Are we seriously not pricing solar panel waste into net-zero plans?

I’m trying to understand something that rarely gets discussed in net-zero planning.

Solar is often described as “cheap” based on LCOE (levelized cost of energy). But LCOE only measures generation at the plant. It does not include end-of-life outcomes.

Some open questions I haven’t seen answered clearly:

• Utility-scale panels typically last ~20–25 years
• Inverters and batteries often less
• Once deployment saturates, replacement (not growth) dominates
• That creates a permanent waste flow, even if capacity stops expanding

Recycling is frequently cited as the solution, but:

• Current recycling rates are low
• Recycling is more expensive than landfill
• Recovered materials generally don’t meet Tier-1 purity standards
• Downcycling doesn’t eliminate waste, it just delays it
• Virgin mining remains necessary for high-purity inputs

There’s also a regulatory question.

Many panels use fluoropolymer backsheets and encapsulants. These are often labeled “polymers of low concern” in lab settings—but disposal doesn’t happen in labs. It happens in landfills with:

• Mechanical fragmentation
• Moisture
• Chemical heterogeneity
• Multi-decade to century-scale time horizons

Under current environmental rules, if contaminants are detected in groundwater, disposal sites can become long-term remediation liabilities, with costs that are difficult to predict or reverse.

I’m not arguing against solar deployment.
I am asking why large-scale planning seems to assume:

1. Recycling will scale perfectly
2. Material loops will close
3. Long-term liabilities will be negligible

If those assumptions are wrong, shouldn’t they be priced now rather than deferred?

Genuinely interested in evidence-based answers, especially from people working in waste management, materials science, or grid planning.