The playbook is the same. Discover a deposit that will produce a lot of energy, try to mine it senselessly, discourage research that could potentially expose its harmful effects, and then 40 years later, wonder how did we end up exploiting our planet like that. We did this decades ago with fossil fuel deposits discovered deep under dry land and we are all set to do the same with minerals found in the deep sea.
Instead of waiting another 40 years to figure out how we destroyed our planet, The Global Tiller examines this week how the corporate-government nexus is creating conditions for deep sea mining. What are some arguments being put forth in its favour and what are its potentially deadly effects?
The quest for deep sea mining is led by the need to find enough sources of energy to replace our dependence on fossil fuels. If we need to switch away from petrol and diesel-driven cars to electric ones, we need billions of tons of cobalt, lithium, copper, and other metals, which in turn, requires vast amounts of natural resources. To meet the exploding demand, mining companies, carmakers, and governments are scouring the planet for potential mines or expanding existing ones and they have finally hit the jackpot: the ocean floor.
The US Geological Survey estimates that 21 billion tons of polymetallic nodules lie in a single region of the Pacific, containing more of some metals (such as nickel and cobalt) than can be found in all the world’s dryland deposits. Leading this exploration is a Canadian mining startup, called the Metals Company, but it is, so far, being held back by international law that prohibits deep sea mining.
However, the Metals Company has partnered with the South Pacific island nation of Nauru to trigger an obscure process — which stipulates that once a nation informs the UN of its intentions to pursue deep sea mining, the authorities have two years to come up with regulations. As this deadline approaches in July 2023, it could allow these partners to bypass the international prohibition and get a license to start full-scale operations as early as July 2024. The matter now rests before the International Seabed Authority, which is currently meeting in Jamaica to decide whether or not such a permission could be granted.
While they deliberate, opposition to any such move grows. The main reason why scientists are opposed to granting any licence for ocean bed mining is simple: we simply don’t know enough about the deep sea to even calculate how harmful it could be for the planet. There is tons of carbon dioxide stored in our ocean beds that these mining exploits could release, triggering an even faster extinction of our species. According to a marine experts statement calling for a pause to deep sea mining:
The deep sea is home to a significant proportion of Earth’s biodiversity, with most species yet to be discovered. The richness and diversity of organisms in the deep sea supports ecosystem processes necessary for the Earth’s natural systems to function. The deep ocean also constitutes more than 90% of the biosphere, and plays a key role in climate regulation, fisheries production, and elemental cycling. It is an integral part of the culture and well-being of local communities and the seafloor forms part of the common heritage of humankind.
It is not just the scientists who are sounding the alarm. Many countries have voiced concerns that we need at least 10 more years to assess the ecological impacts of such an endeavour. In fact, the French Parliament voted in favour of banning deep-sea mining in its waters this January, joining a growing number of governments calling for a ban or precautionary pause to deep sea mining in the meantime, including Germany, Spain, New Zealand and Costa Rica. Apart from the Pacific nations of Nauru, Kiribati and Cook Islands, most other Pacific Islands have shared their concerns about premature exploitation — with Palau and Fiji launching an Alliance for Deep Sea Mining Moratorium.
If it seems that those calling for the moratorium are more concerned about climate change, you should know that the advocates of deep sea mining consider themselves equally green. "The biggest challenge to our planet is climate change and biodiversity loss. We don’t have a spare decade to sit around," says Metals Company CEO Gerard Barron. But his very argument that we need deep-ocean minerals for electric car batteries and the transition to green energy is based on a big lie. We don’t need deep sea minerals for car batteries, they can be found elsewhere. Plus, the idea of reduced consumption and the circular economy are better alternatives to reducing our carbon footprint than just manufacturing billions of cars to replace the current fleet.
For anyone who remembers the massive advertising campaigns that denied global warming in the 1980s, this playbook should seem familiar. Private companies and short-sighted governments collaborate for near-term gains while compromising the very survival of the future generations. Let’s make sure that, this time around, we see through their facade.
Until next time, take care and stay safe!
Hira - Editor - The Global Tiller
Dig Deeper
Since the 1980s, fossil fuel firms have run ads touting climate denial messages – many of which they’d now like us to forget.
…and now what?
Who should benefit from what’s in the oceans? Everyone or no one? Who should decide who benefits from what’s in the oceans? Everyone or no one? This has been and still is a big question in the law of the sea. And it has led to much confusion in the past.
For a long time, the high sea (from top to bottom) has been thought as “res nullius”, belonging to no one, because it was not regulated. But many have often pleaded it as being “res communis”, belonging to everyone. This debate is an important one when it comes to think about how to and who should protect the environment.
Under a very specific mindset, nature can be seen as a resource available to whoever wants to use it. Unless enclosed inside someone’s fences, as a claim of ownership, whatever is outside belongs to no one, so it’s yours to take, enjoy it and don’t think much about it. This is pretty much the idea that sustained colonialism: there was no “private property” sign at the entrance of those new lands, so they were open to be taken, apparently.
But this approach to natural things has proven dangerous. What if then nature was by default a belonging of everyone and that, in order to use it, we should ask everyone’s views on this? That would be a hell of a task for sure. So we could revert to special entities representing everyone to decide on everyone’s behalf. Yes, I know, I’m reinventing democracy here. But maybe it’s time to invent a democratic system for nature and to change the paradigm.
If nature is everyone’s property, then everyone has a stake and a right to it, it’s not up to just anyone to take without considering the impact on others. Isn’t it actually what everyone does when we live in society? If you live in a condominium, that’s actually what you do. And we call this being civilised.
So why don’t we try to be civilised? Why is this mining startup, of which many members I’m sure comply with the rules of their own condos, unwilling to ask the neighbours if they’re ok with it dirtying the floor of their shared ocean without knowing if that will impact the generations to come?
The Convention of Montego Bay of 1982 that framed the international law of the sea, tried to create this version of a condominium of the deep sea and regulate the system. Forty years ago. But since, those who claim to being the caretaker of the global order, haven’t even signed this convention.
We have all the solutions to solve most of today’s problem, among which greed is probably at the top of the list. But we lack courageous leadership. We lack visionary leadership. We lack leaders who understand that when it comes to existential challenges we need new ways to decide and work together, we need to think, collaborate and decide globally. Otherwise, the toxic neighbour will find its way to play among the divisions of the co-owners and will take its benefit at the expense of everyone.
But unfortunately today, we have leaders that are digging deep the hole in which they will bury us all, too busy they are looking for shiny rocks for their own benefits, as we dive deep into our own alienation. Yet, all we needed was to basically be a good, careful and polite neighbour. Doesn’t seem to too hard to do now, does it?
Philippe - Founder & CEO - Pacific Ventury