The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Wind turbine blade recycling: Experiences, challenges and possibilities in a circular economy
Abstract
Abstract The wind power industry is a fast growing, global consumer of glass fiber-reinforced plastics (GFRP) composites, which correlates with the industry’s rapid growth in recent years. Considering current and future developments, GFRP waste amounts from the wind industry are expected to increase. Therefore, a sustainable process is needed for dealing with wind turbines at the end of their service life in order to maximize the environmental benefits of wind power. Most components of a wind turbine such as the foundation, tower, gear box and generator are already recyclable and treated accordingly. Nevertheless, wind turbine blades represent a challenge due to the type of materials used and their complex composition. There are a number of ways to treat GFRP waste, depending on the intended application. The best available waste treatment technologies in Europe are outlined in this paper. However, there is a lack of practical experiences in applying secondary materials in new products. A Danish innovation consortium was addressing this waste with a predominant focus on the blades from the wind power industry. The outcomes from the consortium and the various tested tools are presented in this paper as well as the secondary applications that were proposed. The outcomes are structured using Ellen MacArthur’s circular economy diagram. The “adjusted” diagram illustrates the potentials for a continuous flow of composite materials through the value circle, where secondary applications were developed in respect to “reuse”, “resize and reshape”, “recycle”, “recover” and ‘conversion’. This included applications for architectural purposes, consumer goods, and industrial filler material. By presenting the outcomes of the consortium, new insights are provided into potential forms of reuse of composites and the practical challenges that need to be addressed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Karuppannan Gopalraj, S., & Kärki, T. (2020) · SN Applied Sciences · doi:10.1007/s42452-020-2195-4 · Cited by 452
Furszyfer Del Rio, D. D., Sovacool, B. K., Foley, A. M., Griffiths, S., Bazilian, M., Kim, J., & Rooney, D. (2022) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2021.111885 · Cited by 171
Metadata
- Authors
- Jensen, J. P., & Skelton, K.
- Venue
- Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-12
- Volume
- 97
- Pages
- 165-176
- ISSN
- 1364-0321 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2888983666
- Cited by
- 401
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Wind turbine blade recycling: Experiences, challenges and possibilities in a circular economy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.rser.2018.08.041
- The paper
- Jensen, J. P., & Skelton, K. (2018). Wind turbine blade recycling: Experiences, challenges and possibilities in a circular economy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.08.041
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.