There’s a Hole in the Bottom of the Sea

By: Catherine Fink

“It’s like Dr. Seuss down there,” according to Diva Amon, a scientist who studies the marine floor, describing the incredible sea life and geologic formations in an area known as the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ), which may soon be opened to the first-ever deep sea mining of polymetallic nodules. “Corals, sponges, nematodes, and dozens of other organisms live on the nodules [or] beneath them. Other critters float around them, including anemones with 8-foot tentacles, rippling squidworms, glass sponges, and ghostly white Dumbo octopuses”--in fact, between 70% and 90% of living things collected in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone have never been seen before, leading to concerns over what percentage of all living species in the region has never been seen or collected. What is known is that an estimated 21 billion tons of polymetallic nodules lie in this single region of the Pacific, containing more of some metals (such as nickel and cobalt) than can be found in all the world’s terrestrial deposits. Because of this, mining there has the potential to be 10 times more lucrative than mining similar mineral deposits on land. In fact, estimates place the value of this new industry at some US$30 billion annually by 2030 due to the rapidly increasing demand for lithium batteries and solar panels. Some argue that deep seabed mining could help meet demand for the metals required for their production, aiding the rapid transition to renewable energy required to combat climate change. However, there are several issues with this new technology.

Unknowns: First, according to Arlo Hemphill, a senior oceans campaigner at Greenpeace USA, “We know more about the surface of Mars and the moon than we do of the deep sea.”  And, despite encompassing 99 percent of the world’s livable space, less than one-fifth of the ocean has even been explored by scientists, so many believe that at least 5 more years of research would be necessary “to make evidence-based recommendations” for regulating the potential seabed mining industry. The European Parliament and 12 countries including France, Germany, Chile, Spain, and several Pacific island nations,  have called for at least a temporary moratorium on deep-sea mining. Several banks have declared they won’t loan to ocean-mining companies, and corporations including BMW, Microsoft, Google, Volvo, and Volkswagen have pledged not to buy deep-sea metals until the environmental impacts are known.

 Environmental impacts: Secondly, based on what is currently known, there are valid environmental concerns about the proposed mining operations. Every phase of the proposed mining process could pose risks for the world’s oceans, which are already severely stressed by pollution, overfishing, and climate change. According to “The Rush for Metals in the Deep Sea,” a Feb. 2023 report by Greenpeace, the mining process is highly invasive:

“First, the nodules need to be lifted from the seabed using autonomous mining crawlers which collect the nodules as well as surrounding sediment…From here, nodules will be pumped to the production vessel on the surface…The nodules will be separated from the residual water and sediment, which is discharged from the production vessel to…below 200m…Finally, the nodules will be transported to land for onshore processing…Environmental impacts can occur at each of these steps, with the most direct impacts occurring on the seabed itself… [T]he deep ocean floor is one of the most intact ecosystems on the planet…and mining activities would disrupt this ecosystem on several fronts.”

This process has the potential to negatively impact biodiversity at the sea bottom and surface by disrupting animal colonies, clouding sea water with sediment plumes, and creating potentially harmful noise and light pollution for species adapted to live in total darkness. It could also cause habitat fragmentation, of special concern due to slow recovery rates for deep sea creatures. Finally, some evidence suggests that the process could possibly hinder the seabed’s ability to sequester carbon.

Unnecessary: Third, some argue that prospective mining companies are overstating the degree to which deep sea mining is necessary to procure the minerals needed for renewable energy products. According to the same Greenpeace study, “polymetallic nodules from the deep-sea may only supply four or five key mineral…of which only three could be supplied in volumes relevant…The nodules do not provide lithium and graphite, which are the two most supply-critical battery raw materials.”  Sylvia Earle, marine life expert, and Daniel Kammen, sustainability professor at UC Berkeley, challenge the assertion that deep sea mining is a necessity, calling it a “big lie,” and arguing:  there are now alternative battery technologies that don’t require deep sea minerals; some battery minerals like lithium and cobalt can be extracted directly from sea water with few environmental impacts; and car battery recycling is rapidly developing.

Positives: In addition to the aforementioned financial and possible renewable energy ramp-up benefits, proponents of deep sea mining counter these arguments by pointing out that terrestrial mining operations already have caused significant environmental, and in some cases, social problems. For example, mines in Africa are a prime example: mining cobalt led to human rights abuses in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Zambia’s copper mining industry has poisoned nearby rivers. In addition, in Indonesia, nickel mining has generated enough runoff to dye the country’s waters red.

Legal issues: There are as yet unresolved legal considerations because international law currently forbids deep-ocean mining. International waters more than 200 miles offshore are governed by the International Seabed Authority (ISA) based in Jamaica, and it has yet to approve any mining operations. Based in Kingston, Jamaica, the ISA has the contradictory mandates of protecting the ocean floor and coordinating its commercial exploitation. There is a treaty, signed by 167 of the world’s nations (not including the United States) called the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLS), that acts as a kind of “constitution” for the world’s oceans and which created the ISA. A provision of the constitution mandates that, once a notification is lodged, regulations must be approved within two years, or else mining can go ahead under any existing regulations.

Although no specific regulations have been passed allowing deep sea mining, the ISA has issued 22 permits to explore the seabed for mining purposes. The ISA’s Secretary General, Michel Lodge, says it will exercise strict oversight over any mining operations: “We have very strong legal powers already, but we fully expect we’ll be able to use those powers to monitor activities…We will put in a lot of emphasis on remote monitoring.” However, there has already been controversy about the integrity of the permit process and the NY Times published an investigation showing a seemingly inappropriately close relationship between The Metals Company [a leading contender for the first mining permit] and the ISA. The first deep sea mining permit was actually requested by Nauru in conjunction with The Metals Company (then named DeepGreen) because, in order to mine, companies must partner with a country that is a partner to the UNCLS. In an ironic twist, the tiny island of Nauru located NE of Australia, has itself been mined to the point of being 80% uninhabitable. However, should their venture succeed, mining the CCZ thousands of miles away from Nauru, could be a “a rare opportunity for…social and economic development” because Nauru stands to lose the most from climate change as sea levels rise.

Even without the proposed moratorium like the one offered by the world’s largest and most inclusive environmental decision-making group, the International Union for Conservation of Nature Congress, or a total ban on deep sea mining, the earliest mining could begin is 2026. However, with the March 2023 passage of the BBNJ Treaty to protect marine biodiversity in areas beyond jurisdiction, there may be further legal battles ahead. In the meantime, embattled ISA official, Michael Loge, told the NY Times: “Everybody in Brooklyn can say, ‘I don’t want to harm the ocean.’ But they sure want their Teslas.”