What happens when the sun goes down on the parts used for storing solar power? Where do they go in the sunset of their lives? And who pays for it? 

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) performed the first global assessment on how best handle solar photovoltaic modules once they have reached the end of use. It was paid for by the United States Department of Energy’s Solar Energy Technologies Office.

NREL senior scientist Garvin Heath, who specializes in sustainability science, was the principal author of an article on the topic for the journal Nature Energy. His colleagues Timothy J. Silverman, Michael Kempe, Michael Deceglie, Dwarakanath Ravikumar, Timothy Remo, Hao Cui, Parikhit Sinha, Cara Libby, Stephanie Shaw, Keiichi Komoto, Karsten Wambach, Evelyn Butler, Teresa Barnes & Andreas Wade contributed to the piece.

Energy Alliance's Bill Peacock | Energy Alliance

Heath told Renewable Energy Magazine it was an important topic that has not been properly examined.

“We must be good stewards of these materials and develop a circular economy for PV modules,” he told the magazine. “It provides a succinct, in-depth synthesis of where we should and should not steer our focus as researchers, investors, and policymakers.”

Bill Peacock, policy director of Energy Alliance, a project of the Texas Business Coalition, said it’s a big issue that may become massive within three decades.

“The NREL study notes the average lifespan for photovoltaic (PV) solar panel components is 30 years, and that is beginning to come due for some solar farms,” Peacock said. “The volume of modules no longer needed could total 80 million metric tons by 2050.”

Right now, no means exists to recycle these components, he noted.

“To date, there has not been a viable recycling industry springing up to support the increasing need to deal with solar farms coming to the end of their life cycle,” Peacock said.

The primary concern is not because materials are dangerous or toxic, he said.

“More than the toxicity of any particular component of solar panels, it is the vast amount of materials that will have to be dealt with that is the biggest problem,” Peacock said.

A phrase that may indicate further expense is “increased research and investment” into recycling these components. Peacock said that has meant more money out of ordinary people’s pockets.

“Whatever the many problems are caused by wind and solar generation, the cost of fixing them always seems to fall on taxpayers and consumers,” he said. “It is hard to estimate the cost recycling R&D related to solar. But recycling costs have had negative effects on multiple industries. For instance, recycling of newsprint is what turned most cities into one-newspaper towns. And recycling of trash has led to greatly increased waste-disposal costs.”

Peacock said all these problems are based on a false premise, as was explained in a Feb. 8, 2019, commentary on the Institute for Energy Research website.

“Advocates for wind and solar energy are trying to convince Americans that the economy can thrive on 100% renewable energy. However, wind and solar energy are intermittent sources that currently need back up power from reliable energy sources like coal, nuclear, and natural gas to keep the lights on, keep our homes heated, and keep our factories running,” it stated. “The truth is, the physics of wind and solar energy render 100% renewable energy nothing more than a myth. These technologies can only operate if the sun shines or the wind blows, requiring large amounts of storage for back up. Additionally, their land mass requirements are immense, they have much lower capacity factors compared to traditional sources, and the cost of transition would be enormous.

“Bottom line: setting a national goal of relying upon 100% renewable energy within a decade would lead to catastrophe,” the piece stated.

Peacock said it’s a falsehood that could cause grave danger.

“‘Green solar energy’ is a myth,” he said. “The entire life cycle from mining and manufacturing, to transportation, construction, and disposal is supported by fossil fuel burning and CO2-emitting processes. And that doesn't include the batteries that are required to keep solar from destroying the grid.”