8,000 Wind Turbine Blades Decommissioned Annually in the U.S. Have No Recycling Standard

No ASTM standard governs the recycling, decommissioning, or material recovery of composite wind turbine blades. These blades are predominantly thermoset glass fiber-reinforced polymers (GFRP) that resist conventional recycling. Approximately 8,000 blades are decommissioned annually in the U.S., generating tens of thousands of tons of composite waste. Several states have enacted or proposed landfill bans for wind turbine blades, creating disposal urgency. But existing recycling facility operators "find it difficult to process the materials in wind turbine blades," and the reuse of blade components in infrastructure "is often inconsistent with professional technical standards and specifications, which diminishes motivation for wider adoption." No certification standard exists for recycled fibers or shredded blade composites, so downstream markets cannot verify quality.

Wind energy is central to decarbonization, but its sustainability credentials are undermined by end-of-life waste. Only two recycling pathways are currently both profitable and carbon-reducing: cement co-processing ($27.57/ton profit) and chemical dissolution ($199.71/ton profit). Less than 1% of rare earth elements from turbine generators are recovered. LCA analysis shows that using recycled blade material in fiberglass production can actually increase global warming impacts by 11% compared to virgin materials — but no standard exists to evaluate these tradeoffs. As state landfill bans proliferate and the first generation of large-scale wind installations reaches end-of-life, the waste volume will accelerate sharply.

NREL published a comprehensive roadmap in 2024 identifying RD&D priorities for 2024-2026. GE announced a blade recycling contract with Veolia, the largest industrial effort to date. Academic research on cement co-processing, chemical dissolution (solvolysis), and mechanical recycling has been extensive. Individual ASTM test methods (D638 for tensile properties, D6954 for environmental degradation) can be applied to recycled materials but were not designed for this purpose. However, no ASTM committee has a subcommittee or work item for end-of-life composite recycling. Each recycling pilot operates with proprietary methods, preventing industry scaling. Without quality certification for recovered materials, downstream buyers (cement plants, fiberglass manufacturers) cannot integrate recycled feedstock into their processes with confidence. The absence of standards also means LCA comparisons between recycling pathways use incomparable system boundaries and assumptions.

Three linked standards: (1) a classification standard for recovered composite materials based on fiber length, resin residue content, and mechanical property retention; (2) a test method for evaluating recycled fiber quality against application-specific thresholds; and (3) a guide for LCA of composite recycling pathways with standardized system boundaries. The first two would enable a market for recycled materials; the third would allow evidence-based comparison of recycling technologies. The closest structural precedent is the aluminum recycling standards ecosystem, where alloy composition specifications enable commodity trading of recycled aluminum.

A team could obtain decommissioned blade sections (many are available from utilities and scrap yards), process them through mechanical shredding, characterize the resulting fiber/matrix mixture (fiber length distribution, residual resin content, tensile properties), and assess suitability for specific applications (concrete reinforcement, insulation, 3D printing feedstock). This generates the material property data needed for any future ASTM classification standard. A complementary project could conduct a standardized LCA comparing cement co-processing, solvolysis, and landfill for a representative blade composition. Relevant disciplines: materials science, chemical engineering, environmental engineering, manufacturing.