Circular Economy and Waste Challenges

#### **Chapter 7**

## Circular Economy: An Antidote to Municipal Solid Waste Challenges in Zambia

*Kachikoti Banda, Erastus M. Mwanaumo and Bupe Getrude Mwanza*

#### **Abstract**

Zambia is one of the fastest developing countries in Africa. It is land linked and has one of the most urbanizing cities, the capital, Lusaka. The country is now grappling with serious challenges of managing municipal solid waste that is generated from its growing population and increased economic activity. Circular economy ensures that all the negativities of linear economy are reduced or prevented by ensuring reduced generation of waste at source, reuse of the generated waste and if these cannot be implemented, recycling of the generated waste follows. This results into environmental benefits such as clean and safe air and water. Land degradation or pollution is prevented. Therefore, there is need to implement circular economy as an antidote to the current municipal solid waste challenges. Municipal solid waste management is a critical public good that provides a barometer for the effectiveness of any governance system around the world. Successive governments should embed the waste management issue in all the policies developed for to ensure sustainability. In today's world of material scarcity and a call to action toward climate change action, it cannot be over emphasized that circular economy is the antidote to municipal solid waste challenges Zambia is facing.

**Keywords:** circular economy, municipal, solid waste, antidote, linear economy

#### **1. Introduction**

Rising populations and increased economic activities across the world have given rise to the generation of municipal solid waste. While developed countries have made tremendous slides to cope with this increased generation, developing countries especially in southern Africa are still grappling with the challenge. Developing countries are making efforts to improve the well-being of their people, grow the economy and ensure the much-needed development is delivered especially when it comes to political, promises. While they focus is on the former, municipal solid waste generation rates continue to rise and are not met with sustainable municipal solid waste management systems. This paper focuses on municipal solid waste management in Zambia,

a southern African country and how circular economy could be used as an antidote or solution to many challenges the country is facing.

Zambia is a vast African country and one of the fastest developing countries in Africa and has one of the most urbanizing cities, the capital, Lusaka. National records indicate that the country covers 752,614 square kilometers and the World Bank projects the 2021 population to be at 18.9 million. According to www.cia.gov, the rate of urbanization in Zambia is estimated at 4.2% for the period 2020 to 2025 with the urban population accounting for 46% as at the year 2022. The country applies democratic governance system with its 2016 Republican Constitution providing exclusive functions for local authorities among which is municipal solid waste management (Article 147). Rising populations and the rural urban drift due to improved economy have given rise to the daunting challenge in the management of municipal solid waste in the country. Once known as the Garden City of Africa, the country is now grappling with serious challenges of managing municipal solid waste that is generated from its growing population and increased economic activity. This is exacerbated by collapsed waste management systems, lack of financing and bad behavioral attitudes. Successive governments have tried several efforts to ensure that municipal solid waste is effectively managed to ultimately protect public health and the environment [1, 2]. While this is just an example of the challenge in the capital city, the situation is similar across the country especially cosmopolitan towns along the line of rail. Lack of financing, poor behavior attitudes couple with lack of equipment and uncontrolled unplanned settlement has led to a serious challenge to Local Authorities. The situation poses a threat to public health, environment, socio-economic and to a larger extent political sector. Further, contributions from Balasubramanian [3], indicate that social, economic and health issues are some of the effects of uncollected waste. While effects of poor waste management are innumerable as they affect all sectors of human, environmental and socio-economic development, the use of linear economy focuses only on municipal solid waste systems that recognize generation, collection, transportation and disposal only. Such linear economy as revealed by Glaser et al. [4], has been in existence since the industrial revolution and has achieved economic growth. Linear economy systems have several negative impacts on the public health and the environment as they are primarily focused on economic growth in their non-holistic approach.

Sustainable municipal solid waste management is a potential tool for socio-economic development despite its primary focus on public health and environment. As the world and Zambia as member of the global village propagates then achievement of sustainable development goals, the implementation of circular economy is an urgent matter. The call for circular economy across the world is now louder and more apparent than before. This would not only ensure a clean and safe environment but also, create the much-needed jobs with more than 60% population being the youths. As opposed to linear economy, circular economy is more productive and healthier with raw materials are maintained in the production cycle and recycled [5].

#### **2. Municipal solid waste management in Zambia**

Zambia attained independence in 1964 on October 24th. During that period and a few years post-independence, municipal solid waste ably managed by the colonial government and new independent Zambia. This was made possible through the public health act and other related legislation. As the country embarked on liberalizing

#### *Circular Economy: An Antidote to Municipal Solid Waste Challenges in Zambia DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.109689*

the economy, the Environmental Council of Zambia was created to attend to environmental challenges in the country especially those coming forum the mining sector which is the main revenue base for the country. This led to formulation of the waste management regulations. a few years before that, the national conservation strategy of 1985 was developed to provide policy guidance on the use of natural resources and environmental preservation. These two categories of documents formulated the basis of legal and policy framework that government municipal solid waste management in Zambia.

As the country progress on its economic reforms, the economy was liberalized leading the country into a free market economy. Increased population growth, a booming economy coupled with the rural urban drift along the cosmopolitan towns of the line of rail led to increased population growth. It is worth noting that the colonial government and the subsequent Zambian governments after independence used a tariff bundling systems for collection of waste management fees. This system collapsed on the mid-1990s when economic reforms took place, the resultant effect was piles of uncollected waste lying in the stress because municipalities could not effectively collect waste mainly because of failure to maintain the fleet and also low subscription rates form the citizens. The situation was exacerbated with low research and funding for the waste management sector leading to outbreak of diseases such as cholera especially in major cities like Lusaka the capital.

According to the constitution of Zambia, municipal solid waste management is an exclusive function of local authorities. Therefore, as the responsibility grew, the Zambia Environmental Management Agency (ZEMA), an institution created with the enactment of the environmental management act of 2011 was regulating local authorities in the management of municipal solid waste. However, in December of 2018, the government of Zambia enacted the first ever stand-alone act of parliament, the Solid Waste Regulation and Management Act of 2018. The act recognizes waste as resources and provides for formulation of utility companies to by local authorities to manage waste on their behalf. Further, the country does not have a new waste management strategic plan and is currently using the nation solid waste management strategy of 2004. Apparently, only the Lusaka City Council from the capital Lusaka has developed a waste management plan. Local authorities in the country are visibly struggling to manage municipal solid waste. Some of the reasons attributed to the glaring problems are; lack of revenue, low or no investments or incentive sin the sector by government, extremely low levels of awareness among the citizens leading to illegal dumping, burning and burying of waste etc. While the law is in a place and few convictions have been secured especially in Lusaka, many towns and cities across the country are doing very little to combat this environmental and public health threat. What is more threatening and appalling, not all the 116 municipalities in the country have engineered landfills for safe disposal of their waste. This means the whole country is using crude dumping clearly polluting the atmosphere, land and water, both surface and underground, the eminent public health threat the immediate communities living around these dumpsites cannot be over emphasized. Further, very little landfill diversion strategies are areas being done to enhance recycling and waste to energy process in a bid to promote circular economy. From the highlighted enormous challenges, it is time the country embraced circular economy for an assured sustainable future. This calls for enhanced recycling of municipal solid waste to ensure a sustained supply of material to the industry for production. The model would reduce the stress on landfills and eventually lead to manageable levels of costs for final disposal sites.

#### **3. Current generation rates, streams and sources**

Municipal solid waste management in Zambia is a constitutional mandate for Local Authorities. The Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development and other agencies like the Zambia Environmental Management Agency provide an oversight role to the management of solid waste in the country. The implementation of circular economy models are based on the fact that waste generated from any activity, is used as raw material for the production of other items thereby avowing the use of virgin materials. As discussed earlier, the implementation of the 3R systems is the blueprint of this model. However, it is important to know generation rates to determine the quantities of raw materials for production. For example, waste to energy systems are one the innovative technologies that use waste as a raw material for the generation of het and energy. In world affected by climate change, the scarcity of water for hydroelectricity generation is real. Further, generation of heat and electricity from fossil fuels is a serious threat to climate change. Therefore, use of municipal solid waste for this purpose is the alternative. Zambia currently has had nor empirical survey to determine generation rates, waste streams and sources which produces what kind of waste. Expert opinion, experience and physical characterization of waste informs that for the city of Lusaka in Zambia, 60% of waste produced is comprised of plastic and paper. This could be similar for other cosmopolitan towns and cities but notably different for rural districts, which have agricultural activities and lack of manufacturing industries, low commercial activities and low production more than these towns. This implies that there is huge potential for recycling. Metal is heavily recycled in the currently because of a lucrative market for scrap metal. Glass, garments and organic waste are rarely recycled. It is therefore important that before any circular economy model is implemented, these studies be conducted to inform decision and devise strategies.

#### **4. Circular economy and municipal solid waste management**

According to Zhang et al. [6], Circular Economy is an economic development model consisting of resources-products-renewable resources and repeated circulation of materials based on the principles of reduce, reuse and recycle. Natural resource depletion and increased waste generation have contributed to the emergence of the concept of a "circular economy" as a new paradigm opposed to the standard "linear economy" [7]. While there are other schools of thoughts that have more than 3Rs, the scope of this paper is just the 3Rs. This means that the waste generation is reduced at source from every day economic, domestic and commercial activities. Reduction of generation of waste is a conscious-based activity at individual level and also systembased at industrial or commercial level. This means that individuals, residents, or the citizenry is well aware that they have to reduce the generation of more waste by employing technics at individual level that could help in reducing waste generation. For example, an individual or a family could use are reusable shopping bag other than purchasing more plastic bags as they con duct their shopping. Another example at commercial or industrial levels is implementation of systems that reduce more generation of waste are employed. For example, when an organization is conducting a workshop, the institutional policy to reduce the generation of waste from purchase of individual water drinking bottles could clearly be spelt such that all workshop participants could come with their own reusable water bottles and drink from the

#### *Circular Economy: An Antidote to Municipal Solid Waste Challenges in Zambia DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.109689*

common water dispenser or reusable cups could be used for the participants. Clearly, these technics could help reduce the generation of waste that affecting the first R for reduce. The unavoidable waste that is generated could then be disposed of in separate bins according to waste streams or indeed taken to sorting centers for separation at communal sorting stations. This leads us to the second R. However, the effectiveness of this is mainly based on the mindset of the population [8] and effectiveness of the implementation of institutional or work policies aimed at reducing the generation of municipal solid waste.

When waste is generated, there are certain streams or types of waste that could be reused without any physical or chemical change in this case recycling. The reusing of such waste is based on the primary status of its physical, chemical or biological properties. For example, waste from vegetable cuttings or food premises could be used as they are for manure or compost in the backyard gardens for growing of vegetables, this would contribute to the reduction of expenditure on fertilizers, especially if it is conducted at large scale. The world has seen the rise of proponents or enthusiasts of organic framing leading to some becoming vegetarians to save the animals. The growing of such organic food is based on the reuse and recycling of organic waste or waste that can decompose and provide that much needed nutrients to plants or animals. Reduce and Reuse of waste helps in diverting the waste from final disposal sites and thus contribute to the lifespan of the landfill. This is a closed loop systems. Plastics are the other stream of waste that can be reused in its form for several purposes. This leads us to the final R; Recycling. Recycling is the manufacture or production of goods or items by use of material that has performed a primary function and not virgin material. This implies that the raw material used in the production line is waste disposed off in another activity. Recycling of waste could save millions of money needed to purchase, transport and use of virgin material in production systems. Environmental conservation and protection is at the core of the implementation of this R because of the potential of prevention of pollution, conserves the earth and ensuring a safer and cleaner environment. Recycling is thus a game changer in industrial production, job creation, public health and environmental protection. Circular economy if well implemented could be an antidote the currently challenges the country is facing in managing its waste in most of its cosmopolitan towns and cities. This is affirmed by the work of Allevi et al. [8] who propose a waste management model in a circular economy framework.

#### **5. Environmental and socio-economic value of circular economy**

While the implementation of circular economy as opposed to linear economy is being encouraged and considered, it is worth noting that the circular economy has numerable environmental and socio-economic value to the implementing agent, institution, city or indeed country. Linear economy involves the use of raw materials to make new products and the waste generated is disposed off. This implies that there is no diversion from the final disposal systems, for recycling let alone, reduction and ruse. This cause pollution landfills, over consumption of natural resources thereby depleting the much-needed resources for future development, clearly going against the concept of sustainable development. Continued hauling of waste from generation to disposal sites and management of disposal sites consume a lot of fuel thereby affecting budgets of municipalities across the country. The threat of climate change, pollution and contamination of air land water cannot be overemphasized. However, circular

economy ensures that all the negativities of linear economy are reduced or prevented by ensuring reduced generation of waste are source, reuse of the generated waste and if these tow cannot be implemented, recycling of the generated waste. This yields innumerable environmental benefits among which are clean and safe air and water. Land degradation or pollution is prevented.

On the other hand, agents, institutions or industries and indeed municipalities are bale to record significant savings on their financials in circular economy is implemented. For example, the cost of running landfills is significantly reduced if waste is diverted to recycling plants as opposed to just being disposed of at landfills. This is true also at domestic or industrial level as evidenced by significant savings on the cost of virgin raw material needed for production. Individuals of agents can save at personal or domestic level if the 3Rs are implemented as circular economy principles.

#### **6. Circular economy and vision 2030**

Zambia seeks to grow its economy to achieve a middle-income prosperous nation by the year 2030. This aspiration has led to the development and implementation of the Zambia Vision 2030 policy that would spur the country to the desired status by the year 2030. Implementation of circular economy through the 3R system can greatly contribute to the achievement of these visions by the year 2030. Concerning waste management, the Vision 2030 clearly seeks to *achieve and sustain efficiency and effectiveness in the delivery of Public Services; and also attract and retain quality technical, professional and managerial staff in the Public Service*. This implies that as an antidote to the current municipal solid waste challenges the country is facing, there is need to ensure that there is effectiveness and efficiency in the implementation of the 3R system to realize the accrued benefits. Further, these results cannot be achieved if the country does not produce through its universities and colleges, technical and professional staff to undertake this important program. Often times, countries or municipalities especially in developing countries do not have experts in waste management leading to the sector being managed or handled by all sorts of people thereby causing chaos and disjointed activities whose results and impacts cannot not be measured. Therefore, circular economy, through the implementation of the 3R system in Zambia can greatly contribute to the achievement of the Government's vision for a middleincome prosperous nation by the year 2030.

#### **7. Strategies for Zambia to achieve a circular economy**

Zambia is party to international organizations and treaties among the notable ones being the sustainable development goals. It is therefore important that the country migrate to a fully-fledged circular economy in order to contribute to the achievement of the vision 2030 and actualize the sustainable development goals. Therefore, the following are proposed strategies to be implemented in an effort to implement circular economy as an antidote to the currently municipal solid waste challenges;

There is need for government to immediately provide incentives the waste management sector so that it becomes economically viable to reduce, reuse and recycle including waste to energy projects. Currently, there is no incentive in the waste management sector making infrastructure, equipment and collection systems economically and unattractive. The second strategy is to ensure that domestic and

*Circular Economy: An Antidote to Municipal Solid Waste Challenges in Zambia DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.109689*

institutional policies are developed and enforced aimed at implementing the 3R system. Thirdly, there is need to streamline flow of all waste materials to industries and track the recycling rates for purposes of measuring progress and impacts. The last strategy is to ensure application of technology in all process so as to crate the closes loop systems for monitoring and evaluation from generation, collection, transportation, intermediate treatment, and final disposal i.e. Waste to energy plant.

#### **8. Conclusion**

Municipal solid waste management is a critical public good that provides a barometer for the effectiveness of any governance system around the world. Waste management is always a political issue as much as it is an environmental and public health issue. It is therefore important that successive governments should embed the waste management issue in all the policies developed for development. Further, the education and financial system should supplement enforcement and operational solutions in the sector. In today's world of material scarcity and a call to action towards climate change, it cannot be over emphasized that circular economy is the antidote to municipal solid waste challenges Zambia is facing. Environmental, social and governance factors need to be critically considered in devising waste management systems in order to combat climate change caused by municipal solid waste management [9].

#### **Acknowledgements**

I wish to acknowledge the valuable guidance from my coach and many other unsung heroes in this work.

#### **Conflict of interest**

The author declares no conflict of interest.

#### **Notes/thanks/other declarations**

I am grateful to my family for their sacrifice of time during the late nights and weekends of writing. Special gratitude to my son Kachikoti whose time I always sacrificed!

#### **Author details**

Kachikoti Banda1 \*, Erastus M. Mwanaumo1 and Bupe Getrude Mwanza2

1 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia

2 Graduate School of Business, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia

\*Address all correspondence to: billkachikoti@gmail.com

© 2023 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

#### **References**

[1] Available from: www.lusakatimes. com/2013/07/12/lusaka-has-lost-gardencity-concept-mayor-chisenga/

[2] Zambia: 60% of garbage in Lusaka is uncollected (lusakatimes.com)

[3] Balasubramanian M. Economics of solid waste management: A review. In: Saleh HM, editor. Strategies of Sustainable Solid Waste Management. London: IntechOpen; 2020. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.95343

[4] Glaser JA, Sahle-Demessie E, Richardson TL. Are reliable and emerging technologies available for plastic recycling in a circular economy? In: Achilias DS, editor. Waste Material Recycling in the Circular Economy—Challenges and Developments. London: IntechOpen; 2022. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.101350

[5] Musarat MA et al. Circular economy— Recent advances in sustainable construction waste management. In: Zhang T, editor. The Circular Economy— Recent Advances in Sustainable Waste Management. London: IntechOpen; 2022. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.105050

[6] Zhang Y, Niu Y, Zhang T. Introductory chapter: The overview of recent advances of sustainable waste management. In: Zhang T, editor. The Circular Economy— Recent Advances in Sustainable Waste Management. London: IntechOpen; 2022. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.105574

[7] Vargas-Terranova C-A,

Rodrigo-Ilarri J, Rodrigo-Clavero M-E, Parra-Saad A. Implementing circular economy techniques for the optimal management of recyclable solid waste using the M-GRCT decision support model. Applied Sciences. 2022;**12**:8072. DOI: 10.3390/app12168072

[8] Allevi E, Gnudi A, Konnov IV, Oggioni G. Municipal solid waste management in circular economy: A sequential optimization model. Energy Economics. 2021;**100**. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S014098832100284X [Accessed: November 30, 2022]

[9] Jinga P. The increasing importance of environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing in combating climate change. In: Tiefenbacher JP, editor. Environmental Management—Pollution, Habitat, Ecology, and Sustainability. London: IntechOpen; 2021. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.98345

### **Chapter 8**

## Design for Recycling of E-Textiles: Current Issues of Recycling of Products Combining Electronics and Textiles and Implications for a Circular Design Approach

*Elisabeth Eppinger, Alina Slomkowski, Tanita Behrendt, Sigrid Rotzler and Max Marwede*

#### **Abstract**

Circular economy principles and eco-design guidelines such as design for recycling gain increasing importance to improve recyclability of products. The market of textiles with electronic components—so-called electronic textiles (e-textiles)–grows quickly entailing an increase in waste due to obsolete and defect products. This chapter presents insights into the current state of e-textile recycling in Europe. As electronic recycling differs from textile recycling, a survey of sorting and recycling businesses in Europe was conducted to obtain insights into the current and future handling of e-textiles. The survey results reveal that e-textiles have so far played a minor role for sorting and recycling companies, but about one-third of the businesses already experienced issues in recycling e-textiles. While some of the respondents have already developed processing concepts, the overall occurrence of e-textiles is so low that businesses are unlikely to develop recycling solutions. However, with increasing market volume, waste will also increase and recycling requires improvement to reduce environmental impact. Based on the survey results, recommendations for improving the recyclability and recycling rate of e-textiles are proposed. This includes expanding the scope of current regulations to e-textiles to apply guidelines for integrating sustainable end-of-life solutions in the product design process, acknowledging current shortcomings of the recycling industry.

**Keywords:** circular design for e-textiles, eco-design, electronics recycling, e-textiles, textile recycling

#### **1. Introduction**

E-textiles experience an increasing popularity in both consumer product markets as well as the research community. The global market volume of e-textiles is expected to more than double from 2021 by 2026 [1]. Over the last decades, research and

development of e-textiles focused on increasing the wearing comfort, robustness, reliability, and cleaning ability of the products as these properties are crucial for user acceptance [2]. One way to improve these properties is to miniaturize the electrical circuitry and fuse it to or combine it with the textile substrate [3]. However, this trend toward a high degree of integration of the electrical components into textiles leads to challenges in terms of reparability and recycling of e-textiles and their components [4]. Recycling of textile products due to different fiber material combinations, auxiliaries, such as buttons and zippers, and various chemical treatments is already difficult and hardly practiced. Also recycling of electronics because of different, strongly connected materials is challenging. Due to their hybrid nature, recycling and recovery of reusable resources from e-textiles are even more challenging than for pure textile or electronic products. Particularly, because waste collection and recycling businesses are either specialized on textiles or on electronic products.

Hence, this chapter aims to shed light onto the current processing of e-textiles in sorting and recycling companies within Europe. It provides insights into product features and conditions that must be met to ensure the recycling of e-textiles. Furthermore, it provides recommendations on conditions that have to be fulfilled to develop circular product life cycles of e-textiles. The insights into the current state of recycling and waste management for e-textiles within Europe, including challenges and possible solutions, are based on a survey among sorting and recycling companies in the textile and electronics sector conducted in the year 2021.

Circular economy principles include reuse, repair, and recycling [5]. In order to improve the reuse, reparability, and recycling of e-textiles, circular design principles should already be incorporated in the design stage. But how can we achieve this effectively for e-textiles? Based on the results of the survey, we propose that it needs to be governed top-down. A bottom-up approach from the industry is not likely to happen due to the small quantities of e-textiles.

The European Union (EU) committed its member states to sustainability transitions of manufacturing industries, among other strategies by moving toward a circular economy [6]. Other regions and states, such as China, India, Japan, and the United States of America, strengthen their commitments to circular economy and sustainable manufacturing [7–9]. Consequently, the results of this study are relevant to other territories, which are committed to sustainability transitions of manufacturing industries. As the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDG) gain importance around the world for transforming economic activities to sustainability, the results of this study presented in this chapter contribute to UNSDG 9—Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure, and UNSDG 12—responsible consumption and production.

The chapter is structured as follows: Section 2 provides a short introduction into e-textiles and their current market development. Section 3 explicates the survey method and data that was conducted to obtain insights into the current and future handling of e-textiles by sorting and recycling companies. Section 4 presents the results of the survey, including a discussion. Section 5 summarizes the main conclusions and proposed ways to improve recyclability of e-textiles.

#### **2. Current trends and challenges in product design, markets, and recycling of E-textiles**

E-textiles are combinations of electronics and textiles. They consist of electronic components such as circuits, sensors, and lights for achieving functionalities of garments

#### *Design for Recycling of E-Textiles: Current Issues of Recycling of Products Combining Electronics… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107527*

and textile products. Application examples include conductive components for sensing and actuating, communicating, and microprocessing information such as acoustic and motion signals [10]. The products range from monitoring health status of patients, tracking body functions, speed and routes for personal feedback in professional sports products, at leisure sport and fitness exercises, safety performance such as light signals, to acoustic combinations connectable to mobile devices for leisure [1, 3, 10, 11]. Against the backdrop of the growing market of e-textiles with a global turnover expectation of about US\$ 1.3 billion by 2032 [12], the e-textile waste will increase accordingly.

Current research reveals that the shortcomings of durable integration of electronics and a lack of standards to analyze the performance are still major reasons for market failure [13, 14]. Test standards are still under development [1]. A current trend to improve longevity of e-textiles is through miniaturizing electrical circuitry and combining it with the textile substrate. The electronic components need to be fixed onto or inside the textile structures, which is done through different processes such as gluing, welding, brazing, and soldering. These joints between rigid electronic components and flexible textile substrates are often the critical product feature that is most likely to fail. A current development trend is to integrate conductive threads through knitting, stitching, sewing, and weaving into fabrics as well as printing circuits onto textile structures, instead of usage of conventional electronic components such as cables and circuit boards mounted on hard plastics [15, 16]. These electric conductive textile substrates, also known as fiber-based devices, appear to be promising to enable comfortable and durable solutions [17], and improving the washability of e-textiles [18]. However, a high degree of integration of the electrical components leads to challenges in terms of reparability and recycling of e-textiles.

Electronic waste and textile waste have different collection and recycling systems that differ among European countries. In Germany, for example, waste collection falls under communal services, and municipalities work with a variety of private businesses and charity organizations to enable collecting, sorting, recycling, and resale. While consumers bring back defect electronic and electrical products to where they have purchased them, lately, also fashion brands take on more responsibility in actively communicating to consumers that they can dispose their used items at the producers and offer take-back systems [19]. Overall, the textile and electronic waste collection in the EU is still under development, with electronic waste collection being more advanced than textile waste collection and high percentages being disposed in household trash and end up in landfills.

Electronic recycling and textile recycling both face several issues. Both require careful sorting to guarantee efficient and high-quality recycling, and for both product groups, the recycling rate is rather low, given the complex product compositions. As for textile recycling, different fiber compositions and auxiliaries make automation in sorting and processing rather challenging. The mandatory product labels that indicate the raw material compositions are often cut out by consumers, wear out through washing, or are wrongly labeled right from the start [20]. While the overall recycling rate is rather low including packaging and other waste, the EU sets targets to increase recycling and recovery of resources. For textiles, the low cost supply of new raw materials is a serious barrier to improve and increase recycling [19]. The current business model of textile sorting and recycling businesses is based on resales of highquality second-hand garments. With decreasing quality of used textiles and a steep increase in second-hand markets that are organized through internet platforms and enable users to directly sell their apparel, the waste recycling businesses require new sources of income to sustain [19, 21].

The EU has strict regulations on the treatment of waste in general, which is continuously adjusted and guides the waste treatment in the member countries. With the aim to transition to sustainable manufacturing and consumption, further initiatives on EU and on national level guide the treatment of textile and electronic waste that facilitate recycling. However, not all countries have implemented the stricter recycling and recovery regulations [22]. The treatment of electronic components falls under the EU directive on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE Directive) [23]. Along with stricter electronic and textile waste regulation, especially for disposal of WEEE criminal activities increased, resulting in illegal landfills, which primarily occurred in low-income countries [24]. This development reveals the issues at stake, that with increasing costs for waste treatment, the institutions to enforce proper waste treatments need to be strengthened as well to counteract false disposal. Hence, concepts and technologies for waste treatment should be advanced and implemented on a global scale to be effective [25].

#### **3. E-textile recycling in Europe: survey method and data**

The two main components of an e-textile are the textile substrate and the electronic and electrically conductive components. Based on this, two target groups were defined for the survey: (1) electronics collectors and recycling businesses, and (2) textile collectors and recycling businesses. Applying a purposive sampling strategy, using industry websites, 506 businesses from electronics recycling, 179 from textile recycling, and 81 with cross-sector expertise were identified and requested to participate per email, in English and in German language. The processing time of the survey was approximately 15 min, which was conducted online using the survey tool "LimeSurvey."

In total, the survey consisted of 46 questions for electronics and 47 questions for textiles. According to the prior experience with e-textiles, not all questions required a response with about 10 questions being optional. The questions addressed the extent to which e-textiles are recognized in sorting and recycling companies within Europe and already processed in a suitable way. The survey included a list of product features and conditions that may facilitate the recycling of e-textiles. The features and conditions were identified based on an extensive literature research and discussions with recycling experts. The option to add further characteristics and conditions enabled respondents to expand the predefined list.

To increase the response rate, the survey was carried out anonymously. The survey has a coverage bias as it was conducted online, which requires a stable internet connection, and the companies needed to have an email address, which excludes smaller sorting and recycling businesses in rural regions. A response bias may also occur due to a desired external presentation of the company or in the course of internal confidentiality or security agreements, despite the fact that the survey has been anonymized. Politeness or the desire to complete the survey despite a lack of expertise can also contribute to a bias in the results [26]. The non-response bias includes decisions not to participate or stop participation. Direct declines gave usually the lack of time due to the persistence of the Covid-19 pandemic as their reason. It is conceivable that smaller businesses in particular did not participate in the survey due to a lack of time and personnel.

The data were collected during four weeks in June 2021. The response rate of complete datasets was 6.13%. With regard to sector classification, a bit more than half of the respondents (57%) belong to the sorting and recycling sector in the field of used textiles, the others operate sorting and recycling of e-waste. Within the EU, most processing facilities of the companies that participated in the survey are

#### *Design for Recycling of E-Textiles: Current Issues of Recycling of Products Combining Electronics… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107527*

located in Germany, followed by Lithuania, Poland, Spain, and Hungary. About 6.7% of the companies operate sorting and recycling facilities outside the EU, such as in Macedonia, Switzerland, and the United Arab Emirates. Outsourcing outside of the EU occurs only for textiles and not for electronics. In terms of how well the respondents represent the recycling industry in the EU, it is important to note that a large cluster of textile sorting and recycling businesses exists in East European countries [27]. However, the purchasing ability in Western European countries is higher; accordingly, a higher amount of e-textile waste can be assumed in the dominant region of the respondents. Also, the textile waste collection and recycling facilities are very structured in Germany, as compared with other countries [28]. Hence, with the majority of respondents from Germany, the results could be interpreted in terms of perspectives from advanced sorting and recycling regions.

The respondents that operate in electronic waste claimed to sort WEEE into defined categories (37%), disassemble them into their components (22%), and process WEEE as second-hand goods or recycle it mechanically (19%). Only one business claimed to recover precious metals. However, all of the respondents forward the waste at least partially to external companies for recycling and recovery processes and for reuse as secondhand goods. None of the respondents forward the WEEE outside of the EU. This might be due to stricter regulations of the electronic waste trade as compared with used textiles.

Regarding used textiles, 32% of the respondents stated that they sort into defined categories, and about 26% reprocess the used textiles as second-hand goods. Mechanically recycling of textiles is done by 23%, and only 13% of the companies indicated that they use thermal recycling for energy recovery. However, as thermal and mechanical recycling is the most common approach, this may be outsourced to others, so that the respondents do not do it themselves. In fact, about 75% of the businesses that sort used textiles exclusively have outsourced processing operations to others, such as recycling, recovery, or reprocessing into second-hand goods.

#### **4. Current state of E-textile recycling: survey results and discussion**

The study is guided by the question, whether e-textiles are recognized in sorting and recycling companies within the EU, and processed in a suitable way that addresses both the electronic and the textile components. Accordingly, the study contained a question about the occurrence of e-textiles in the recycling process. The sorting and recycling companies responded that currently the quantities of e-textile waste that show up at their businesses are rather low to very low. The e-textiles originate from textile container collections (33%), from hospitals and industrial manufacturing (17%), and from municipality WEEE collection points (17%). The rest steams from unknown sources. The e-textiles had integrated, flexible printed circuit boards, and stretchable printed circuit boards, embroidered circuits, as well as integrated textile circuit boards. Whereas printed and stretchable circuit boards showed up at both subsectors (electronic recycling and textile recycling), the e-textiles with embroidered circuits and with integrated textile circuit boards only showed up in textile sorting and recycling businesses. They did not get processed except for thermal recovery, whereas the others with printed circuit boards got either forwarded to second-hand markets or separated into textile and electronic components and got processed further accordingly within electronic and within textile recycling.

Regarding existing processing concepts for e-textiles, 28.6% of the textile and electronic sorting and recycling companies stated that they already process e-textiles. In total, 37.5% stated that they do have a processing concept. The businesses with processing concepts usually sort the waste based on the type of e-textile, high quality gets forwarded to second-hand markets and for lower quality, the components get separated. In a next step, the textile content gets mechanically separated and processed into fibers for nonwovens, for example, for cleaning rags or insulation material, or for new fabrics. Energy recovery is also quite common. The electronic sorting and recycling businesses claimed that they would recover secondary raw materials such as precious metals from the electronic parts. It is conceivable that e-textiles that have occurred in the companies to date have not been documented with details of their construction type. This makes it difficult to draw conclusions about the occurrence of different e-textile systems and their current recycling.

The respondents were not aware of any business that specialized on recycling of e-textiles. This appears plausible given the very few products that end up at recycling facilities. While 62.5% of the companies in the textile sector can reliably identify e-textiles during processing operations, 37.5% of all companies stated that they experienced difficulties during further processing of e-textiles in the past. This was among other issues due to e-textiles that remained undetected. The undetected e-textiles caused reduction of the quality in terms of purity grade of the recycling streams. Accidental shredding of these components contaminates the recycling streams. One respondent explained that there may be an additional fire hazard. The respondents confirmed that a high integration of electronics and textiles is difficult in recycling. Especially permanent bonds between the textile substrate and conductive yarns such as for e-textiles with embroidered circuits cannot be disassembled so far. Consequently, they get sorted out for thermal recovery.

The future emergence of e-textiles is estimated to be rather low and very low by the majority of the respondents (82.3%). Although a strong market increase of e-textiles is forecasted for the next decade [1], it will continue to make up only a small segment of the overall textile and electronics markets in the future. Thus, the market volumes of regular textile products and electronics will continue to exceed the market volume of e-textiles by a multiple. Given the low volume of market-ready e-textiles, there does not seem to be any urgency for recyclers to develop specialized processing methods at this stage. It is likely that processing methods specifically designed for e-textiles are not yet economically viable or cost-covering for the companies. This may result in lack of action, with the industry failing to develop efficient solutions for e-textiles. Accordingly, it should be governed top-down by policymakers, as the quantities are too low for industry to develop bottom-up solutions.

To recycle e-textiles efficiently, the companies explicated various requirements and conditions. These requirements include product design that allow easy disassembly, reliable identification of electronic components, clear waste regulations to help consumers understand how to dispose e-textile waste properly, the development of integrated factories that can process both textiles and electronic components, the documentation and evaluation of processes for reliable data, and a general improvement of the recycling processes of electronic waste and textile waste. Electronic and textile waste both operate on a very low margin, and the processes to regain highquality resources for further products are still expensive.

In order to identify e-textiles in sorting, the product labeling regulations could include specific markers. In case of non-detection, sorting companies exporting end-of-life textiles to third countries run the risk of exporting e-textiles together with other textile waste. This may constitute an illegal export of e-waste to third countries. In the survey, we asked about feasible ways to mark e-textiles from a sorting and

#### *Design for Recycling of E-Textiles: Current Issues of Recycling of Products Combining Electronics… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107527*

recycling perspective. The respondents had different views on the practicality of various markings to facilitate reliable identification of e-textiles. About 11% stated that standardized markings were not necessary for the identification of e-textiles and that a visual inspection was sufficient. About 22% found a text on the sewn-in tag in the product practicable, and about 22% considered RFID tags useful. In total, 19% voted for printed or embroidered text on the textile surface, whereas 15% found an embroidered or printed QR code on the textile surface the best solution, and 11% selected QR codes onto the sewn-in tag or color stripes. The use of chemical marker was also mentioned as an alternative solution for efficient and reliable identification of e-textiles. This can enable time-efficient detection of e-textiles in the near-infrared range, which would eliminate the need to search for a marker. Overall, the variety of answers reflect the uncertainty and need for a practicable solution to mark e-textiles.

Product marking with RFID tags adds an additional microchip and antenna-based electrical component that must be properly processed at the end of the product's life. To find out whether the textile sorting and recycling businesses have already experienced difficulties with RFID-tagged products, the companies were surveyed in this regard. About 28% reported that difficulties already occurred due to integrated RFID tags during processing operations. Specifically, difficulties arose in sorting products correctly according to their RFID tags. In addition, one business indicated that problems were suspected to occur during mechanical and chemical recycling processes. One business from the electronic sorting and recycling sector stated that there was no RFID detection in primary treatment plants and that the sensor technology in sorting plants can react to RFID tags with error messages.

The majority of respondents (about 81%) agree that special collection systems for discarded e-textiles would support proper recycling. However, the remaining 19% disagree with the statement. The issue that users dispose their waste incorrectly despite collection systems and awareness campaigns could be the reason why the respondents have rather different views on the value of specially dedicated collection system for e-textiles. The other reason may be the low quantity of e-textiles, which hardly justifies dedicated collection systems. Hence, take-back solutions by producers or disposal at WEEE collection points at municipalities are likely to be sufficient.

Waste regulations need to be combined with campaigns to inform users of e-textiles. To efficiently process end-of-life e-textiles, end users need sufficient knowledge about the proper disposal. As the quantity of e-textile waste is still very low, we asked in the study about the sufficiency of knowledge on proper disposal of textiles and electronics. The different responses from textile sorting and recycling businesses as compared with electronic sorting and recycling show that knowledge of proper textile waste disposal is lower. Regarding used textiles, only 12.5% of the respondents that operate in textile waste rated the knowledge of end users for the proper disposal as rather sufficient. About 68.75% stated that the existing knowledge of end users is rather insufficient, and the remaining 18.75% claimed that end users lack appropriate knowledge. The knowledge how to correctly dispose WEEE appears slightly better with 50% of the electronic waste treatment businesses considered the knowledge of end users to be rather sufficient. Only 33% find the knowledge rather insufficient, and again the remaining 17% rate it as insufficient. The knowledge that wrong disposals of electronic and electrical components pollute the environment and that the contained metals should be recovered is probably more widespread than the consequences of disposing used textiles in household trash. With textiles, the awareness campaigns may be also challenged by the perspective that used garment exports

may destroy apparel manufacturing industries in developing countries; hence, various states implement import stops or high import taxes for used textiles [29].

The awareness campaigns could also involve users in such a way that they separate the electronic or electrically conductive components and the textile substrate and accordingly dispose the different parts into the textile and the electronic waste stream. However, this requires a modular design that enables the separation of the components. The application of the eco-design strategy "design-for-recycling" in the product development process was rated by all except one respondent as an opportunity to improve the recyclability of e-textiles. Furthermore, about 88% agreed that the extension of the scope of the WEEE Directive may lead to an increase in applying design-for-recycling during product development of e-textiles. By extending the scope, e-textiles can be classified under the categories of "Small equipment" and "Small IT and telecommunication equipment" depending on their intended use. Consequently, applying a holistic product planning can facilitate the development of concepts for separate end-of-life processing. Encouragement of research, documentation and evaluation, and the development of best practices may provide access to reliable information and databases in the future. Again, this must be governed by stakeholders from the policy domain, as the recycling sector is unlikely to initiate it. Given the low quantities of e-textiles, there is no apparent reason for the recycling industry to develop solutions.

To drive holistic and efficient recycling of e-textiles, collaboration and sharing of information and best practices among companies in the textile and electronics recycling sectors are essential. Nonetheless, about 88% of the respondents indicated that no cross-sector collaborations existed to date. This may be attributed to the low volume of e-textiles. Hence, industry associations can play a role to facilitate the joint development of processing concepts and assess and suggest suitable processing equipment for e-textiles.

It should be noted that modular product design with the aim of better recyclability is currently still a topic that tends to receive little attention in the field of research and development of e-textile systems. This is also reflected in the low availability of publications on this topic. Modular product design in the field of e-textiles is currently mainly utilized in the context of building kits for rapid and accessible prototype development [30–33]. Fiber-, carbon-nanotube-, and graphene-based electronic and electrically conductive components primarily aim at improving the reliability, comfort, and functionality aspects of e-textiles [17, 34, 35]. Highly integrated electronic and electrically conductive components are difficult to separate from the textile substrate, posing a challenge for sustainable product development. Reparability and maintenance by end users becomes difficult or impossible. Likewise, it is questionable whether product-responsible companies with internal or external repair services can repair highly integrated e-textile components without damaging the textile substrate. Simply replacing defective products should not be considered a sustainable solution, as it would create further waste and resource consumption. Insufficient reparability promotes short product life cycles through premature obsolescence. Nevertheless, it is conceivable that a modular or semi-modular product design would meet with approval from end users and other stakeholders.

#### **5. Conclusion and outlook to improve e-textile recycling**

The results of the study reveal that e-textiles have so far played a minor role for sorting and recycling companies in Europe: e-textiles are not commonly found

#### *Design for Recycling of E-Textiles: Current Issues of Recycling of Products Combining Electronics… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107527*

products at sorting and recycling companies. Consequently, only about one-third of the businesses already have specialized processing concepts for e-textiles. During sorting, e-textiles are recognized to some extent; however, the technology and machinery of sorting and recycling companies are not designed for the processing of e-textiles. The low waste quantities also lead to a lack of urgency to develop special recycling concepts for e-textiles. Even with a higher market volume, they still will make up a very small percentage of textile and electronic waste streams.

The results of the survey also provide insights into the conditions that must be met to ensure the recycling of e-textiles. Sustainable product development that applies eco-design strategies such as circular design approaches acknowledging end-of life treatment can improve the recyclability of products. It can also help to comply with current and future EU directives and legislation. Especially a modular product design may simplify the separation of e-textiles. This would enable the use of existing processing infrastructures for used textiles and e-waste through collaborations across electronic and textile recycling companies. As currently ease of separation implies also a compromise on longevity of products, e-textiles require novel solutions to integrate electronics and textiles for improved recyclability. Since electronic components interfere with textile recycling if they are not detected, it is advisable to dispose e-textiles at electronic waste collection points.

In order to govern the product design and the e-textile waste treatment, an extension of the scope of the WEEE Directive appears to be fruitful. For example, the definition of small equipment in the WEEE Directive can be adjusted to include e-textiles. The legal frameworks for sustainable, circular product development are also established at EU level by the Ecodesign Directive 2009/125/EC. The scope has so far been limited to energy-related products. Both textiles and products with electrical circuitry and consequently e-textiles are not addressed. Again, expanding the scope of the Ecodesign Directive might facilitate the design of e-textiles for efficient recyclability.

The lack of financially viable business models in recycling compared with lowcost supply of new products impedes the recycling rate. Approaches to integrate the end-of-life treatment in the product costs and distribute the costs partially to the responsibility of the producers may contribute to the development of efficient recycling processes. However, sustainable business models for increasing recycling require definitely further exploration.

#### **Conflict of interest**

The authors declare to have no conflict of interest.

#### **Thanks**

The authors thank the participants of the survey for their contribution.

#### **Author details**

Elisabeth Eppinger1 \*, Alina Slomkowski1 , Tanita Behrendt1 , Sigrid Rotzler2 and Max Marwede2

1 University of Applied Sciences for Technology and Economics (HTW), Berlin, Germany

2 Fraunhofer Institute for Reliability and Microintegration (IZM), Berlin, Germany

\*Address all correspondence to: elisabeth.eppinger@htw-berlin.de

© 2022 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

*Design for Recycling of E-Textiles: Current Issues of Recycling of Products Combining Electronics… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107527*

#### **References**

[1] Hayward J. E-Textiles 2016-2026: Technologies, Markets, Players. Cambridge, UK: IDTechEx; 2021

[2] Rotzler S, Kallmayer C, Dils C, von Krshiwoblozki M, Bauer U, Schneider-Ramelow M. Improving the washability of smart textiles: Influence of different washing conditions on textile integrated conductor tracks. The Journal of The Textile Institute. 2020;**111**(12):1766-1777. DOI: 10.1080/ 00405000.2020.1729056

[3] Gonçalves C, Ferreira da Silva A, Gomes J, Simoes R. Wearable E-textile technologies: A review on sensors. Actuators and Control Elements. Inventions. 2018;**3**(1):14. DOI: 10.3390/ INVENTIONS3010014

[4] Kirstein T. The future of smarttextiles development: New enabling technologies, commercialization and market trends. In: Kirstein T, editor. Multidisciplinary Know-How for Smart-Textiles Developers. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing; 2013. pp. 1-15. DOI: 10.1533/9780857093530.1

[5] Korhonen J, Honkasalo A, Seppälä J. Circular economy: The concept and its limitations. Ecological Economics. 2018;**143**(C):37-46. DOI: 10.1016/j. ecolecon.2017.06.041

[6] European Commission. Closing the Loop—An EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy. Brussles; 2015. Available from: https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ TXT/?uri=CELEX:52015DC0614. [Accessed: July 27, 2022]

[7] Isles, J. Which Country Is Leading the Circular Economy Shift? [Internet]. 2021. Available from:

https://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/ articles/which-country-is-leading-thecircular-economy-shift. [Accessed: July 27, 2022]

[8] PIB Dehli. Govt Driving Transition from Linear to Circular Economy [Internet]. 2021. Available from: https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage. aspx?PRID=1705772. [Accessed: July 27, 2022]

[9] UNSDG. United Nations Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework for the People's Republic of China 2021-2025. [Internet]. 2021. Available from: https://unsdg.un.org/sites/default/ files/2020-11/China-UNSDCF-2021-2025. pdf. [Accessed: July 27, 2022]

[10] Yang K, Isaia B, Brown LJE, Beeby S. E-textiles for healthy ageing. Sensors. 2019;**19**(20):4463. DOI: 10.3390/ s19204463

[11] Wilson P, Teverovsky J. New product development for e-textiles: Experiences from the forefront of a new industry. In: Horne L, editor. New Product Development in Textiles. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing; 2012. pp. 156-174. DOI: 10.1533/9780857095190.2.156

[12] Hayward J. E-Textiles 2021-2031: Technologies, Markets and Players. Cambridge, UK: IDTechEx; 2020

[13] Iftekhar Shuvo I, Decaens J, Lachapelle D, Dolez PI. Smart textiles testing: A roadmap to standardized test methods for safety and qualitycontrol. In: Kumar B, editor. Textiles for Functional Applications. London: IntechOpen; 2021. pp. 141-170. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.96500

[14] Stoppa M, Chiolerio A. Wearable electronics and smart textiles: A critical review. Sensors. 2014;**14**(7):11957-11992. DOI: 10.3390/s140711957

[15] Bosowski P, Hoerr M, Mecnika V, Gries T, Jockenhövel S. Design and manufacture of textile-based sensors. In: Dias T, editor. Electronic Textiles. Smart Fabrics and Wearable Technology. Amsterdam: Woodhead Publishing; 2015. pp. 75-107. DOI: 10.1016/ B978-0-08-100201-8.00005-9

[16] Simegnaw A, Malengier B, Rotich G, Tadesse M, Van Langenhove L. Review on the integration of microelectronics for E-textile. Materials. 2021;**14**(17):5113. DOI: 10.3390/ma14175113

[17] Seyedin S, Carey T, Arbab A, Eskandarian L, Bohm S, Kim JM, et al. Fibre electronics: Towards scaled-up manufacturing of integrated e-textile systems. Nanoscale. 2021;**13**(30):12818-12847

[18] Rotzler S, von Krshiwoblozki M, Schneider-Ramelow M. Washability of e-textiles: Current testing practices and the need for standardization. Textile Research Journal. 2021;**91**:19-20. DOI: 10.1177/0040517521996727

[19] Eppinger E. Recycling technologies for enabling sustainability transitions of the fashion industry: Status quo and avenues for increasing post-consumer waste recycling. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy. 2021;**18**(1):114-128. DOI: 10.1080/15487733.2022.2027122

[20] Wilting, J, van Dujin, H. Clothing Labels: Accurate or Not? [Internet]. 2020. Available from: https://assets.websitefiles.com/5d26d80e8836af2d12ed1269/5e 9feceb7b5b126eb582c1d9\_20200420%20 -%20Labels%20Check%20-%20 report%20EN%20web%20297x210mm. pdf. [Accessed: September 13, 2021]

[21] Stanescu MD. State of the art of post-consumer textile waste upcycling to reach the zero waste milestone. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2021;**2021**(28):14253-14270. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-12416-9

[22] Anastasio, M. Whatever Happened to Europe's Circular Economy Ambition? [Internet] 2020. Available from: https://meta.eeb.org/2020/11/03/ whatever-happened-to-europes-circulareconomy/. [Accessed: August 17, 2021]

[23] The European Parliament, The Council of the European Union. Directive 2012/19/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE). Official Journal of the European Union. 2012. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX: 32012L0019&from=DE. [Accessed: July 27, 2022]

[24] Rucevska I, Nellemann C, Isarin N, Yang W, Liu N, Yu K, et al. Waste Crime—Waste Risks: Gaps in Meeting the Global Waste Challenge. [Internet]. 2015. Available from: https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/ handle/20.500.11822/9648/ Waste\_crime\_RRA.pdf?se. [Accessed: September 17, 2021]

[25] Wang Z, Zhang B, Guan D. Take responsibility for electronic-waste disposal. Nature News. 2016;**536**:23-25. DOI: 10.1038/536023a

[26] Bogner K, Landrock U. Response Biases in Standardised Surveys. Mannheim: GESIS - Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften; 2016. DOI: 10.15465/gesis-sg\_en\_016

[27] Watson D, Palm D, Brix L, Amstrup M, Syversen F, Nielsen R. Exports of Nordic used textiles: Fate, benefits and impacts. Nordisk

*Design for Recycling of E-Textiles: Current Issues of Recycling of Products Combining Electronics… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107527*

Ministerråd. 2016. p. 160. DOI: 10.6027/ TN2016-558

[28] Manshoven, S, Christis, M, Vercalsteren, A, Arnold, M, Nicolau, M, Lafond, E, Fogh Mortensen, L, Coscieme, L. Textiles and the environment in a circular economy. European Topic Centre on Waste and Materials in a Green Economy ETC/ WMGE 2019/6. ETC/WMGE Report. [Internet]. 2019. Available from: https:// ecodesign-centres.org/wp-content/ uploads/2020/03/ETC\_report\_textilesand-the-enviroment-in-a-circulareconomy.pdf. [Accessed: July 27, 2022]

[29] Brooks A, Simon D. Unravelling the relationships between used-clothing imports and the decline of African clothing industries. Development & Change. 2012;**43**(6):1265-1290. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.2012.01797.x

[30] Kazemitabaar M, He L, Wang K, Aloimonos C, Cheng T, Froehlich JE. ReWear: Early explorations of a modular wearable construction kit for young children. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '06); 7 – 12 May 2006; San Jose, USA. 2006. pp. 2072-2080

[31] Woop E, Zahn EF, Flechtner R, Joost G. Demonstrating a modular construction toolkit for interactive textile applications. In: Proceedings of the 11th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Shaping Experiences, Shaping Society (NordiCHI '20); 25-29 October 2020; Tallinn, Estonia. 2020. pp. 1-4

[32] Jones L, Nabil S, Girouard A. Swatch-bits: Prototyping e-textiles with modular swatches. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI '20); 9-12 February

2020; Sydney, Australia. 2020. pp. 893-897

[33] Garbacz K, Stagun L, Rotzler S, Semenec M, von Krshiwoblozki M. Modular E-textile toolkit for prototyping and manufacturing. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute Proceedings. 2021;**68**(1):5. DOI: 10.3390/ PROCEEDINGS2021068005

[34] Geim AK. Graphene: Status and prospects. Science. 2009;**324**(5934):1530- 1534. DOI: 10.1126/science.1158877

[35] Karim N, Sarker F, Afroj S, Zhang M, Potluri P, Novoselov KS. Sustainable and multifunctional composites of graphenebased natural jute fibers. Advanced Sustainable Systems. 2021;**5**(3):2000228. DOI: 10.1002/adsu.202000228

#### **Chapter 9**

## Tesla's Circular Economy Strategy to Recycle, Reduce, Reuse, Repurpose and Recover Batteries

*Michael Naor*

#### **Abstract**

The purpose of this research is to explore how Tesla is capable to materialize the circular economy futuristic vision. Specifically, it explains how batteries are recycled, reduced, reused, repurposed, and recovered in order to preserve raw materials and dimmish toxic waste disposal. Tesla extends traveling distance by supercharging stations and repurpose degraded batteries for second-life applications to energize home appliances with its solar panels. Tesla intends to substantially diminish the costs of battery production while increasing range by developing an innovative 4680 tabless cobalt-free battery. An insight emerging from the study is that the fundamental principles upon the operations management field was established such as the concept of focused factory and Goldratt's theory of constraints stay valid and are applicable towards establishing sustainable manufacturing process at the 21st century.

**Keywords:** tesla, circular economy, recycle, reduce, reuse, repurpose, recover

#### **1. Introduction**

Circular economy (CE) is defined as an industrial revolution designed to be restorative in nature. It includes utilization of renewable energy sources with an emphasis on five pillars of sustainability: recycle, reduce, reuse, repurpose, and recover in order to preserve raw materials as much as possible. Consequently, it diminishes production of toxic materials and ensures safe disposal which in the case of Millions batteries for electric cars present an environmental hazard.

Major step taken in the 21st century to achieve an ambitious world-class progress towards materializing circular economy vision is by moving towards usage of fully electric vehicles. In order to institutionalize environmental protection by sustainable transportation [1], governments worldwide have been building a global momentum to strictly regulate CO2 and greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions. In the Earth Summit (1992, 154 countries signed a treaty to voluntarily reduce emissions of GHG. One of the summit achievements was the establishment of a GHG pooled inventory shared between countries. Subsequently, over 187 countries have already signed the Kyoto protocol (1997) committing themselves to a reduction of GHG by 5.2% from the benchmark levels of 1990 in order to stabilize the depletion of the atmosphere ozone layer, and combat global warming [2]. More recently, the Copenhagen Summit in

2009 reached an accord that recognizes the necessity to maintain the temperature rise no more than 2 degrees Celsius above agreed threshold.

Tesla manifests a market encroachment attempt to meet the social principles mentioned above [3]. For example, it reached 92% battery cell material recovery in new recycling process of Nickel, Copper, and Cobalt. Furthermore, batteries at end-of-life cycle are reused at homes in conjunction with Tesla solar conglomerate. The companies' executives embarked on a campaign to make the transition to electric vehicles not only in their regional areas but also in the global industrial economy. Specifically, at the end of 2018, Tesla sold its 500,000th car and the next half-million car deliveries will take about 15 months at the current production pace (**Figure 1**).

As of January 2019, Tesla surpassed GM, Ford and BMW to rank the world's 4th most valuable car manufacturer in the stock market. According to Long et al. [4], Tesla is regarded by almost forty percent of customers as role model for future electric car manufacturers because of its elegant innovative attributes, innovation and artificial intelligence technology. It should be mentioned that the hype surrounding its CEO Elon Musk contributes to its stellar image too. In certain states such as California its sales have consistently surpassed over several quarters leading traditional combustion engine brands.

The purpose of this research study is to illustrate how Tesla developed a 21st century manifestation of Ford T mass-production philosophy to sustainable transportation [5]. The similarities between their founders' (Ford and Elon Musk) entrepreneurship skills are stark and brings hope to revive American manufacturing

#### **Figure 1.**

*Tesla production rate based on VIN registration.*

#### *Tesla's Circular Economy Strategy to Recycle, Reduce, Reuse, Repurpose and Recover Batteries DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107256*

global lead which seemed to be totally under control during last fifty years initially by Japan and more recently by China. Tesla follows an economy-of-scale mindset which is similar to Ford T mass-production line. It gains competitive advantage from capability to recycle, reduce, reuse, repurpose and recover battery materials, all in affordable expenses, which as will be elaborated in this article brings about the competitive manufacturing strategy of Tesla [6]. Tesla possesses vertically integrated supply chain built of Gigafactories producing approximately five thousand cars per week and thousands of batteries/cars [7]. Tesla reduces bullwhip effect phenomena associated with interruption in the supply chain by mining of battery raw materials instead of relying on external suppliers of battery ingredients [8]. Tesla manufacturers far more batteries in terms of kWh than the relevant contestants all together (approximately 15GWh/year, or 0.15TWh).

Prominent scholars such as Harper et al. [9] and Siqi et al. [10] argue that discovery of advanced waste management techniques for batteries is essential for market domination of electric cars. These new technologies include pyrometallurgy usage of high temperature to extract materials. Hydrometallurgy is an innovative technology to recycle metals from ores with low reaction energy consumption. In a similar vein, Biometallurgy introduces a way to extract valuable metals by interaction with microorganisms. The major advantage of this technology is that it entitles lower expenses and render less pollution in comparison with pyrometallurgy and hydrometallurgy.

Substantial amount of saving in materials can be gained by repurposing battery packs towards second-life applications. Leading scholars in the field such as Hua et al. [11] and Yang et al. [12], corroborate that reuse and repurpose processes render less environmental signature in juxtaposition to recycling and recovery of ingredient materials composing batteries due to waste disposal residuals. Thus, Tesla, a solar panels mega-manufacturer, decided to repurpose batteries of old electric vehicles which are no longer capable to efficiently propel a car in order to electrify home appliances as manifestation of circular economy.

#### **2. Applying Goldratt's approach to Tesla's needs**

The theory of constraints [13] practical approach on generating profit from sales is useful for evaluating bottlenecks of large-scale projects such as the innovation of electric cars. It stands on three pillars: throughput, operational expenses, and inventory [14]. Previous similar electric car mega-projects such as Better Place in Israel were bankrupt because lack of sales rendered by poor marketing. The enormous amount of money required to establish country-wide charging infrastructure demands equally value assets secured in pre-sales format to ensure financial stability, a lesson carefully learned by Tesla from Better Place bankruptcy [15].

Goldratt's principal idea is to locate bottleneck and utilize it efficiently to streamline the process. Traveling range on single full charge has been considered by scholars for over a century the prime bottleneck of electric transportation [16, 17]. Skippon and Garwood [18] empirically substantiate this claim by finding that consumers decision to procure an electric vehicle as a second car is dependent on its ability to travel a distance of 100 miles, and as their first priority vehicle if it has a traveling range exceeding 150 miles.

Tesla philosophy is based on imitating Fort T mass-production line (estimated to reach sales of 1 Million cars by 2021) by establishing advanced gigafactories.

Multi-purpose team is an essential part of this manufacturing paradigm consistent with Deming's quality management philosophy [19].

Thomas and Maine [20], claim that Tesla production mindset did not follow a disruptive innovation route, instead its origin of commercialization success derives from an architectural model based on deploying supercharging stations countrywide which are meant to relieve customer's traveling range anxiety Importantly from a business perspective which has been Tesla strength from the outset because of Elon Musk sensemaking ability, the charging infrastructure is compatible with rival's electric car design too, rendering an additional source of income from offering charging services to rivals which contributes to its image as green company with altruism motive, instead of greedy hidden agenda driven by ulterior motive to become a monopoly.

#### **3. Methodology: case study description of mega-project**

Shenhar and Holzmann [21] highlight that there is void in the literature in the subject of how to manage complex mega-projects. This is especially evident in pioneer megaprojects which require high degree of adaptation due to lack of experience. Tesla can be classified among this cluster of unprecedented projects both in its technological novelty and magnitude. As such, the method of case study is appropriate [22]. A longitudinal series of rigor interviews over a decade with Tesla employees as well as similar mega projects such as EV-1 in California and Better Place in Israel constituted the empirical approach in this case. It was validated with secondary data sources to juxtapose sources and verify information. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with Tesla's marketing, procurement, and technical engineering in two headquarter centers located in McLean, Virginia and Washington, DC.

#### **4. Interpretation of results**

In 2003, several engineers at Silicon Valley embarked on a journey to advance the world's movement to green mobility [23]. To make this century-long dream come true, Tesla Motors was founded. As will be seen, Tesla always went bigger than industrial benchmark, appropriately setting its production quantities to yield sales of 1 million cars by 2021.

In the first step, on 2008, Tesla introduced the Roadster, a car with capability to drive 245 miles on single charge. Afterwards, Tesla introduced the Model S, with a traveling distance of 265 miles, which acclaimed Motor Trends' 2013 car of the year prize. Next, it began manufacturing the Model X, a crossover type car with an additional third seating row. Tesla is currently building \$5 billion worth battery factory that is estimated to produce more lithium-ion batteries in 2020 than all of the contestants' yield.

Tesla owners are able to charge their batteries to 50% level in a short timeframe of 20 minutes. Tesla expanded rapidly in 2014, starting with charging stations in Norway, afterwards encroached 12 additional countries, and plans to enter into the market of almost every country in Europe [24]. In effort to extend international sales, Tesla began marketing its electric vehicles to the Chinese niche on August 2013. Although China's market is larger than Europe, the regulatory environment in Europe makes it a favorable destination for electric cars in the next decade because European Parliament Transport Committee approved a resolution in November 2013 making it

*Tesla's Circular Economy Strategy to Recycle, Reduce, Reuse, Repurpose and Recover Batteries DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107256*

compulsory that EU country members need to install network of at least one charging station per 100 km.

Tesla Motors portfolio is diversified to include both vehicle and battery components. The batteries manufactured by Tesla are compatible with other car brands extending their market worldwide. For example, Toyota and Mercedes utilize Tesla's battery in the Rav4 and Mercedes B-Class.

In contrast to Better Place infrastructure which was based on the notion of swapping depleted batteries (**Figure 2**) of cars in short time period of 5 minutes but was limited to single car manufacturer (Renault), Tesla supercharging stations are capable to rapidly charge depleted battery in forty minutes. The super-charging stations are compatible with various car manufacturers rendering the infrastructure a servicizing source of income for Tesla. As of April 2019, Tesla had a network of 12,000 supercharging stations across North America, Europe and Asia. According to Tesla, the funding needed to establish a supercharging station is \$150,000 without solar panels, and \$300,000 to construct a solar powered facility. A single station can charge multiple cars simultaneously (usually 2–4 spots are available). The decision where to build a super-charging station is determined based on actual electric car sales and strategically curated after rigor post-sales survey of consumers' driving patterns.

On March 2019, Tesla debuted an innovative V3 supercharger architecture that is capable to reduce the charging time on average by approximately 50%. Furthermore, utilizing the V3 supercharger, the Model 3 car extends its traveling range by an additional 75 miles on a quick charge that consumes short duration of five minutes. To avoid over-usage of supercharging services which degrades the battery's lifespan, the V3 supercharger can charge a battery up to 80% instead of its maximum capacity in 45 minutes because subject matter experts in university investigation found that charging a battery to its full extent had negative impact on its lifespan. Interestingly, Tesla is debuting a technology titled, on-route battery warmup, which heats the battery to an optimal temperature on the way to the supercharger station. The warmup technology diminishes the average charge time by an additional 25%. Overall, V3 supercharger network permits Tesla to double the amount of vehicles it servicizes in order to meet the needs of its exponentially increasing fleet.

Tesla portfolio has major differences from past mega-projects attempting to electrify transportation. The innovator's dilemma is whether to focus on becoming solely

**Figure 2.** *Renault Fluence swapping station better place.*

an electric car manufacturer as Tesla have chosen or to diversify portfolio with blend of fuel combustion cars too such as done by other mainstream manufacturers such as Toyota [25]. Tesla pursues Skinner's [26] seminal model called, focused factory, by creating array of Gigafactories which builds fully electric vehicles (not including hybrid or combustion engine type of cars inside it). Its Model X and S target different household incomes. The Model 3 represents an affordable family sedan with distance of 320 miles per charge, Model S large sedan with distance of 400 miles and Model X is a large SUV traveling 300 miles. Model Y is a mid-size SUV with 315 miles traveling distance. In future, the second-generation coupe Roadster is going to be designed in order to travel 650 miles per charge.

Tesla marketing is using social media word of mouth as its main networking tool to reach audience. Surprisingly, this low budget method achieves record high preorders which paces the production line capacity.

Trying to stay head of the curve, Tesla vehicles come equipped with autonomous capability based on variety of technologies such as radar, sonar, acoustic sensors and a network of cameras to identify pedestrians, cars and other potential obstacles on the route. The United States Department of Transportation categorizes Tesla as Stage 2 level self-drive capability, meaning that a driver must be seated behind the wheel at all times. Tesla self-driving parallel parking capability has been appealing for wide segments of population. The capability for stage 3 autonomous driving without driver behind the wheel is built-in by Tesla vehicles too, but its pending approval of regulatory agencies.

To meet weekly pre-sale, Tesla emulates Ford T mass-production mindset by building Gigafactories. Historically, the Ford T used the stationary construction methods available in the 20th century, assembly by hand, to manufacture small batches. The original Ford Piquette Avenue Plant could not meet demand for the Model T because 11 cars were built there during the first month of production. Consequently, in 1910, in order to create mass-production line, Henry Ford moved the factory to the new Highland Park facility. The Model T production line shifted into an innovative modular format where Ford's cars were constructed rapidly, diminishing production time from 12.5 hours beforehand to 93 minutes by 1914. It was accomplished by conveyor belts, a technology which standardized the process. This allowed Ford to decrease the cost of cars by gaining economies of scale [27, 28]. Fredrick Taylor rendered consulting services to diminish the assembly line into 84 discrete steps (an unprecedented accomplishment last century). Subsequently, Ford built machines that could stampout large car components automatically for engine and transmission.

After the Model T reached a remarkable threshold of 10 million vehicles, it accounted for 50% of all cars globally. Similar to Tesla marketing method, Ford brand was notably famous among consumers so it did not require extra advertisement. By 1925, Ford plant reached a production milestone of 15 million vehicles, with a manufacturing pace of 10,000 cars per day (2 million annually).

Following Ford's footsteps, Tesla established hubs (Gigafactories) around the world to mass-produce electric cars. These green plants are energized by solar power. Gigafactory 1 located at Nevada is a large size, 10 million square feet plant, which is forecasted to yield 500,000 batteries for the Models S, X and 3 cars per year. The facility also produces Tesla Powerwall, Powerpack, and Megapack devices. It is expected to build the Tesla Semitruck in future. Battery production at Gigafactory 1 passed an annualized pace of about 20 GWh (3.5 Million cells per day), ranking it the highestvolume battery plant globally. Tesla has been innovating Tab-less cobalt-free lithium battery cell measuring 46 by 80 millimeters (hence called 4680), utilizing nickelmanganese structure, which extends by 16% the car range and multiply six times the

#### *Tesla's Circular Economy Strategy to Recycle, Reduce, Reuse, Repurpose and Recover Batteries DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107256*

amount of energy, while decreasing expenses to produce the cell by 14% compared to existing cells which are powering the model 3 and Y. Its anode uses raw metallurgical silicon which does not crack. The new cylindrical architecture shape batteries will utilize Maxwell's dry electrode technology which is lowers cost and is purer than lithiumion batteries. The rolled-up copper material cuts the distance for electrons to travel rendering a decrease in internal resistance and heat dissipation. The state of Nevada, where Tesla Gigafactory is located has plenty deposits of lithium embedded in clay which Tesla plans to mine. Overall, Tesla plans to diminish the price per kilowatt hour (kWh) of its cells by 56%. After the Model 3 production had reached the pace of 5000 cars a week, the manufacturing quota of battery cells in the Gigafactory had reached 3.5 million cells per day. As of 2019, the plant employs about 8000 workers.

Gigafactory 2, Tesla's plant for Model 3 cars in Fremont, California, was in the beginning constructed on 5.3 million square feet but latter expanded after the City of Fremont's granted permission for Tesla, in 2016, to double the plant's area to 10 million square feet, employing over 10,000 people in the Fermont's municipality. It is connected to rail network which transports batteries and parts between Tesla Gigafactories. The production line uses more than 160 robots, including 10 of the biggest robots globally. The assembly process takes between three to five days. The battery pack which is put inside car weighs approximately 1200 pounds. Tesla built a mega casting machine in the Fremont factory in order to produce large car parts in a single piece. The one-of-a-kind machine called, Giga Press, made of aluminum die casting, produced by Idra Group in Italy, has a clamping force of about 60,000 Kilonewtons. It reduced casting from 70 parts to four parts, with future goal to produce most of the Model Y frame in one piece.

Gigafactory 3, is located in Shanghai, China. The plant was built in a minimal time period of one year. Tesla targets this plant to produce a quota record of 250,000 cars per year (starting with a weekly production quota of 3000 units). Tesla introduced the Model Y crossover for the Chinese market, postulating based on the assumption that sales for this car model are going to exceed that of Tesla's other models alltogether. The president of Tesla's location in China, proclaimed that it is designing a cheaper Tesla for the low-income customer niche which is expected to be priced at an affordable \$25,000. It is called Model 2 and will be a hatchback.

Gigafactory 4, is at Austin, Texas. This plant is going to manufacture the cybertruck (**Figure 3**) which has over 500,000 preorders. Tesla is developing three models of cybertruck: single, dual and tri motor) to conquer the vast market of electric pickup trucks which is very popular in North America rural landscape. The cybertruck is built with an exterior shell called exoskeleton for extra strength, and equipped with a passenger protection armor glass.

Gigafactory 5, is taking ground at Berlin, Germany. The plant is going to produce Model Y (500,000 car annually) and associated battery packs. Tesla ordered eight new casting equipment devices that are planned to be assembled in the Berlin Gigafactory which encroaches into the European market.

There is a plan in blueprint to establish Gigafactory 6, at India. Specifically, on January, 2021, Tesla stepped into the Indian market by officiating a subsidiary, Tesla India Motors and Energy Private Limited. Tesla's Indian branch is considered to be built in the Karnataka state which encompasses research and development infrastructure hubs. Since India has demand for small size and cheaper price vehicles, the lowcost Model 2 is primary designated for production in this Gigafactory. Importantly, India's interest in the worldwide growing trend of sustainability fits with Tesla solar panels branch.

**Figure 3.** *Tesla Cybertruck.*

#### **5. Discussion of tesla business model limitations and future challenges**

Tesla exponential sale's grow is notable, but it faces numerous impediments in the near future. First, the battery production is composed of three components: cell manufacturing, module manufacturing, and pack assembly. Tesla manufactures battery modules and packs at both its Gigafactory in Nevada, and at its vehicle assembly plant in Fremont, California. Tesla's battery packs for the Model 3 utilize cells from the Gigafactory, while cells for the Model S and Model X are still manufactured by Panasonic in Japan, which should be brought back home for manufacturing instead of outsourced because pack assembly needs to be near the vehicle assembly location for logistic reasons to reduce cost of transporting battery packs, which are larger and heavier than cells or modules. Thus, Tesla is aiming to achieve cell manufacturing capacity of 100GWh per year by 2022 and 3TWh per year by 2030. Through usage of nickel and lithium resources available within North America, and manufacturing cells in-house at Nevada, Tesla may substantially lower the cost of lithium production by 33% and decrease the miles traveled for the battery packs assembly by 80%. Following this mindset, Tesla vertical supply chain should extend into the mining industry coupled with investment in developing frontier material science in collaboration with prime universities which are leading the field. Tesla plans to reduce by 50% the price of its batteries in an effort to sell its flagship Model 2 car in a low-cost price of \$25,000. Towards this goal, Tesla signed a contract with North Carolinafocused mining group Piedmont Lithium to purchase five years of their yield starting in 2022 and Tesla is also looking at creative ways to mine lithium from clay deposits in Nevada. These actions are going to render a fraction of Tesla lithium consumption, while the rest can be procured from Chile, Australia, China, etc. Tesla needs 25,000 tons of lithium per year to produce 35 GWh. It is a source of discrepancy because a future Tera-factory can consume up to 800,000 tons of lithium per year. Currently, there is no shortage of lithium worldwide. Which has decreased lithium cost (at 2020's global lithium production output is at 300,000 tons per year), but this situation is going to dramatically change due to disruption in worldwide supply chain rendered by COVID-19 crisis starting 2021 until at least 2024.

Also, the Tesla's Model 3, which is relatively affordable electric car, suffered from production delays. It has recently met the monthly production quota needed to satisfy customers' backlog of reservations and the demand forecasted. Although, Tesla has fulfilled a goal of producing 5000 Model 3 s each week and delivering over 500,000

*Tesla's Circular Economy Strategy to Recycle, Reduce, Reuse, Repurpose and Recover Batteries DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107256*

cars, its ability to meet increasingly high pre-orders rendered by spiking oil prices is doubtful [29]. Consequently, Tesla ended its customer referral program, cut its workforce by 7% and reduced the prices of the Models 3, S and X by \$2000 because its sales in the fourth quarter of 2018 fell behind estimates. Tesla has yet to fulfill its major promise to market its flagship Model 3 car at a price of \$35,000 and has reduced its production of the Models S and X that are in less demand to 2000 cars per week.

Another source of concern is the quota limit on tax credits [30]. Electric car buyers are granted a \$7500 break on their federal taxes. These perks are intended to put more green vehicles on the road. However, each electric car brand has a quota limit: 200,000 units. After passing this threshold, the incentives halt. As of 2019, more than 370,000 consumers have secured deposits for a Model 3 but not all of them will be able to receive the tax exemption, rendering risk of abolishing pre-orders.

A bigger source of concern for Tesla future prospects is that it falls behind rivals in offering car-sharing services. For instance, the Waymo originally developed by Google which pioneered the ride-sharing market, Zoox a self-driving car company that Amazon bought, and AutoX a Chinese self-driving startup funded by Alibaba. BMW group and Daimler AG are pooling resources to invest 1 Billion Dollars in total to develop ride-hailing services. In the future, Tesla plans to further expand its supply chain network by creating a ride-hailing platform titled Robotaxi. According to ARK invest report, this market has the potential to generate 1 Trillion Dollars in annual operating earnings by 2030 [31]. Essentially, the Robotaxi service aims to repurpose the car by allowing Tesla customers whenever not driving their vehicle, to use it as an autonomous taxi.

Finally, one should not ignore that the electric grid can become overloaded on peak-hours of consumption. It requires collaboration between all electric car manufacturing and their affiliated charging stations for development of a smart grid.

#### **6. Conclusion**

Despite concerns mentioned above, a report by UBS [32] asserts Tesla's future is promising. The bank highlights Tesla's record-high order backlog, growing margins, and an advantage in critical supply chains components. The analysts of the bank corroborated their arguments based on Tesla's two new plants in Germany and Texas, which are ramping up manufacturing and should roughly double the company's production capacity over time. They forecast the new factories with Tesla's pricing is going to keep the company's automotive margins above 30% for quarters to come. Tesla postulates sales grow by approximately 50% on average year over year, a goal UBS confirm it will meet in 2022. Despite lost sales due to the COVID-19 lockdown in Shanghai which restricted employees from attending work for a while, Tesla should be capable to manufacture 1.4 million vehicles on 2022 and reach 2.9 million by 2025. Finally, Tesla's capability to retain competitive advantage stems from software's scalability, which can gain substantial revenue beyond 2025 because Tesla is yet again head of the curve by investing in lidar and machine learning technologies for selfdriving cars.

#### **Author details**

Michael Naor Department of Operations Research, Hebrew University, School of Business Administration, Jerusalem, Israel

\*Address all correspondence to: michael.naor@mail.huji.ac.il

© 2022 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

*Tesla's Circular Economy Strategy to Recycle, Reduce, Reuse, Repurpose and Recover Batteries DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107256*

#### **References**

[1] Wolfson A, Tavor D, Mark S, Schermann M, Krcmar H. Better place: A case study of the reciprocal relations between sustainability and service. Service Science. 2011;**3**(2):172-181

[2] Naor M, Bernardes ES, Druehl C, Shiftan Y. Overcoming barriers to adoption of environmentally-friendly innovations through design and strategy: Learning from failure of an electric vehicle infrastructure. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. 2015;**35**(1):26-59

[3] Stringham EP, Miller JK, Clark JR. Overcoming barriers to entry in an established industry: Tesla motors. California Management Review. 2015;**57**(4):85-103

[4] Long Z, Axsen J, Miller I, Kormos C. What does tesla mean to car buyers? Exploring the role of automotive brand in perceptions of battery electric vehicles. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2019;**129**:185-204

[5] Hardman S, Shiu E, Steinberger-Wilckens R. Changing the fate of fuel cell vehicles: Can lessons be learnt from tesla motors? International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2015;**40**(4):1625-1638

[6] Crabtree G. The coming electric vehicle transformation. Science. 2019;**366**(6464):422-424

[7] Mangram ME. The globalization of tesla motors: A strategic marketing plan analysis. Journal of Strategic Marketing. 2012;**20**(4):289-312

[8] Mann MK, Mayyas AT, Steward DM. Supply-Chain Analysis of Li-Ion Battery Material and Impact of Recycling (No. NREL/PO-6A20-71724). Golden, CO

(United States): National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL); 2019

[9] Harper G, Sommerville R, Kendrick E, Driscoll L, Slater P, Stolkin R, et al. Recycling lithium-ion batteries from electric vehicles. Nature. 2019;**575**(7781):75-86

[10] Siqi Z, Guangming L, Wenzhi H, Juwen H, Haochen Z. Recovery methods and regulation status of waste lithiumion batteries in China: A mini review. Waste Management & Research. 2019;**37**(11):1142-1152

[11] Hua Y, Liu X, Zhou S, Huang Y, Ling H, Yang S. Toward sustainable reuse of retired Lithium-ion batteries from electric vehicles. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2020;**168**:105249

[12] Yang J, Gu F, Guo J. Environmental feasibility of secondary use of electric vehicle lithium-ion batteries in communication base stations. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2020;**156**:104713

[13] Goldratt EM, Cox J. The Goal. revised ed. Great Barrington, MA: The Northern River Press Publishing Corporation; 1986

[14] Naor M, Bernardes SE, Coman A. Theory of constraints: Is it a theory and a good one? International Journal of Production Research. 2012;**51**(2):542-554

[15] Ito N, Takeuchi K, Managi S. Willingness-to-pay for infrastructure investments for alternative fuel vehicles. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2013;**18**:1-8

[16] Axsen J, Kurani KS, Burke A. Are batteries ready for plug-in hybrid buyers? Transport Policy. 2010;**17**(3):173-182

[17] Kirsch DA. The Electric Vehicle and the Burden of History. Piscataway, NJ, United States: Rutgers University Press; 2000

[18] Skippon S, Garwood M. Responses to battery electric vehicles: UK consumer attitudes and attributions of symbolic meaning following direct experience to reduce psychological distance. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2011;**16**(7):525-531

[19] Anderson JC, Rungtusanatham M, Schroeder RG. A theory of quality management underlying the Deming management method. Academy of Management Review. 1994;**19**(3):472-509

[20] Thomas VJ, Maine E. Market entry strategies for electric vehicle start-ups in the automotive industry–lessons from tesla motors. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019;**235**:653-663

[21] Shenhar A, Holzmann V. The three secrets of megaproject success: Clear strategic vision, total alignment, and adapting to complexity. Project Management Journal. 2017;**48**(6):29-46

[22] Shenhar AJ, Holzmann V, Melamed B, Zhao Y. The challenge of innovation in highly complex projects: What can we learn from Boeing's Dreamliner experience? Project Management Journal. 2016;**47**(2):62-78

[23] Perkins G, Murmann JP. What does the success of tesla mean for the future dynamics in the global automobile sector? Management and Organization Review. 2018;**14**(3):471-480

[24] Chen Y, Perez Y. Business model design: Lessons learned from tesla motors. In: Towards a Sustainable Economy. Cham: Springer; 2018. pp. 53-69

[25] Christensen CM. The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Boston, MA, USA: Harvard Business Review Press; 2013

[26] Skinner W. The Focused Factory. Boston, MA, USA: Harvard Business Review; 1974. pp. 114-121

[27] Alizon F, Shooter SB, Simpson TW. Henry ford and the model T: Lessons for product platforming and mass customization. Design Studies. 2009;**30**(5):588-605

[28] Brooke L. Ford Model T: The Car That Put the World on Wheels. Minneapolis, MN, USA: Motorbooks International; 2008

[29] Bloomberg. Tesla model 3 tracker. 2019. Available from: https:// www.bloomberg.com/graphics/ tesla-model-3-vin-tracker/?terminal=true

[30] Shiftan Y, Albert G, Keinan T. The impact of company-car taxation policy on travel behavior. Transport Policy. 2012;**19**(1):139-146

[31] Big ideas report. ARK invest. 2021. Available from: https://ark-invest.com/ big-ideas-2021/?utm\_campaign=Big%20 Ideas%202021&utm\_medium=email&\_ hsmi=108239947&\_hsenc=p2ANqtz-\_ DosaDBniWZ3ZtBhhpnLmcjIPKY5kt2 0hxNGb710eUTGnPbk3MwSwEs3Ys9- VpCRSq7nSSPQJQSjbQ6Tp2MEPvF8deg&utm\_content=108239947&utm\_ source=hs\_email

[32] Business Insider. Tesla's Future 'Brighter Than Ever,' UBS Analysts Say. 2022. Available from: businessinsider. com

### *Edited by Hosam M. Saleh and Amal I. Hassan*

Recycling is an act of collecting and processing items that would otherwise be discarded as waste in order to create a new product. Recycled material is being used in an increasing number of today's products. Waste management is primarily concerned with a wide range of wastes, including industrial, biological, household, municipal, organic, biomedical, and radioactive wastes. Human activity, such as the mining and processing of basic resources, generates waste and poses health problems that can emerge both indirectly and directly. Waste mismanagement is a serious problem on an individual and a governmental level. Nowadays, the waste disposal business is struggling to adapt to globalized consumerism, a system in which things are manufactured on one continent, purchased and used on another, and disposed of on yet another. Therefore, remediation is often subject to a variety of legal criteria, but it can also be based on evaluations of human health and environmental concerns in cases where no statutory standards exist or when standards are advisory. This book discusses recycling strategies and technologies to find solutions to waste management. Chapters address such topics as biodegradable waste, the circular economy, managing industrial and nuclear waste, and much more.

Published in London, UK © 2023 IntechOpen © Andrew Holland / iStock

Recycling Strategy and Challenges Associated with Waste Management

Towards Sustaining the World

Recycling Strategy and

Challenges Associated with

Waste Management Towards

Sustaining the World

*Edited by Hosam M. Saleh and Amal I. Hassan*