I don’t think the amount of waste is that important, relatively speaking. It’s probably far, far less than 1% of solid waste.
Problem is the energy input required for those high temperatures. It costs money to consume that energy, quite often more money than you make by reselling the simpler substances that come out the end of your pyrolysis process.
Transporting the blade to the facility, processing them, developing all the equipment will probably make more CO2 anyway.
Maybe it’s even possible to burn them directly in a coal plant and recover the energy. (they have very good filtration systems)
We look at all the signs that go in that direction(climate apocalypse) and throw out all the ones that that point in the other side.
We are in a feedback loop where more awareness create more funding who find more "evidence" who create more funding.
On the other side, the scientists who express doubts are labeled "deniers" are cast out of their professions, get their funding cut out.
The government get an easy excuse for every problems: climate change ! the media get clicks and headlines, the research get funding, etc.
Going to solar electricity is a good thing, EV too, big fan and investor in all of those. But I think we should focus more on human flourishing and that at the speed of transformation we have (solar panels price) we will be fine with climate.
I like Tony Seba on Solar/Wind/Battery transition of energy and Bjorn Lomberg on the priorities for our world.