SVTC’s Top Ten: Why Solar Companies Must Take Back & Responsibly Recycle

#4 – Mandatory takeback and recycling laws can help stop sham recycling

#5 – Develop Panel Recycling Infrastructure

#6 - Consumers who buy solar panels have already proven that they are willing to make an investment in order to protect the environment.

#7 – Companies who want to recycle their panels won’t be able to justify recycling investments

#8 - If the solar industry doesn’t take proactive steps to develop and support a federal law on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), they will most likely be at the mercy of a patchwork of different laws enacted at the state and local levels.

#9 - Mandatory recycling will allow companies to set up viable recycling financing systems.

#10 – Irresponsible companies shouldn’t get a free ride

SVTC’s report, Toward a Just and Sustainable Solar Energy Industry, came out a year ago and exposed the not-so-green side of the solar industry.  We opened a global discussion on the need for takeback and responsible recycling of solar panels.  SVTC’s history is one that examines issues in both production and the end-of-life of electronics.

As an organization that wants to see the solar industry succeed, we hope to work with solar companies to take full responsibility for the environmental and health impacts of their products. The first step is for solar companies to takeback and responsibly recycle solar panels (no export and no prison labor).

Over the next several weeks, SVTC’s executive director, Sheila Davis, will share, “SVTC’s Top 10: Why Solar Companies Must Take back & Responsibly Recycle.”

The posting of these blog entries will lead up to the release of SVTC’s Solar Scorecard, which will be released in late March. The scorecard will rank companies according to their takeback policies, supply chain monitoring, chemical use, lifecycle analysis, and willingness to be transparent.

#4 – Mandatory takeback and recycling laws can help stop sham recycling

Mandatory takeback and recycling laws that enforce uniform recycling standards will ensure high standards and sustainable practices throughout the solar industry. Without basic standards the solar industry can expect to have its reputation damaged by a few solar companies who take the take the low-road and take shortcuts that lead to dumping and environmental degradation.

Recycler Certification

Recyclers need to be held accountable. A certification program will guarantee that recycling facilities are operating safely and handling the materials properly and following all of the environmental, labor, and health and safety laws.

Downstream monitoring

Standards for supply chain monitoring will require companies to know who is in the recycling supply chain. Solar companies won’t be able to hand-off their panels to a first tier processor and wash their hands. Solar companies who elected to work with third-party recyclers should be able to track their materials to final disposition.

#5 – Develop Panel Recycling Infrastructure

Each country where solar panels are sold will have unique hazardous waste, solid waste recycling and collection infrastructures.  We know these differences exist between states, here in the U.S. But you can imagine how much this would differ from country to country? These varying infrastructures are based on a region’s geography, climate, culture and economy.

Recycling laws in one country won’t automatically be suited for another country.  The exact system used in the EU might not work for the U.S. But what we do know is that voluntary programs do not work.

We also know that the U.S. needs good jobs and clean jobs. With the U.S. government and states investing millions in promoting solar, such as California’s commitment to putting a million solar panels on roofs, it is only logical that we invest in regional solar panel recycling   facilities that support US workers and communities.

It is estimated that solar panels will last 20-25 years and thousands of tons of waste will be created when they come down. For example, the Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) is developing two large-scale solar energy facilities and several smaller facilities in California that will total 1,300 megawatts (MW) or approximately 12,000,000 solar panels.  At the end of their useful lives, these panels will result in 190,000 tons of waste some of which is hazardous.

Why not create a system now to deal with decommissioned panels as well as plan for the future and look for areas in the U.S. where they can be recycled? Why not have a plan in place to create jobs here?

By supporting mandatory takeback and responsible recycling, solar companies can more than lower electric bills; they can prove that they are re-investing in the US.

#6 – Consumers who buy solar panels have already proven that they are willing to make an investment in order to protect the environment.

Consumers who buy solar panels have already proven that they are willing to make an investment in order to protect the environment. Consumers and investors will be more likely to buy or invest in a company that is living up to the image they have created for themselves – one that will keep the planet green and clean.

As solar energy industry works to replace polluting fossil fuels, it is in the industry’s best interest to ensure that pollutants from the panels don’t enter the environment.  Only the solar producers can ensure that this will happen by eliminating pollution during production and taking back the panels and recycling them responsibly.

Only the manufacturers will be able to develop programs to takeback their panels and guarantee that reusable materials are incorporated into new products. Responsible recycling will also prevent chemicals from harming workers, communities or the environment. By implementing recycling programs, producers will be able to determine how to construct the panels in a way that is easily recyclable. They will also receive firsthand knowledge on ways to reduce the use of toxic substances.

When consumers see that companies are committed to the environment and are creating manufacturing and recycling jobs in their own backyard, they will feel more secure about the investment they have made in solar energy.

Enthusiasm for solar and trust of brand loyalty may be undermined when consumers learn that their panels are being dumped or mishandled and are harming the environment.

Solar companies that do not support mandatory takeback or that work against any type of recycling legislation would find themselves contradicting the concepts of being green, and their brand would certainly come into question when the public finds out.

More than any other industry, solar companies need to get behind takeback and responsible recycling to ensure that it is a universal policy if they want to continue to be seen as green and clean.

# 7 – Companies Who Want to Recycle Their Panels Won’t Be Able to Justify Recycling Investments

If there is no legal requirement for recycling, companies that want to recycle their panels won‘t be able to justify recycling investments to shareholders or stakeholders.

Even when a company wants to do the “right thing” and develop a recycling program for their panels, they might not be able to justify the cost of such a program to shareholders. If the environmental leaders within the company can’t prove that an investment in recycling will be profitable to shareholders, then those leaders will have less incentive to come forward and make a case for designing products so that they can be easily recycled.

For example, a representative from a computer manufacturer once told me a discouraging story about a situation at his company. He said that the designers worked with recyclers and found that if they simply added a $1.25 component part to the new line of printers it would make the printer easier to disassemble and cheaper to recycle. The design team was told  not to include the part because there was no guarantee that the printer would be recycled, so the added cost could not be justified. If there would have been a law in place, the $1.25 component could have saved money for the company in the long run.

If there is a system in place to ensure that solar panels  that are designed today will be recycled, solar companies that are taking action to protect the environment will have the full support of their shareholders and law.

#8 – SVTC’s Top Ten: Why Solar Companies Must Take Back & Responsibly Recycle

If the solar industry doesn’t take proactive steps to develop and support a federal law on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), they will most likely be at the mercy of a patchwork of different laws enacted at the state and local levels.

The Resource Conservation and Recycling Act (RCRA) is very outdated. Most states interpret RCRA differently, and some have been developing recycling programs that are far more aggressive than the federal law. In fact, this is occurring with electronics. Since there is no federal law in place, more than 15 states have passed different electronic waste (e-waste) recycling laws.

Local governments are responsible for waste generated in their communities. Those municipalities that are strapped for cash and are desperate to divert the large quantities of hazardous e-waste from their landfills have  turned to the cheapest recycling options. Without some type of federal legislation on product takeback and responsible recycling, how can we be sure that solar is not going to go down the same dirty path as e-waste? 

Organizations and individuals who want to ensure that companies are responsible for the environmental impacts of their products are left with no option but to work towards changing their local and state laws.

Hopefully, with the support of companies that understand the importance of protecting people and the environment, a federal law will be passed so that the industry doesn’t have to abide by different laws in every state.

#9 – SVTC’s Top Ten: Why Solar Companies Must Take Back & Responsibly Recycle

#9 Mandatory recycling will allow companies to set up viable recycling financing systems.

Right now, recycling solar panels isn’t profitable. Maybe it won’t be tomorrow, or the next day, but it will surely remain inefficient and costly in twenty years if laws aren’t passed  requiring solar companies to invest in recycling systems.

Mandatory recycling laws can be structured so that solar companies can take advantage of the long life cycle of their products, approximately 25 years, to develop and test recycling systems that are economically viable and environmentally sound.

Once recycling laws are in place, there will be a level playing field, and that will allow more time for the companies to “get it right” and possibly incorporate some of the recycled materials in new products and recover some of the cost of developing the recycling program.

Having these types of systems in place will help prevent dumping overseas, the use of prison labor, and will truly protect the environment & human health.

#10 – SVTC’s Top Ten: Why Solar Companies Must Take Back & Responsibly Recycle

#10 – Irresponsible companies shouldn’t get a free ride

Without mandatory laws for recycling, the companies that invest in recycling will give a “free ride” to those companies that do not set up programs. Companies lacking a takeback and recycling program will have an economic advantage since their costs will not reflect the true cost of doing business. By externalizing recycling costs, these companies   will be able to charge their customers less for their products.

It is not rocket science for these companies to figure out why there is a very real need to create a takeback and responsible recycling system for their company. The solar industry, as a whole, will suffer because of these free riders; few companies will be bearing the burden that all of the companies should be responsible for.

Responsible solar companies won’t be the only ones picking up the tab for the free riders. Companies without takeback programs will also be shifting the burden onto taxpayers and communities.

Local municipal waste management programs will have to take responsibility for the influx of solar panels that will either end up being treated as hazardous waste or sent to a landfill if takeback and recycling programs are not compulsory.  Taxpayers, who pay for these services, will be paying for the costs that the companies should have covered.

Communities located near hazardous waste facilities and landfills might pay a price when solar panels containing toxic substances, as well as substances that have an unknown effect on the environment, such as nanomaterials, are dumped in their area. The poor in the developing countries will also have to pay for the absence of proper infrastructure to recycle panels. However, they will most likely not pay a monetary price. If the treatment of electronic waste is any indicator, developed countries, such as the U.S., will dump the panels in these communities and they will end up paying with their health.

SVTC’s doesn’t believe there should be any “free riders.”

Avatar: 3-D images, 2-D message

by Lauren Ornelas     

As someone who has seen Avatar in both the 3D and non-3D, I can say without a doubt that the 3D version was much better.

 However, when you hear about something called the “Avatar Effect” when discussing how some companies are looking to create 3D televisions you realize that maybe some missed the point of the movie…

The movie is about corporations who are willing to sacrifice the planet and people for a mineral buried in the Earth. Now the movie is clearly an allegory for the quest for natural resources and the harm we have caused to ourselves and to other nations in our quest, but the underlying message is how we continue to ravage our planet and its people for the almighty dollar.

With the recent switchover from analog TVs to digital TVs, a need to extract rare metals buried in the earth to make new TVs and an influx of electronic waste (e-waste) are created as people tossed out their old analog TV.  This pattern will happen again when consumers get rid of their old digital and HD TV’s and purchase new 3D TVs.

Remember, TVs and computers contain hazardous chemicals which have been known to harm communities and workers in the production phase as well as in disposal. In the summer of 2008, a number of us from SVTC traveled to India and saw first-hand what happens when e-waste from the U.S. is dumped to other countries that do not have the infrastructure to take care of it. Men, women and children dismantled products without proper tools and were exposed to lead and carcinogens such as carbon black from printers. Children were covered in it.

I was really hopeful that the strong message from Avatar would make people understand the need to protect our planet and not simply purchase a new TV.  

Although I truly enjoyed the 3D version and felt the experience was amazing,  I would, without a doubt, prefer to experience parts of the world, such as Africa, without it being mined away to make new TV components or used as our dumping ground for those same TVs after a mere 1-2 years of use.

Sunflowers and Solar Panels

Since we sent out over 200 surveys to solar companies in October, I had to visit several hundred solar websites to get companies’ addresses. Some sites were bare-bones and for others, cost was probably not an issue.

On thing I noticed while dredging through hundreds of sites was sunflowers. Beautiful sunflowers fully blossomed in the foreground and a shiny black solar panel in the background. Maybe it’s the contrast of black and yellow, but this image is everywhere.

The more I thought about which plant should be next to the solar panel, a very simple image came to mind – a potato. In my opinion, potatoes, while much less glamorous than sunflowers, do a far better job at capturing the true characteristics of solar panels.

So it doesn’t sound like I’m coming completely out of left field with this comparison, here’s a little info about a potato. While the root of the potato plant is edible, the plant itself is highly toxic. Once we have used up the root, we have toxic leftovers.

The same goes for solar panels. After they have been “used” up, that is to say the panels have reached the end of their useful life, we are left with something that contains toxic materials.

Although it’s far from being a perfect comparison, it illustrates the problem that solar panel manufacturers must face. No matter how sleek the panel might look, it will not live up to the image of a benign sunflower as long as it contains toxic chemicals.

SVTC encourages companies to try to become the image of the sunflower. Remove the toxic substances in your panel that will not harm people or the environment during manufacturing or disposal.