Solar panels are almost entirely recyclable. The same is true for batteries used for energy storage. It not being “economical” is a capitalism problem and not a renewable energy problem.
This is bordering on miss information. It’s a tiny fraction of resources compared to what we are currently extracting to produce energy and discarded solar panels are pretty safe (unless it’s American solar panels that sometimes contain heavy metals like cadmium).
And the neoliberal answer to solar panels being economically non-recycleable is to increase the cost to putting them in landfills until they are economically recyclable. Even if it’s just grinding them into dust to use as a filler in concrete or something.
edit, some rough calculations:
20kg of solar panels produce about as much electricity as 5 tons of coal.
Sure, but we’re not doing net zero, and never were. It’s an Ideal that dominates in the media only to undermine the actual work of adaptation, since it cannot and will not be attempted under capitalism - it’d be easier to ask the devil to lay off on the brimstone. Like fusion, when net zero 2025 passed, they just start talking about net zero by 2030.
Somewhat decentralised and resilient solar energy infrastructure is far more valuable for surviving extreme climate change and global excitements than a nuclear power infrastructure that won’t exist without decades of struggle. And the former can be attempted by individuals and small communities even with our malicious and incapable governments - small-scale community nuclear isn’t even a dream.
Focusing on nuclear energy is ultimately passive, it’ll always be a decades-long project, first to overcome the hostile regulations and corruption blocking it, and then to just get it done - and it can only be done by corporations or governments, who we must trust to actually do it. Solar/renewables are active, alive, they can be done now even imperfectly, by small groups.
The only single solution is every single solution - nuclear, solar, communism, wind, ecological adaptation, yadda yadda.
Saying the panels would end up in landfills is absolutely misinformation.
Like 95% of a solar panel is glass, aluminum, or silicon. I terms of recycling, those are some of the most recyclable materials.
If your goal is net zero than solar and batteries is it because its theoretically possible to reach a point where all new panels and batteries are produced from materials recycled out of old panels and batteries.
Saying the panels would end up in landfills is absolutely misinformation.
It absolutely isn’t, because that’s literally where they already end up.
Like 95% of a solar panel is glass, aluminum, or silicon. I terms of recycling, those are some of the most recyclable materials.
Fantastic! They still end up in landfill though, because like I said, economically it’s not viable to recycle them. It costs more money to recycle a solar panel than it does to buy a new one.
its theoretically possible to reach a point where all new panels and batteries are produced from materials recycled out of old panels and batteries.
It’s definitely not, even theoretically. Batteries definitely aren’t infinitely recyclable.
If your goal is net zero than solar and batteries is it
Nope, the only real way to go net zero is nuclear.
Solar panels require mining and non-renewable materials to make
All human activity has an impact, replacing fossil fuels by solar is extremely positive
and are economically non-recyclable
Their lifespan is 30+ years easily. Recycling may very well become economically feasible once we start generating millions of tons of solar panel residue, large scale operation is a huge aspect of profitability
Recycling may very well become economically feasible once we start generating millions of tons of solar panel residue, large scale operation is a huge aspect of profitability
Scale is irrelevant. The cost to break down and recover materials from a solar panel and then recycle it to be able to make it into a new panel is higher than it costs to just buy a new panel, and this is never going to change - especially as the price of cheap chinese-made solar panels keeps decreasing.
That would be all solar panels. China manufactures 95% of the solar photovoltaic power in the planet, you can thank socialism for providing an alternative to fossil fuels
On the evening of March 29, 2026, something quietly remarkable happened on the California power grid. While people were cooking dinner, charging electric vehicles, and running air conditioning, grid-scale batteries delivered 12.3 gigawatts (GW) of electricity and met 42.8% of the state’s total electricity demand. To put that in perspective, 12.3 GW is roughly equivalent to the output of six Hoover Dams, and it exceeds the all-time peak electricity demand of Greece.
Bro you are extremely wrong on this topic
It has twice the population and 3x the GDP of Australia. If California can source 42% of its electricity from batteries, Australia could easily do 100%.
And China has even more. They plan 180 gigawatts of battery storage.
You are extremely incorrect. Grid scale batteries already exist. They aren’t even uncommon anymore. Your scaremongering belong in 2002.
Also for things like heating a home at night, those sand batteries can store heat from excess electricity generated and you can pump it to entire neighborhoods.
Solar panels require mining and non-renewable materials to make, and are economically non-recyclable, meaning they end up in landfill.
Solar panels are almost entirely recyclable. The same is true for batteries used for energy storage. It not being “economical” is a capitalism problem and not a renewable energy problem.
Removed by mod
Hoxha’s communist government thought it could electrify all of Albania in 25 years. It was wrong.
spoiler
It only took 10.
This is bordering on miss information. It’s a tiny fraction of resources compared to what we are currently extracting to produce energy and discarded solar panels are pretty safe (unless it’s American solar panels that sometimes contain heavy metals like cadmium).
And the neoliberal answer to solar panels being economically non-recycleable is to increase the cost to putting them in landfills until they are economically recyclable. Even if it’s just grinding them into dust to use as a filler in concrete or something.
edit, some rough calculations:
20kg of solar panels produce about as much electricity as 5 tons of coal.
Nothing I said is bordering on “miss information”. It’s all true.
If we were serious about “net zero” we’d be all in on nuclear. It’s the only way to it.
Sure, but we’re not doing net zero, and never were. It’s an Ideal that dominates in the media only to undermine the actual work of adaptation, since it cannot and will not be attempted under capitalism - it’d be easier to ask the devil to lay off on the brimstone. Like fusion, when net zero 2025 passed, they just start talking about net zero by 2030.
Somewhat decentralised and resilient solar energy infrastructure is far more valuable for surviving extreme climate change and global excitements than a nuclear power infrastructure that won’t exist without decades of struggle. And the former can be attempted by individuals and small communities even with our malicious and incapable governments - small-scale community nuclear isn’t even a dream.
Focusing on nuclear energy is ultimately passive, it’ll always be a decades-long project, first to overcome the hostile regulations and corruption blocking it, and then to just get it done - and it can only be done by corporations or governments, who we must trust to actually do it. Solar/renewables are active, alive, they can be done now even imperfectly, by small groups.
The only single solution is every single solution - nuclear, solar, communism, wind, ecological adaptation, yadda yadda.
Ummm that’s literally what most countries and governments are specifically saying is their goal.
No they can’t lol. You need giant corporations manufacturing them lol.
Edit: didn’t see they were banned
Have you heard of lying? It’s so hot right now.
“Should I bother to close that line of response? Nah.”
Many such cases.
Open system, closed loop, accessibility, control, influence: these are all words. Pretend I added some filler.
Nuclear plants require mining and non-renewable materials to make, and are economically non-recyclable, meaning they end up in landfill.
Saying the panels would end up in landfills is absolutely misinformation.
Like 95% of a solar panel is glass, aluminum, or silicon. I terms of recycling, those are some of the most recyclable materials.
If your goal is net zero than solar and batteries is it because its theoretically possible to reach a point where all new panels and batteries are produced from materials recycled out of old panels and batteries.
It absolutely isn’t, because that’s literally where they already end up.
Fantastic! They still end up in landfill though, because like I said, economically it’s not viable to recycle them. It costs more money to recycle a solar panel than it does to buy a new one.
It’s definitely not, even theoretically. Batteries definitely aren’t infinitely recyclable.
Nope, the only real way to go net zero is nuclear.
All human activity has an impact, replacing fossil fuels by solar is extremely positive
Their lifespan is 30+ years easily. Recycling may very well become economically feasible once we start generating millions of tons of solar panel residue, large scale operation is a huge aspect of profitability
Scale is irrelevant. The cost to break down and recover materials from a solar panel and then recycle it to be able to make it into a new panel is higher than it costs to just buy a new panel, and this is never going to change - especially as the price of cheap chinese-made solar panels keeps decreasing.
Famously, economy of scale isn’t a thing /s
That would be all solar panels. China manufactures 95% of the solar photovoltaic power in the planet, you can thank socialism for providing an alternative to fossil fuels
Hey I’m about to blow your mind: coal comes out of the fucking ground, often requiring mining!, and it can’t be recycled
No shit. Coal works at night though.
Why did you make an inane comment about how solar panels aren’t recyclable and need to be mined then?
It’s not a point worth making because the lifetime emissions of solar are insanely lower than coal, negligible in comparison.
Yet you said solar panels aren’t recyclable and require mining so what were you trying to say? What did you mean by that?
Because the person I replied to said this:
they are extremely clean, the comparison to coal proves this.
Australia yet to discover batteries
Show me a country running off grid scale batteries. Then out of those 0 countries, show me one that’s as big as Australia.
How about california, the biggest regional economy in the world
https://www.houseofimpact.com/blog/california-battery-grid-storage-energy-transition
Bro you are extremely wrong on this topic
It has twice the population and 3x the GDP of Australia. If California can source 42% of its electricity from batteries, Australia could easily do 100%.
And China has even more. They plan 180 gigawatts of battery storage.
You are extremely incorrect. Grid scale batteries already exist. They aren’t even uncommon anymore. Your scaremongering belong in 2002.
Also for things like heating a home at night, those sand batteries can store heat from excess electricity generated and you can pump it to entire neighborhoods.