By Mara Werkman and Manon Stravens

The deep seabed in all oceans contains huge reserves of unexploited critical minerals needed for the energy transition, such as cobalt, nickel and zinc. These reserves attract attention, as land-based mineral deposits are becoming scarce and as mining is often accompanied by human rights abuses. However, deep sea mining (DSM) is technologically complex, expensive, and not yet regulated. As little is known about deep sea ecosystems, concerns are growing about the potential negative impacts of DSM. As it takes ages for the ores to develop, we can’t speak of a renewable source, say experts.

The deep seabed belongs to the least explored areas on the planet. What we do know, is that at great depths of up to 6,000 meters colourful creatures move around without daylight and under immense pressure. And in the midst of these incredible creatures (look them up: bloody-belly comb jellyfish, the sea angel or the basket sea stars), the seabed is packed with potato-shaped nodules, that contain precious minerals such as nickel, lithium, cobalt and manganese. These metals are crucial for the production of batteries for electric vehicles, as well as cell phones, solar panels and other electronic devices. Thus, the deep sea could fuel our energy transition.

As climate change becomes all the more pressing while land-based mineral deposits become scarce, the eyes of governments and companies are increasingly focused on these unexplored regions of the planet. Oceans cover 70% of the earth’s surface. Mining companies insist on the urgency to start exploration, stating that the minerals are key to a green transition and to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Global demand for some minerals is estimated to rise by as much as 400%-600% in the coming decades. Companies like The Metals Company (TMC) claim that they are helping the world with the energy transition.

No tunnel collapses or child labour, but light and noise pollution

Other reasons why ocean floors are preyed upon, is that many of the abuses reported about mining on land will not happen on the deep seabed. For example, no tunnels need to be dug so that no tunnel collapse can kill people. Also, there is no risk of deforestation, forced evictions, or child labour, which are among the reported abuses in countries like Congo. 

However, scientists widely warn for the many other negative consequences of DSM. An analysis of the seabed ecology which was undertaken after Japan’s drilling tests in 2020 concluded that marine life such as fish and shrimp had decreased at the site a year later. The density had dropped even further in areas outside the impact zone, by more than half. Furthermore, the harvesting of the mineral-rich nodules at the seabed will have to be done by cutting them or by spraying water at very high pressure onto the bottom, as explained by a FairFin report to which Profundo contributed to. Both techniqueswill remove and destroy the top layer of the seabed which is about 15 to 40 cm thick and contains essential sources of food for various ocean organisms. The discharging of excess sand back in the ocean will create enormous plumes of pollution disturbing ocean life.

Slow growth

What actually happens there in the deep dark blue, making the seabed so fragile? Marine biologist Arjen Boon explains: “Daylight only reaches until about 100 meters, and in the top 100 meters almost all the food is created for the animals living in the sea.” He further states that: “Of this food production only a tiny fraction (< 1%) percentage ends up at the bottom of the ocean. So, the deeper you go, the less food is available. Animals living there are adapted to this: they grow very slowly.” This also goes for the mineral nodules, he says. “These nodules are mostly the result of bacterial processes, that take place in an extremely low pace, a few centimetres per million years. Quite like fossil processes. So, you cannot say that the nodules are a renewable source.” Nodules contain unique life forms, because they are a hard substrate in an otherwise very muddy environment, he explains. And there are creatures that grow on them. For example, the so-called ‘ghost octopus’ attaches its clutch of eggs to the stalk of a dead sponge. And the sponge needs to attach it self to something hard on the sea floor, such as a nodule.

New species being discovered

Other serious concerns include the impacts of light pollution by robotic vehicles harming shrimp larvae, industrial noise disturbing communications among marine animals as sounds can travel far. The ocean is already stressed enough, recalls a group of 56 Indigenous Groups in a March 2023 petition: “We are not in a position to add any new stress to our oceans by allowing deep-sea mining to start. Overfishing, ocean pollution, and rising temperatures have already taken a huge toll on our high seas.”  

At the same time, little is known about life in the deep sea. Scientists recently discovered more than 5,000 new species in the Pacific, a foreseen mining hotspot. The seabed appears to be the largest habitable space on the planet, and home to a great array of life. And what is destroyed or killed, cannot restore easily. Like corals, this would take hundreds or thousands of years.

Because of those concerns, Deep Sea Mining Campaign and Greenpeace are currently campaigning to stop DSM. Some companies, including automaker BMW, Google and Samsung backed a WWF call for a temporary ban on DSM until the risks are fully understood and all alternatives are exhausted. They have committed to avoid ocean-mined minerals. Also countries like Germany and Canada have called for national and regional moratoria.

Failed deadline for regulation

In July 2023, a group of 37 financial institutions, representing over EUR 3.3 trillion of combined assets released a joint statement urging governments to protect the ocean and to not proceed with deep seabed mining until the environmental, social and economic risks are comprehensively understood, and alternatives to deep-sea minerals have been fully explored.

Some financial institutions have taken steps to reflect their position in their own nature or mining policy. For example, the Norwegian Investor Storebrand which in the last update of its nature policy commits to “not invest in companies involved in deep-sea mining until we have more scientific knowledge on the impacts of these activities’’. The commercial bank Standard Chartered mentions in its position statement on extractive industries that it will refrain “from providing financial services directly towards the exploration or production of Deep-sea Mining projects’’.   

Most of the earth's seas and oceans fall outside the territorial waters of countries and are therefore not regulated. To fill the regulatory gap, the United Nations has set up the International Seabed Authority (ISA), a Jamaica-based UN organisation that develops regulations for the sea. According to its website, the ISA gave out 15-year DSM exploration contracts to 22 contractors. But any country can start deep-sea mining in its territorial waters, and Norway, Japan and the Cook Islands are about to allow it. Norway already collected mineral samples using undersea robots and drilling machines. It might be the first to start commercial mining. Japan plans to develop extraction technologies next year to start mining the mud on the deep sea bottom in an area in the Pacific Ocean, aiming to reduce the dependence on China for rare earth metals.

And regulation is going slow. Since the Pacific Island nation of Nauru notified the ISA in 2021 of its plans to begin mining in international waters, a provision in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) known as the “two-year rule” was included. The ISA had until 9 July 2023 to agree upon regulations that determine whether and how countries could pursue deep-sea mining in international waters. As the ISA failed to reach an agreement, it now has until 2025 to finalize regulations. In the meantime, countries could go ahead with mining projects in their own territorial waters.

Technically challenging

What is inhibiting a strong growth of DSM plans, is that it is technologically challenging and expensive, requiring huge investments. Financial institutions are involved, as is shown in a not published 2022 Profundo report on DSM. Profundo provided creditor and investor data that could be linked to DSM companies. For example, Barclays, a UK bank, invested in Deep Sea Mining related companies, among which The Metals Company, with US$ 175 million, (data from July 2022). Other investors in The Metals Company at the time were ERAS Holding with US$ 70 million and AP Moller Foundation with US$ 36 million. Additionally, in April 2022 Barclays also underwrote US$ 57 million in bond issuances in Lockheed Martin, a company which was involved in DSM back at the time, although it is not anymore. At the same time, in 2020, Barclays entered in a  “three-year, £5 million partnership to promote a stable climate through marine conservation” with the Blue Marine Foundation.

No messing around

Banks and investors should avoid an activity for which we do not yet know how harmful it will be for people, the environment and the climate. Financial institutions must clearly formulate policies towards deep-sea mining, ensuring extraction will happen without irreversible harmful impact on people and the planet. So far, deep-sea mining cannot guarantee that yet. And as long this is the case, financial institutions should support a temporary stop, a moratorium, on deep-sea mining. As marine biologist Arjen Boon said, “if you start messing around in the deep sea, the impact will be big, no question.”

This expert view is written by Mara Werkman and Manon Stravens. For further information, please contact Mara Werkman (M.werkman@profundo.nl) or Manon Stravens (M.stravens@profundo.nl)

 (Photo: diegograndi on iStock)