Share:

The Geopolitics of Junk

written by Deborah Dull, on site at GreenBiz 2026

 

I spent today in a room full of people who think about waste for a living. And the word that kept coming up had nothing to do with recycling. It was sovereignty.

Here is the situation. The United States imports 95% of its critical mineral supply. Lithium, cobalt, rare earth elements, the stuff inside every battery, every semiconductor, every electric motor. We do not make it, we do not mine much of it, and we do not control the supply chain that delivers it. That is not an energy policy problem. That is a national security problem.

Now here is the part that should make you put down your coffee. A ton of smartphones contains dramatically more gold than a ton of mined ore. We are talking about concentrations that make urban mining look like a gold rush compared to digging in the ground. And yet the recovery rate for those materials, once a phone leaves its first owner, drops to around 13%. We are losing roughly 80% of the value sitting in devices right now, in drawers, in closets, in landfills.

E-waste is also the fastest growing waste stream in the world, at 2% per year. We are not catching up. We are falling further behind every single year we delay building the systems to recover these materials.

What I kept hearing today, from people running battery recycling operations, from state economic development officers, from supply chain professionals, is a reframe that matters. Urban mining is not a recycling program. It is a domestic supply chain strategy. The materials are already refined. They are already concentrated. They already exist inside products we made and sold. The only part missing is the infrastructure to get them back and the policy environment that makes it worth doing.

There are some promising signals. The federal government put $100 million toward critical mineral recovery through Project Vault. A critical mineral ministerial just launched. States like New Mexico are directing sovereign wealth fund capital toward exactly this kind of industry. The appetite is real.

But appetite without direction goes to the people who already have the relationships. That is not cynicism, that is just how procurement works. The question for everyone working in this space right now is whether we can get specific enough, fast enough, to shape where that money actually goes.

The materials are not buried in a mountain somewhere waiting on a 20-year permitting process. They are in your junk drawer. They are in the back of your office supply closet. They are in the decommissioned equipment sitting in a warehouse three miles from here.

We just need to stop treating them like trash and start treating them like inventory.

More Blogs

supply chain planning
Blogs
January 7, 2026

ToolsGroup CEO Sean Elliott on Embracing Uncertainty, Probabilistic Planning, and Preparing for an Agentic Future

At the Gartner Supply Chain Planning Summit in Denver, Scott Luton sat down with Sean Elliott, CEO of ToolsGroup, to discuss why uncertainty is no longer something supply chain leaders should fear—and how the right technology can turn volatility into advantage. Elliott brings decades of experience across supply chain execution and planning, a background that shapes his pragmatic leadership philosophy. As he noted, bad plans can cripple even the best execution environments, just as poor execution can undermine well-crafted plans. ToolsGroup’s mission sits squarely at that intersection.   What Makes ToolsGroup Different Elliott described ToolsGroup as one of the few truly probabilistic planning providers in the market. While many vendors claim probabilistic capabilities, most stop at probabilistic forecasting. ToolsGroup goes further by embedding probabilistic thinking across the full breadth of its planning technology. The company’s belief is simple but powerful: uncertainty is not the enemy—it’s an asset. Rather than chasing forecast accuracy for its own sake, ToolsGroup focuses on business outcomes. What planning organizations really care about, Elliott argued, is having the right inventory in the right place at the right time to satisfy customers. Customer satisfaction—driven by availability, pricing, and service—is the ultimate goal. Probabilistic planning enables organizations to…
warranty management optimization
Blogs
May 5, 2026

Can the Warranty Claims Process be Improved?

written by Chris Cunnane with InterSystems   Automotive manufacturers have invested billions in digital transformation over the past two decades, achieving meaningful gains in production efficiency. Yet one area has stubbornly lagged behind: warranty cost performance. Despite advances aligned with Industry 4.0, warranty costs as a percentage of revenue have remained largely unchanged. This disconnect highlights a critical truth that while production has evolved, warranty operations have not kept pace. At the heart of the issue is a fundamental inefficiency: time. Specifically, the lag between when a warranty claim is submitted and when meaningful problem-solving begins. This delay not only drives up operational costs but also impacts customer satisfaction and brand perception.   The Hidden Complexity of Warranty Claims Warranty management is more than a back-office function. It is a complex, data-driven process involving multiple stakeholders, systems, and validation steps. Each claim requires verification of warranty coverage, assessment of the issue, and coordination across service providers, suppliers, and internal teams. Much of this process remains manual. Organizations often rely on fragmented systems, inconsistent data formats, and time-intensive validation steps such as reviewing receipts, maintenance records, and warranty agreements. These inefficiencies introduce delays that can stretch into weeks before root cause…