搏击俱乐部
As Japan pours billions into defense dreaming of arms-led prosperity, many warn history’s darkest chapters offer a sobering lesson_我的网站
一 | 好评中国｜循环经济中国说：变废为宝，点“废”成金 从退役风机叶片入海成礁，到废钢电炉短流程炼钢，从动力电池闭环回收到再生材料逐绿出海，那些曾被当作“工业垃圾”的废旧资源，正在被重新定义。
二 | Editor's Note:
August 15 marked the 81st anniversary of Japan's announcement of its unconditional surrender. Eighty-one years on, Japan, the defeated aggressor in World War II (WWII), has not only failed to conduct a thorough reckoning with its wartime aggression, but has instead intensified its drive to expand military power. In its newly released 2026 Defense White Paper on August 4, Japan says that "defense business not only possesses a high degree of public value by directly contributing to the protection of citizens' lives, but also contributes to Japan's economic growth through ripple effects into the civilian sector."
This line of argument, along with Japan's defense policies in recent years, in fact reflects a form of "military Keynesianism" - the use of military spending as a means to stimulate overall economic development. However, this logic of "trying to boost the economy through military buildup" has faced widespread skepticism inside Japan. Some scholars have also warned that Japan pursued a similar policy during WWII, which led to the expansion of the military-industrial complex (MIC) and, in objective terms, fueled the scale of Japan's war of aggression, bringing profound suffering to the peoples of Asia and the world.
Pursuing a military Keynesian path
Japan's 2026 Defense White Paper, at 598 pages, has set a record as the longest in history. More alarming than its length, however, is the document's first-ever explicit definition of the development of the defense industry as an effective means of promoting "economic growth."
"The white paper 'stresses that investment in defense benefits the wider economy and people's lives,' according to a Defense Ministry presentation document," reported Reuters on August 4. "That message aligns with Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi's broader use of strategic state spending in an effort to drive economic growth," Reuters commented. Previously, The Asahi Shimbun warned in an opinion piece that this entanglement of defense buildup with economic policy will, over time, slide into "military Keynesianism."
"Military Keynesianism" refers to the use of military spending as a tool to stimulate overall economic development. Since the Takaichi administration took office, Japan has been expanding its domestic defense market through year-on-year increases in the defense budget, while at the same time opening up international sales channels for defense production by relaxing export controls - thereby systematically pursuing a military Keynesian path.
In fiscal 2026, Japan's defense budget for the first time exceeded 9 trillion yen ($56.5 billion). Its defense-related spending has already reached 2 percent of GDP, according to The Japan Times. This not only means Japan's defense budget has risen for 14 consecutive years, but also indicates that the government is using fiscal stimulus to artificially create a large and relatively stable "arms market." The resulting closed-loop logic is clear: the government increases defense spending to expand procurement; defense companies receive orders and scale up production; and, through industrial-chain spillovers, related industries also expand output.
As Japan's new Defense White Paper says, higher defense expenditures will not only significantly increase orders in the defense industry, but also reinforce the defense production base through measures such as introducing mechanisms to assess corporate efforts and calculate appropriate profits for companies. These measures, the paper claims, are expected to generate economic ripple effects, "as well as technological ripple effects into the civilian sector."
What is even more alarming is that Japan is systematically removing the institutional barriers to the growth of its defense industry.
One long-standing challenge in postwar Japan has been the limited size of its domestic defense market and restrictions on arms exports, which have kept defense firms' profits relatively low and prompted some major companies to withdraw from parts of the military supply business, observers pointed out.
In 2022, however, Japan elevated the defense industry to a national strategic priority in its three key security documents, National Security Strategy, National Defense Strategy and Defense Buildup Program. In 2023, it enacted the Act on Enhancing Defense Production and Technology Bases, allowing the government to sustain and reinforce defense manufacturing through subsidies, capital investment and other measures. And in April this year, the Takaichi administration formally lifted the ban on exports of lethal weapons, fully opening the door for Japan's defense industry to enter global markets.
Together, these moves show that Japan is no longer content with relying on its Self-Defense Forces' limited procurement needs. It seeks to turn itself into a global arms supplier. This will inevitably intensify the regional arms race and seriously destabilize the security landscape in East Asia, warned some experts reached by the Global Times.
Of particular concern is that the focus of Japan's military Keynesianism has shifted from traditional weapons such as guns and artillery, to high-tech fields including artificial intelligence (AI) and drones, with an explicit emphasis on civil-military integration. Japan's new Defense White Paper places special emphasis on AI and unmanned systems, which are expected to become central issues in the year-end revision of its three key security documents.
Widespread criticism and concern
Japan's bid to jolt economic growth through higher military spending amounts to little more than a wishful gamble that "guns for butter" can be turned on its head. But when the fiscal question of "where will the money come from?" collides with public anxiety over "where is people's livelihood headed?", voices from international media outlets to Japanese scholars, lawmakers and ordinary citizens alike, are warning that the narrative of arms-led prosperity is not only unlikely to work, but could also drag Japan's economy into dangerous territory, observers noted.
Japan's fiscal expenditure faces "competing demands on the public purse," "but Takaichi has yet to explain clearly how she would pay for a further expansion without adding pressure on Japan's already stretched public finances," Reuters said on August 4.
In a Japanese-language editorial piece on August 8, The Asahi Shimbun pushed the debate further toward livelihoods, saying that military expansion would place a direct strain on the daily lives of Japanese people. The piece also cited a United Nations study saying that reallocating the same resources to education and healthcare rather than the military could generate more jobs. The International Monetary Fund has also warned that rising defense spending may, in the medium term, increase economic vulnerabilities, including through wider fiscal deficits, it said.
Strong criticism also echoes across Japan's political arena. House of Representatives member Joji Yamamoto accused the Takaichi administration of doubling defense spending and lifting bans on weapons exports, while shifting healthcare costs onto patients and eroding elderly care systems. If left unchecked, Japan will gradually turn into a nation sustained by the arms trade, seriously violating people's right to subsistence guaranteed by law, Yamamoto told the Global Times.
A risky gamble
Military Keynesianism is not only unlikely to sustain long-term economic growth in Japan, but also carries hidden security risks. Koji Sonoda, deputy editor at The Asahi Shimbun's Political News Section, recently cautioned that if defense budget expansion, initially justified by a deteriorating security environment, comes instead to serve the goal of economic growth through industrial promotion, the risk grows that spending will lose any effective restraint.
History has already proven this point. The global economic depression of 1929 triggered the Showa Depression in Japan, pushing the country's economy to the brink of collapse. At the time, rather than pursuing structural reforms, Japan's political and military leadership shifted the national economy onto a wartime footing, using military spending to boost demand and mask unemployment.
Meng Mingming, assistant researcher at the Institute of Japanese Studies of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times that in 1932, Korekiyo Takahashi, Japan's then Finance Minister, rolled out stimulus policies including yen depreciation and expanded fiscal outlays. Massive military spending paired with public works projects lifted domestic demand and enabled Japan to recover from the recession earlier than many nations. Takahashi became known as "Japan's Keynes."
However, the prosperity driven by fiscal deficits and military-industrial expansion was ultimately a shortsighted fix. Meng pointed out that, first, while wartime demand boosted Japan's heavy chemical and weapons manufacturing sectors to some extent, most military output was removed from the social reproduction cycle and constituted sheer waste. Second, heavy chemical industries relied heavily on resources such as oil, which Japan lacked domestically. This created a vicious cycle: military demand expanded heavy industrial capacity; that expansion increased Japan's dependence on overseas resources and markets; rising resource needs drove further military expansion to secure supply chains; and that expansion in turn required even more defense spending, further militarizing the economy. Finally, a coalition of interest formed among heavy industrial capitalists, emerging zaibatsu and the military. Military adventurism was no longer driven solely by the armed forces, but was backed by industrial and financial power.
Currently, many Japanese citizens have recognized the dangers of the Takaichi administration's policies and taken to the streets to protest.
Kazuo Adachi, a sexagenarian, told the Global Times in Japan that behind the administration's claim that the defense industry fuels growth lies the profit motive of the military-industrial complex. From policy deregulation launched under the Abe administration to accelerated implementation under the Takaichi administration, the path of military expansion catering to arms capital is akin to poison, fraught with alarming risks.
Marin Toyosu, a member of Japan's Generation Z, said the Takaichi administration's aggressive push for war preparedness essentially hides a self-serving agenda under the slogan of a "virtuous cycle between security and the economy." It abandons vulnerable groups to benefit a small circle of arms capitalists and represents an administration bent on stoking conflict.
"This military expansion agenda harms Japanese citizens and endangers people across the world," she noted.
Tatara Satoshi, an anti-war activist, pointed out that the Takaichi administration hypes up the "China threat" to justify military buildup while pushing the flawed argument that the defense industry can boost the economy.
This does not reflect the genuine aspirations of Japanese society or ordinary citizens. "Japanese people do not want war with China. They should unite to firmly oppose efforts to advance military expansion by stoking tensions and overstating supposed economic benefits," he said.
Global Times
。中国资源循环利用产业，正完成一场从“收破烂”到“炼资源”的深刻跃迁。 这场跃迁由三重倒逼驱动：资源安全之困——铁矿石对外依存度超80%，而社会废钢正进入快速释放期，废旧资源就是自主可控的“城市矿山”；绿色壁垒之压——欧盟碳关税正式落地，中欧碳价差距超7倍，谁先建立规范的再生体系，谁就能在全球贸易中掌握主动权；产业升级之需——正向制造需要逆向再生，单靠开采原生资源难以为继，构建“制造+再生”双轨并行的工业闭环，是必答题，不是选择题。 废旧工业资源，一头牵着减碳，一头连着产业。“闪电评论”专栏推出“循环经济中国说”系列评论，从产业逻辑、政策破局、国际博弈三个维度，解读这场“变废为宝”的中国实践。一头连“废”，一头牵“绿” 1吨废钢炼钢，可节约1.6吨铁精矿、减排1.6吨碳；生产1吨再生铝替代原生铝，可节约3.4吨标准煤、减排13吨碳。这组数据背后，是一个正在加速崛起的万亿级产业。 2025年，我国11个主要品种再生资源回收总量达4.17亿吨，回收总额1.39万亿元。资源循环利用产业产值达到5万亿元，年均增速保持在10%左右。 废弃的钢铁、铝材、塑料、轮胎，正从“工业垃圾”变身为支撑制造业运转的“城市矿产”。 掘地三尺 挖富矿 在天津，全国首个轨道交通全链条资源循环利用体系已经落地。一辆服役二十余年的退役地铁列车进行标准化拆解，钢材、铝合金综合回收率超过98%，再生铜提纯纯度达到99%；在内蒙古，退役风电叶片经过处理变成高强度复合材料板材，单条生产线年消纳退役叶片可达万吨；在江苏徐州，国家级工程机械再制造基地对废旧挖掘机、装载机的核心部件进行精密修复和性能升级，生产成本降低50%以上。 这些场景不再是实验室里的“盆景”，而是正在铺开的产业图景。 放眼全国，废钢铁已成为回收量最大的品种，占再生资源回收总量六成以上。再生有色金属产量突破2000万吨，为工业生产提供了稳定的资源保障。从再生不锈钢到再生铜、再生塑料，一条条“回收—拆解—粗加工—精深加工—终端产品”的循环经济产业链正在成形。
三 | 有人说，垃圾是放错地方的资源。这话没错，但说得轻了。在资源约束日益收紧、矿产开采成本持续攀升的今天，这些“放错地方的资源”正在成为制造业不可或缺的“第二矿藏”。 逐绿出海 越碳关 如果说过去发展再生资源产业还带着几分“道德自觉”的色彩，那么今天，它已经是一场不得不打的硬仗。 2026年1月1日，欧盟碳边境调节机制正式结束两年过渡期，进入实质性征收阶段。
四 | 2026年4月，欧盟公布了首个CBAM证书价格，第一季度为75.36欧元/吨，第二季度调整为75.28欧元/吨。而中国全国碳市场碳价仅约80元人民币/吨——中欧碳价差距高达7倍以上。 更值得警惕的是，欧盟已提出将管控范围从基础材料扩展至紧固件、线材、弹簧等下游成品。2026年7月9日，欧洲议会环境委员会投票通过扩容方案。就在同一周，另一项更直接的重磅政策已经落地——钢铁进口免税配额被砍掉47%，超额关税从25%翻倍至50%。 这意味着过去靠“只是加工环节、不属于基础材料”就能豁免的企业，很快将直接被纳入管控。机械设备、汽车零部件、家用电器……这些中国制造业的出口主力，都将面临碳成本的直接冲击。
五 | 碳关税不只是一道边境税费。它通过改变产品的成本结构，重塑企业的选址逻辑和全球产业布局。
六 | 谁先建立规范的再生资源体系、规模化使用再生原料，谁就能有效压低产品碳足迹，在国际规则博弈中抢占主动。这不是选择题，是生存题。 乘势而上 闯新路 国家层面，《固体废物综合治理行动计划》明确，到2030年大宗固废年综合利用量达到45亿吨，主要再生资源年循环利用量达到5.1亿吨。
七 | 工信部印发《工业绿色低碳发展“十五五”规划》，将健全工业资源循环利用体系作为重点任务。国家发展和改革委印发的《循环经济发展“十五五”规划》，部署了传统再生资源、稀贵金属、“新三样”固体废物等回收利用重点举措。七部门联合印发《再生材料应用推广行动方案》，提出到2030年废钢铁年回收利用量超过3亿吨、再生有色金属年产量超过2500万吨。
八 | 地方层面的探索同样可圈可点。2026年8月5日，山东由八部门联合发布《工业再生资源循环利用规范化管理办法(试行)》，搭建省级智慧监测平台，推动“五流合一”数字化监管。每一批次工业再生资源都将实现全流程留痕、来源可查、去向可追。配套政策同步发力——金融产品创新赋能企业，产业链上下游协同联动，专精特新、单项冠军企业持续孵化。 技术层面同样在突破。在广西，一家名为梧州弘毅新材的企业引入人工智能大模型，每生产一吨不锈钢节约13度电和1.5%的原材料消耗，良品率从98.6%提升到99.2%。 链动未来 铸根基 回望全球工业化历程，其核心是一条单向流通的产业链：从开采天然原始资源，到原材料加工、零配件生产、成品装配，最终流向消费。这条单向模式走到今天，矿产成本起伏不定，资源供给受地缘冲突冲击的短板愈发突出。 回收、拆解、资源再生，正在成为产业长期可持续发展的关键一环。 打通正向制造与逆向再生两条脉络，构建完整的工业循环体系，这是制造业转型升级的必由之路。坐拥全球最完整工业体系的中国，完全有条件、有能力在这条路上走在前列。 万物循环，生生不息。把海量废弃资源变“废”为“宝”，不仅是推进“双碳”目标的内在要求，更是中国制造在全球绿色贸易壁垒中站稳脚跟、重塑竞争力的战略底气。
九 | 这口“富矿”，值得深挖，也必须深挖。一边算“碳”，一边算“账” 在山东日照，众鑫环保的废旧钢铁破碎生产线正在高速运转。与传统生产线不同，这里加装了一套智能称重系统，根据传送带上的重量和速度实时判断产品质量。
十 | 从原料进入破碎机开始，系统就能精确控制合格率、成品率和除杂率。 废钢，这个曾经靠着“眼看手摸”论斤卖的“废品”，如今正被一条条智能生产线重新定义。 2026年7月，工信部《工业绿色低碳发展“十五五”规划》正式发布，废钢铁循环利用被纳入三大国家核心战略。规划明确提出，到2030年废钢铁年回收利用量达到3亿吨。同月，国家发展和改革委《循环经济发展“十五五”规划》进一步提出，到2030年资源循环利用产业产值达到8万亿元。 废钢，第一次站在了国家战略的聚光灯下。
十一 | 一场迟到的正名 我国铁矿石对外依存度长期超过80%。
十二 | 这意味着，每炼十吨钢，就有八吨的铁矿石来自海外——澳大利亚、巴西的矿山，隔着大洋，捏着中国钢铁的命脉。 而另一边，我国钢铁蓄积量已突破120亿吨，社会废钢资源正进入快速释放期。2025年全国回收利用废钢铁约2.5亿吨，保障了20%以上的粗钢生产。废钢铁占再生资源回收总量的60.8%，是名副其实的“城市矿产”第一大品种。 一个尴尬的现实是：一边是每年砸下近万亿进口铁矿石，一边是上亿吨废钢在回收体系里打转。废钢不是没有，而是没有被真正当作“资源”来对待。 “十五五”规划的意义，正在于此——它给废钢正了名。废钢不再仅仅是回收站里论斤称的“破烂”，而是保障资源安全的战略性铁素资源。在逆全球化抬头、关键矿产供应链频受冲击的背景下，大力发展废钢循环利用，本质上是在系统开发“城市矿山”，构建自主可控的资源供给战略备份。
十三 | 一本减碳的绿账 废钢的价值，不只在于“替代进口”，更在于“减少排放”。
十四 | 每利用1吨废钢，可节约1.7吨铁矿石、350公斤标准煤，减少1.6吨二氧化碳排放。电炉短流程炼钢以废钢为主要原料，生产一吨钢的二氧化碳排放量仅0.4吨，而传统长流程高达2吨。据测算，“十四五”时期循环经济对我国碳减排的综合贡献率达30%，预计2030年将进一步提升至35%。 这不仅是数字，更是正在发生的产业变革。
十五 | 今年6月，湖南崇中环保科技有限公司在湘潭高新区正式投产，年回收加工配送60万吨废钢铁。项目引入红外光谱分拣、液压剪切破碎等先进工艺，构建起完整的“回收—分拣—加工—配送”产业体系。
十六 | 在山东，全省年产生废钢铁约1700万吨，当地正通过强化行业管理、打通回收堵点，最大限度推动废钢变废为宝。 在河北唐山，燕赵钢铁实验室的研究人员正在用另一种方式回答“绿色钢铁”的命题。他们通过力学冶金技术，把钢中的“缺陷”变成提升性能的帮手，让原本需要添加30%以上合金元素的高性能钢，合金用量压到了5%左右。实验室还有40多项绿色化、智能化成果在河钢、首钢等企业落地应用。 从湖南的加工配送中心到河北的实验室，废钢循环利用正在从“收破烂”走向“高科技”。
十七 | 一本绕不开的硬账 规划很清晰，目标很明确——到2030年废钢铁年回收利用量超过3亿吨。
十八 | 2025年是2.5亿吨，未来5年要净增5000万吨以上。 但账要算清楚，路要一步步走。 废钢行业长期受困于“散、乱、污”。
十九 | 回收、加工、利用各环节相互割裂，线下撮合、信息闭塞，资源匹配效率偏低。“五流”——合同流、货物流、发票流、资金流、信息流难以统一，滋生虚假交易、虚开发票等乱象。合规经营的主体反而承压，规模化、标准化发展步履维艰。 另一个挑战是电炉钢比例偏低。目前我国电炉钢占比仅10%左右，而全球平均水平约30%。提升电炉钢比例，需要废钢资源稳定供给、电力成本可控、技术装备成熟等多重条件支撑。 这些痛点，规划并非视而不见。《工业绿色低碳发展“十五五”规划》明确提出，在钢铁企业集中地区引导钢铁企业与废钢企业深度合作，推动废钢铁回收、拆解、加工、配送一体化发展；推动废钢、绿电资源向电炉短流程炼钢企业倾斜。山东等地已经开始探索用数字化手段破解“五流脱节”难题，搭建省级工业再生资源回收加工智慧监测平台。 一盘更大的棋局 废钢行业正从“量的增长”转向“质的提升”。“十五五”期间，行业将继续朝着产业化、产品化、区域化、规模化方向发展。
| 这不仅是环保命题，更是经济命题。2025年我国资源循环利用产业产值已达5万亿元，2030年要增至8万亿元，年均增长约10%。一个以两位数增速扩张的战略性产业，蕴藏着巨大的市场机遇和就业空间。 更深远的意义在于国际竞争。今年1月，欧盟碳边境调节机制正式落地，钢铁、铝等大宗商品率先纳入管控。谁能够更早建立规范的再生资源体系、规模化使用再生原料，谁就能有效压低产品碳足迹，在国际规则博弈中抢占主动。 废钢循环利用，一头连着资源安全，一头连着“双碳”目标，中间还牵动着万亿级产业赛道。“十五五”的大幕已经拉开，接下来要看的是：政策如何落地，市场如何响应，技术如何突破，行业如何从“收废品”真正走向“炼资源”。 一边算“碳”，一边算“账”——这笔账，关乎中国钢铁的未来，也关乎中国制造的竞争力。一端强“链”，一端固“基” 在山东烟台一处海域，一座特殊的新型人工鱼礁被缓缓吊入海底。主体并非传统混凝土，而是由退役风机叶片材料制作而成。
| 利用叶片材质抗腐蚀、不变形、强度高的特性，这些曾经矗立在戈壁或海上的庞然大物，在海底找到了新的归宿。 从“迎风发电”到“入海为礁”——这一幕，正是中国“新三样”固废回收探索的一个缩影。 过去二十余年，我国新能源产业一路高歌猛进。如今，昔日的绿色能源“功臣”：动力电池、光伏组件、风机叶片正迎来规模化退役期。 据预测，到2030年，累计将有超过3万台机组达到退役年限，废旧动力电池回收处置正迎来百万吨级规模，“新三样”固废的回收利用已上升为循环经济“十五五”规划的重点部署领域。
| 废料堆里藏金山 一块标准的光伏组件，富含银、铝、硅、铜等资源；一块退役的动力电池，更是蕴含锂、钴、镍等关键金属的“城市矿山”。1吨动力电池回收后，可以提取200公斤至300公斤锂、镍、钴等金属资源。
| 若从原矿中开采，可能需要20吨至30吨。 一组对比数据，道出了“物尽其用”的价值。 当前，“新三样”固废回收利用已上升为循环经济“十五五”规划的重点部署领域。据测算，到2030年资源循环利用产业产值将达到8万亿元，再生资源年回收利用量达5.1亿吨。把固废“包袱”变成产业增量，既是生态命题，更是关乎资源安全和绿色经济增长的战略课题。
| 建章立制强根基 制度的完善，正在为这个新兴领域铺路。 今年3月正式施行的生态环境法典，设立“循环经济”专章，将生产者责任延伸制度从“软约束”升级为“硬指标”。国家发展和改革委印发的《循环经济发展“十五五”规划》，首次将“新三样”固废回收独立成篇，明确发电企业须将退役风电、光伏设备回收处置费用纳入成本核算。困扰行业多年的成本分担问题，有了制度性安排。 商务部随后召开专题座谈会，提出建立“1+N”工作体系，统一制度框架与分类施策相结合。国家发展和改革委也明确表态，将抓紧制定风电、光伏设备回收利用管理办法，到2030年建立健全全链条闭环管理体系。 系列政策密集出台，释放出一个清晰信号：新能源产业的竞争，已从产能和出口延伸到全生命周期的治理能力。“新三样”固废的回收利用，正从“善后工作”变成“产业必修课”。 规范发展正本源 行业要健康发展，规范是前提。 今年7月，工信部公告将100家已公告的动力电池“梯次利用”企业移出名单。这一调整引发了行业广泛关注。所谓“梯次利用”，原意是将退役电池用于储能、基站备用电源等场景，最大化挖掘剩余价值。但实践中也出现了一些问题——部分企业打着“梯次利用”旗号，将废旧电池简单拆解重组后流入电动自行车市场，带来安全隐患。
| 同时，“梯次利用”企业在回收环节出价更高，导致大量退役电池流入该渠道，正规的再生利用企业反而“吃不饱”。 叫停“梯次利用”资质，并非否定梯次利用本身的价值，而是让所有利用方式回归同一套标准——废旧动力电池再生产品，必须和新品一样满足质量与安全要求。这是对市场秩序的规范，也是对正规企业的保护。 从长远看，这一调整有利于破除“劣币驱逐良币”的困境，让合规经营的企业更有信心投入技术创新和产能建设。
| 一线探索开新路 制度的生命力在于执行，而一线企业的探索同样可圈可点。 在天津，中国资源循环集团的绿色低碳循环经济示范基地，退役风机叶片融入景观，公共活动空间铺着再生纤维草皮；退役光伏组件变身为彩色发电建材，发电效率达到标准光伏板的90%左右。今年4月上线的“新源循环网”，为退役风电、光伏设备提供在线撮合交易，一个多月累计成交额达3.8亿元。 在山东，中车风电打造了国内首套“智能移动工厂”，一个与标准集装箱大小相似的移动产线，可以远程控制，直接进驻风场或叶片贮存地，有效解决了退役叶片运输难、成本高的痛点。枣庄滕州欣旺达废旧锂电池回收利用项目近日全面投产，1.1公里自动化生产线综合回收率达98.5%，提炼的金属重新进入供应链，实现了从废旧电池到正极材料的闭环。 强链固基向未来 当然，挑战依然存在。
| 残值评估难、运输距离远、部分领域标准缺失，都是需要逐步破解的现实问题。
| 电站企业、制造企业、回收企业三方如何高效协作，产业链各环节如何形成合力，也还在探索之中。 但方向已经清晰。一端强“链”——把回收利用嵌入新能源产业链的每个环节，从产品绿色设计、规范回收到再生材料应用，形成全链条闭环。一端固“基”——把制度底座夯实，让生产者责任延伸、成本内化、溯源管理等硬约束落地生根。 这场从“城市固废”到“产业矿山”的转变，考验的不仅是技术和政策，更是一种资源观、发展观和生态观的深刻变革。机遇稍纵即逝，看准了就抓紧干。“新三样”固废回收，正在打开一个万亿级的超级市场。把“退役潮”变成“新赛道”，既是时代的考卷，也是产业的机遇。 策划：刘科春 文字：陈一钊 来源：闪电新闻。
Current article:http://cyvfh.xuebenwagangqingre.buzz/2gjgdh/20260826/4219.html
Published on:02:14:14