Top 5 Wind Turbine Blade Recycling Companies
LM Wind Power
Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy SA
Vestas Wind Systems A/S
Veolia Environnement S.A.
Arkema S.A.
Source: Mordor Intelligence
Wind Turbine Blade Recycling Companies Matrix by Mordor Intelligence
Our comprehensive proprietary performance metrics of key Wind Turbine Blade Recycling players beyond traditional revenue and ranking measures
This MI Matrix can diverge from a simple top list because it weighs observable delivery signals, not only revenue scale. Those signals include installed base access, repeatable processing routes, and evidence that new blade designs translate into real project deployments. Capability indicators that often separate firms are recycling throughput per site, secured downstream outlets, resin system readiness, and the ability to run multi year programs across regions. Wind turbine blades are difficult to recycle mainly because thermoset resins do not remelt, so separation pathways matter as much as cutting and transport. Buyers usually narrow choices by asking where material goes next, what permits apply, and who carries liability for transport and residual waste. This MI Matrix by Mordor Intelligence is better for supplier and competitor evaluation than revenue tables alone because it ties positioning to execution proof points and near term scalability.
MI Competitive Matrix for Wind Turbine Blade Recycling
The MI Matrix benchmarks top Wind Turbine Blade Recycling Companies on dual axes of Impact and Execution Scale.
Analysis of Wind Turbine Blade Recycling Companies and Quadrants in the MI Competitive Matrix
Comprehensive positioning breakdown
Vestas Wind Systems A/S
Near-term volumes sit in epoxy blades, and Vestas, a major player, is pushing a chemical pathway that targets blades already in service. In February 2023, Vestas described a CETEC based chemical disassembly process and a value chain with Olin and Stena Recycling aimed at scaling toward commercial use. In February 2024, Stena Recycling said the collaboration received a JEC Composites innovation award, with progress described at lab scale rather than full industrial throughput. If regulators tighten landfill restrictions faster than scale up occurs, Vestas may face a gap between commitments and available processing capacity, despite strong brand pull.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the main recycling routes for wind turbine blades today?
Mechanical size reduction is common and often feeds cement kilns or construction fillers. Chemical routes aim to recover fibers and resin components for higher value reuse, but they need more specialized plants.
How should an owner qualify a blade recycling provider before a repowering project starts?
Ask for a documented chain of custody, permits, and the named downstream outlet for every output stream. Confirm how transport, cutting safety, and residual waste fees are handled in the contract.
When does pyrolysis make sense versus physical processing?
Pyrolysis can help recover fibers, yet it depends on stable demand for recovered material and tight process control. Physical processing can be simpler, but it often leads to lower value reuse.
What contract terms reduce end of life risk for blades?
Define acceptance criteria for blade condition, contamination, and maximum section length at pickup. Include clear liability, audit rights, and what happens if the planned outlet becomes unavailable.
What policy trends most affect blade end of life choices?
Landfill restrictions and extended producer responsibility discussions can shift decisions toward verified recycling pathways. Public funding programs can also speed up pilot to scale transitions for new methods.
What performance evidence matters most when selecting recyclable blade designs?
Look for proof of full scale deployment, not only lab results, and confirm the end of life separation method. Also verify whether the resin supply chain can support repeatable volumes.
Methodology
Research approach and analytical framework
Sources prioritize company filings, investor materials, and official press rooms, plus government and standards body publications. For private activity, evidence relies on named projects, site descriptions, and credible partner disclosures. When in scope financial detail is limited, scores use conservative proxies like program continuity and public restructuring signals. Conflicts are triangulated across multiple primary sources where possible.
Sites, partners, and project access near wind farm clusters reduce transport friction and improve blade intake.
Trust matters for decommissioning liability, permits, and acceptance of recycled outputs by cement, composites, or plastics users.
Proxy based on in scope blade volumes influenced, including OEM installed base leverage and confirmed deployments of recyclable designs.
Cutting, shredding, handling, and certified outlets determine whether blades are processed at usable cost and speed.
New resin systems, chemical separation, and validated closed loop trials improve value recovery versus downcycling routes.
Ability to fund scale up, absorb ramp losses, and maintain programs through policy shifts and project delays.
