The rapid expansion of solar energy is creating a new environmental challenge: the fate of photovoltaic panels as they reach the end of their useful life. An international study published in Nature estimates that the global volume of solar panel waste could reach between 297 and 402 million tons by 2060.
The research, which involves researchers from China, Australia and Sweden, including Jian Zuo, professor at the University of Adelaide, warns, however, that this growing amount of waste could become an economic opportunity. According to the authors, proper recycling of photovoltaic panels could generate cumulative economic benefits of hundreds of billions of dollars by 2060, potentially approaching a trillion dollars.
“Solar energy is essential for the transition to a low-carbon energy system, but we must not ignore what happens to solar panels at the end of their life,” says Jian Zuo. For the researcher, it is necessary to start planning recycling now, in order to turn the growing stream of waste into a source of materials rather than an environmental problem.
Solar panels contain economically valuable materials, such as silicon, silver, copper, and tellurium. They also include metals such as lead and cadmium, which can pose environmental risks if the equipment is discarded improperly.
To evaluate the different possibilities, the researchers developed an integrated model that analyzed 1,708 recycling scenarios across 32 regions of the world, considering available technologies, material prices, international trade, and subsidy policies.
The results indicate that the combination of regionally adapted recycling technologies with the use of external recycling facilities could provide the greatest economic and environmental benefits. This approach would reduce costs and emissions, particularly by routing waste to countries with more advanced and economically competitive recycling technologies.
However, the solution raises an equity issue. The concentration of recycling in regions with greater technological capacity could result in economic benefits being similarly concentrated, leaving lower-income countries with a smaller share of the gains.
“The globally cheapest or most efficient recycling path is not necessarily the fairest,” warns the researcher, arguing that recycling policies should take into account not only economic efficiency, but also the distribution of benefits and environmental impacts.
The study points to the possibility of using declining subsidies, which would be reduced progressively as recycling becomes economically viable. According to the researchers, this model could improve the distribution of benefits across regions and require less investment than maintaining permanent subsidies.
The value of recovered materials will also be decisive. An increase in the prices of raw materials such as silver, aluminum, and silicon could boost the profitability of recycling, while technological progress should help reduce the costs of the processes.
For the researchers, international cooperation will be essential to prepare the sector for the rise in photovoltaic waste. “We need to treat solar panels as part of a circular economy, and not as a disposable product,” says Jian Zuo.
The conclusion comes at a moment when the photovoltaic industry still has the opportunity to build recycling capacity before the volume of end-of-life equipment reaches its peak. For the authors, anticipating this investment will be essential to prevent the transition to solar energy from creating a new waste problem on a global scale and to ensure that the materials in the panels can re-enter the production cycle.
