However, while materials such as waste wood or construction and demolition waste can be easily sorted by type at the end of their product life cycle and subsequently recycled, CFRP and GFRP present the recycling industry with a real “disposal dilemma”, the so-called end-of-life problem.

This is because the very properties that make fiber-reinforced plastics such versatile materials are also the reason why these robust fiber composites are comparatively difficult to dispose of.

GFRP and CFRP: What are fiber-reinforced plastics?

As the name implies, fiber-reinforced composites are composite materials in which two different components, which, on their own, would be unsuitable for many applications are combined: A plastic matrix holds the material together, while additional glass or carbon fibers enable an even distribution of tensile forces – thus ensuring maximum stability.

GFRP (glass-fiber-reinforced plastic) and CFRP (carbon-fiber-reinforced plastic) are the two dominant representatives within this material class. Both materials differ in terms of their properties and areas of application, but are equally affected by the disposal dilemma.

The type of plastic used is the primary factor determining the material’s recyclability. In practice, the use of duromers with irreversible, three-dimensional cross-linking is widespread: Since the fibers and matrix are chemically bonded in a way that cannot be undone, a structure is created that cannot be easily separated the core of the subsequent disposal problem. Although thermoplastic matrices would be significantly more recyclable, they have so far been used only rarely.

Would you like some advice? ARJES offers state-of-the-art shredding solutions for the processing of of CFRP/GRP waste. We can advise you on suitable machine designs and bespoke solutions.

CONTACT US

Glass fiber vs. carbon fiber: structure, properties, and differences between GFRP and CFRP

GFRP and CFRP follow the same construction principle: glass or carbon fibers are embedded in a plastic matrix, usually epoxy or polyester resin. The orientation of the fibers in the laminate known as the fiber architecture determines the direction in which the component can ultimately withstand stress. Strength is present only along the direction of the load, not in all directions.

Apart from that, the two fiber-reinforced composites differ primarily in terms of weight, stiffness, and electrical conductivity:

• GFRP
  offers high impact and fracture resistance, as well as excellent weather and corrosion resistance. This makes the material ideal for large-area components exposed to the elements. Since glass fibers are electrically insulating, GFRP is also used wherever electrical conductivity is undesirable or even harmful- such as in the manufacture of printed circuit boards.
• CFRP
  is about five times lighter than steel and about 40% lighter than aluminum, while offering the same or higher strength. The high modulus of elasticity – a measure of stiffness against deformation – makes carbon-fiber-reinforced plastics the material of choice for structures that must bend very little or not at all, even under load.

But whether it’s GFRP or CFRP, fiber-reinforced plastics share a common weakness: Since the fibers and the matrix have fundamentally different material characteristics, the composite is inhomogeneous. This uneven structure complicates not only machining but also the recycling of fiber composites at the end of their life cycle. Added to this is the high abrasiveness of both materials, which further drives up tool wear and machining costs.

Fiber-Reinforced composites in practice: Production volumes and applications

GFRP and CFRP are definitely not niche materials. Rather, these innovative fiber-reinforced composites are shaping entire industries and have become indispensable in numerous sectors. Currently, GFRP dominates the market for fiber-reinforced composites in terms of volume, with steadily growing demand. The biggest driver of growth is increasing investment in renewable energy, particularly wind power.

According to the GFRP Market Report (2020), glass-fiber-reinforced plastics are used in Europe in the following sectors:

• Transportation: 36%
• Construction and infrastructure: 35%
• Electrical and electronics: 14%

Polyester resin accounts for the majority of GFRP processing, with a market share of 62%. And for good reason. The material is inexpensive, versatile, and has long been the established standard for mass-produced goods. For example, rotor blades, boat hulls, piping, and facade elements are often made from GFRP.

Although the share of carbon fiber-reinforced plastic (CFRP) is smaller, the material is nonetheless highly relevant from an economic perspective. According to the German Federal Environment Agency, approximately 128,000 metric tons of CFRP were processed worldwide in 2017 of which 36% was used in the aviation industry, 24% in automotive manufacturing, and 13% in wind energy.

GFRP or CFRP – What are the advantages and disadvantages of each material?

GFRP is less expensive to manufacture and makes economic sense wherever large-area, weather-resistant components are needed but weight plays a relatively minor role.

CFRP is significantly more expensive than GFRP and is therefore generally used only where the specific application justifies the higher costs. This is always the case where every kilogram of additional weight directly affects operating costs and performance, for example in motorsports or aviation. At the same time, the material’s electrical conductivity effectively protects aircraft from lightning strikes. Furthermore, CFRP exhibits minimal fatigue and retains its high residual strength even after long-term stress.

A real challenge: Disposal and recycling of Fiber-Reinforced composites

Both GFRP and CFRP excel in terms of stability and durability: Both materials are corrosion-resistant- meaning they do not rust- and can easily withstand moisture.

However, what is an advantage during use becomes a problem at the end of the product life cycle: The commonly used thermoset matrix cannot be melted down. This rules out conventional plastic recycling, necessitating more complex alternative processes to ensure the material is disposed of properly.

Two sides of the same coin: The environmental impact of GFRP and CFRP

Even the production of glass or carbon fibers involves high energy costs. For example, the production of carbon fibers requires up to 286 MJ per kilogram. By comparison, steel requires around 20 to 30 MJ/kg.

During operation, the advantages of lightweight construction usually offset these impacts, for example through fuel savings in aviation. At the end of its life, however, the balance shifts once again:

• Incineration
  Carbon fibers withstand the heat largely unchanged and end up in the ash – without being recovered and without adding any value.
• Landfilling
  GFRP and CFRP are not biodegradable. The fibers persist indefinitely in the soil. Furthermore, landfilling of fiber-reinforced composites is prohibited by law within the EU.
• Fiber Release
  If the material is incinerated or otherwise processed, respirable particles may be released.
• Lack of Repair Options
  Repairing either material is also virtually impossible. In the event of structural damage, the only option is usually complete replacement, which in turn increases the amount of waste generated.

Companies that put fiber-reinforced plastics into circulation must ultimately bear the resulting disposal costs. Unlike with scrap metal, there is usually no revenue generated from this.

This lack of economic incentive hinders the development of structured recycling solutions. Nevertheless, the Federal Environment Agency reaches a clear conclusion: Recycling is more environmentally sound than all alternatives and should be specifically promoted. However, many recycling methods quickly reach their limits when it comes to GFRP and CFRP.

The downcycling cascade: Recycling processes and their limitations

The core problem of all recycling processes is the same: the duromer matrix and the reinforcing fibers are inextricably bonded together. The challenge is to break up this composite. This almost always compromises material qualit- resulting in a cascade where GFRP and CFRP lose further value with each recycling step: Originally high-performance components are turned into fillers in cement or asphalt and ultimately end up in landfills.

The three established methods mechanical recycling, pyrolysis, and solvolysis do not solve this fundamental dilemma. The gentler the process, the more expensive it is. The cheaper the process, the lower the quality of the result. Since processing costs often exceed the value of the recycled materials, they frequently cannot compete with virgin materials in terms of price. This is particularly evident with glass fibers: virgin material can be produced so cheaply that recycled materials are hardly competitive. With carbon fibers, although the demand for recycled materials is greater, the quality usually falls short of that of virgin material. Their use therefore remains limited to less demanding applications.

(Un)clarified responsibilities: Lack of infrastructure, landfill bans, and EPR

The disposal problem does not begin at the recycling plant, but rather during the dismantling of components at the end of their service life. Components made of fiber-reinforced composites are often large, heavy, and difficult to disassemble for transport. There are currently no uniform dismantling standards, nor is there a specialized waste code for GFRP and CFRP in Germany’s Waste Catalog Regulation. Furthermore, the handling of CFRP and GFRP waste is regulated differently from region to region. To date, there is no nationwide waste disposal infrastructure in Germany specifically designed for fiber-reinforced composite waste.

Furthermore, it is not legally clear who ultimately bears responsibility. While the principle of extended producer responsibility (EPR) holds manufacturers and distributors accountable, it does not apply to fiber-reinforced composites to the same extent as it does to other materials such as packaging, electrical appliances, or scrap tires. As long as this gap remains, the industry lacks the regulatory pressure to invest in structured recycling solutions.

A look into the future: Ways out of the “End-of-life” dilemma

As long as regulatory gaps persist and recycled materials cannot compete with virgin materials in terms of price, the industry lacks the structural incentive to change. Yet the pressure to act is growing: rising waste volumes, a lack of infrastructure, and a legal framework that remains unresolved are increasingly forcing the industry to rethink its approach. Solutions are already being developed in terms of both technology and materials.

At the same time, companies and waste management firms are trying to address the issue at the end of the product life cycle: In order for GFRP and CFRP waste to be disposed of properly at all, bulky composite components in particular must first be shredded.

This is exactly where we at ARJES come in: Our modern two-shaft shredders break down the material in a controlled manner, transforming the end-of-life fiber composites into a manageable form that can be safely transported, temporarily stored, and subsequently processed accordingly.

Disposal begins in the lab: New matrix systems and fiber types

There are many ideas and potential solutions for simplifying the disposal of fiber-reinforced composites such as CFRP and GFRP in the long term.

Modern recycling approaches, such as the thermal plasma process which has been tested since 2025 as part of the Plas4Plas pilot project aim to make recycling processes more efficient and sustainable in the future. However, it is not yet possible to conclusively assess whether and to what extent novel technologies will simplify the disposal and recycling of GFRP and CFRP.

Other approaches attempt to address the root of the problem. And in the case of GFRP and CFRP, this lies in the nature of the material itself. In other words: As long as duromers dominate the market, recycling remains structurally difficult because these resins cannot be melted down or cleanly separated once they have cured.

Thermoplastic matrices are meltable and thus significantly easier to recycle. GFRP waste can be combined with a thermoplastic matrix to form a completely new material and thus returned to a closed-loop system without requiring new raw materials. This approach is remarkable in that it does not rely on improved disposal of existing materials, but rather views the waste material itself as a resource, thereby requiring a fundamentally different understanding of recycling.

The Swiss company iwas-concepts AG and the FHNW have already tested this concept. This “proof of concept” demonstrates that a circular GFRP solution is indeed feasible under real-world conditions.

Other approaches are still under development:

• Vitrimers
  These novel plastics can be thermoformed without melting, thereby combining the structural strength of a duromer with the recyclability of a thermoplastic.
• Bio-based resins
  Resins made from renewable raw materials significantly reduce the consumption of fossil resources. However, they do not solve the end-of-life separation problem, because whether a resin is bio-based or not says nothing about how easily it can later be separated from the fiber.
• Natural-fiber-reinforced plastics
  Materials such as flax or hemp are biodegradable and are therefore generally easier to handle at the end of their life cycle than conventional fiber composites. For high-load applications, however, they lack the mechanical strength that characterizes carbon-fiber-reinforced plastics (CFRP) or glass-fiber-reinforced plastics (GFRP), which is why they have not yet been considered as replacements in load-bearing structures.

All of these approaches are based on a common guiding principle that is increasingly being discussed in professional circles as “design for recycling”: The choice of matrix and fiber type must be geared toward the component’s end-of-life already during the design phase, not only after it has reached the end of its service life.

Efficiently shredding GFRP and CFRP – Successfully recycling fiber-reinforced composites

New matrix systems and recycling-friendly design are promising approaches, but they can only be fully effective once they are industrially scalable. Until then, existing technologies must handle the volumes of fiber-reinforced composites that are generated. A prerequisite for the successful recycling of GFRP and CFRP waste remains that the material must first be mechanically broken down and reduced to a defined particle size. Shredding thus serves as the link between demolition logistics and all downstream recycling processes.

With fiber-reinforced composites, this process is significantly more challenging than with other materials, as their high abrasiveness quickly wears down tools and pushes standard machines to their limits. Against this backdrop, many suppliers currently do not offer a suitable solution for the pre-shredding of fiber-reinforced composites.

As a company specializing in the development of high-performance recycling machines, we at ARJES manufacture high-quality two-shaft shredders that meet all requirements for the proper disposal of fiber-reinforced composites. At the same time, we are working more closely with waste management companies to further develop the processing of fiber-reinforced composite waste in a way that is economically viable.

Our machines are specifically designed for heavy-duty applications and abrasive materials and provide the necessary power and robustness to reliably shred GFRP and CFRP.

The degree of shredding determines which recycling route ultimately makes economic sense:

• Thermal recycling (cement industry)
  Coarse particles are sufficient – GFRP serves as a substitute fuel and replaces fossil fuels.
• Material recycling
  The longer the fibers remain intact, the higher the quality of the recycled material and the broader the range of applications in the secondary market.
• Pyrolysis and solvolysis
  Both processes require a defined, homogeneous particle size. A finer degree of shredding means higher energy consumption, but also higher-quality recycled material.

If you have any questions, we are always available as qualified experts to provide advice. Contact us today. Together, we’ll find the right product for your specific application.

CONTACT US

In this context, volume reduction is far more than a purely mechanical step. It can reduce transport burdens, make interim storage more manageable, and supply sorting facilities with a more consistent material flow. Material streams prepared early on not only lower residual waste costs but also improve the recovery of recyclables.

Why landfill costs often arise before the waste even reaches the landfill

Landfill costs do not arise only when residual waste is transported away or stored. They are often incurred much earlier—namely, when material streams enter the process that are too bulky, too heterogeneous, or too difficult to dose properly. This increases transshipment costs, storage pressure, transport volume, and the proportion of those fractions that can only be recycled with additional effort—or not at all.

For municipalities and waste management companies, this means: High residual waste costs are often a symptom of a material flow that was not sufficiently prepared beforehand. If material is better standardized and volume-reduced before sorting, downstream process steps can be organized more efficiently. This is evident, for example, in overfilled intermediate storage facilities, additional transshipment operations, or poorly controlled sorting lines. Typical scenarios from commercial waste recycling illustrate precisely this connection between material mix, processing, and cost-effective process management.

Would you like some advice? ARJES offers state-of-the-art shredding solutions for the processing of commercial waste. We can advise you on suitable machine designs and bespoke solutions.
CONTACT US

How volume reduction makes the material flow more economical

Volume reduction changes not only the size of the material but the entire processability of a material flow. Bulky fractions can often be conveyed in a more controlled manner after pretreatment, stored more effectively in intermediate storage, and transferred to subsequent units in a more defined way. This can be particularly helpful where varying materials, limited space, or high logistical pressure converge.

For small to medium quantities, shredders are often sufficient to standardize material streams early on, thereby reducing the load on subsequent process steps. The appropriate solution depends primarily on the material stream, volume, and on-site conditions.

Why pre-processed materials significantly reduce the load on sorting plants

Sorting plants operate more reliably the better the input material is matched to the separation technology. If fractions are fed in that are too bulky, too tangled, or too heterogeneous, susceptibility to malfunctions, the need for re-sorting, and ejection losses increase. Upstream volume reduction can therefore help make the material flow more uniform and allow for more predictable sorting.

For larger material volumes and robust material streams, shredders can help to stabilize the material flow and make it more uniform even before the actual sorting process begins. The key point remains the same: effective sorting does not begin at the plant itself, but often starts with how the material is prepared beforehand.

Which cost factors influence household and commercial waste processing

Those seeking to reduce landfill costs should not focus solely on fees or residual material prices. Several cost categories, which influence one another, are usually economically relevant. These include, above all:
 

• Transport volume and vehicle utilization
• Interim storage and space requirements
• Disruptions in the material flow
• Additional effort in sorting
• High proportions of residual material with low recyclability

These factors rarely operate in isolation. A bulky material stream can simultaneously take up more space, trigger more transport runs, and impair sorting performance. This is precisely why volume reduction is not a marginal issue, but rather part of a comprehensive economic analysis.

How a more efficient recycling cycle is created step by step

A more economical cycle begins with a simple question: In what condition does the material reach the first relevant processing step? If household or commercial waste is received in a disorganized, bulky, and difficult-to-dose state, the chances of cleanly separating recyclables are limited from the start. If, on the other hand, the material stream is structured early on, volume-reduced, and prepared for the subsequent process, the starting point for everything that follows improves.

The logic can be summarized in five steps: material generation, collection, pre-treatment, sorting, and recovery. It is precisely at the interface between collection and sorting that the greatest economic leverage often arises. Examples from the ARJES News section demonstrate how this can look in practice, where pre-treatment noticeably supports the subsequent material flow.

From a bulky waste stream to a more easily separable fraction

Between bulky raw material and a recoverable fraction, there is usually not a single processing step, but rather a coordinated process chain. Volume reduction is particularly useful when it improves the transition to sorting. This means that the material should not simply be made smaller, but rather prepared in such a way that metals, wood, paper, or other components can be more easily separated or further processed in subsequent steps.

Scrap recycling in particular demonstrates how important volume reduction can be for further separation and recovery. If robust material streams are properly prepared early on, metals can be separated out more effectively in downstream steps and recycled more cleanly.

Which material streams benefit most from volume reduction

Not every material stream reacts the same way to pretreatment. Volume reduction is particularly useful where materials are bulky, tangled, mixed, or difficult to handle due to their density. Typical examples include:
 

• Mixed commercial waste
• Packaging fractions and paper
• Natural and waste wood
• Construction and demolition materials
• Scrap-like or metal-containing mixed fractions

For waste management companies and municipalities, this primarily leads to a key question: Which fraction currently causes particularly high volumes of residual material, high handling costs, or sorting problems? That is usually where the greatest potential for volume reduction and improved recovery lies.

What municipalities and waste management companies should consider when planning processes

Effective process planning does not start with the machine, but with the characteristics of the material stream. The decisive factors are composition, variation range, contaminants, the desired target size, and the downstream separation process. Those who clearly define these points early on can more quickly determine whether pretreatment is necessary and what effect it may have on sorting, logistics, and the residual material content.

It is also helpful to view the process not as a rigid line but as a chain of transfer points. Where are bottlenecks, mis-sorting, reloading, or excessive volume occurring today? Where does sorting quality suffer because the material arrives too unevenly? It is precisely at such points that technical and organizational refinements are worthwhile.

Which errors cause unnecessarily high residual material and landfill costs

Many costs arise not from individual misjudgments, but from a chain of small inconsistencies in the process. Typical errors include:
 

• pre-treatment too late in the material stream
• unclear sorting targets
• lack of coordination between material intake and downstream processes
• too heterogeneous feed to the sorting plant
• insufficient attention to logistics and interim storage

Such errors often result in recyclable fractions ending up in the residual waste or sorting plants operating below their potential. Anyone seeking to reduce landfill costs must identify sources of error in the material stream before they manifest as residual volumes and post-processing.

The role of appropriate technology in waste processing

When household or commercial waste processing is geared toward volume reduction and pre-sorting, technology is needed that fits the material stream and its role in the overall process. For small to medium-sized quantities, more compact shredders may suffice, while more robust material streams and higher volumes require higher-performance solutions.

Whether a mobile or stationary solution is more suitable always depends on the structure of the material stream and the role that pretreatment is intended to play in the overall process. Therefore, what matters is not so much the machine designation as the question of how material flow, sorting, and recovery can be effectively supported by the appropriate processing.

Less residual material, more recovery: what matters in the end

Ultimately, the economic impact of effective processing is evident not only in a smaller volume of material but also in improved material stream quality. When volume reduction helps feed sorting facilities more consistently and better separate recoverable fractions, the residual waste fraction decreases. This is precisely the link between lower landfill costs and a higher recycling rate.

For waste management companies and municipalities, this means: The crucial question is not just how much material is generated, but in what condition it passes through the process. Those who understand volume reduction as part of the recycling logic can consider costs and recovery together, rather than pitting the two goals against each other.

FAQ: Volume reduction and preparation for sorting plants

This FAQ section provides a concise summary of key practical questions.

Why can volume reduction lower landfill costs?

Volume reduction can impact transportation, interim storage, and the amount of residual materials that are difficult to recycle. If material is made process-ready earlier, the proportion of those fractions that are later only landfilled or disposed of at high cost often decreases.

Why can volume reduction lower landfill costs?

Sorting facilities operate more reliably when materials arrive in a more uniform, less bulky, and more easily controllable state. This improves feeding, separation performance, and process stability. Pre-treatment can thus significantly enhance the quality of recovery.

How do sorting facilities benefit from pre-treated material streams?

Mixed or bulky material streams such as commercial waste, packaging, paper, wood, or certain construction and demolition fractions are particularly suitable. The decisive factor is always whether pre-treatment improves sorting and reduces residual waste volumes.

Why does the material feed have such a strong influence on the recycling rate?

The recycling rate depends heavily on how well recyclables can be captured and separated in the process. If the material feed is too uneven or contains too many contaminants, the likelihood of cleanly recovering usable fractions decreases.

What should municipalities and waste management companies focus on first?

The first consideration should be material composition, contaminants, volume, target size, and downstream processes. Those who thoroughly evaluate these points will more quickly identify where volume reduction makes sense and how sorting and recovery can be made more cost-effective.

This article explains how flexibility, throughput, and costs can be compared using a technically sound evaluation approach. The aim is to establish a comprehensible decision-making logic that leads to the most economical solution. It is based on the material, the location, and the planned mode of operation.

Starting point: Price is not the only factor influencing the purchase decision

When making investment decisions relating to processing, a mobile shredder is evaluated as part of a process concept: feeding, material flow, separation, and logistics are all interlinked. The purchase price (CAPEX) is therefore only part of the picture. The decisive factors are how much usable output per hour is produced at stable operating costs and how much material changes, impurities, or short site deployments influence availability.

For managing directors and plant managers, it is worth taking a look at the overall effect: if pre-shredding is possible directly at the point of origin, transport distances are shortened or trips are reduced. This can quickly make the difference between needing four trips of 35 km each per day or only two, with the same amount of material but a lower volume load. If you want to take a closer look at the general conditions, you can focus on typical scenarios from commercial waste recycling. There, it becomes clear how much the material mix and operating concept influence economic efficiency. Such kilometers add up to OPEX over weeks.

Would you like some advice? ARJES offers state-of-the-art shredding solutions in both mobile and stationary versions. We can advise you on suitable machine designs and bespoke solutions.

CONTACT US

Evaluation logic: This is how the comparison becomes reliable

In order for flexibility, real throughput, and CAPEX/OPEX to be truly reliable in comparison, a common evaluation logic with clear key figures is required. Three perspectives have proven themselves: technical parameters, operational constraints, and costs per ton.

Flexibility: Material mix, changeover, and tolerance to contaminants

– Range of material flows (e.g., commercial waste, wood recycling, tires, scrap recycling).

– Changeover effort (tool or shaft change, adjustment of counter jaws, inlet geometry).

– Tolerance to impurities (metal content, bulky fractions, varying moisture content).

At ARJES, adaptation to different material flows is conceptually designed using shaft types and adjustable counter jaws. In practice, it is less important whether a change is possible in principle, but rather how much downtime realistically occurs and whether changeovers can be scheduled into the course of a shift.

Throughput: Which factors determine the actual output

Throughput is often understood as t/h. However, the usable output is decisive for economic efficiency. The proportion that reaches the subsequent process steps in the desired quality is therefore the relevant reference value. Typical influencing factors are:

– Final grain size or required particle size
the finer the desired discharge size is set, the greater the reduction in real throughput

– Material density and structure
wood, rubber, mixed fractions, metal content

– Feeding
even vs. intermittent, hopper design, conveyor technology

– Contaminants
steel content in tires, foreign metals, long films, wire

A mobile shredder can score points if it runs stably with changing inputs and thus generates fewer unplanned stops. One hour of downtime usually has a greater impact on daily output than theoretical peak performance.

CAPEX/OPEX: Separate costs clearly and evaluate them over the entire service life

CAPEX typically includes the machine, peripherals, and commissioning. Depending on the project, this may also include conveyor technology, magnetic separation, protection and enclosure solutions, and infrastructural adjustments at the site.

OPEX includes energy (diesel or electricity), wear parts, maintenance, personnel, downtime, and logistics and disposal costs. Mobile applications in particular often have an additional logic: the machine travels to the material, not the other way around. If this eliminates six trips of 45 km each per week, that’s 270 km less, which has a direct impact on costs and capacities. Equally relevant are routes on site: an optimized layout can save 20 to 40 m of conveyor belt or reduce internal wheel loader distances by 200 to 400 m per hour. Such details become noticeable in OPEX over operating hours.

Direct comparison: operating models in the TCO check

The decision between “mobile or stationary” is rarely binary. Especially with changing material sources, from seasonal construction waste recycling to constant packaging fractions such as paper recycling, the economic advantage often only arises from the right mix of pre-shredding and downstream process steps.

– Flexibility in comparison: locations, changeover times, material changes
– Throughput comparison: stability, final grain size, and process reliability
– CAPEX/OPEX comparison: investment, energy, wear, downtime

Practical example tires: Why this fraction is technically challenging

Tire streams are considered challenging because rubber is elastic and also contains steel components. The process must therefore cope with changing material behavior without disproportionate increases in wear or instability in the material flow.

Typical technical challenges include steel belts and wire components, which affect tool geometry and material removal, as well as the desired particle size for downstream separation or granulation steps. Economic efficiency therefore depends not only on the shredding itself, but also on process stability: If pre-shredding is designed in such a way that subsequent separations run more smoothly, downtime across the entire line is reduced.

The connection to ARJES is obvious, because we explicitly see material flows for tire recycling as an application. The follow-up process is important for the design: desired particle size, intended metal separation, and consistency of input.

Decision matrix: Which priority suits which operation

Clear prioritization helps with quick preselection. The following key questions put flexibility, throughput, and costs in a verifiable order:

– How much does the material mix fluctuate over the week and month?

– What annual volume is to be processed, and how many shifts are planned?

– What logistics routes are currently involved (e.g., 20 to 60 km per tour), and how do they change with on-site pre-shredding?

– What downtimes are tolerable, and what service windows are realistic?

– Which cost item dominates in the operation: energy, wear and tear, personnel, or logistics?

Those with high material variance prioritize flexibility and predictable changeovers. Those who consistently process large quantities prioritize stable throughput and process reliability. Those who are strongly OPEX-driven prioritize energy per ton, wear per ton, and availability.

ARJES in context: Selection paths for mobile shredding

ARJES develops and manufactures recycling machines, in particular slow-running twin-shaft shredders. Two paths are helpful for internal orientation when classifying the portfolio:

For mobile applications with moderate use, it is worth taking a look at the COMPAKTOR series.

For an optimal cost-benefit ratio in the field of composting and wood processing plants as well as in the processing of commercial waste, the EKOMAXX line is recommended.

If higher performance requirements and robust material flows are the focus, the TITAN product line is a relevant point of comparison.

The project logic of material mix, final grain size, and application profile is important for making the right economic choice.

The quickest way to determine whether the COMPAKTOR, EKOMAXX, or TITAN line is the right fit is to talk to us. Let us advise you on the right solution for your material, location, and TCO.

Make an economical decision, compare technically clean

The best economic decision is made when material, final grain size, location, and mode of operation are considered together. A mobile shredder not only affects throughput, but also logistics, availability, and cost per ton. Those who consistently combine flexibility, real output, and CAPEX/OPEX in the TCO model will quickly recognize which solution is right for their own operation.

The new partnership is supported by ARJES sales representative Lennart Stecher, who is highly familiar with the Austrian market and its specific requirements for modern shredding technology. From the very beginning, he has advised the BAG Klöch team and supported not only successful sales and product training sessions, but also the strategic introduction of ARJES machines to the Austrian market. In the future, Christoph Ulrich from BAG Klöch will serve as the direct contact person for sales and technical consulting related to ARJES machines for customers and interested parties throughout Austria.

The first visible sign of the cooperation did not take long to appear: immediately after IFAT Munich 2026, the first ARJES COMPAKTOR 300 was delivered to BAG Klöch. With its eye-catching “Still on Fire” design, the mobile two-shaft shredder already attracted significant attention at the trade fair stand in Munich and quickly became a true crowd-puller. The machine is now starting its demonstration tour and is literally bringing new “fire” to Austria. Wherever the COMPAKTOR 300 appears, strong interest, impressive shredding performance, and hands-on live demonstrations are guaranteed.

“With BAG Klöch, we have gained a strong and experienced partner who shares our philosophy and our commitment to customer-oriented solutions. We are looking forward to a successful collaboration, many joint projects, and further expanding our base of satisfied end customers and operators in Austria,” emphasizes Lennart Stecher.

We at ARJES and EuRec also look back on an exceptionally successful week at the trade fair. Together, we presented our two brands with a significantly expanded exhibition presence in the outdoor area as well as live in material processing applications – represented by our partner Moerschen Mobile Aufbereitung – in the VDMA Crushing Zone. The focus was not only on our established two-shaft shredders, but also on technological innovations in the field of mobile screening technologies.

Global Dealer Network Represented at IFAT

One of the highlights for ARJES and EuRec was the strong international presence at our booth. In total, more than 25 long-standing as well as new sales partners from all over the world were represented on site. For the first time, our new American distribution partners US Equipment and RPM as well as SRS Equipment from Canada also presented themselves together with the ARJES team at IFAT Munich 2026.

In addition, existing and successful partnerships were further strengthened. Long-standing cooperations with SCAI from Italy and Østli from Denmark were officially extended. Overall, the exhibition clearly demonstrated how strongly ARJES’ international dealer network has grown over the years.

Numerous Machines Sold Directly at the Exhibition

From a sales perspective, IFAT Munich 2026 was also extremely successful for ARJES and EuRec. Several machines displayed at the booth were sold directly during the exhibition and handed over to their new owners.

• ARJES COMPAKTOR 300 to BAG Klöch in Austria
• ARJES EKOMAXX 800 to Kölsch Baumaschinen in Germany
• ARJES TITAN 900 to Doyle Machinery in the United Kingdom
• Another ARJES TITAN 900 to Hagl Recycling in Germany
• EuRec FERRO 950 demo machine to HJM in Spain

Particular interest was also shown in the new mobile screening machines NEOS 6.3 and NOVA 518, with which ARJES is strategically expanding its portfolio in the field of screening technologies for the first time. Many trade visitors took the opportunity to learn more directly on site about the advantages of our processing and complete recycling solutions. At the same time, the electrically driven machine solutions of the EuRec ULTIMA 850 Lightning and FERRO 950 Lightning series also generated intensive technical discussions and strong interest among international visitors.

“Breathtaking and Overwhelming”

Our Managing Shareholder Thomas Hayn draws an entirely positive conclusion from IFAT Munich 2026:

“In short: breathtaking and overwhelming. With more than 40 sales and service partners worldwide, we were able to demonstrate at IFAT Munich just how important the topic of recycling has become — not only in Europe, but across the globe — and how strongly we have grown together with our partners. At the same time, we were able to present new ARJES and EuRec technologies at IFAT and hold many forward-looking discussions for the future.”

For ARJES and EuRec, IFAT Munich 2026 was not only a successful trade fair, but above all a strong signal for the growing international importance of modern recycling and environmental technologies. With strong partnerships, numerous new contacts, successful sales and innovative product solutions, we look confidently toward the years ahead — entirely in line with our claim: “Recycling Starts With ARJES”.

With this new partnership, ARJES aims to meet the growing demand for high-performance shredding solutions beyond Europe while providing customers with expert consultation and reliable local service. The collaboration between ARJES and SRS Equipment is supported by Jochen Kamm, who has been responsible for the strategic development of new markets outside Europe as Business Development & Global Sales Manager since the end of last year, and who is actively driving the expansion of the international dealer network.

“With SRS Equipment, we have found a partner who shares our values and has an excellent understanding of the Eastern Canadian market. Together, we aim to establish the ARJES brand in North America and meet the increasing demand for reliable shredding and recycling technology,” explains Jochen Kamm.

First joint trade show appearance in April

A first highlight of the new partnership is already approaching: On April 23 and 24, 2026, SRS Equipment will present itself for the first time as an official ARJES dealer at the National Heavy Equipment Show in Toronto, Ontario. Visitors will have the opportunity to experience the performance and wide range of applications of ARJES two-shaft shredders firsthand and engage directly with the experts on site.

With the expansion of its dealer network in Canada, ARJES GmbH once again underlines its commitment to providing customers worldwide with reliable and practical recycling solutions. The combination of powerful technology, a clear strategic direction, and strong local partners forms the foundation for sustainable success in international markets.

At the outdoor exhibition area of Messe München, ARJES and EuRec will showcase their technologies at stand FM.709/13 with a significantly larger exhibition stand compared to IFAT 2024. Visitors can expect a comprehensive overview of modern shredding and processing technologies as well as new solutions for integrated recycling processes.

Exciting innovations at the ARJES and EuRec exhibition stand

At IFAT Munich, ARJES will present its entire machine portfolio – ranging from the mobile “bestseller” COMPAKTOR 300, which has seen consistently strong demand since its market launch in Munich in 2016 and represents the original product of ARJES GmbH, to the stationary TITAN 900 e-pu heavy-duty class designed for industrial applications.

ARJES is also pleased to announce its entry into the mobile trommel screen and scalping screen segment at IFAT Munich 2026. Shredding, screening and material processing are increasingly viewed by ARJES as an integrated overall process, forming a full-liner solution for a wide range of material streams. By combining powerful shredding technology with modern screening solutions, ARJES will be able to offer its customers even more efficient and economical processing solutions from a single source.

EuRec will also showcase new machine developments at IFAT, particularly in the field of electric drive technologies. One of the highlights is the stationary electric version of the FERRO 950, specifically designed for demanding heavy-duty applications. In addition, EuRec will present a new electro-mobile tracked machine of the ULTIMA 850 series, combining powerful shredding performance with energy-efficient concepts, future-oriented drive systems and high mobility.

Live demonstration at the VDMA Crushing Zone

Another highlight awaits visitors at the VDMA Crushing Zone, where ARJES, EuRec and Rockster will jointly demonstrate a complete process solution for the processing of concrete railway sleepers. As part of the RBG family – “Recycling Beyond Generations”, the three brands combine their technologies to create an integrated process chain consisting of shredding, crushing and screening. The demonstration will feature the EuRec FERRO 950, the Rockster R1000 impact crusher, and the new ARJES scalper screen NEOS 6.3.

The live demonstration clearly shows how different technologies interact seamlessly to transform complex input materials into high-quality, marketable recycled products. This provides visitors with a unique opportunity to experience complete processing workflows under real operating conditions and to better understand the practical advantages of integrated machine concepts.

IFAT Munich is the international meeting point for the recycling and environmental technology industry and offers the ideal opportunity to explore new technologies, discuss practical applications and establish valuable contacts.

We would therefore like to cordially invite you to visit us at Messe München at the ARJES and EuRec stand (FM.709/13) as well as at the live demonstration in the VDMA Crushing Zone. Join us for several exciting and forward-looking days at the world’s leading platform for environmental technologies. We look forward to welcoming you.

HJM’s activities are consistently focused on the specific requirements of its customers. Through individual consulting, tailor-made solutions and a holistic service approach, customized concepts are developed for a wide range of applications. With five own branches, a nationwide network of sales partners and authorized workshops, as well as an experienced service team, HJM operates one of the most powerful service infrastructures in Spain.

The addition of ARJES as a new sales brand represents a logical step in HJM’s strategic alignment and expansion of its product portfolio. Alongside strong brands such as Hitachi, Fuchs, Metso and Bell, the portfolio also includes our RBG partner company Doppstadt. The newly established cooperation with ARJES opens up comprehensive new opportunities in the field of shredding and recycling technology.

In the future, HJM will distribute the complete ARJES product portfolio in Spain. This includes the mobile and stationary COMPAKTOR, EKOMAXX and TITAN classes, as well as the products of our subsidiary brand EuRec. Existing and new customers alike will benefit from an expanded range of applications, significantly enhanced technical capabilities and a single, reliable point of contact.

The first ARJES machines are already on their way to Spain, providing the market with hands-on insights into the performance of our shredding solutions. Together with HJM, we are planning nationwide demo tours and marketing activities throughout Spain in 2026 to showcase the advantages of our two-shaft shredders in practical applications. Key highlights will include IFAT Munich, where our partner HJM will also be present at the ARJES booth, as well as the International SRR Trade Fair in Madrid, where HJM will represent and exhibit the ARJES brand.

Our shared ambition is clear: to simplify decision-making, provide comprehensive solutions and consistently generate added value, in full accordance with the HJM guiding principle of ‘Think Orange, Make The Difference’.

ARJES Area Sales Manager Lennart Stecher will support and assist our new business partner. With his experience and market expertise, he will actively accompany the development of this partnership and work closely with HJM to further expand our joint activities. We look forward to a promising cooperation through which, together with Hispano Japonesa de Maquinaria, we will provide end customers in Spain with high-performance shredding technology, outstanding service quality and reliable solutions.

Jochen Kamm brings extensive industry knowledge and a broad technical background. His professional career began in the development of drive systems at renowned manufacturers in Germany and the USA, before he specialized in optimizing shredding technology. In his further roles, he was responsible for existing recycling plants, standardized the technologies in use, and designed new recycling towers as well as processing lines for both material recovery and thermal use in power plants. During this period, Jochen also gained comprehensive insights into the quality, performance, and diverse applications of ARJES shredding technology. This combination of technical expertise, process knowledge, and hands-on experience forms the foundation for his new role at ARJES GmbH.

Responsibilities at ARJES

As the new Business Development and Global Sales Manager, Jochen Kamm not only assumes sales responsibility but, more importantly, takes on the task of driving ARJES’ international market development.

His tasks include:

• Strategic development of new markets outside Europe – with a focus on North and South America
• Strengthening market penetration through targeted positioning of existing ARJES products
• Establishing new sales partners in previously untapped markets
• Further development of the global market strategy and identification of long-term growth potential

With this strategic expansion, ARJES aims for targeted, sustainable growth in the coming years and an even stronger position in international markets.

In working with his business partners, Jochen relies on open, honest communication and pragmatic solutions, following the motto: “Impossible doesn’t exist!”

“Personal contact with people from diverse cultures is incredibly exciting for me. What matters most is listening to the customer and understanding their needs precisely. Mobile machines and shredding technology have been part of my life since my studies. Recycling is one of the most important global future topics, and ARJES combines both.”

Beyond the technology and product portfolio, Jochen was particularly impressed by the collegial atmosphere, the pleasant working environment, and the short decision-making processes at ARJES GmbH.

Global Expansion Through Teamwork

Working alongside Jochen Kamm, Elke Ernest will continue her role as Global Sales Manager, responsible for Europe and the eastern world markets – including Asia and Australia. Together, they combine business development and global sales management into a strong, unified force.