Circularity not yet a priority in energy transition and construction
Are we on the right track towards a circular economy in 2050, with fully renewable energy technology and circular construction? The CML of Leiden University, together with the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL), TNO, Utrecht University and RIVM, is investigating what is needed to achieve this goal. The main message? ‘Work together and consider circularity when developing new innovations.’
‘It would be very beneficial if we opt for a circular economy,’ says René Kleijn, professor of Industrial Ecology. ‘It affects both the required amount of scarce primary resources and the environment.’ Politicians now support the climate mission, but innovation strategies in recycling and reuse seem secondary to this. The analyses on which CML collaborated examine the opportunities for making renewable energy technology and construction circular, and explores how these opportunities result in a more sustainable sector.
Impact of circular measures on renewable energy technology
Renewable energy technology has the wind in its sails. This rapid expansion requires many resources, resulting in environmental risks and resource scarcity. René Kleijn and Arjan de Koning of CML, together with researchers from RIVM, TU Delft and Utrecht University, investigated the impact of circular measures on three renewable energy systems: solar panels, wind turbines and Li-ion batteries in, for example, electric cars. To do so, they combined three perspectives: material flows, the technical options and the innovation system (everything related to facilitating innovations and transitions).
‘The energy transition and the circular transition are obviously interrelated in several ways and can both counteract and reinforce each other.’
The analysis shows that we can reduce the increase in resource use by 19 to 38 per cent if we prioritise circularity when installing renewable energy systems up to 2050. Circular measures include product passports, design for longevity, more efficient use of resources and advanced recycling methods to recover more materials from Li-ion batteries.
One of the messages from the report is the need to develop circularity innovations alongside energy innovations, as the latter currently dominates. ‘The energy transition and the circular transition are of course interrelated in several ways and can both counteract and reinforce each other,’ says Kleijn.
Circular construction requires coordinated action
To continue to meet the demand for housing, we will have to renovate existing houses and also build new ones. This requires a lot of resources. Ester van der Voet and Janneke van Oorschot of the CML, together with researchers from TNO, Utrecht University and PBL, therefore looked at material stocks and flows in construction. They also examined the effects of various measures (such as recycling and reuse) on material stocks until 2050. ‘With our knowledge, we can test which circularity strategies best contribute to the government's policy goal of reducing the use of primary resources in construction,’ says Ester van der Voet, professor of Sustainable Resource Use.
Their analysis shows that the right measures can certainly reduce increases in resource use. However, a combination of measures is needed to make a difference. Consider, for instance: topping up (building on existing construction), prefabricated construction, life extension and bio-based construction. However, effects can only be seen in the long term, says Van der Voet. ‘Houses have a long lifespan; changes happen slowly.’
‘If we do nothing now, no circularity and associated environmental gains can be expected in the long term either.’
Although circularity benefits resource use, climate and environmental impacts remain high, the report shows. Greenhouse gas emissions will halve by 2050 compared to 2020, according to the study. Further reductions are needed to meet climate targets.
In the report, the researchers stress that a coordinated approach is required to facilitate the transition to circular construction. Change in construction is complex, as policies are spread across multiple parties. Van der Voet: ‘That does not mean that we should just abandon the whole idea; if we do nothing now, no circularity and associated environmental gains can be expected in the long term either.’
Using knowledge to support Dutch environmental policy
Kleijn underscores the importance of participating in these analyses into material stocks of key product groups as part of the National Circular Economy Programme (NPCE). 'We have been contributing to policy around NCPE for years. We think it is valuable not only to publish in scientific literature but also to support Dutch environmental policy with our knowledge.'
Work programme Monitoring and Steering Circular Economy 2023-2024
These product group analyses on renewable energy technology and construction are two of the three analyses carried out within the Work Programme Monitoring and Steering Circular Economy 2023-2024. Besides renewable energy technology and construction, plastic packaging was also examined. They were conducted under PBL's direction by RIVM, TNO and CML in collaboration with Utrecht University, RWS and TU Delft.
PBL also produced an overarching note on the similarities and differences between the product group analyses.
During the symposium on 9 September, they will explore what follow-up steps could be for politics & policy, civil society organisations and companies. You can register for this symposium here.