Photovoltaic Modules Waste Management: Ethical Issues for Developing Nations

Abstract

Solar photovoltaic (PV) systems are composed of modules and batteries characterized
by depreciable, short lifespans. A survey was carried out to ascertain the
level of awareness of the management of used PV modules in developing
countries. Even though the respondents are aware of the environmental and
health risks of the chemical components of the modules, nothing is being done
presently to recycle or plan for the management of the items at end-of-life (EoL)
period in developing countries. Whereas PV modules at EoL are being reprocessed
by recycling in developed countries like the EU, it is not being considered as
a health and environmental challenge, as for other electronic wastes in developing
countries. Herein, the status and ethical challenges of PV waste generation
in developing countries are discussed. Data from a structured survey instrument
are obtained, analyzed, and discussed for determining the precursory method to
avoid PV wastes in developing countries. It is observed that soon when most
installations will be decommissioned, the developing nations will begin to
experience a huge collection of PV wastes like other electronic gadgets and be
exposed to the dangers of electronic waste pollution if necessary legislative
programs are neglected.

Full text

Photovoltaic Modules Waste Management: Ethical Issues
for Developing Nations
Florence C. Okoroigwe, Edmund C. Okoroigwe,* Oluwatoyin O. Ajayi,
Solomon N. Agbo, and Joseph N. Chukwuma
1. Introduction
At the moment, solar photovoltaic (PV) technology ranks third-
most established renewable energy technology (RET) after hydro
and wind
[1]
because it can be easily adapted for electricity genera-
tion at the micro- and macrolevels.The parameters that have aided
its rapid growth in global installation capacity presentlyand during
the past few decades, compared with
other sources of electricity, include the sim-
plicity of the technology, public incentives,
lowest cost of electricity supply, promising
benefits, and ease of adaptation for electric-
ity generation. The continual reduction in
thecostofmanufacturingsolarcellshave
predominantly, made it most attractive to
grow the market. For instance, Nussey
and Fischer
[2]
have shown that silver mate-
rial is the driving factor responsible for the
drastic reduction in today’scostofPVcell
production as previously against silicon.
Furthermore, it is a technology that allows
small-scale end-users to make additional
income through an attractive feed-in-tariff,
whereby excess generated energy is fed into
the nation’s grid for monetary reward. A typ-
ical PV market trend, expressed as yearly
global installed capacity, in the past 5 years
beginning from 2015 is shown in Figure 1.
Data for 2015–2018 are according to IEA
PVPS,
[3–7]
whereas for 2019 alone, the global
installed capacity was 593.9 GW although
650 GW
[8]
was estimated and about 133 GW of solar cells were
manufactured.
[9]
Following the rapid dissemination and steady
annual market growth rate of PV, the yearly installation capacity
is projected to hit 1 582.9 GW by 2030
[10–12]
as more countries shift
from the traditional fossil fuels to renewables.
Although, there was an average increase rate of 91.7 GW per
annum of the installed capacity over the 5 year period (Figure 1),
F. C. Okoroigwe
Natural Science Unit, School of General Studies
University of Nigeria, Nsukka
Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria
F. C. Okoroigwe
Department of Nutrition and Dietetics
University of Nigeria, Nsukka
Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria
Dr. E. C. Okoroigwe
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Nigeria, Nsukka
Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria
E-mail: edmund.okoroigwe@unn.edu.ng
The ORCID identification number(s) for the author(s) of this article
can be found under https://doi.org/10.1002/ente.202000543.
DOI: 10.1002/ente.202000543
Dr. O. O. Ajayi
Faculty of Law
Obafemi Awolowo University
Ile Ife, Oyo State, Nigeria
Dr. S. N. Agbo
Forschungszentrum Julich GmbH
Wilhelm-Johnen-Straße, 52428 Julich, Germany
Dr. J. N. Chukwuma
Department of Philosophy
University of Nigeria, Nsukka
Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria
Solar photovoltaic (PV) systems are composed of modules and batteries char-
acterized by depreciable, short lifespans. A survey was carried out to ascertain the
level of awareness of the management of used PV modules in developing
countries. Even though the respondents are aware of the environmental and
health risks of the chemical components of the modules, nothing is being done
presently to recycle or plan for the management of the items at end-of-life (EoL)
period in developing countries. Whereas PV modules at EoL are being reproc-
essed by recycling in developed countries like the EU, it is not being considered as
a health and environmental challenge, as for other electronic wastes in devel-
oping countries. Herein, the status and ethical challenges of PV waste generation
in developing countries are discussed. Data from a structured survey instrument
are obtained, analyzed, and discussed for determining the precursory method to
avoid PV wastes in developing countries. It is observed that soon when most
installations will be decommissioned, the developing nations will begin to
experience a huge collection of PV wastes like other electronic gadgets and be
exposed to the dangers of electronic waste pollution if necessary legislative
programs are neglected.
REVIEW
www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (1 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH

there was an increase in 109.5 GW from 2017 to 2018 being the
highest increase value so far between two consecutive years. The
increase was slightly more than double the value reported by
Ogunmodimu and Okoroigwe
[13]
over 2014–2015. Even though
there have been conflicting values of the yearly installed capacity
reported by many scholars
[14–22]
over the years, the fact remains
that the market growth rate has been steadily positive. This
implies that PV will continue to play a significant role in global
electricity generation in the coming years with increased atten-
tion given to developing countries.
It has been established that RETs are environmentally friendly
during their useful life, in terms of obnoxious gaseous emissions
as do fossil fuels, however, they are not 100% pollution-free at
their end-of-life (EoL) period. This “nonpollution”concept of
RETs is obvious at a microcapacity level even during the EoL
period but at the level of industrial and megawatt plant capacities,
solid wastes (discarded systems components) accruing therefrom
can raise issues for environmental concern. Generally, PV systems
have ways of generating primary and secondary wastes streams.
the primary wastes streams are direct components used in PV sys-
tems, whereas secondary waste streams comprise pollutants from
nonrenewable energy resources used in the production and dis-
posal of PV panels and the rest of the balance of system (BOS)
components (wires, batteries, inverters, metallic frames). These
large quantities of nonrenewable energy generated wastes (pollu-
tants) are of high environmental impacts. The rapid increase in the
global PV installation capacity (Figure 1) implies an increase in PV
solid waste generation worldwide.
The projected PV waste generation by some leading countries
and continents is shown in Figure 2. China, India, Africa, the
Middle East, and Latin America (developing countries) waste
generation will be significant which is also expected to increase
as new projects emerge.
European Union PV waste generation is expected to exceed
two million tonnes by 2028,
[25]
whereas the South Korean figure
will fluctuate between 4299 and 5764 thousand tons by 2080
[22]
depending on the scenario. On the global scene, about eight mil-
lion tonnes will be generated by 2030,
[26,27]
which is expected to
exponentially reach 78 million tonnes by 2050 (Figure 2).
Due to the limited lifespan (usually 25–30 years) of PV mod-
ules and other systems components, electronics stakeholders
(systems manufacturers), researchers, electric power industries,
government, and nongovernmental agencies have developed
strong interests on studies that focus on the generation and man-
agement of: PV wastes, the EoL of electronics components, and
the methods involved in managing them.
[16,28–30]
At the incep-
tion of decommissioning of some PV modules, the respective
countries involved resorted to landfilling and it is the most widely
used disposal method for waste PV modules.
[31–34]
Conversely, as
the global installation capacity continues to increase and follow-
ing the widespread acceptance of PV for electricity generation in
many developing countries, waste generation from PV systems
will no longer be accommodated in landfill technology. Some
researchers have undertaken studies that indicate that PV instal-
lations generate solid wastes even though the technology produ-
ces green energy. For instance, Fthenakis
[35]
studied the life cycle
impact of emissions of cadmium in CdTe PV modules which is
safe for the environment under normal conditions but can be
227.1
303.1
402.5
512
593.9
Installed Capacity (GW)
Year
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Figure 1. Global cumulative PV installed capacity (data source from pre-
vious studies
[3–8]
).
20
10 7.5 7.5 4.3 1.715 1.6 1.285 0.7
78
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Figure 2. Projected PV waste generation by 2050 (data source from previous studies
[16,23,24]
).
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (2 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH

leached into aquatic environment through municipal dumpsites
at the module’s EoL period. Cucchiella et al.
[36]
studied the eco-
nomic benefits of recycling e-waste (PV modules inclusive) in
Europe and showed that there was a huge revenue potential
for recycling PV wastes in the continent. Using the Italian envi-
ronment, Cucchiella et al.
[37]
showed that the EoL PV recycling
does not encourage economic benefit without the construction of
a multiproduct recycling facility capable of treating a wide range
of e-waste streams.
The inclusion of PV wastes in waste electrical and electronic
equipment (WEEE) definition by EU motivated the assessment
in 2013 of PV waste in Italy, the second leading country in PV
installation capacity in Europe after Germany.
[1]
Sica et al.
[18]
assessed the economics of recycling waste PV panels and showed
that there was an environmental benefit of possibly saving about
1480–2220 ton CO
2
equivalent from a 2.46MW PV plant. Choi
and Fthenakis
[38]
assessed the economic benefits of PV waste
management by recycling and showed its nonprofitability based
on the input cost and value of the recovered materials.
Klugmann-Radziemska and Ostrowski
[39]
carried out a chemical
treatment of crystalline silicon cells to enhance the easy recovery
of pure silicon from the discarded modules. Eisenberg et al.
[40]
studied the toxicity hazards involved in the production of
copper–indium–gallium–selenium–sulfide (CIGS) thin-film PV
cells using different materials. Chatzisideris et al.
[41]
carried
out a life-cycle assessment of PV systems and showed that only
a few studies have highlighted the waste’s disposal mechanism.
Many other researchers
[42–48]
have also considered PV waste
management as an important programme in the general PV tech-
nology and industry.
It can be observed from the ongoing that PV wastes quantifi-
cation, management proposals, and recycling programmes are
being carried out in developed countries where advanced tech-
nology and funds to handle the wastes exist while the developing
countries have remained overly inactive in this respect. They are
yet to wake up to the reality of the consequences of EoL PV mod-
ules. Several thousands of modules are usually involved in large
capacity PV installations which can be decommissioned at once
at the end of the project’s life or the end of the equipment’s life. It
becomes worrisome when large quantities of solar module mate-
rials, considered unserviceable and unusable, are generated and
dumped due to lack of the facilities to handle the wastes, espe-
cially in the developing countries.
This article aims at discussing the ethical issues of PV module
waste management in developing countries. The objectives of
this article are to i) discuss the ethical implications of exporting
near EoL and/or used PV modules in developing countries,
ii) discuss the need to begin early to plan for the handling of
waste PV modules in developing countries following the lack
of advanced technology and funds to recycle the wastes, and
iii) proffer policy guidelines toward handling PV wastes in devel-
oping countries.
Europe is the only continent that has policy legislation restrain-
ing the use of heavy metals like lead, mercury, cadmium, hexava-
lent chromium, polybrominated biphenyls, and polybrominated
diphenyl ethers in the manufacture and handling of PV electronics
but replacing them with safer alternatives.
[49]
There is no Federal
legislation on PV wastes in the United States outside the general
definition of hazardous wastes
[50]
but many US states are
including PV spent products as hazardous wastes in their regula-
tions. Asia, (China, Japan, and India) has no specific regulations
for EoL PV panels although research had just begun for related
recycling technologies in China. Although India is among the
leading countries with increasing PV installation in the world,
it has neither a policy guideline nor an operational facility to recy-
cle wastes from solar panels.
[51]
The rest of the world including
Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, and the Caribbean are
yet to show concerns for the consequences of EoL PV wastes
despite the influx of PV facilities into the continents. More worri-
some is that approximately one-half of the annual WEEEs genera-
tion by developed countries find their ways to developing countries
under humanitarian aids or fairly used products
[36]
and are some-
times illegally shipped down.
1.1. Electronic Wastes Definition and Classification
The world today relies heavily on electronic systems to be able to
survive. Various researches have led to the development of super
electronic components of modern technologies. Electronic sys-
tems find application in virtually all human life especially in
energy infrastructure. Annually, billions of electronic devices
are manufactured, used and discarded.
An outstanding feature of all electronics devices is their lim-
ited lifespan. When an electronic device stops performing at its
designed and manufactured specification, or a better performing
alternative is developed, or when the fundamental technology
required to produce it is no longer considered state of the art,
then it can be said that the device has exhausted its life.
Thenceforth, it can be considered a waste irrespective of the
manufacturing date.
It is a challenge to classify e-wastes due to the complex nature
of its composition. Recently, the EU WEEE Directive defined
e-wastes to include PV panels
[29]
which are obsolete. In other
words, all electrical and electronic appliances or devices that are
no longer in use due to malfunction, damage, or ageing can be
classified as e-waste. PV modules which have stopped working,
have manufacturing deficiency, or have exhausted their life are
included in the e-wastes classification. In the e-waste stream, some
components are useful (recoverable and reusable) and/or hazard-
ous (harmful). These include glasses; metals (aluminium, copper,
iron, steel, silver, zinc, and nickel); harmful/hazardous metals
(mercury, lead, cadmium, indium, lithium, arsenic, and phos-
phors); polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and plastics.
1.1.1. Status of E-Waste
In some countries, e-waste constitutes part of municipal solid
waste (MSW) and it is continually being generated. Between
2010 and 2011 in EU countries and Australia, e-waste was about
4% or less, of the MSW collected.
[52]
Poverty and the high cost of
new electronics have made the developing countries remain the
dumping grounds for used and discarded electronics coming
from developed countries. It is noted that about 50–80%
[53]
of
the e-waste generated in developed markets, find themselves
in developing countries for reuse, often in violation of interna-
tional laws. This increases the rate and volume of e-waste gener-
ation in developing countries even more than the developed ones
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (3 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH

due to the reduced lifespan of the items by the time they begin to
use them in those countries. Table 1 shows per country’s e-waste
generation for some selected countries.
Zeng et al.
[54]
have put China’s future WEEE waste-generation
capacity to 15.5 and 28.4 million tonnes in 2020 and 2030, respec-
tively and it has also overtaken the United States to become the
world’s leading producer of e-waste.
[55]
The issues of WEEE in
developing countries call for the attention of individual countries
and international regulatory agencies to properly control the
influx of depreciating/deteriorating electronics into the coun-
tries. This will not only enhance the cleanliness of the environ-
ment but also ensure the safety of lives and properties.
1.2. PV Cells/Modules Production Materials
The PV industry is mainly dominated by silicon-based solar cells
and modules (wafer-based crystalline silicon) making up over
90% of the entire PV solar cells and modules currently in use.
Several research over the years have led to the production of mul-
ticrystalline silicon (multi-c-Si) wafers made from molten silicon
poured into crucibles which crystallize into square-shaped ingots
of small grains of monocrystalline silicon. Monocrystalline silicon
contains a single crystal structure grown into a cylindrical shaped
ingot from a cooling polysilicon melt (Czochralski process) and
then sliced into wafers.
[59]
They have gained more technical pref-
erence over the multicrystalline type with laboratory efficiencies
of 26.7% and 22.3%,
[9]
respectively. Of the global solar cells pro-
duction capacity in 2019, the vast majority were mc-Si and they
remain the dominant PV technology in the market accounting for
about 66% of the entire Si-wafer-based PV modules.
Over the past decade, the cost of silicon-based PV has gone
down drastically driven by reduction in the thickness of the sili-
con wafer and the silver contacts. According to Nussey and
Fisher,
[2]
more price reductions are expected to be driven by shift
from back surface field cells to passivated emitter rear cell, fast
roll-out of diamond wire sawing that replaced the slurry-based
sawing technology, complete shift to monocrystalline wafers
and a further reduction of the remaining silver at the finished
cell. The use of silver is a quantum leap in the cost reduction
profile of PV cell manufacture. Silver is overlaid on silicon wafer
thereby gathering up the electrons generated by light photons
impinging on the silicon wafer. The report further shows that
although silver is the “most expensive of nonsilicon”component
in solar modules/panels, there is a considerable reduction in its
quantity per cell from 400 mg (in 2009) to 90 mg presently
and hope to further reduce to 50 mg in 2029. There are also many
innovations in several other solar cell materials such as the thin-
films organics, perovskites solar cells, and the heterojunction
devices. These recent technologies use the benefits of cadmium
telluride (CdTe), cadmium sulfide (CdS), indium, gallium
arsenide (GaAs), copper cadmium telluride (CuCdTe), copper
indium diselenide (CuInSe
2
), and titanium dioxide
(TiO
2
),
[13,14,60–64]
to produce more efficient solar cells. Even
though the silicon-based solar cells dominate the market, these
recent thin film-based solar cells are altogether operational and
form part of PV cells products’stream.
As the silicon-based PV modules constitute over 90–98% of
PV systems installed between 1980s and mid-1990s, concerns
are being raised over how the wastes arising from the used mod-
ules and other accessories will be handled, considering the pos-
sible health and climate hazards, as they are about ending their
life or nearing decommissioning if not already discarded.
1.3. PV Module Waste Recycling and Management
Decommissioned photovoltaic modules (DPVMs) are considered
WEEE materials by European Union Guideline 2012/19/EU
[29]
that should be collected, recovered, and recycled. Following this,
several PV EoL wastes management schemes are being consid-
ered by different researchers such as life-cycle assessment and
recycling,
[36,65–67]
and recovering of Si from Kerf loss slurry
waste.
[43,68–70]
However, in the early years of decommissioning,
silicon-based solar cells ended up in landfills
[36,38,70,71]
due to
their small volume, lack of economic sustainability, and environ-
mental challenge
[34,37,48,72]
toward recycling them. However,
recycling is now used to recover some materials.
A suitable method that can be utilized depends on the type of
PV material and the recoverable components of interest. For
instance, a physical recovery route involving two rotors crush-
ing followed by hammer crushing of amorphous silicon, poly-
crystalline silicon, and cadmium telluride (CdTe) PV modules is
suggested by Granata et al.
[28]
to be the best option for mass
recovery of materials. This implies that glass can be recovered
from the three PV wastes by collectively applying rotor and
hammer crushing, heat treatment of large particles, and sieving
techniques. Silicon PV modules contain up to 600 g ton
1
of
silver
[74]
and yields about 94% silver concentration when dis-
solved in nitric acid and sodium chloride which is cheaper
and less energy-intensive than applying a pyrolysis method
before acid leaching. Combination of electrolysis and nitric acid
leaching for silver extraction from DPVMs was suggested by
Klugmann-Radziemska and Ostrowski
[39]
and Tao and Yu.
[73]
Table 1. E-waste generation potential of some selected countries.
Country Total (tons) per year Ref.
US 5 10
6
[53]
EU 7 10
6
China 28.4 10
6
(2030) [54,55]
Australia 587 450 (2014) [52]
Argentina 120 000 [56]
Brazil 900 000
Colombia 150 000
Ghana 280 000 (2009)
India 400 000
Japan 38.48 10
6
units
Malaysia 132 094
a)
per year and 678 813
b)
Thailand 342 000 (2011)
Vietnam 913
Nigeria 440 000 (2010) [57]
a)
Industries;
b)
Household, commercial and institutions, computed from previous
studies.
[56,58]
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (4 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH

Catalytic recovery process involving a mixture of hydrogen per-
oxide and organic and nonorganic catalysts was suggested in the
study by Nieland et al.
[75]
Proper management and recycling of DPVMs for metals
recovery impact positively on the environment by reducing the
mining of the metals. Environmental pollution, energy demand,
and water stress caused due to mining activities of the metals are
abated by the alternative supply of these metals from DPVM
recycling.
Electronics wastes recycling in developing countries involves,
mostly, no advanced techniques characterized by manual
processes in backyards of residential apartments
[76]
or near com-
mercial centres. These methods not only constitute sources of
environmental pollution, human accidents, and direct exposure
of persons to poisonous e-substances but also are very slow and
limit the kind of components that can be recovered. Several
components that cannot be extracted by hand due to their
embedment in interior compartments of other components in
the equipment are forced to remain unremoved. The manual
method is less productive and energy-intensive in terms of
man-hour. Landfill technique, by burying WEEE alongside
decomposable wastes, had been and is still being integrated into
WEEE management probably because there is no alternative
method. Even though the owners of modern landfills claim
removal of the harmful e-waste substances from the wastes
before burying,
[76,77]
this method aids the loss of valuable recov-
erable components such as the metals found in DPVMs. Manual
processing is preferable to landfill in the management of DPVMs
due to the risks posed by the later.
Considering the level of technological advancement of devel-
oping countries, proper handling, and processing of PV wastes
without jeopardizing human safety, material losses, and environ-
mental pollution, will just remain a dream. Thus, uncommercial
landfill disposal, manual extraction, and dumping at street cor-
ners like other WEEE materials will remain the available option
for its disposal. However, a better alternative is the take back
method where system manufacturers accept used and EoL PV
modules returned to them from technologically developing coun-
tries for proper recycling and mass recovery. The take back path-
way leading to proper PV waste recovery and recycling is shown
in Figure 3. This process places premium investment cost recov-
ery on each market player. The chain of investment recovery
shows that the manufacturer recovers part of his production
material which reduces cost of procuring fresh materials for
fresh products as well as government incentive (where provided).
The vendor recovers part of the cost of the goods through sell
back to the manufacturer, whereas the end-user recoups part
of his investment from take back sales to vendors.
1.4. Health and Environmental Effects of Wrong Disposal
of PV and PV Components at EoL
Only a small fraction of PV waste modules are recycled, whereas
an overwhelming portion is disposed of in landfills and inciner-
ators. The consequences of this action on the environment and
the life of its inhabitants are quite alarming. Cadmium telluride
(CdTe) and cadmium selenide (CdS), lead (Pb), chromium (Cr),
and bismuth (Bi) are the most commonly used semiconductors
and substances in the production of second-generation PV cells
and their high toxicity remains a concern for both human
lives and the environment
[1,31,78,79]
When they are improperly dis-
posed of, the semiconductors and chemical substances leach into
the soil. This results in direct or indirect effects on animal (human)
nutrition through plants that take them up as minerals in the soil
or irrigation water in food production.
[80]
Microorganisms and
aquatic animals are not spared out as well
[81–83]
as the contami-
nants are assimilated by humans through the food chain by direct
consumption of contaminated animal products even though it may
be safe in the animal’sbody.
[84]
The presence of these chemicals in
man, especially cadmium, damages the vital organs such as the
kidney, lungs, heart, liver, and so on in the body. It results in excess
production of protein in the urine, low bone mineralization, high
rate of fractures, increased osteoporosis, and intense bone pain
and cancer (if inhaled).
Damaged PV panels have been associated with the release of
low concentrations of electrolytes (sodium, calcium, and magne-
sium), nickel and antimony into the water at a contamination
level that may be considered potentially toxic and unsafe for
water use. Chronic exposure to nickel has been connected with
diverse human disorder
[85–89]
and these and more make it
extremely unacceptable to expose unprotected individuals to
dumps filled with sources of nickel leakage, especially discarded
PV modules.
Exhausted PV panels coming to the end of their lives are not
environmentally friendly and care should be taken so that they do
not enter the waste stream without proper control.
2. Ethical Implications of PV Installation,
Decommissioning, and Waste Disposal in
Developing Countries
In as much as PV systems hold great positive impacts in provid-
ing green energy, environmental sustainability, climate change
remediation, and also providing dispatchable electricity for
remote areas, there are some “negative perceptions”associated
with the technology. Large installations of megawatt capacity
occupy large areas of land that could serve for human habitation,
agricultural activities, and other socioeconomic and developmen-
tal projects. Ethically, consideration should be given to whether it
is ideal to displace humans or farm lands in preference to PV
installation when the solar array occupies a large expanse of land.
In fact, both investments are of utmost importance in socioeco-
nomic existence of man. In as much as land demand for energy
(especially solar energy) is important and inevitable, it should be
traded with caution. It is suggested that nonarable lands should
be devoted for nonagricultural investments like solar energy
PV Manufacturer Vendor (distributor, retailer, contractor) Consumer
Waste
p
athwa
y
Fresh product pathway
Figure 3. PV module utilization pathway.
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (5 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH

facilities but compensation for arable lands could be incorpo-
rated in “land for energy”investments. One of the ways of doing
this could be by giving farmers incentives to produce more on
the available useful lands. Another step further in saving lands
for agriculture from energy investments is to massively encour-
age the use of buildings for solar energy systems and implemen-
tation of built environment schemes. Architects, building
engineers, and town planners (stakeholders) should learn to
incorporate solar PV systems, for large energy production, in
their facilities as a way to save spaces that could have been taken
up by solar infrastructure.
Similarly, it is unethical to permit the use of unprofessional
methods to handle the DPVMs. There are four ethical viewpoints
under which the issues of PV wastes management can be dis-
cussed. These include individualism, utilitarianism, justice,
and moral rights
[90]
viewpoints, although an in-depth study/
discussion of the viewpoints is beyond the scope of this work.
Also, the crude method of scavenging on used and DPVMs is
based on the individual interest of the persons engaging in the
act/business. Furthermore, the large number of people who
get involved in the crude method, make the utilitarian school
of thoughts see good reasons to approve large deposits of
DPVMs in developing countries where the unemployment rate
is high. This is because a good number of people make their liv-
ing by trading or working on the items for valuable components
recovery. Strong support to this, is the estimated 6.4 million jobs
that will be created by the solar energy sector (REmap case) by
2030
[91]
following the PV market growth over the years. This
implies that many people are getting involved directly or other-
wise in solar-related activities including solar PV. Although pro-
ponents of the utilitarian belief can support an argument for most
beneficiaries from used PV modules either for materials recovery
or reuse as fairly used systems, it does not make it right and jus-
tifiable. The number of people exposed to the harmful effects of
the used materials when the items can no longer serve their pur-
pose calls for a rethink. This, however, should be discouraged in
the sense that, it is the absence of prohibitive laws against the
continual movement of decommissioned modules across borders
that is the only factor responsible for the action. If there is no
provision for used items, users of PV modules will be restricted
to new ones that serve longer and more efficiently than used ones
irrespective of the cost. The environmental implication of waste
PV modules should form the decision to discourage the act of
trans-border trading of used and/or low standard PV modules
regardless of the number of people using them.
On the other hand, both justice and moral rights viewpoints
would condemn the practice of large installation and decommis-
sioning of PV systems if these actions tend to cause more harm
than good. For instance, if persons would be displaced, starved of
food, and/or violate their rights to free use of their natural habitat
in exchange for energy generation and wastes dumping, then
there will be no moral justification for the action. Although these
views have their critics, especially where they protect manufac-
turers and traders from developed countries, it is unethical for
the governments and agencies responsible for commercial man-
ufacture, distribution, and installations of PV systems in devel-
oping countries to neglect the effects of the harmful components
of the DPVMs as a result of lack of and compliance to regulations
of these materials. For instance, whereas it can be justified that,
due to poverty, individuals make a living by crude method of
manual recovery of valuables from PV wastes, the consequences
of their actions can lead to a national disaster. It has been
reported that in Guiyu village in China
[90]
that the manual
method of recovering valuables from e-wastes resulted in land
and water contamination that exposed the entire village to health
risk and lack of potable water.
It is unethical for governments and key players in the PV
industry to neglect or violate the Basel Convention on
Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and Their
Disposal 1989. The convention is the international policy that
regulates the movement of these harmful wastes within member
nations that signed it. Its major thrust is trade regulation
between developed countries of the north (Europe and
America) and developing countries of the south (Africa, Asia,
and Australia) of trade in toxic and harmful wastes.
The inability of the Convention to eliminate the export of haz-
ardous wastes from developed countries to technologically devel-
oping countries lacking PV and other e-waste recycling facilities
morally detests the provisions of the convention and gives oppor-
tunities for illegal dumping of unusable electronics components
to the receiving countries. Even though this gap has been bridged
by the Ban Amendment 1995, which prohibits the exports of
hazardous wastes to non-Organisation for Economic Co-opera-
tion and Development member states, if these regulations are
not implemented, the developing countries would run the risk
of battling with e-wastes from PV systems. It is obvious that
most, if not all, developing countries presently do not have spe-
cific laws or focal regulations dealing with the management of
PV wastes.
[37,92]
3. Discussion
Following the need to obtain relevant data for this study, a ques-
tionnaire was designed to capture information on PV installa-
tions in some African countries to be a representative of
developing nations. Details sought from the respondents include
the capacity of the PV installation, the year of installation, own-
ership, and project funding structure. Inputs were also received
from the responders who are largely PV system designers, instal-
lers, academics, and policymakers on what is currently the status
of PV waste management and their recommendations for best
practice in this regard.
Considering all the companies and institutions (agencies
involved in PV systems) who were contacted to respond to the
questionnaires, only a handful responded. It was disappointing
that major players in the PV industry in many African countries
declined response, even though they are into serious PV business.
Most responses came from operators of standalone systems of
very low capacity mainly domestic and institutional. In Rwanda,
grid-tied PV installation of about 8.5 MW capacity was installed
and operated by Scatec Solar and comprises of 28 360 modules.
This project which is corporately owned by Scatec Solar AS
(Norway), Norfund (Norway), and GWG Cooperatief UA (The
Netherlands)
[93]
was funded by a bank loan.
From the survey, most developing countries do not have PV
manufacturing plants and hence all the PV installations includ-
ing the modules and the BOS components are imported. The
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (6 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH

information gathered during this research shows that most users
of PV or stakeholders are aware of the material make-up of their
PV system but have skeletal plans or ideas of what to do with the
system at its EoL. As PV is just gradually getting into the African
energy mix and that of many other developing continents, there
are no available data on any PV system that has been decommis-
sioned at the system’s EoL. A major concern, however, is the ris-
ing incidence of malfunctioning solar streetlight projects and PV
failures in Nigeria, Ghana, India, and so on. Many of such instal-
lations in some Nigerian cities have been observed to fail to func-
tion shortly after installation. A detailed investigation into the
reasons for their failure will be the subject of the authors’next
work and is not unconnected to the quality of the installation
materials and the technical competence of the system designers
and installers.
Rapid PV market growth is expected in Africa as being wit-
nessed currently following reduction in prices and massive avail-
ability in global market. As generation of electricity from fossil
fuel technologies remain epileptic, it paves way for more recog-
nition of the importance of PV technology toward utilizing it to
extend electricity to the rural communities by African govern-
ments and individuals. This, however, makes it imperative that
the right time to worry about managing the waste from PV instal-
lations is now. It will require concrete policy-based initiatives that
will ensure that all the stakeholders including end-users, instal-
lers, designers, and manufacturers are brought together to take
responsibility toward ensuring that the environment and human
safety from the installation to EoL of the systems are guaranteed.
According to the responders in this work, the common opinion is
that the manufacturers of PV modules and their BOS compo-
nents should retrieve them after their EoL for recycling or proper
disposal. Again, this will only be possible if enforced by the
government.
3.1. Policy Issues
As the effects of fossil fuel consumption on the climate have
caught the attention of governments, agencies, researchers, and
stakeholders at local and global levels, the consequences of uncon-
trolled and mishandling of DPVMs on the environment ought to
be worrisome at such levels. Even though the two waste streams
have unequal environmental consequences in the present, in the
long term, WEEE-related environmental challenges will take a
global magnitude that may be more devastating than fossil-
induced climate change consequences. Its health implications
should call for more global, regional, and national regulations
to control the export, import, and disposal of the waste modules.
To eliminate or reduce to the barest minimum, the risks posed
by DPVMs on human and environmental life in the developing
countries, enforceable legislation/regulation must be set up at all
levels of governance. Some of the pressing legislative regulatory
measures are proposed in this section in the form of policies.
3.1.1. Legal Framework
Procurement Law: As a measure to checkmate the subject
matter, it is imperative to enact PV procurement law at the country
level and export law at the international level. Procurement law
ensures that at point of entry, any substandard product being
imported will attract legal consequences to the importer while
at the international level the agencies exporting the same product
to the developing country will be prosecuted. This law should
protect receiving countries against the dumping of “near-to-
die”PV products in the name of fairly used or second-hand
goods in the countries. Although from the individualism point
of ethical views, the economic status of the receiving country
might consider certain quality to be acceptable but by consider-
ing the unavailable technology to handle the waste, there should
be a blanket ban on PV systems that have deviated from their
manufactured and operational standards. This will give room
for such products to remain in the countries where they are man-
ufactured or first used (whichever one is responsible for direct
shipment to where the modules ended their life).
Waste Management Law: Establishing a national PV waste
management facility at the country level to take care of the wastes
when generated is an avenue to minimize the risk of exposing
individuals to the toxic substances in PV modules. International
agencies for monitoring hazardous wastes should encourage
countries to set up PV management laws that will ensure the
establishment of recycling centers by companies at zero taxation.
This will enable investors to explore this avenue to develop the
PV and electronics recycling sector which will take the business
away from inexperienced and vulnerable unprotected human
beings exposing their lives to this menace.
3.1.2. PV Products Tracking
Modern PV panels come with GPS antitheft tracking systems
which help to prevent theft or recover such panels when stolen.
This can be extended to the manufacturer’s identifier tracking
system to enforce producer responsibility law. The introduction
of this policy in PV manufacturing will enable environmental
and other government agencies involved in regulating the move-
ment of PV systems to identify the manufacturers and their dis-
tribution agencies who will eventually take the responsibility of
recalling all DPVMs for proper management. This will enhance
the ability to determine who to hold responsible and answerable
to the law in case of defaulting in the proper recovery of used
PV systems.
3.2. Importation Regulation and Standardization
It has been observed that there is a lack of adequate regulatory
measures to check what is imported and the resultant effect is the
dumping of poorly standard materials in those receiving coun-
tries. A solution to this is to set up a monitoring agency saddled
with the responsibility of ensuring standard. Where a country
lacks the technical know-how to set up PV standards, internation-
ally approved standards operational in nearby countries can be
adopted where similar climatic, economic, political spheres,
and geographical conditions exist. For instance, countries within
the regions of West Africa, East Asia or Southern America, and
so on, located close to each other may adopt regional PV stand-
ards if each country does not have PV standards already opera-
tional. An example is the case of Nigeria where the standard
organization of Nigeria (SON) is the main standard regulatory
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (7 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH

agency charged with the responsibility of ensuring that the
imported materials adhere to the stipulated standard as defined
by the agency in line with international best practices.
However, in principle, these standards and regulations
guiding PV importation, distribution, and standardization may
exist in these developing countries but the main challenge
remains in the implementation and strict insistence on adher-
ence. Governments should develop strong political will to ensure
and enforce the strict compliance to PV products standards. This
will be the first step in fighting the peril of influx of substandard
PV products into the developing countries hence reducing their
risk to life and ease of disposal at the end of their useful life.
3.3. Installation and Components Management
In Section 1.1, it is pointed out that WEEE originates from the
malfunctioning of electronic devices of which poor handling is a
contributor. For PV systems, module failure can originate from
the design and technology of the PV module,
[94,95]
corrosion of
module and cell damage,
[96]
environmental conditions,
[97–105]
the
interaction of materials used in a PV module among others.
[106]
One of the ways to reduce PV waste is through proper handling
of a module and other components during installation. There is
no doubt that some of the components may have factory deficien-
cies, leading to their early failure or death but some technical
factors from technical experts and operators can be avoided.
Therefore, to ensure that the PV systems’EoL does not come
up earlier than designed and installed, there must be, at the
country level, a regulation prohibiting nonexperts from handling
and installing PV modules. PV contracts and/or installations of
any sort must be handled by government certified experts who
had received training from certified and approved PV training
organizations. Such experts must be either Engineers or
Technicians who must have obtained at least a college degree
or diploma from government-approved institutions. This will
contain most of the causes of early “death”of PV modules asso-
ciated with installation errors caused by amateur handling.
There must be a policy preventing the disposal and dumping
of discarded PV modules in dumpsites. This ensures that all such
wastes are properly handled by individual project owners in col-
laboration with the manufacturers, vendors, or their representa-
tives. Recycling should be a major management policy guiding
the management of PV wastes in addition to ensuring proper
handling by experts.
All PV modules manufacturing and management, as a matter
of policy, should conform to the directive on the restriction of
hazardous substances (RoHS) and there must be a regulatory
body at all levels of government (international and national) to
inspect the movement of PV modules. This inspection should
ensure strict compliance to RoHS approved limits on the use
of hazardous substances (RoHS guide) in electronics
manufacturing.
As suggested, handling of used or EoL PV components involves
manufacturers, vendors, and consumers (Figure 3). As such there
should be a policy on the cost-sharing mechanism between all par-
ties involved. Although in the United States, the generator of the
waste is liable for the cost of any site remediation,
[32]
it will be
more beneficial for manufacturers, vendors, and consumers to
share costs if recycling is to be carried out. In this case, everyone
benefits when the “selling back”policy is adopted. The WEEE
directive in the European countries and other developed econo-
mies should be extended to all developing countries beyond those
outlined by Tanskanen
[53]
such as China, South Africa, Mexico,
Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia,
Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam, Thailand,
and Indonesia.
3.4. PV Waste Disposal Policy and Health-Related Issues
Strong measures are required to prevent exhausted PV panels
from entering the waste stream without strict control. When a
product first becomes a waste and can no longer be used for
its original purpose, recycling it and recovering valuable materi-
als contained in it form two possible routes for its disposal (treat-
ment). Landfilling route or incineration is not advisable for
environmental and societal sustainability.
[53]
The overall target
when planning a national PV and/or electronic wastes policy
must include: 1) changing the behavior and attitude of consum-
ers to favor the proper disposal route. This should be achieved
through consumer awareness creation by different stakeholders
(producers, government, academia, nongovernmental organiza-
tions, and so on). 2) Setting up robust models and infrastructures
for collection and recycling. Consumers should appreciate infor-
mation on methods and locations to recycle their old equipment.
This increases the readiness of the consumer to return obsolete
products for recycling.
Generally, a positive attitude of the individual toward the
recycling of e-waste is crucial for rendering the whole recycling
process efficient and successful.
[53]
All the new practices need
time to develop. Therefore, the policy should be put in place
to restrict illegal and uncontrolled export of used equipment
to developing countries where there are no existing or controlled
recycling practices. Again before efficient PV waste disposal is
achieved, the policy should be put in place to reduce the bioavail-
ability of soil toxic contaminants from PV waste. It has been
reported that adding lime to the soil reduces cadmium bioavail-
ability in the soil.
[84]
Once cadmium is in the soil, it is persistent
and cannot be broken down into less toxic substances in the envi-
ronment. Therefore there is a need that farmers through proper
agricultural extension programs be educated and directed on
how to use lime to reduce soil cadmium bioavailability to prevent
its entrance into the food chain.
3.5. Policy on PV Waste Recycling Process and Technology
Recycling DPVMs does not only guarantee the recovering of
valuable metals and materials but also positively impacts on
the environment by the withdrawal of pollutant and harmful
waste substances. Hence, policies and regulations on PV waste
recycling processes are inevitable and can be collated as follows.
3.5.1. Collection and Recycling Centers
One of the methods to ensure coordinated PV recycling is by estab-
lishing DPVM recycling centers close to major cities. This should
receive the attention of municipal legislation prohibiting the
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (8 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH

dumping of DPVMs and other e-wastes around the street corners
but at collection and recycling centers. Such laws or policies can
further ensure that those centers are established based on zero or
marginal tax charges thereby expediting the growth of PV wastes
handling and recovery process. National government policies on
e-wastes ought to encourage multinational companies, being
the major consumers of EEE, to establish electronics recycling cen-
ters. This encouragement may come in the form of incentives,
partnerships, and duty removals as recycling at the moment
may not be economically rewarding due to its cost parity with land-
fill method.
[48]
Even though presently, landfill method appears
cheaper than recycling without government incentives, as has
been suggested by McDonald and Pearce,
[48]
recycling cost may,
in the long run, fall behind the cost of landfill disposal due to pop-
ulation growth and increased pressure on land for several compet-
ing purposes such as housing, agriculture, renewable energy
projects, and industrial developments.
3.5.2. Product Recycling Design Policy
There should be a regulatory framework that ensures that PV
module manufacturers incorporate the EoL PV material recovery
and recycling process into the product’s design, manufacturing,
and marketing stages. This is expected to get manufacturers to
take responsibility
[24,48]
of sourcing and managing the wastes as
part of the product’s life cycle.
Commoditization of PV equipment may preclude developing
countries and small businesses from taking responsibility for
the proper recycling of DPVMs. However, a global regulation
on recycling and recovery of DPVMs wastes will help to ensure
a level playing ground for all market players (manufacturers and
consumers—represented here now by individual countries), to
ensure long-term EoL recycling for PV wastes.
[16]
According to the
European Commission,
[107]
the extended producer–responsibility–
principle upholds producers of PV products who want to place
their products in EU markets to legally take responsibility for
the wastes therefrom. This should be extended to other markets
as well especially within the developing countries. There are
instances where governments have given incentives to PV pro-
ducers to enable the establishment of large volume PV
manufacturing.
[48,108]
In such cases, producer–responsibility pol-
icy will not be out of place if it is implemented in leading econo-
mies and extended to developing countries as well.
3.5.3. Recycling Process Policy
Furthermore, considering the health implications, a policy to
prohibit manual extraction of valuables from PV modules should
be established in developing countries. The policy will address
the use of advanced recycling technologies as the only approved
means of recycling of PV wastes. This will minimize manual
handling of hazardous extracts from DPVMs. This legislation
will be adopted by all market players.
3.5.4. PV Waste Recycling Education Policy
As part of the recycling process, the policy framework geared
toward mass literacy should be promoted. One of the major
challenges of WEEE management is the lack of consumer aware-
ness of the potential for electronics recycling.
[109]
Many consum-
ers in developing countries do not know that valuable
components can be recovered from their discarded obsolete elec-
tronics but they resort to storing them at homes or companies.
To solve this problem, policies establishing electronics recycle
mass literacy should be made. Educating consumers is one step,
whereas the introduction of recycling technology in educational
institutions’curriculum is another step. Such policies, if intro-
duced in PV education, will create societal awareness of benefits
therein as well as produce skilled manpower to manage and han-
dle the wastes when generated.
4. Conclusion
PV modules are manufactured with chemical substances, which
can be injurious to human and animal lives when exposed directly
to them in an unprotected way through contact. Indirectly, the sub-
stances can affect human and animal life through contaminated
soil, water, and crops/animals that feed on the affected media. At
the instance of the system’s production or operation, these sub-
stances do not constitute danger but begin to raise concerns at
the end of the modules’life as they begin to leach out of the encap-
sulate. It has been observed that the benefits of using near-to-die
PV modules in developing countries are very low compared with
the possible health risks and environmental hazards these can lead
to at the end. Ethically, it is not worthwhile exposing individuals to
chemical hazards on grounds of poverty alleviation via trading on
used modules with countries where there are no technical know-
how to handle the wastes. For large-scale PV installations in devel-
oping countries, the article discussed the need to build the
management of used PV modules into the project plans even
at the instance of bidding, award, and execution of the projects.
As a matter of policy, PV installations, in developing countries,
requiring hundreds of PV panels should provide evidenceof mod-
ules waste handling at EoL of the project as part of the environ-
mental impact assessment report. The quantity of e-wastes other
than PV, already existing in Africa and other developing nations
should stir up concerns by environmentalist and PV stakeholders
toward ensuring the prevention of further addition of wastes from
PV modules. The continent is currently battling with the manage-
ment of the e-wastes due to lack of the technology to recycle them
and this will be aggravated if PV wastes are added.
It is observed that some electronic devices such as computers,
communication systems (cell phones, batteries), electrical appli-
ances, e-toys, used PV panels, and so on come through charities
and donations for less privileged in developing nations and a lot
has been transported across borders. Whereas donors and solic-
itors of such items, most times, release them to agencies in
between the donors and the recipients, at no cost benefits, con-
trarily those items have ended up as for-profit businesses for
individuals and organizations in the destination countries doing
trade on foreign goods. The authors are yet to see e-gadgets freely
distributed to the needy in developing countries. Unlike most
electrical and electronic devices that have no defined maximum
life span, PV modules life span is obvious. Whereas transborder
trade on e-gadgets can be permitted on grounds of charity due to
suspected long lifespan, used PV modules ought not to be traded
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (9 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH

in like manner. This is because no matter how long they had
been used, the second users cannot use the modules more than
the maximum lifespan. Following recent advances in PV technol-
ogy leading to the development of more efficient versions of PV
cells and reduction in their prices, trading on and/or donation of
second hand (near EoL) PV modules should be discouraged. The
use of brand new systems should be promoted over the use of
fairly used ones to ensure maximum utilization of PV’s lifespan
and be returned for recycling afterward. In fact, if there is no
provision for trade on second-hand electronics, all users will
be compelled to use new ones.
Recycling is the best option for PV wastes for values placed on
silicon, silver, copper, and other useful materials. Who should be
responsible for this is the big question waiting for an answer.
However, the Government should incentivize projects aimed
at setting up recycling companies for waste PV modules to
encourage massive investments in the technology for electricity
generation.
Producer takes responsibility that is proposed as one of the
policy guidelines in the management of decommissioned PV
modules in developing countries, whereas transborder trade
should ensure strict compliance to international and national
laws prohibiting trade in substandard PV modules. National laws
on PV systems should be promulgated to protect the countries
from substandard and used systems finding their ways into
the countries. Research should be extended to explore the social
consequences of PV wastes in developing countries, which are
ignorant of the dangers of chemical emissions from PV pan-
els/cells. Studies on the morality of shipment of “near-to-die”
e-wastes (especially PV modules and components) to vulnerable
developing countries that are not so advanced to recycle wastes
should be studied.
It is also important to consider the following in further studies
as they have not been exhaustively researched on: 1) quantifica-
tion of the present and future PV waste generation in developing
countries based on PV installation growth in each country, 2) eco-
nomic analysis of PV waste recycling in developing countries.
Acknowledgements
This research was made possible by the funding contributed by the authors
and it is duly acknowledged. The authors are grateful to the reviewers for
their comments and suggestions that strengthened the paper.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Keywords
decommissioning, end of life photovoltaic modules, e-wastes, human
health, modules, photovoltaics
Received: June 8, 2020
Revised: August 18, 2020
Published online:
[1] A. Paiano, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015,41, 99.
[2] B. Nussey, M. Fischer, An Interview with Dr. Markus Fischer on
the Declining Costs of Solar Energy. www.freeingenergy.com/an-
interview-with-dr-markus-fischer-on-the-declining-costs-of-solar-energy/
(accessed: July 2020).
[3] IEA PVPS, 2015 Snapshot of Global Photovoltaic Markets,
Report IEA PVPS T1-29:2016, https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/320268038_2016_snapshot_of_global_photovoltaic_
markets, (accessed: April 2020).
[4] IEA PVPS, 2016 Snapshot of Global Photovoltaic Markets,
Report IEA PVPS T1-31:2017, https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/324728482_2017_snapshot_of_global_photovoltaic_
markets, (accessed: April 2020).
[5] IEA PVPS, 2018 Snapshot of Global Photovoltaic Markets 2017, Report
IEA PVPS T1-33:2018, https://iea-pvps.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/
01/IEA-PVPS-A_Snapshot_of_Global_PV_-_1992-2017.pdf (accessed:
April 2020).
[6] IEA PVPS, Snapshot of Global PV 2019, https://iea-pvps.org/
snapshot-reports/snapshot-2019/, (accessed: April 2020).
[7] IRENA, Renewable Capacity Statistics 2019, IRENA, Abu Dhabi,
https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2019/
Mar/IRENA_RE_Capacity_Statistics_2019.pdf, (accessed: April 2020).
[8] A. Jäger-Waldau, in PV Status Report 2019, EUR 29938 EN,
Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2019.
[9] Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems, ISE. Photovoltaic report,
https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/ise/de/documents/
publications/studies/Photovoltaics-Report.pdf (accessed: July 2020).
[10] L. Wood, Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Market Report 2019, https://
www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/11/13/1946223/0/en/
Solar-Photovoltaic-PV-Market-Report-2019-World-Solar-PV-Capacity-
Estimated-to-Increase-Significantly-from-593-9GW-in-2019-to-1-582-
9GW-in-2030.html, (accessed: March 2020).
[11] Asian power, Asia could boost global solar PV capacity by 2030,
https://asian-power.com/power-utility/news/asia-could-boost-global-
solar-pv-capacity-2030, (accessed: March 2020).
[12] A. Verma, With 10.6 GW Additions in 2018, the US now the
2nd Largest Solar Market, https://www.saurenergy.com/solar-
energy-news/with-10-6-gw-additions-us-2nd-largest-solar-market-2018,
(accessed: March2020).
[13] O. Ogunmodimu, E. C. Okoroigwe, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018,
90, 104.
[14] REN21, in Renewables 2016, Global Status Report: 60, 2016.
[15] T. M. Razykov, C. S. Ferekides, D. Morel, E. Stefanakos, H. S. Ullal,
H. M. Upadhyaya, Sol. Energy,2011,85, 1580.
[16] IRENA IEA-PVPS. End-of-Life Management: Solar Photovoltaic
Panels, http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/
IRENA_IEAPVPS_End-of-Life_Solar_PV_Panels_2016.pdf, (accessed:
September 2016).
[17] S. Wilkinson, J. Berg, von S. Aichberger, Marketbuzz 2016, IHS
Technology https://technology.ihs.com, (accessed: March 2016).
[18] D. Sica, O. Malandrino, S. Supino, M. Testa, M. C. Lucchetti, Renew
Sustain Energy Rev,2018,82, 2934.
[19] GTM Research, Global PV Demand Outlook 2015–2015: Exploring
Risk in Downstream Solar Markets, http://www.greentechmedia.
com/research/report/globalpv-demand-outlook-2015-2020, (accessed:
January 2016).
[20] B. Attia, Global Solar Demand Monitor: Q1 2017, https://www.
greentechmedia.com/research/report/global-solar-demand-monitor-
q1-2017, (accessed: April 2020).
[21] REN21, Renewables 2018 Global Status Report, REN21, Secretariat,
Paris, France 2018.
[22] H. Kim, H. Park, Sustainability 2018,10, 3565.
[23] J. D. Santos, M. C. Alonso-García. J. Clean Prod. 2018,196, 1613.
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (10 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH

[24] M. S. Chowdhury, K. S. Rahman, T. Chowdhury, N. Nuthammachot,
K. Techato, M. Akhtaruzzaman, S. K. Tiong, K. Sopian, N. Amin,
Energy Strat. Rev. 2020,27, 100431.
[25] S. Bilimoria, N. Defrenne, The Evolution of Photovoltaic Waste
in Europe, Study 1305-01. S & T Consulting and CERES 2013,
www.sandtconsulting.eu/english-1/our-publications/ (accessed:
September 2016).
[26] G. Giacchetta, M. Leporini, B. Marchetti, J. Clean Prod. 2013,51, 214.
[27] IRENA, Accelerating the Global Energy Transformation, 2017.
[28] G. Granata, F. Pagnanelli, E. Moscardini, T. Havlik, L. Toro. Sol.
Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2014,123, 239.
[29] BIO Intelligence Service, Equivalent Conditions for Waste Electrical
and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Recycling Operations Taking
Place Outside the European Union, Final Report Prepared for
European Commission, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/
weee/pdf/Final%20report_E%20C%20S.pdf (accessed: September
2016).
[30] C. M. Motta, R. Cerciello, S. De Bonis, V. Mazzella, P. Cirino,
R. Panzuto, M. Ciaravolo, P. Simoniello, M. Toscanesi, M. Trifuoggi,
B. Avallone, Environ. Pollut. 2016,216, 786.
[31] S. Kang, S. Yoo, J. Lee, B. Boo, H. Ryu, Renew. Energy 2012,
47, 152.
[32] V. M Fthenakis, Energy Policy 2000,28, 1051.
[33] M. Goe, G. Gaustad, Appl. Energy 2014,120, 41.
[34] V. Monier, M. Hestin, Bio. Intell. Serv. 2011,1,1.
[35] V. M. Fthenakis, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2004,8, 303.
[36] F. Cucchiella, I. D’Adamo, S. C. L. Koh, P. Rosa, Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 2015,51, 263.
[37] F. Cucchiella, I. D’Adamo, P. Rosa. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015,
47, 552.
[38] J-K. Choi, V. Fthenakis, J. Clean Prod. 2014,66, 443.
[39] E. Klugmann-Radziemska, P. Ostrowski, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2010,35, 1751.
[40] D. A. Eisenberg, M. Yu, C. W. Lam, O. A. Ogunseitan,
J. M. Schoenung. J. Hazard Mater. 2013,260, 534.
[41] M. D. Chatzisideris, E. Nieves, L. Alexis, C. K. Frederik. Sol. Energy
Mater. Sol. Cells 2016,156,2.
[42] R. Deng, N. L. Chang, Z. Ouyang, C. M. Chong, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 2019,109, 532.
[43] P. Nain, A. Kumar, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020,119, 109592.
[44] T. Matsubara, M. A. Uddin, Y. Kato, T. Kawanishi, Y. Hayashi,
J. Sustain. Metall. 2018,4, 378.
[45] V. Savvilotidou, A. Antoniou, E. Gidarakos, Waste Manage. 2017,
59, 394.
[46] S. Gerbinet, S. Belboom, A. Léonard, Renew. Sustain. Energy. Rev.
2014,38, 747.
[47] N. Kittner, S. H. Gheewala, R. M. Kamens, Energy Sustain. Dev. 2013,
17, 605.
[48] N. McDonald, J. M. Pearce, Energy Policy 2010,38, 7041.
[49] European Commission, Official Journal of the European Union
L 174/88,2011.
[50] V. Fthenakis, PV Recycling in the US, presented at IEA-PVPS Task-12
Open Wkshop, http://www.iea-pvps.org/fileadmin/dam/public/
workshop/14_Vasilis_FTHENAKIS.pdf, (accessed: September 2016).
[51] P. V. Lal, India is Lagging Behind the EU on PV waste management,
https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/04/12/india-is-lagging-behind-
the-eu-on-pv-waste-management/, (accessed: April 2020).
[52] A. Golev, D. R. Schmeda-Lopez, S. K. Smart, G. D. Corder,
E. W. McFarland, Waste Manag,2016,58, 348.
[53] P. Tanskanen, Acta Mater. 2013,61, 1001.
[54] X. Zeng, H. Duan, F. Wang, J. Li, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017,
72, 1076.
[55] X. Zeng, C. Yang, J. F. Chiang, J. Li, Sci. Total Environ. 2017,575,1.
[56] EPA, E-Waste Management Around the World: Materials from the
Third Annual Meeting of the International E-waste Management
Network, https://www.epa.gov/international-cooperation/e-waste-
management-around-world-materials-third-annual-meeting, (accessed:
November 2016).
[57] O. Ogungbuyi, I. C. Nnorom, O. Osibanjo, M. Schluep, e-Waste Africa
project of the Secretariat of the Basel Convention, e-Waste Country
Assessment Nigeria 2012.
[58] C. A. Ibrahim, Policy Update from Malaysia, Hazardous Substances
Division Department of Environment, Malaysia 2013.
[59] J. Peng, L. Lu, H. Yang, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013,19, 255.
[60] F. Enrichi, C. Armellini, G. Battaglin, F. Belluomo, S. Belmokhtar,
A. Bouajaj, E. Cattaruzza, M. Ferrari, F. Gonella, A. Lukowiak,
M. Mardegan, S. Polizzi, E. Pontoglio, G. C. Righini, C. Sada,
E. Trave, L. Zur, Opt. Mater. 2016,60, 264.
[61] B. Paridaa, S. Iniyan, R. Goic, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2011,
15, 1625.
[62] A. Descoeudres, C. Allebé, N. Badel, L. Barraud, J. Champliaud,
F. Debrot, A. Faes, A. Lachowicz, J. Levrat, S. Nicolay, L. Sansonnens,
M. Despeisse, C. Ballif, Energy Proc. 2015,77,508.
[63] E. L. Chaar, L. A. lamont, N. El Zein, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2011,
15, 2165.
[64] R. Stropnik, U. Stritih, Renew. Energy 2016,97, 671.
[65] S. Kim, B. Jeong, Sustainability 2016,8, 596.
[66] M. Marwede, A. Reller, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2012,69, 35.
[67] A. Zyoud, S. Al-Yamani, H. Bsharat, M. H. Helal, H. Kwon, D. Park,
H. S. Hilal, Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process. 2018,74, 277.
[68] G. Mesaritis, E. Symeou, A. Delimitis, S. Oikonomidis, M. Jaegle,
K. Tarantik, Ch Nicolaou, Th Kyratsi, J. Alloy Compd. 2019,
775, 1036.
[69] N. Drouiche, P. Cuellar, F. Kerkar, S. Medjahed, T. Ouslimane,
M. O. Hamou. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015,52, 393.
[70] N. Drouiche, P. Cuellar, F. Kerkar, S. Medjahed, N. Boutouchent-
Guerfi, M. O. Hamou. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014,32, 936.
[71] K. Jiptner, M. Fukuzawa, Y. Miyamura, H. Harada, K. Kakimoto,
T. Sekiguchi, Solid State Phenom. 2013,205,206, 94.
[72] I. D’Adamo, M. Miliacca, P. Rosa, P. Rosa. Int. J. Photoenergy 2017,
2017,1.
[73] J. Tao, S. Yu, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2015,141, 108.
[74] P. Dias, S. Javimczik, M. Benevit, H. Veit, A. M. Bernardes, Waste
Manage. 2016,57, 220.
[75] S. Nieland, U. Neuhaus, T. Pfaff, E. Radlein, Electronics Goes Green
2012þ(EGG), 2012.
[76] P. Kiddee, R. Naidu, M. H. Wong. Waste Manage. 2013,33, 1237.
[77] SWANA, The Environmental Consequence of Disposing of Products
Containing Heavy Metals in Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. Solid
Waste Association of North America, Silver Spring, MD. 2004.
[78] A. C. Ramos-Ruiz, R. Zeng, L. H. Sierra-Alvarez, J. A. Teixeira,
Chemosphere 2016,162, 131.
[79] M. Marwede, W. Berger, M. Schlummer, A. Maeurer, A. Reller. Renew.
Energy 2013,55, 220.
[80] European Environment Agency, Progress in Management of
Contaminated Sites, www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/
indicators/progress-in-management-of-contaminated-sides/progress-
in-management-of-contaminated-1, (accessed: June 2016).
[81] A. Macken, M. Giltrap, K. Ryall, B. Foley, E. McGovern, B. McHugh,
M. Davoren. Ecotoxicology 2009,18, 470.
[82] A. Ramos-Ruiz, J. A. Field, J. V. Wilkening, R. Sierra-Alvarez. Environ.
Sci. Technol. 2016,50, 1492.
[83] D. E. Taylor, Trends Microbiol. 1999,7, 111.
[84] Science Commission Unit, University of the West of England,
Bristol. Science for Environment Policy In-Depth Report: Soil
contamination: Impacts on Human Health. Report produced for
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (11 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH

European Commission DG Environment. http://ec.europa.eu/
science-environment-policy, (accessed: October, 2016).
[85] Y. Chervona, A. Arita, M. Costa, Metallomics 2012,4, 619.
[86] L. Macomber, R. P. Hausinger. Metallomics 2011,3, 1153.
[87] K. K. Das, S. N. Das, S. A. Dhundasi, Ind. J. Med. Res. 2008,128, 412.
[88] Z. Forgacs, P. Massanyi, N. Lukac, Z. Somosy, J. Environ. Sci. Health.
A: Toxic Hazard. Subst. Environ. Eng. 2012,47, 1249.
[89] P. Apostoli, S. Catalani, Metal. Ion. Life Sci. 2011,8, 253.
[90] W. I. Sauser Jr., L. D. Sauser, R. R. Sims, J. Manage. Policy Practice
2014,15, 11.
[91] IRENA, Renewable Energy Benefits: Measuring the Economics,
https://www.irena.org/documentdownloads/publications/irena_
measuring-the-economics_2016.pdf, (accessed: January, 2020).
[92] M. M. Aman, K. H. Solangi, M. S.Hossain, A. Badarudin, G. B. Jasmon,
H. Mokhlis, S. N. Kazi. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015,41,1190.
[93] SCATEC, https://scatecsolar.com/locations/rwanda/#asyv-rwanda
(accessed: January, 2020).
[94] I. Lillo-Bravo, P. González-Martínez, M. Larra˜netaI, J. Guasumba-
Codena, Energies 2018,11, 363.
[95] G. J-P. Tevi, I. Faye, M. É. Faye, U. Blieske, M. Sene, M. A. Seidou, in
7th Int. Energy and Sustainability Conf. (IESC), IEEE, Cologne,
Germany 2018.
[96] L. Cristaldi, M. Faifer, M. Lazzaroni, M. M. A. F. Khalil, M. Catelani,
L. Ciani, in 13th IMEKO TC10 Workshop on Technical Diagnostics 2014:
Advanced Measurement Tools in Technical Diagnostics for Systems’
Reliability and Safety, Warsaw, Poland 2014.
[97] C. Ferrara, D. Philipp, Energy Proc. 2012,15, 379.
[98] K. Lappalainen, S. Valkealahti, Sol. Energy 2017,158, 455.
[99] S. Pareek, N. Chaturvedi, R. Dahiya, Sol. Energy 2017,155, 537.
[100] K. Sporleder, K. Hübener, K. Petter, C. Kranert, T. Luka, M. Tureka.
Energy Proc. 2017,124, 174.
[101] S. Racharla, K. Rajan, Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 2017,10, 27.
[102] T. Kaden, K. Lammers, H. J. Möller, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells
2015.142, 24.
[103] B. Marion, R. Schaefer, H. Caine, G. Sanchez. Sol. Energy 2013,
97, 112.
[104] S. R. Potnuru, D. Pattabiraman, S.I. Ganesan, N. Chilakapati. Renew.
Energy 2017,78, 264.
[105] F. Mavromatakis, F. Vigmola, B. Marion, Sol. Energy 2017,157, 496.
[106] International Energy Agency, Photovoltaic Power Systems
Programme Assessment of Photovoltaic Module Failures in the
Field. IEA PVPS Task 13, Subtask 3 Report IEA-PVPS T13-09 2017.
[107] European Commission, Mandate to the European Standardisation
Organisations for Standardisation in the Field of Waste Electrical
and Electronic Equipment (Directive 2012/19/ EU) (M/518 EN),
European Commission, Brussels, Belgium 2013.
[108] M. Platzer, U.S Solar Photovoltaic Manufacturing: Industry Trends,
Global Competition, Federal Support. CRS Report. 2015-7–5700.
www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42509.pdf (accessed: October 2016).
[109] D. Santosh, Electronics History Timeline (600 BC to 2007). http://
www.electronicsandyou.com/blog/electronics-history-timeline-bc-
600-to-2007.html (accessed: November 2016).
Florence C. Okoroigwe holds a M.Sc. degree and a Ph.D. candidate in nutrition and dietetics from
University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria. Currently, she is a lecturer in the Natural Science Unit, School of
General studies, and the Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, University of Nigeria. Her research cuts
across human nutrition, health, and applied natural science. She has interest in how renewable energy
technologies affect human coexistence with the environment and health.
Edmund C. Okoroigwe holds a Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineering and is a senior lecturer at the
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Nigeria. He was a onetime acting head of
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Nigeria, for 2 years. His research is in applied
renewable energy. He was formerly a research fellow at the National Centre for Energy Research and
Development, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria, under the Energy Commission of Nigeria.
Solomon N. Agbo holds Ph.D. degree in materials physics/electrical sustainable energy from the Delft
University of Technology, The Netherlands. He is currently a Senior Scientist/Project Manager, Institute
of Energy and Climate Research (IEK-5)-Photovoltaic and Corporate Development, Forschungszentrum
Jülich GmbH, Germany. He was formerly a Senior Research Fellow/Head of Unit, at the National Centre
for Energy Research and Development, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.entechnol.de
Energy Technol. 2020, 2000543 2000543 (12 of 12) © 2020 Wiley-VCH GmbH