Search

The background to this research is that across the world there will be 200,000 tonnes of wind turbine blade waste to be disposed of each year from 2033. The purpose of the research is to compare the relative sustainability of alternative ways to deal with this waste, these being: landfill, incineration with heat recovery, co-processing in cement kilns, making furniture and bridge fabrication. The method is to use the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to select 11 metrics for sustainability. The use of the SDGs adds to the objectivity of this process overcoming one of the principal weaknesses of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). Quantitative information methods from Life Cycle Assessment, Geographic Information Science, census data and real options analysis of R&D, alongside qualitative information from Delphi studies and Strengths/Weaknesses/Opportunities/Threats analysis are combined in the assessment. Three MCDA methods are used, each calculates economic, social and environmental sustainability indices for the end-of-life alternatives which are then combined into integrated sustainability indices. A novel Delphi stopping condition based on consensus, consistency and convergence is used. The primary result is that bridge fabrication is the most sustainable alternative with furniture making in second place. Co-processing, incineration with heat recovery and landfill are progressively less sustainable alternatives. This result is robust to substantial changes in the selection of experts' opinions, the weights for MCDA and the values of the metrics. These findings offer researchers and policymakers a robust decision making process, applicable to situations where choices are made on sustainability criteria. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dealing with composite waste from decommissioned wind turbine blades will become a major issue in the coming years. This study aims to determine the most sustainable disposal method for Irish blade waste in the next ten years by using life cycle assessment to compare three scenarios: Co-processing in cement kilns in Germany, co-processing in Ireland, and landfill in Ireland. The results of this study establish a baseline impact scenario with which to compare future repurposing solutions, which are higher on the European Waste Hierarchy. Co-processing is not carried out in Ireland at the moment, but as blade waste increases, there is a strong likelihood of it becoming viable. Co-processing utilizes shredded blade waste to replace fuel and raw materials in the production of clinker, whereby environmental gains are made through material substitution. Comparative Life Cycle Assessment is used to determine which scenario is the least environmentally impactful, and which of the variables has the strongest impact. Co-processing in Ireland is determined to be the least impactful, due to the material substitution and the reduced transport. Material substitution is found to have a stronger impact than increased transport between Ireland and Germany. There is, however, a concern with co-processing as a preferred method to dispose of Irish blade waste in that the ease of disposal in this fashion might de-incentivize repurposing. Future research is needed to compare the costs of co-processing to other repurposing ideas, and to develop policy that requires farm owners to set aside bonds to pay for more sustainable second life options for blade waste. This will ensure that the option of co-processing in Ireland is passed over for a more sustainable Irish alternative. • Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is used to compare end of life solutions to blade waste. • Co-processing of composite blade waste can reduce raw material requirements. • Co-processing of blade waste is 6 times more environmentally beneficial than landfill. • The benefits of 10% material substitution outweigh the impacts of reduced transport. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]