## 4 Results and Discussion
### LCA of Wind Turbines or Their Components
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Impact** & **P+O+R 4** & **Blades Recycling Potential** & **P+O 5** \\ \cline{2-3}  & [57,82–84,86–90] & [91,92] & **Ecolnvent** \\ \hline Climate Change, g CO\({}_{2}\) eq & 6.5 [84]–10.42 [87] & \(-\)0.01088 [91]–0.102 [92] & 95.7 \\ Resource Depletion, mg Sb eq & 0.06 [86]–14.16 [83] & & 11.692 \\ Abiotic depletion (fossils), MJ & 0.02 [57]–0.1 [82,86] & & 1.4744 \\ Water Use, L & 0.0009 [57]–6.7 [83] & & 40.842 \\ Marine Ecotoxicity, g 1,4-DBC eq & 6.91 [83] & & 179.95 \\ Air Quality, mg PM2.5 eq & 14.6 [57]–25.2 [83] & & 203.25 \\ CED, kWh & 0.107 [57]–0.654 [89] & & 1.476 \\ Acidification potential, mg SO\({}_{2}\)-e & 27.1 [87]–104 [57] & & 540 \\ Eutrophication potential, mg PO\({}_{4}\)-e & 3.7 [86] & & 231.48 \\ The photochemical oxidant, mg Etihene & 3.9 [86] & & 39.714 \\ N\({}_{2}\)O, g & 0.0001474 [87] & & 0.003353 \\ CH\({}_{4}\) g & 0.0001065 [87] & & 0.26812 \\ NMVOC, g & 0.0003469 [87] & & 0.47615 \\ CO, g & 0.0112237 [87] & & 0.6853 \\ Carcinogens, CTUh & \(1.78\times 10^{-9}\)[57] & & \(1.5899\times 10^{-8}\) \\ Non-carcinogens, CTUh & 5.88 \(\times 10^{-9}\)[57] & & \(1.0176\times 10^{-7}\) \\ Land occupation, m\({}^{2}\) & 6.86/21.32/15.44 [88] & & 0.012118 \\ Ozone depletion, kg CFC-11-eq & \(2.69\times 10^{-9}\)[57] & & 8.1088\(\times 10^{-9}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{4}\)–Minimum and maximum values are given in single units of measurement from sources [57,82–84,86–89] of Table 5. Data from [88] were not taken into account since they are 3–4 orders of magnitude higher than data from other sources, which most likely indicates significant differences in the choice of primary data. The exception was the data on the land occupation category since they were not found in other sources, and it was impossible to compare them with any other results. \({}^{5}\)–Data from Ecolnvent for Vestas 2 MW wind turbine (global).  
\end{table} 
Table 6: Environmental impacts of different life cycle stages of wind plants (for 1 kWh). renewable sources are represented by small hydropower plants (48.9 MWh), biogas plants (28 MWh), biomass and waste power plants (43.5 MWh), and landfill gas (9.6 MWh). The system of government incentives for renewable energy in Russia stimulates not only the construction of new renewable energy plants but also the development of national manufacturers of solar panels and wind turbines. Due to these incentives, Hevel (the largest producer of silicon heterostructured solar modules in Russia) and NovaWind JSC (the Rosatom division responsible for wind energy projects) are already successfully operating on the Russian market. Hevel currently manages 1145.5 MW of solar projects that are scattered throughout southern Siberia, the Volga region, the North Caucasus, and the Far East (Figure 5). The production unit of the company is located in the city of Novocheboksarsk, the Republic of Chuvashia. Thus, the distance between the manufacturer and the most remote solar energy facility is more than 7500 km. At the time it was launched in 2015, the plant's production capacity was only 90 MW per year; by 2019, it had already increased to 300 MW per year. The company plans to implement several large solar projects not only in Russia but also in Kazakhstan and further increase production to strengthen its position in the market and reduce production costs due to the economies of scale, learning-by-doing, and learning-by-researching [97; 98]. Following this development strategy will likely lead to the construction of an increasing number of solar power plants, including ones at a considerable distance from the place of direct production. Such an approach in the future can significantly complicate the development of the recycling of solar modules, making it environmentally and economically impractical due to the need to transport old modules over long distances.