For those that keep saying wind turbines can't be reused or recycled need to read this
-
@schnedan @radicalabacus @ar387
I can't find products made from "Plaswire's smart RX Polymer" for sale anywhere, it looks like more greenwashing. Last year Plaswire were jumping on the blockchain bandwagon.
@geoffl @schnedan @ar387 ew, that's awful. And it's not like blockchain's reputation wasn't already terrible at the time. Blockchain doesn't necessarily imply some sort of wasteful proof of work based cryptocurrency nonsense but it's also 100% not necessary just to keep track of blades and materials
-
@schnedan @radicalabacus @ar387
I can't find products made from "Plaswire's smart RX Polymer" for sale anywhere, it looks like more greenwashing. Last year Plaswire were jumping on the blockchain bandwagon.
@geoffl @radicalabacus @ar387 don't know if these actual use recycling materials from blades, but these are products which can.
they can cope with some degree of impurities and need fair amounts of material:
https://www.relux-umwelt.de/leistungen/bahnschwellen/
https://pioonier.com/kunststoff-bahnschwellen/ -
@geoffl @schnedan @ar387 ew, that's awful. And it's not like blockchain's reputation wasn't already terrible at the time. Blockchain doesn't necessarily imply some sort of wasteful proof of work based cryptocurrency nonsense but it's also 100% not necessary just to keep track of blades and materials
@radicalabacus @geoffl @ar387 you don't need blockchains... just some international standard signs
there is no english version, but this page lists plastic variant markings.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurzzeichen_(Kunststoff)
e.g. GF: glasfaserverstärkt (engl. glass fibre)
you can include the markings in the mold, laser em,... it will last a long time.
-
For those that keep saying wind turbines can't be reused or recycled need to read this
"The analysis found a total 99.9% material recovery – calculating that 79.5% of the wind farm’s components were recycled and 20.4% were reused or retained as spare parts, keeping nearly all material out of landfills."
100% of the recycling and component retention took place in the UK, supporting domestic green jobs and at least 10 supply chain companies.
@ar387 if the energy choice is between wind or fossil fuel, I'd rather be left with a mountain of old turbine blades instead of gigatons of carbon dioxide diffused across the atmosphere and roasting the planet alive
-
@ar387 The more important question is how many years did that wind farm run before needing to be decommissioned. When we compare various energy systems this is an important consideration.
@icanbob
Phase 1 was operating since 1995 and ran 28 years until 2023.
According to https://www.scottishpowerrenewables.com/onshore-new/onshore-scotland/wind-scotland/operational-windfarms/hagshaw-hill-windfarm only Phase 1 turbines will be replaced. -
@radicalabacus @schnedan @ar387
It just delays the inceneration/landfill step. There are currently 33000 blades in the UK to replace and we need better solutions than shredding them to mix with even more plastic. It looks nice in the headlines, which is the main reason for doing it, but we're creating an even more difficult recycling problem for the future.
If this wind park can be used as a yardstick, these 33,000 blades will be replaced every 28 years, but not all at the same time.
With an average of 1,180 blades per year and assuming they are all the very large kind that weighs 26t,(1) that's 30,380t of blades to recycle every year.That's less than the stated capacity of the factory that uses them to create RX Polymer (2) and ~1.70% of the yearly plastic production in the United Kingdom(3).
In 2025, the blades produced 85 TWh(4), the equivalent of 1.450 times their own mass in coal (5).
Yes, fully recyclable material would be better, but given that blades can be safely stored before recycling, are not as radioactive or toxic as fly ash and do not continuously emit CO2 it seems prudent to use them instead of waiting for something better.
(1) https://theroundup.org/how-much-does-a-wind-turbine-blade-weigh/
(2) https://plaswire.com/solutions/
(3) https://www.bpf.co.uk/industry/Default.aspx
(4) https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz947djd3d3o
(5) https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=667&t=2 -
If this wind park can be used as a yardstick, these 33,000 blades will be replaced every 28 years, but not all at the same time.
With an average of 1,180 blades per year and assuming they are all the very large kind that weighs 26t,(1) that's 30,380t of blades to recycle every year.That's less than the stated capacity of the factory that uses them to create RX Polymer (2) and ~1.70% of the yearly plastic production in the United Kingdom(3).
In 2025, the blades produced 85 TWh(4), the equivalent of 1.450 times their own mass in coal (5).
Yes, fully recyclable material would be better, but given that blades can be safely stored before recycling, are not as radioactive or toxic as fly ash and do not continuously emit CO2 it seems prudent to use them instead of waiting for something better.
(1) https://theroundup.org/how-much-does-a-wind-turbine-blade-weigh/
(2) https://plaswire.com/solutions/
(3) https://www.bpf.co.uk/industry/Default.aspx
(4) https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz947djd3d3o
(5) https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=667&t=2@geoffl
I'm sorry, I missed the problem with the company mentioned when first reading the thread.My argument doesn't really hinge on a specific company though, there's others if this one can't deliver on its promises.
-
If this wind park can be used as a yardstick, these 33,000 blades will be replaced every 28 years, but not all at the same time.
With an average of 1,180 blades per year and assuming they are all the very large kind that weighs 26t,(1) that's 30,380t of blades to recycle every year.That's less than the stated capacity of the factory that uses them to create RX Polymer (2) and ~1.70% of the yearly plastic production in the United Kingdom(3).
In 2025, the blades produced 85 TWh(4), the equivalent of 1.450 times their own mass in coal (5).
Yes, fully recyclable material would be better, but given that blades can be safely stored before recycling, are not as radioactive or toxic as fly ash and do not continuously emit CO2 it seems prudent to use them instead of waiting for something better.
(1) https://theroundup.org/how-much-does-a-wind-turbine-blade-weigh/
(2) https://plaswire.com/solutions/
(3) https://www.bpf.co.uk/industry/Default.aspx
(4) https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz947djd3d3o
(5) https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=667&t=2@Landa @geoffl @radicalabacus @ar387 nobody said otherwise...
-
@ar387 a canal restoration project in England just installed Lock Gates made from up-cycled end-of-life Dutch wind turbine blade(s).
-
If this wind park can be used as a yardstick, these 33,000 blades will be replaced every 28 years, but not all at the same time.
With an average of 1,180 blades per year and assuming they are all the very large kind that weighs 26t,(1) that's 30,380t of blades to recycle every year.That's less than the stated capacity of the factory that uses them to create RX Polymer (2) and ~1.70% of the yearly plastic production in the United Kingdom(3).
In 2025, the blades produced 85 TWh(4), the equivalent of 1.450 times their own mass in coal (5).
Yes, fully recyclable material would be better, but given that blades can be safely stored before recycling, are not as radioactive or toxic as fly ash and do not continuously emit CO2 it seems prudent to use them instead of waiting for something better.
(1) https://theroundup.org/how-much-does-a-wind-turbine-blade-weigh/
(2) https://plaswire.com/solutions/
(3) https://www.bpf.co.uk/industry/Default.aspx
(4) https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz947djd3d3o
(5) https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=667&t=2@Landa @radicalabacus @schnedan @ar387
Can you find any products made with this so-called "smart RX polymer", of which there are almost no details, actually on the market? As far as I can tell they're only storing the turbine blades for later processing.
-
T tokeriis@helvede.net shared this topic
