IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i7p2681-d1363280.html

The Juxtaposition of Our Future Electrification Solutions: A View into the Unsustainable Life Cycle of the Permanent Magnet Electrical Machine

Author

Listed:
  • Leigh Paterson

    (Department of Design, Manufacturing and Engineering Management, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G1 1XJ, UK)

  • Jill Miscandlon

    (National Manufacturing Institute Scotland, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow PA4 9LJ, UK)

  • David Butler

    (School of Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK)

Abstract

Electrification is increasing in prevalence due to the importance placed on it for achieving global net zero targets. This has led to the proliferation of electrical mobility, including the wide-scale production of passenger vehicles, personal mobility devices and recent announcements regarding electrically powered aircraft, as well as in energy production. Electrical machines provide a cleaner source of energy during operation in comparison to their traditional fossil-based alternatives. The uncertainty and lack of transparency hanging over these green credentials can be attributed to how these products are manufactured and then disposed of at the end of their life. For them to be a truly sustainable solution, improvements need to be made across their entire life cycle. With the projected increase in their numbers due to the advancement of electrification, this current life cycle is not sustainable, directly opposing the intention of these products. This paper will introduce the current demand and challenges. It will also present these motors broken down into their constituent parts and follow each through their typical lifecycle. This paper presents the typical current life cycle of permanent magnet electrical machines, demonstrating the environmental issues associated with the current linear life cycle, and proposing alternative practices, to ease the environmental burden.

Suggested Citation

  • Leigh Paterson & Jill Miscandlon & David Butler, 2024. "The Juxtaposition of Our Future Electrification Solutions: A View into the Unsustainable Life Cycle of the Permanent Magnet Electrical Machine," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-26, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:7:p:2681-:d:1363280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/7/2681/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/7/2681/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Espinoza & Marcos Goycoolea & Eduardo Moreno & Alexandra Newman, 2013. "MineLib: a library of open pit mining problems," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 206(1), pages 93-114, July.
    2. Knopf, Brigitte & Nahmmacher, Paul & Schmid, Eva, 2015. "The European renewable energy target for 2030 – An impact assessment of the electricity sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 50-60.
    3. Staffell, Iain & Green, Richard, 2014. "How does wind farm performance decline with age?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 775-786.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ettore Bompard & Daniele Grosso & Tao Huang & Francesco Profumo & Xianzhang Lei & Duo Li, 2018. "World Decarbonization through Global Electricity Interconnections," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-29, July.
    2. Kyriakopoulos, Grigorios L. & Arabatzis, Garyfallos & Tsialis, Panagiotis & Ioannou, Konstantinos, 2018. "Electricity consumption and RES plants in Greece: Typologies of regional units," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 134-144.
    3. Jäger, Tobias & McKenna, Russell & Fichtner, Wolf, 2015. "Onshore wind energy in Baden-Württemberg: a bottom-up economic assessment of the socio-technical potential," Working Paper Series in Production and Energy 7, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Industrial Production (IIP).
    4. Habibi, Hamed & Howard, Ian & Simani, Silvio, 2019. "Reliability improvement of wind turbine power generation using model-based fault detection and fault tolerant control: A review," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 877-896.
    5. Akintayo T. Abolude & Wen Zhou, 2018. "A Comparative Computational Fluid Dynamic Study on the Effects of Terrain Type on Hub-Height Wind Aerodynamic Properties," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, December.
    6. Francisco Haces-Fernandez, 2020. "GoWInD: Wind Energy Spatiotemporal Assessment and Characterization of End-of-Life Activities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-20, November.
    7. Abdollahzadeh, Hadi & Atashgar, Karim & Abbasi, Morteza, 2016. "Multi-objective opportunistic maintenance optimization of a wind farm considering limited number of maintenance groups," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 247-261.
    8. Amina Lamghari & Roussos Dimitrakopoulos & Jacques Ferland, 2015. "A hybrid method based on linear programming and variable neighborhood descent for scheduling production in open-pit mines," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 555-582, November.
    9. Hayes, Liam & Stocks, Matthew & Blakers, Andrew, 2021. "Accurate long-term power generation model for offshore wind farms in Europe using ERA5 reanalysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    10. Niklas Andersen & Ola Eriksson & Karl Hillman & Marita Wallhagen, 2016. "Wind Turbines’ End-of-Life: Quantification and Characterisation of Future Waste Materials on a National Level," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-24, November.
    11. Abadie, Luis Mª & Chamorro, José M., 2023. "Investment in wind-based hydrogen production under economic and physical uncertainties," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 337(C).
    12. Duscha, Vicki & Fougeyrollas, Arnaud & Nathani, Carsten & Pfaff, Matthias & Ragwitz, Mario & Resch, Gustav & Schade, Wolfgang & Breitschopf, Barbara & Walz, Rainer, 2016. "Renewable energy deployment in Europe up to 2030 and the aim of a triple dividend," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 314-323.
    13. Aldersey-Williams, John & Broadbent, Ian D. & Strachan, Peter A., 2020. "Analysis of United Kingdom offshore wind farm performance using public data: Improving the evidence base for policymaking," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    14. Hayashi, Daisuke & Huenteler, Joern & Lewis, Joanna I., 2018. "Gone with the wind: A learning curve analysis of China's wind power industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 38-51.
    15. Ramirez Camargo, Luis & Gruber, Katharina & Nitsch, Felix, 2019. "Assessing variables of regional reanalysis data sets relevant for modelling small-scale renewable energy systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1468-1478.
    16. Cannon, D.J. & Brayshaw, D.J. & Methven, J. & Coker, P.J. & Lenaghan, D., 2015. "Using reanalysis data to quantify extreme wind power generation statistics: A 33 year case study in Great Britain," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 767-778.
    17. Sánchez-Pozo, Nadia N. & Vanem, Erik & Bloomfield, Hannah & Aizpurua, Jose I., 2025. "A probabilistic risk assessment framework for the impact assessment of extreme events on renewable power plant components," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    18. Prasad, Abhnil A. & Taylor, Robert A. & Kay, Merlinde, 2017. "Assessment of solar and wind resource synergy in Australia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 354-367.
    19. Mehrjoo, Mehrdad & Jafari Jozani, Mohammad & Pawlak, Miroslaw, 2021. "Toward hybrid approaches for wind turbine power curve modeling with balanced loss functions and local weighting schemes," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    20. Zhou, Yuekuan & Cao, Sunliang & Hensen, Jan L.M., 2021. "An energy paradigm transition framework from negative towards positive district energy sharing networks—Battery cycling aging, advanced battery management strategies, flexible vehicles-to-buildings interactions, uncertainty and sensitivity analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:7:p:2681-:d:1363280. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.