The study is interesting, but the linked press release is pretty sad, and has been roundly mocked across the internet.

You see, the headline is: "Rare earth metals scarcity: A ‘ticking time-bomb’ for the world, asks PwC?"

This headline would work better if the study was about rare earth metals. It's not. Also, I'm not entirely sure what "flurospar" is, but Google indicates it's some kind of paint. The actual study, as opposed to the press release, includes some discussion of "fluorspar", which is something quite different (although it's still not a metal or a rare earth...).

Again, the study is fine, and doesn't make any of those stupid mistakes, but the press release is shocking.

I'm interested in how hard it is to recycle these things from scrap electronics.

There are many developing nations where a clean safe recycling factory would be very much better than scavenging scrap from a dump.

It seems to solve a few problems - giving people work and money; diverting dangerous materials form landfill recycling; etc.

It's weird seeing tantalum on the list, and knowing how many tantalum capacitors are thrown away each year. Or lithium, and knowing how many mobile phones I have stored away. (At least mobile phones now have some value and get sold onto recyclers.)