Paladin EnviroTech ads

We’re proud to feature in Ed Ballard’s recent piece for the The Wall Street Journal on our efforts to harvest rare earth metals from old wind turbines, reducing U.S. reliance on China for critical materials. 📰 This is only the beginning. We’re excited to scale this capability and unlock the enormous potential of these untapped domestic resources, from retired wind turbines to EV motors and MRI machines. It wouldn’t be possible to recapture these critical resources without our partners. Huge thank you to Kevin Stoll and Daniel Bina at Critical Materials Recycling and Nathan Steffes at GRI who are building this with us. Read the article here 👉 https://lnkd.in/emkaddpX

This week, Paladin and Critical Materials Recycling, Inc (CMR) leadership were in Washington, D.C. meeting with senior national security stakeholders to discuss the strategic importance of end-of-life (EOL) electronics as a domestic source of critical rare earth elements (REEs). As the United States works to strengthen critical mineral supply chains, retired IT assets represent a significant and largely untapped domestic resource. Recovering rare earth magnets from end-of-life electronics not only reduces reliance on foreign sources, but also supports a secure, near-term circular supply chain for the materials that power defense systems, advanced manufacturing, data infrastructure, and next-generation energy technologies. At Paladin, we believe secure IT asset disposition, responsible electronics recycling, and advanced rare earth recovery are essential components of our nation's critical infrastructure strategy. By transforming end-of-life assets into strategic domestic resources, we can strengthen U.S. manufacturing, improve supply chain resilience, and enhance our nation's long-term resource security. We appreciate the opportunity to contribute to these important discussions and look forward to continuing our work with government, industry, and research partners to advance secure, domestic solutions for critical materials recovery. Brian Diesselhorst Luke Wray Critical Materials Recycling Kevin Stoll

Most ITAD suppliers still operate the same way: pick up, hand off, and hope nothing goes wrong. It never made sense to us, the real risk starts after equipment leaves the facility. I’ve heard the same complaints from enterprise IT and operations teams for years. Slow response times, missing documentation, limited visibility, too many downstream vendors involved in the process… when something goes wrong, nobody owns it. The lack of accountability is frustrating, and a real pain for our customers. We built Paladin so accountability doesn’t end at pickup. We own the downstream for that reason — if sensitive data and regulated equipment are involved, there can’t be gaps in the process or confusion around who handled what. Large organizations also shouldn’t have to re-explain their process, compliance requirements, and operational risk every time they engage a vendor. They need a partner that understands how enterprise environments actually work. A breakdown in data handling or documentation becomes a legal, compliance, and reputational problem very quickly. A lot of companies stick with providers they know aren’t performing because switching feels painful. Honestly, that hesitation usually costs more in the long run. My view has always been pretty simple: responsiveness, visibility, proper reporting, and real accountability is the bare minimum they should expect from their ITAD partner. It’s our standard. Really proud of the team we’re building at Paladin and the way they show up for customers every day 👊 If your organization is rethinking its ITAD process, send me a DM. Or learn more about what we’re up to here https://lnkd.in/eEiKd8bh

One of the biggest misconceptions in ITAD is that data destruction is the finish line, when it’s not. What matters is whether the process behind it can be accounted for when questions get asked later. Most enterprise organizations already know which certifications they need from a provider: R2, NAID, and chain of custody documentation are now baseline requirements. Where providers separate themselves is in the execution. When ITAD programs fail, it’s usually because somewhere in the process, a device wasn’t properly tracked, documentation was incomplete, equipment changed hands too many times, reporting couldn’t verify the final disposition, or data left the facility before destruction. That’s where operational and compliance risk shows up. At Paladin, we spend a lot of time focused on process control because that’s what ultimately protects our clients. Chain of custody makes sure there’s a documented record of where the equipment was, who handled it, and what happened to it at every stage. If questions come from regulators, auditors, legal teams, or internal stakeholders, that documentation is critical. The same goes for destruction procedures. For many organizations, on-site destruction is important because data never leaves the facility before it’s destroyed. Audit reporting then becomes the proof teams can hand to compliance or legal. That level of execution reduces gaps, reduces uncertainty, and makes the process easier for internal teams to manage. IT directors, EHS leaders, and operations teams are already dealing with fragmented ITAD programs, including multiple vendors, inconsistent reporting, limited downstream visibility, and different processes across locations. Most already know where the weak points are; they’re looking for a provider that can run the process correctly and consistently. That’s the part of ITAD that matters most. See how we approach ITAD, data destruction, and downstream accountability: https://lnkd.in/gtUphXZD

Protect sensitive data while clearing out old tech. Free pickup, on-site data destruction, and enterprise-grade security, built for businesses of all sizes.