THE RENEWABLE GREEN ENERGY MYTH: 50,000 Tons Of Non-Recyclable Wind Turbine Blades Dumped In The Landfill

 

In Germany the blades are ground up and used as fuel in cement kilns. 

As 1990's models reach the ends of the life across Europe and further afield people will develop disposal options that include energy recover or reuse of the materials. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

16 hours ago, NickW said:

In Germany the blades are ground up and used as fuel in cement kilns. 

As 1990's models reach the ends of the life across Europe and further afield people will develop disposal options that include energy recover or reuse of the materials. 

I hope that happens worldwide but it should be a prerequisite to allowing anymore wind farms. Far more energy is used in the processes involved in building them, transporting them to the site, erecting them, removing them, transporting them again, and then grinding them up for fuel. 

[NickW + 2,714]

3 hours ago, ronwagn said:

I hope that happens worldwide but it should be a prerequisite to allowing anymore wind farms. Far more energy is used in the processes involved in building them, transporting them to the site, erecting them, removing them, transporting them again, and then grinding them up for fuel. 

Why not apply exactly the same proscriptive rules to the gas industry?

[remake it + 288]

4 hours ago, ronwagn said:

I hope that happens worldwide but it should be a prerequisite to allowing anymore wind farms. Far more energy is used in the processes involved in building them, transporting them to the site, erecting them, removing them, transporting them again, and then grinding them up for fuel. 

Completely false as the energy payback can be less than a year and the CO2 footprint is also very small

[Otis11 + 551]

On 1/13/2020 at 11:05 PM, ronwagn said:

I hope that happens worldwide but it should be a prerequisite to allowing anymore wind farms. Far more energy is used in the processes involved in building them, transporting them to the site, erecting them, removing them, transporting them again, and then grinding them up for fuel. 

 

On 1/14/2020 at 2:12 AM, NickW said:

Why not apply exactly the same proscriptive rules to the gas industry?

Just stop all the subsidies, require remidiation of all sites after decommisioning, and let the industry figure it out.

Just FYI Ron - I think your stats are out of date. Now most turbines have an energy payback period of less than 2 years as @remake it said, and most solar cells are less than a year (Or, at least that's what it was when I worked with renewables - moved more to O&G back in 2016).

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 1/15/2020 at 3:28 PM, Otis11 said:

 

Just stop all the subsidies, require remidiation of all sites after decommisioning, and let the industry figure it out.

Just FYI Ron - I think your stats are out of date. Now most turbines have an energy payback period of less than 2 years as @remake it said, and most solar cells are less than a year (Or, at least that's what it was when I worked with renewables - moved more to O&G back in 2016).

There are claims and there are facts. There are costs analyses that are reliable and those that are worthless. You have to deal in studies that examine the big picture from mining the materials to burying the remains. Just making statements is  just that. I am not saying that I have all the details. I am sure you know a lot about solar but maybe not the whole picture compared to natural gas plants and the pros and cons. My opinion is my fairly educated guess. The technologies are constantly changing also. My goal is the best consumer price for their energy and balancing the environmental pros and cons. 

Edited January 17, 2020 by ronwagn
addition

[remake it + 288]

15 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

My opinion is my fairly educated guess.

Some people use detailed analysis and do not guess and that is why wind and solar nowadays provide the cheapest forms of electricity for most nations and also have both lower energy and CO2 footprints on life cycle bases.

Edited January 17, 2020 by remake it
link added

[Otis11 + 551]

On 1/16/2020 at 9:03 PM, ronwagn said:

There are claims and there are facts. There are costs analyses that are reliable and those that are worthless. You have to deal in studies that examine the big picture from mining the materials to burying the remains. Just making statements is  just that. I am not saying that I have all the details. I am sure you know a lot about solar but maybe not the whole picture compared to natural gas plants and the pros and cons. My opinion is my fairly educated guess. The technologies are constantly changing also. My goal is the best consumer price for their energy and balancing the environmental pros and cons. 

For reference, back in 2015 I worked extensively with renewable energy, the true LCOE (both backing out subsidies, and after subsidies), and the energy payback including resource extraction. What I found was when implemented intelligently, renewables could make great sense. Where we were deploying them wasn't always intelligent, however, given market distorting forces.

(I also found that increased renewable penetration also drove NG demand as NG is good for cheap peaker plants to fill in and allowed for the decrease in spinning reserves)

I'm also a huge proponent of Natural Gas, just FYI. (And now work with Shale - specifically in facilities design and deployment, but also have cursory experience with the other aspects just by association.)

[ronwagn + 6,290]

I am just tired of hearing false claims by the anti fossil fuel crowd. I am anti coal in most cases but for coal gasification and open to all technologies if honestly analyzed over the true long term.