1. Introduction
Besides catalytic converters, electronic components containing noteworthy amounts of high-value metals (e.g., gold, silver, palladium, indium, neodymium and other rare earth metals) are increasingly used in modern vehicles. Although technologies are available for the recovery of such metals from end of life products, this is not currently common practice in the case of automobiles. Most of high value metals are lost in current end of life vehicle (ELV) recycling practices, which are focused on shredding and recovery of bulk metals, steel, aluminium and copper [
1,
2]. Electronics make up a minute part of the overall vehicle volume and thus, after shredding the full ELV, higher value metals occur only in non-noteworthy concentrations. Selective separation of components with a greater content of high value metals (e.g., printed circuit boards (PCB) for separate material recovery is seldom implemented, although it would enable the recovery and re-use of these strategic materials.
In a typical ELV with a mass of 1050 kg, the mass of critical or precious metals might amount to 50 kg [
3,
4]. Steel, aluminium, copper, glass and plastics make up the largest portion of the mass of a vehicle and yield the main revenues for authorised treatment facilities (ATFs). According to Ortego et al. [
5], Fe, Al, and Cu account for more than 90% of the car’s metal content. Electronic components with precious or critical raw materials can offer additional material value by linking the recycling segments for ELV more closely to waste electronic and electric equipment (WEEE) management assuming that the effort required to dismantle the ELV is less than the revenues gained by selling the electronic components to a WEEE recycler.
The European ELV directive states that as of 1 January 2015, 95 wt% of the ELV must be recovered. Recovery is defined as the final productive use of the parts and materials embedded in ELVs. The EU sets the current recycling target in terms of the mass-% of the entire vehicle. In practice, this incentivises the recycling of heavy materials, although these materials are not necessarily the most important to recycle from a resource and environmental point of view.
A study of German ATFs in 2014 identified a number of relevant car components that contain strategic raw materials in ELVs, which could be subject to dismantling with potential economic gain [
4]. Many of the raw materials in the identified components have a substantial environmental impact, such as a high carbon footprint.
Groke et al. [
4] compared the time required to dismantle the selected components in different car types with the relative quantity of precious metals and other valuable materials contained in the components. Comparison between the cost of dismantling the components and the potential revenues from sales of the components to WEEE recycling facilities indicates the economic viability of dismantling ELV electronic components. Metal prices in 2014 in Germany provided the basis for economic viability calculations by Groke et al. [
4]. Using these calculations as a starting point, this paper will provide a broader overview of the economic potential for recovering critical and/or precious raw materials from ELV components in different EU regions, taking into account the volume and nature of local ELV markets as well as relevant costs and recent raw material prices. Moreover, the specific information regarding recovery of valuable and /or critical metals occurring in lower quantities in the complex end-of life matrix is missing. Increased understanding of the factors affecting the economic potential of recovering materials with a low-weight contribution is crucial to enhance specific material recovery. The aim of this study is therefore to answer to the need for objective assessment of the recovery. The countries selected and the respective European regions represented in the present analysis were Germany and the Netherlands (western Europe), Finland (northern Europe), the Czech Republic (central Europe and a former country of the Eastern bloc) and Spain (southern Europe).
Circa 5.3 million cars with an average age of 15 years were officially scrapped in 2017 in the European Union [
6,
7]. These End-of-life vehicles generate 7–8 Mtons of waste annually in the EU [
8]. Hereof, 94% of parts and materials were reused and recovered, 88% again reused and recycled. In general, the market structure of vehicle recycling in most European countries is characterized by numerous small companies that also provide other services such as towing, repairs, used car trading, scrap trading, etc. A few large companies in each country typically dismantle up to 10,000 ELVs per annum [
9,
10]. Some electronic components, such as the starter, generator, steering servo unit, are regularly dismantled for reuse as spare parts, remanufacturing or for export purposes. The scrap market is a regional market and prices depend on supply volume, prevailing local economic conditions and season. Generally, the market prices for scrap are highly volatile, indicated e.g., by the German raw material database EUWID 2020 [
11].
Generally, dismantling of ELV components for reuse as spare parts is more common for vehicles less than 10 years old, whilst the main economic benefit of old ELVs is in their material content [
10].
3. Results
The results of calculations of revenues versus costs for the selected priority components from ELVs are presented in
Tables S1–S5 in the
Supplementary Material and summarized in
Table 4. For most of the components examined, material revenues are so small (less than 2€ in most cases) that the dismantling can be only economically beneficial when the dismantling times are less than or equal to 2 min. For this reason, we have carried out a sensitivity analysis and analysed how the result will change assuming a 50% increase in material prices. The economic feasibility is slightly improved at 50% higher scrap material prices; however, dismantling of ELVs for WEEE recycling remained non-economically feasible in most cases, with the exception of Czechia where significantly lower labour costs yield relatively greater economic opportunity for WEEE recycling under the 50% higher scrap price scenario.
3.1. Potential in Northern and Western Europe—Germany, The Netherlands and Finland Cases
Components for which dismantling is clearly beneficial (for examined vehicle types) are the inverter for hybrid vehicles, and the side assistant sensor, distance sensor and oxygen sensor for all vehicles. Generally, components with larger masses such as the generator and inverter, rendering higher material revenues were found economical viable to dismantle (
Tables S1–S3 Supplementary Material).
The benefit of dismantling was uncertain for five components, where profitability depends on the vehicle type and dismantling time. These components are the heating blower and generators in the group of engine components, and engine control, transmission control, infotainment and start/stop motor in the group of control components.
For the remaining components, dismantling is not profitable at current labour costs and material prices. These components identified as uneconomic for WEEE recycling include the servomotor, starter, fan motor, and wiper motor in the group of engine components, and drive control, chassis control, and CD changer, TV tuner and radio control in the group of control components.
For most of the components examined, material revenues are so small (less than 2€ in most cases) that the dismantling can be only economically beneficial when the dismantling times are less than or equal to 2 min. For several components (servomotor, starter, fan motor, wiper motor, drive control and CD-changer/TV tuner/radio control), the material revenues in comparison with ATF and WEEE costs are such that that not even a 50% increase in scrap metal prices is sufficient for ELV component dismantling to be profitable (
Tables S1–S3 Supplementary Material).
The impact of transportation costs is less significant than dismantling costs. Calculations using both 30.00 €/t and 60.00 €/t transport costs (ATF) showed that doubling of transport costs causes only a minor change in the ratio of revenue/cost associated with ELV component dismantling and WEEE recycling. The transportation costs are in most cases clearly less than 10% of the total ATF costs, and >10% only when dismantling times are very rapid or component mass high. Thus, doubling of transportation costs typically results in an increase of 1–6% of the total costs of ATF.
3.2. Southern Europe—The Spain Case
The components for which the dismantling is clearly positive (for all examined vehicle types) are the generator in the group of engine components, inverter for hybrid vehicles, start/stop motor in the group of control components and the side assistant, distance sensor and oxygen sensor in the group of sensor components.
For five components, the present analysis could not indicate a clear benefit or disadvantage of dismantling, but the profitability would depend on the vehicle type and dismantling time. Those components include the heating blower and starter in the group of engine components, and engine control, transmission control, drive control, infotainment and chassis control in the group of control components.
For the other components investigated, dismantling is not profitable with the Spanish labour cost of 20.00 €/h and current material prices. These components include the servomotor, fan motor, wiper motor, and servomotor gear in the group of engine components, and CD changer, TV tuner and radio control in the group of control components.
For components with an original ratio of revenue/cost >0.7, the increase of 50% in scrap metal prices shifts the revenue from dismantling to positive. These were some starters, heating blower, engine and transmission control, drive control and servomotor gear. However, for many of the components, the ratio for revenue/costs remained <1.
3.3. Central Europe—The Czech Republic Case
The components for which the dismantling is clearly positive (for all examined vehicle types) are the fan motor, generator and servomotor gear in the group of engine components, the inverter for hybrid vehicles, infotainment and start/stop motor in the group of control components and the side assistant, distance sensor and oxygen sensor in the group of sensor components.
For the following components, the present analysis could not indicate a clear benefit or disadvantage of dismantling, as the profitability depends on the vehicle type and dismantling time: the heating blower and starter in the group of engine components, and engine control, transmission control, drive control and chassis control in the group of control components.
For the other ELV components, dismantling is not profitable with the Czech labour cost of 10.00 €/h and current material prices. These include the servomotor and wiper motor in the group of engine components, and CD changer, TV tuner and radio control in the group of control components. An increase of 50% in material prices may shift the dismantling revenue from negative to positive for the servomotor and wiper motor of some vehicle models.
4. Summary and Discussion
The economic viability of dismantling electronic components for material recycling was evaluated for Germany, the Netherlands, Finland, the Czech Republic and Spain. The countries selected for the analysis represent different parts of the EU and differ with respect to the size and density of the population, average labour costs and ELV fleet, etc.
Metal scrap prices depend on several factors including, e.g., the quality of the obtained scrap and the transportation distance. The volatility of scrap prices substantially impacts material revenues. Between 2011 and 2019, the price of steel scrap on the German market fluctuated between 150 and 370 €/t while the price of aluminium scrap decreased from 1000 €/t in 2017 to 400 €/t in 2019 [
11]. The price range for PCBs, which typically contain the highest quantity of precious metals (Au, Ag, Pd), depend on the quality of the PCB. In the present analysis it is assumed that PCB quality is closer to the lower end of the range of values according to previous analyses by, e.g., [
22].
Material revenues from the dismantled components is primarily based upon the value of Cu, Al and PCBs. Copper is the most valuable material in most components in the engine group, whereas Al and PCBs are the most valuable materials in the group of control components. Printed circuit boards are found in nearly all electronic components, especially those in the control group. Printed circuit boards contain numerous precious metals/critical raw materials, of which the most valuable are gold, silver and palladium.
Critical raw materials (CRMs) also exist in other ELV components. For example, neodymium (Nd) and dysprosium (Dy) are used in permanent magnets, and various rare earth elements (REE) are used in liquid crystal display (LCD) and light-emitting diode (LED) displays as well as other components. The CRM content in different ELV components typically varies from milligrams to grams and is typically low with respect to the total mass of the component [
22]. As the recoverable amounts of CRMs in the almost all ATFs with moderate throughput is economically insignificant and commercial recovery plants remain rare, CRMs such as Nd and REEs have not been taken into account in the present analysis. Research and development on recycling processes for, e.g., Nd magnets and REEs is progressing and these elements could provide additional value if economic recovery processes are available in the future. Furthermore, recovering scarce metals from ELVs could contribute to the EU’s resource resilience. However, economic extraction of CRMs, which are present in very low concentrations within electronic components, remains challenging and public economic incentives for recovering scarce elements from ELVs may be required to promote CRM recovery from ELVs. Neither the current ELV directive nor the WEEE directive provide incentives, as these do not target scarce metals specifically but focus on total recycling rates.
There are significant differences in labour costs across Europe, with hourly labour costs ranging from 5.40 to 43.50 €/h [
8]. In countries where labour costs are lower, manual dismantling and thus also material recovery from electronic components is profitable for a wider range of components. The higher labour costs in western and northern European countries (31.00–32.00 €/h estimated for ATFs) prohibits wider material recovery from electronic components. Where labour costs are high, manual dismantling of components is economical for relatively few components, such as the inverter, oxygen sensor, side assistant sensor, distance and near distance sensors. For some vehicle models, component dismantling can be also profitable for the heating blower, generator, engine and transmission control and start/stop motor.
Spain and the Czech Republic represent the southern and central/eastern regions of Europe where labour costs are on average 30–60% of those in western and northern Europe. Lower labour costs are beneficial for manual component dismantling and thus, more components can be profitably dismantled. In addition to the aforementioned components, dismantling of the drive control, infotainment and chassis control can be profitable depending on the vehicle model and applicable scrap metal prices. If scrap metal prices are higher, even more components can be dismantled in a profitable way.
For many ELV components, the material revenues are so minimal that dismantling yields little to no profit at locally appropriate labour costs without a significant increase in material prices or significantly reduced dismantling times. The components for which significant increases in material prices or reductions in dismantling times would be required include the servomotor, fan motor, wiper motor, CD changer/TV tuner/radio control, and servomotor gear. These particular components are associated with relatively lengthy dismantling times and are largely composed of materials with low scrap value, such as iron/steel and plastics.
In contrast, components for which dismantling is profitable are primarily those with the shortest dismantling times (typically less than two minutes). Rapid dismantling presumes that the ATF knows the location and accessibility of the valuable components. However, information about the content of precious metals and REE in car components are not easily available for ATFs at present. For example, the International Material Data System (IMDS) database that would in principle contain these data is designed for car producers and their suppliers and is currently not available to ATFs. Instead, ATFs use the International dismantling information system (IDIS) database, which provides information about the location of some components in a vehicle and how best to dismantle them but does not contain material compositions of components. One possibility in the future could be to implement an interface between IMDS and IDIS and make information available for ATFs.
The dismantling times and components were assessed for relatively new vehicles (2009–2014) in the present study, representing a future ELV flow. The average scrapping age of ELVs in studied countries are countries is ca. 17–21 years [
3,
10,
23,
24]. To avoid underestimation of required labour, the measured dismantling of components from each vehicle type, performed under good conditions, was multiplied with the factor 1.5 [
4]. The dismantling time measurements did not per se take into account factors such as different skill levels of employees or learning curves that enable faster dismantling, which causes some uncertainty. All the same, as the profit margin is small for almost all the components, longer dismantling times can easily shift the profitability of component dismantling from positive to negative. Furthermore, the dismantling times vary for the same components in different vehicle models and thus the profitability of dismantling of electronic components needs to be considered on a case by case basis. On average, older ELVs also contain fewer electronics.
A market demand for the dismantled components is a prerequisite for the dismantling of electronic components to be economically viable. From both the waste hierarchy and the ELV directive point of view, reuse of the components has higher priority than material recycling. Because the material values related to most of the ELV components are so minor with respect to the dismantling cost, reuse is typically more profitable if there is a market for the dismantled components. The average scrapping age of ELVs is rather high in the countries evaluated in this report, however, in which case there is a lower demand to reuse dismantled components as spare parts. Thus, the utilization of components from older ELVs typically focus on the material recycling rather than reuse. The economic viability of dismantling requires that there is a market for the components and the price is higher when compared to the vehicle body.
Collection and recycling logistics for dismantled components is also economically challenging. The majority of ATFs are small companies and only a few ATFs dismantle more than 10,000 ELVs/year. Estimated logistics costs of 30.00 €/t assume fully a loaded truck with 10 t of transported weight [
4]. However, full load truck transportations may be difficult to achieve in a typical vehicle dismantling facility where material flows are generally small. Thus, it is important to find logistic solutions for small masses of electronic components, such as integration into existing collection systems. Often the recycling of ELVs and WEEE is carried out by the same operators which may also result in synergies in the logistics chain. Logistics costs are also affected by average transportation distances, which vary across Europe.
Changes in the European vehicle fleet and the increasing market share of electric vehicles (EVs) are not considered in detail in the present analysis. The quantities of critical and scarce metals have increased substantially in recent years and vehicles also now include many new metals such as neodymium. Ljunggren Söderman [
25] estimated that by 2020 there will be nearly 18,000 t of neodymium in the active vehicle fleet—nine times the amount present in 2000. While the content of neodymium has been assessed to 27–43 g/unit for conventional vehicles registered from 2003 onwards, the neodymium content is 200–661 g/vehicle for EVs [
26]. Moreover, the volumes of EVs approaching their end-of-life will increase rapidly in the near future [
7] as global EV stock has increased from 17 000 in 2010 to 7.2 million in 2019 [
27]. It has been estimated that the amount of EVs requiring end-of-life processing will increase to 200,000 by 2027 in the EU [
28]. Electric vehicle batteries contain critical raw materials, most importantly cobalt, and they constitute a significant part of the value of the EV. Separate collection and recycling systems are currently being established for the end-of-life EV batteries.
The fast development of the vehicle fleet has been associated with several material risks Ortego et al. [
5] pointed out that this will probably lead to a future supply risk that may hinder the very development of the electric vehicle. At the same time, the recovery of the rare earths does not play a role in the steps of the end-of-life chain of vehicles due to economic viability issues.
Our paper adds to the literature as it is the first detailed analysis of some economic factors which can impede a shift towards more circular practices in this sector.
5. Conclusions
The present analysis considered the material recycling potential of 18 electronic components from ELVs across different European regions, taking into account average local labour costs and recent raw material prices.
The profitability of dismantling different ELV components varies, as it depends on a number of factors and differs depending upon vehicle model. The profit margin is very small for most of the components evaluated here, thus small changes in labour costs and/or material revenues can shift ELV component dismantling from profitable to non-profitable or vice versa. Manual dismantling is generally more beneficial in countries with lower labour costs. The volatility of scrap metal prices also affects the revenues obtained from the recovered materials. Manual dismantling is profitable for only a few components at the higher labour costs in western/northern parts of Europe and current material prices, including the inverter for hybrid vehicles, oxygen sensor, side assistant sensor, distance and near distance sensors. Depending on the vehicle model, labour costs and current material prices, manual dismantling can also be positive for also some other such as the heating blower, generator, starter, engine and transmission control, start/stop motor, drive control, infotainment and chassis control.
The collection and recycling logistics for the dismantled components is challenging as the volumes from typical ATFs are typically low. Thus, close collaboration between ATF and WEEE recyclers is crucial in order to optimize the logistics for dismantled components.
The quantity of electronic components and thus the potential for recovering CRMs from ELVs will increase in the future. Currently, the bottleneck for recovering CRMs such as Nd magnets or REEs from dismantled components is the availability of economical recycling processes for these elements, which are present in very low concentrations. Thus, technological solutions are needed in order to recover critical elements from the electronic components in ELVs. Considering the criticality, i.e., their wider economic importance and high supply risks, such improvements should get a much higher attention in the future.