Electromobility will play a key role in order to reach the specified ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets in the German transport sector of 42% between 1990 and 2030. Subsequently, a significant rise in the sale of electric vehicles (EVs) is to be anticipated in future. The amount of EVs to be recycled will rise correspondingly after a delay. This includes the recyclable power electronics modules which are incorporated in every EV as an important component for energy management. Current recycling methods using car shredders and subsequent post shredder technologies show high recycling rates for the bulk metals but are still associated with high losses of precious and strategic metals such as gold, silver, platinum, palladium and tantalum. For this reason, the project ‘Electric vehicle recycling 2020 – key component power electronics’ developed an optimised recycling route for recycling power electronics modules from EVs which is also practicable in series production and can be implemented using standardised technology. This ‘WEEE recycling route’ involves the disassembly of the power electronics from the vehicle and a subsequent recycling in an electronic end-of-life equipment recycling plant. The developed recycling process is economical under the current conditions and raw material prices, even though it involves considerably higher costs than recycling using the car shredder. The life cycle assessment shows basically good results, both for the traditional car shredder route and the developed WEEE recycling route: the latter provides additional benefits from some higher recovery rates and corresponding credits.

Bulk mineral waste materials are one of the largest waste streams worldwide and their management systems can differ greatly depending on regional conditions. Due to this variation, the decision-making context is of particular importance when studying environmental impacts of mineral waste management systems with life cycle assessment (LCA). We follow the premise that LCA results—if applied in practice—are always used in an improvement (i.e., decision-making) context. But how suitable are existing LCA studies on bulk mineral waste management for decision support? To answer this question, we quantitatively and qualitatively assess 57 peer-reviewed bulk mineral waste management LCA studies against 47 criteria. The results show inadequacies regarding decision support along all LCA phases. Common shortcomings are insufficient attention to the specific decision-making context, lack of a consequential perspective, liberal use of allocation and limited justification thereof, missing justifications for excluded impact categories, inadequately discussed limitations, and incomplete documentation. We identified the following significant issues for bulk mineral waste management systems: transportation, the potential leaching of heavy metals, second-order substitution effects, and the choice to include or exclude avoided landfilling and embodied impacts. When applicable, we provide recommendations for improvement and point to best practice examples.