4.4 Article

Repurposing and recycling wind turbine blades in the United States

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ep.13932

关键词

industrial ecology; wind energy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wind energy is gaining popularity as a low-cost and carbon-free technology, but the end-of-life strategies for wind turbine components, particularly the blades, pose challenges. This study discusses the current literature on blade reuse and recycling, proposing suggestions for applications and policy support. The estimates show a need for repurposing and recycling of 2.4 million metric tons of wind blades by 2043-2050, based only on the development zones on the East Coast.
Wind energy is increasing in popularity worldwide as a low-cost, carbon-free energy technology. As deployment continues to grow, owners will need to conduct planning for end-of-life strategies for the components that are large in volume, number, and not readily recyclable in the operational form. Since the first modern, utility-scale wind turbines were installed in the 1990s, a large number of wind turbines are reaching their end-of-life (typically 20-25 years) and each year an increasing number of blades are decommissioned. To stimulate efficient turbine reuse and recycling industry, industry and public funding should be allocated to support: research and testing processing methods, implementing potential applications of the material, and incentivizing successful applications for reuse of the material. Since the blades are the component most exposed to the elements and least easily recycled, this work will focus on their post-operation applications. This work discusses the current literature on wind turbine blade reuse and recycling, proposing suggestions for applications of the materials and policy support. The work also estimates that by the years 2043-2050, only based on the development zones announced on the East Coast, a cumulative of 2.4 million metric tons (t) of wind blades would be needed to be repurposed and recycled.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据