Environment

Deep sea mining below the oceans

Q&A with Olive Heffernan: ‘We’re looking at taking this practice which is notoriously destructive, and allowing it encroach on one of our most fragile ecosystems’

Nautilus’s deep sea mining robot. It is capable of extracting valuable deposits at a depth of 1,600m.
Conor Purcell
Thu Aug 29 2024 - 06:00

In May one of the world’s most prominent environmental groups, the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), began a lawsuit against the Norwegian government citing the latter’s intent to begin deep sea mining on the nation’s seabed. WWF claimed Norway had failed to properly investigate the possible and likely consequences of its decision, and that the government had breached Norwegian law.

In the new quest to exploit the global ocean’s seabed, the Norwegian case is an early example of what is soon to come, as nations begin to partake in a new technological process which — according to many scientists and conservation groups — is set to further denigrate the Earth’s natural habitat, with far-reaching and as-of-yet unknown, consequences.

Deep sea mining is the proposed process of mining the ocean’s seabed, typically for minerals. Start-ups in the field are increasingly operating under the banner of sustainability, and bolstering their position by lobbying international organisations and governments around the need for minerals for green technology — battery-powered electric vehicles for example — which will help dampen global heating.

Author Olive Heffernan: 'Just because we can do something doesn’t mean we should do it.'

Irish science journalist Olive Heffernan has tackled the topic in her book, The High Seas — Ambition, Greed, and Power on the Unclaimed Ocean, and looked at how the rapid pace of development in the ocean raises concerns about the long-term health of marine ecosystems.

READ MORE

In the second of a two-part series, Irish Times contributor Conor Purcell interviewed Heffernan, speaking by video call.

Why do you think deep sea mining has become an issue now?

Well now it is possible to mine minerals 5km below the ocean surface, at temperatures near freezing, at insanely high pressures, and then to bring them up for processing and commercial scale.

That’s an impressive feat of engineering — 10 years ago it wasn’t possible. It’s only in the last year that a company has proven for the first time that they have the technology to actually mine minerals. I think it’s also important to point out that right now it is a nascent industry. Nobody is commercially mining the seabed as of yet.

But we have to think about it. Just because we can do something doesn’t mean we should do it. Looking around us at the world today, with all of our technological “progress”, I think there is wisdom in slowing down. Deep sea mining is hugely controversial. We’re looking at taking this practice which is notoriously destructive, and allowing it to encroach on one of our most fragile ecosystems.

What arguments are being used by lobbyists to promote the mining of the seabed?

So proponents of deep sea mining — who are generally companies and governments who can benefit from them — say they are interested in exploiting the deep sea for minerals like cobalt, lithium, and copper, as well as others which are typically used for building green technologies. They claim that with access to the seabed we can build more EV batteries, solar panels, and wind turbines, which would help wean us off fossil fuels and alleviate the impacts of climate change.

There is also an argument being used that many developing countries will become enriched by allowing deep sea mining in their waters. And I think a lot of people just see this as business as usual. They think that since we’ve depleted so many resources on land, and in our coastal waters, now we’re simply looking to the offshore ocean to see what we can do and what we can extract from there.

What are the associated risks?

Conservationists are quite sceptical about these claims around the benefits of mining. They point out that we already have enough minerals on land to continue doing what we’re doing. We can build all of those batteries and wind turbines and whatever else using the resources we have on land, they say. They point out — backed up by quite a bit of science — that mining will cause irreparable harm to the deep ocean, a region which can legitimately be regarded as our last remaining wilderness.

Also, scientists are finding that 90 per cent of the species they pull up from the deep sea have never been seen by anyone on Earth — that is to say, they are new to science. So they’re worried that we could easily cause the extinction of many species. In addition, deep sea mining is simply a very messy operation which would kick up a lot of sediment and could interfere with ocean life at all depths, including impacting fisheries in ways that are unpredictable.

What laws are there protecting the environment in these proposed areas?

So beyond national borders, we’ve got international waters, and they are essentially a “free for all”. If you find something in international waters, say a fish, you can take it. But It’s not quite the same for the sea floor below those waters. There was a change in the law during the ‘90s stating that the seafloor is for everyone. The water is owned by no one, but the seafloor is owned by everyone – every nation – meaning that anything derived from the seafloor must be shared.

This means that if deep sea mining goes ahead in international waters, we have to agree in a way that benefits everyone on Earth, and UN regulators are trying to decide how this works. They have been given this conflicting mandate. On the one hand, they are supposed to ensure that deep sea mining is profitable but on the other, they have to protect the sea from harm. So they’re conflicted, and some environmentalists would say they’re so conflicted that they just can’t carry out that role.

Where do we stand today?

Late last year, this all exploded because a legal loophole meant that a Canadian start-up called the Metals Company would be allowed to go ahead and start mining. They have the right to go ahead and do so and are still aiming for that in 2025, despite there being a lot of pressure on them not to. Then we have the regulators who are in the middle of all this, trying to get everyone to agree on a rule book so that the Metals Company can start their work.

Then in January this year the Norwegian government gave the go-ahead via a parliamentary vote to open up its seabed to deep sea mining. They are intending to explore and exploit their Arctic waters first.

A lot of scientists and conservationists are saying, “look, just give us a decade to figure this out and to conduct research on the potential consequences”. But of course, they need the funding to do that, and in fact a lot of science is funded by industry investment and many of the commercial bodies are pro deep sea mining. So, it’s complicated. My own overall feeling is that we should try to keep the mining of resources to land, and focus more on recycling, and then see where we are in 10 years time.

Dr Conor Purcell writes about science, society and culture and can be found on X @ConorPPurcell — some of his other articles are at cppurcell.tumblr.com.