“The data show that significant volumes of critical raw materials are already present in waste flows and will increase further by 2050, but their actual recovery depends on political, infrastructural, and technological choices.” We are discussing the FutuRaM project with Giulia Iattoni, Assistant Programme Officer at the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR).
Read also the Special report FutuRaM
What is the difference between observed data, modelling estimates, and future scenarios in the results of the FutuRaM project?
In the FutuRaM project we have collected and harmonised observed data from official sources, such as Eurostat, national reports, scientific literature, and industrial data, integrating them with mathematical models to fill the information gap. The observed data describe the current state of WEEE flows and their content of critical raw materials. The modelling estimates reconstruct or complete missing information through coherent assumptions, weighted estimates, and mass balances, when possible later validated by industry experts. The future scenarios developed in FutuRaM (business-as-usual, recovery, and circularity) are not forecasts, but represent possible developments up to 2050 based on changes in collection systems, recycling technologies, and market dynamics, allowing an assessment of how these conditions influence the availability and recovery of critical raw materials from WEEE and the achievement of the targets.
What does it mean, in simple terms, to measure the availability of critical raw materials in WEEE?
Measuring the availability of critical raw materials in WEEE means quantifying the entire value chain of the waste: from the generation and collection of flows, to their composition in terms of critical materials and elements, and up to the treatment and recovery processes.
Not all the material present in products is actually recoverable, because the availability as a secondary resource is influenced by several factors: some of it is not intercepted by collection systems, while some, although collected, is not technically or economically accessible with current recycling technologies, due to low concentrations or the complexity of components. A significant portion of WEEE in Europe does not enter formal collection channels compliant with the WEEE Directive, which reduces the potential for recovering the critical raw materials contained within.
FutuRaM therefore integrates data on composition, waste flows, and treatment processes to estimate how much material can be obtained as a secondary resource.
Why is it important to distinguish between materials contained in WEEE and materials that are actually recoverable?
It is crucial because the mere presence of a material in WEEE does not imply its actual recoverability. Recoverability depends on several enabling factors—or, conversely, barriers: product design, concentration and distribution of materials, available recycling technologies, economic feasibility, and collection and pre-treatment systems.
Some materials already achieve high levels of recovery today thanks to favorable properties and well-established technologies. Others represent flows with growing strategic interest and recovery potential, linked to the evolution and market penetration of the products containing them and to existing treatment processes. Conversely, some materials remain difficult to recover due to their dispersion within products and current technological limits, and are recovered only in limited quantities or through processes still under development.
What is the main message that FutuRaM data convey to Europe today?
The message of FutuRaM is that WEEE, along with other types of waste analyzed in the project — including batteries, vehicles, construction and demolition waste, mining waste, industrial slags and ashes, and wind turbines — represents a strategic source of secondary raw materials for Europe. Data show that significant volumes of critical raw materials are already present in waste flows and will increase further by 2050, but their actual recovery depends on political, infrastructural, and technological choices.
It is therefore necessary to strengthen collection and recycling capacity, while also promoting prevention strategies. A key element is shifting from an assessment based primarily on economic feasibility to a perspective that also includes environmental benefits, supply security, and reduced emissions from primary production. Finally, it is essential to invest in data quality to guide political and industrial decisions that are truly effective.
© Riproduzione riservata
){kind=link}