Sustainable Photonics Manufacturing

By Abdul Ahad NazakatReviewed by Louis CastelNov 18 2025

Photonics manufacturing produces the optical parts and light-based devices that support communication, sensing, and energy systems. These technologies are central to modern infrastructure. With rising demand for solar technologies, 5G networks, and newer types of sensors, the environmental side of this industry is gaining more attention. Each wafer and lens comes with an energy and material cost that is becoming harder to overlook. Sustainable manufacturing in this sector aims to lower those costs by using less power, reducing chemical waste, and developing designs that support circular material flows rather than one-way production chains.

Image Credit: luchschenF/Shutterstock.com

Environmental Challenges in Photonics Manufacturing

Making photonic components depends on cleanrooms, wafer processing, and chemical etching. Each of these steps brings its own environmental impact. Life-cycle assessments help show the size of the impact. In photovoltaics, which make up one of the largest areas of photonics, the polysilicon supply chain scores only 0.54 on the Material Circularity Indicator, indicating limited material recovery.¹ By 2050, silicon PV modules may still emit between 8 and 13 g CO2-equivalent per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated.² Even with cleaner grids, the energy and carbon embedded in manufacturing remain comparatively high.

Cleanrooms contribute to a significant part of the overall footprint. They operate continuously, maintaining filtered air and stable temperatures, which requires substantial electricity. The equipment inside also runs for long stretches because interruptions increase the risk of contamination. Together, these demands make fabrication facilities some of the most energy-intensive buildings in technology manufacturing.

Chemical processes increase the challenge. Plasma etching depends on fluorinated gases with global-warming potentials far higher than carbon dioxide.³ Water use and the sourcing of rare-earth materials place additional pressure on resources. Yet detailed data on many of these environmental factors are still limited, leaving parts of the footprint unquantified and, in some cases, easy to overlook.

Materials Innovation: Greener Alternatives

A growing part of the solution lies in introducing new materials and fabrication routes. Research groups are developing bio-based polymers, recyclable substrates, and lower-temperature processes that maintain optical performance while reducing environmental impact. At VTT in Finland, ultra-thin organic photovoltaic devices on PLA and recycled PET have shown 10–85 percent lower carbon footprints than those made on virgin materials.⁴ The Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia has produced fully cellulose-based photonic crystals and metasurfaces that meet ISO 17556 biodegradability standards while retaining glass-like optical clarity.⁵

Other efforts draw on biological and waste-derived materials. Lithuanian teams have created soy-based bio-resins for optical 3D printing, enabling photonic components from nano- to macro-scale without added photoinitiators.⁶ Tufts University researchers are developing silk-protein optics for wearable and implantable devices.⁷ Even post-consumer waste, such as polystyrene packaging and cigarette-filter acetate, has been converted into multilayer photonic crystals with performance close to commercial polymers.⁸

Glass provides another under-explored route. Wafer-scale molding can replicate thousands of micro-optical components in one cycle, reducing the energy previously required for grinding and polishing.⁹ Soft nanoimprint lithography of TiO2 using sol-gel chemistry also enables lower-temperature fabrication (around 400 °C) and reduces the environmental burden compared with traditional high-heat processes.¹⁰

Cleaner Manufacturing Techniques

Process innovation matters as much as material choice. Additive manufacturing builds components layer by layer and generates very little scrap, making it a good match for optical 3D printing with bio-based resins.⁷ Low-temperature deposition and nanoimprint lithography for TiO2 structures also reduce energy use while maintaining the required resolution.¹⁰

A key development is solvent-free lithography. Using mechanically peelable photoresists, researchers have shown that dry, tape-based pattern transfer can replace chemical developers and strippers.¹¹ Layers can be lifted cleanly with little waste, and the method is compatible with biodegradable substrates that would not tolerate conventional wet-chemical processing.

In compound-semiconductor photonics, especially in III–V systems, efficiency improvements in metal-organic vapor-phase epitaxy (MOVPE) are becoming central. Adjustments in gas flow, temperature, and reactor design can lower energy use and reduce consumables such as indium trichloride.¹² Alongside these physical changes, artificial intelligence is beginning to support process control by monitoring growth conditions, optimizing yields, and identifying anomalies that may lead to scrap. Commercial data remain limited, but early studies suggest that combining AI with automation can reduce waste in measurable ways.

Designing for Circularity

Devices are increasingly built for disassembly and material recovery instead of permanent assembly. Modeling suggests that such closed-loop supply chains could raise the Material Circularity Indicator from 0.54 to 0.80 while cutting life-cycle impacts by around 12 percent.¹

End-of-life recovery is now integrated into design from the beginning. Prospective life-cycle studies now simulate the recovery of silicon and silver from solar modules which reveals how recycling choices alter toxicity and particulate emissions.² The same peelable resist technologies that simplify pattern transfer also aid disassembly by allowing layers to separate cleanly.¹¹

Durability and refurbishment thresholds are being defined for new photovoltaic technologies to ensure that environmental gains are maintained over the full product lifetime.¹³ Glass optics, which already offer long-term stability, fit naturally into this approach: they can last for decades, be remolded when needed, and support wafer-scale replication that saves both time and material.¹⁰

The European Union’s Circular Economy Action Plan and emerging ecodesign measures encourage manufacturers to adopt more circular approaches, although photonics-specific requirements are still under development.

Commercial Applications

Interest in sustainable photonics grows most where production volume increases environmental cost, for instance solar photovoltaics. Circularity and life-cycle evaluations are now common tools in the field. Modelling indicates that shifting crystalline-silicon PV production to the United States could reduce emissions by about 30 percent and energy use by roughly 13 percent by 2035 compared with 2020 import baselines.¹⁴ These gains would mainly come from cleaner regional electricity and shorter transport distances.

Lighting and display technologies are moving in the same direction. LEDs, perovskite LEDs, and OLEDs each have identifiable environmental footprints, and studies suggest that PeLEDs need operational lifetimes of around 10,000 hours to match other systems on key sustainability measures.¹⁵ Integrated photonics is also adapting, with hybrid and sol-gel platforms under study to streamline fabrication and lower resource use.¹⁶

Commercial engagement still remains limited. Rather than full-scale product lines, much of the work is still done in research labs and pilot projects. Only a few companies reference “sustainable photonics” in their supply chains, with most continuing to focus on performance and efficiency. The environmental aspect often stays in the background, even though the tools for measuring and reporting it are becoming more sophisticated.

What’s Next?

Coordination is required across sectors including technology, policy and industry to scale sustainable photonic manufacturing. Progress depends on both factory practices and on the designs of new devices. Short-term priorities include improving energy efficiency in deposition tools, replacing high-GWP etch chemistries, and reducing cleanroom emissions through better airflow and managed idle time.^{3, 12, 13} Integrating life-cycle assessment early in development is another important step.

Additionally, localizing production can reduce transport emissions and draw on cleaner regional electricity, providing environmental gains without major technological changes. Shared metrics, such as consistent sustainability indicators, eco-labels, and circular design guidelines, would support broader adoption.

As regulations strengthen and procurement places greater emphasis on sustainability, companies adopting cleaner materials, more efficient processes, and designs that allow recovery and reuse will be better positioned. The main challenge now is transferring these approaches from the laboratory to manufacturing lines.

How can we address the photonics skill gap? Find out here

References

1. Moros, P. B., Sabatella, M., & Di Berardino, D. (2023). Photovoltaic systems through the lens of material–energy–water nexus. Applied Sciences, 13(13), Article 7503. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13137503
2. van der Hulst, M. K., Magoss, D., Massop, Y., Xu, Y., van den Donker, M., Theelen, M., ... van Sark, W. (2024). Prospective life cycle assessment of silicon photovoltaics. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 12(21), 8083–8093. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.4c01952
3. Stafford, N., Jennings, C., & Biltek, S. (2023). Reducing the environmental impact of plasma etching in microelectronics. Proceedings of SPIE, 12496. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2660136
4. Välimäki, M. K., Sokka, L. I., Peltola, H. B., Ihme, S. S., Rokkonen, T. M. J., Kurkela, T. J., ... Hast, J. T. (2020). Printed organic photovoltaic modules on PLA and recycled PET. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 111(1–2), 325–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-06029-8
5. Caligiuri, V., Tedeschi, G., Palei, M., Miscuglio, M., Martín-García, B., Guzmán-Puyol, S., Hedayati, M. K., Kristensen, A., Athanassiou, A., Cingolani, R., Sorger, V. J., Salerno, M., Bonaccorso, F., Krahne, R., & Heredia-Guerrero, J. A. (2020). Biodegradable and insoluble cellulose photonic crystals and metasurfaces. ACS Nano, 14(8), 9502–9511. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.0c03224
6. Skliutas, E., Lebedevaite, M., Kasetaite, S., Rekštyte, S., Lileikis, S., Ostrauskaite, J., & Malinauskas, M. (2020). A bio-based resin for a multi-scale optical 3D printing. Scientific Reports, 10, Article 9758. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-66618-1
7. Omenetto, F. G., & Kaplan, D. L. (2010). New opportunities for an ancient material. Science, 329(5991), 528–531. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1188936
8. Escher, A., Magnasco, L., Martorelli, F., Megahd, H., Van Büren, B., Dodero, A., ... Lova, P. (2024). From landfill to photonics: The upcycling of plastic waste. ACS Applied Polymer Materials, 6(12), 6917–6925. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsapm.4c00398
9. Jia, C., Chen, F., Bian, H., et al. (2021). Optics Letters, 46(7), 1525–1528. https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.419326
10. Ren, H., Chevalier, C., Crespo-Monteiro, N., Valour, A., Blanchard, N., Albertini, D., ... Jamois, C. (2024). Eco-friendly soft nanoimprinting of TiO2 nanostructures with a large range of pattern heights. Proceedings of SPIE, 12898. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.3000169
11. Carlson, A., Bowen, A. M., Huang, Y., Nuzzo, R. G., & Rogers, J. A. (2012). Transfer printing techniques for materials assembly and micro/nanodevice fabrication. Advanced Materials, 24(39), 5284–5318. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.201201386
12. Blanco, C. F., Cucurachi, S., Dimroth, F., Guinée, J. B., Peijnenburg, W. J. G. M., & Vijver, M. G. (2020). Environmental impacts of III–V/silicon photovoltaics: Life cycle assessment and guidance for sustainable manufacturing. Energy & Environmental Science, 13(11), 4280–4290. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0EE01039A
13. Weyand, S., Kawajiri, K., Mortan, C., Jung, S., Zhu, K., & Heath, G. A. (2023). Are perovskite solar cells an environmentally sustainable emerging energy technology? Upscaling from lab to fab in life cycle assessment. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 11(38), 14010–14019. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03019
14. Liang, H., & You, F. (2023). Reshoring silicon photovoltaics manufacturing contributes to decarbonization and climate change mitigation. Nature Communications, 14, Article 1274. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-36827-z
15. Leccisi, E., Fthenakis, V., & Celik, I. (2023). Sustainability and environmental impact assessment of LEDs. In G. Leschhorn & R. Young (Eds.), Handbook of LED and SSL metrology (pp. 307–340). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527831678.ch9
16. Bastos, A. R. N., André, P., Carlos, L. D., Ferreira, R. A. S., & Correia, S. F. H. (2020). Sol-gel derived lanthanide-containing materials for photonic applications. In L. D. Carlos & P. Pal (Eds.), Lanthanide-based multifunctional materials (pp. 293–328). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818396-0.00009-

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are those of the author expressed in their private capacity and do not necessarily represent the views of AZoM.com Limited T/A AZoNetwork the owner and operator of this website. This disclaimer forms part of the Terms and conditions of use of this website.