The conversation surrounding deep-sea mining is heating up, and scholars are stepping in to evaluate the impact and efficacy of the regulations designed to govern this controversial practice. As the world races towards achieving net-zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, the role of renewable energy becomes paramount. Yet, to build the infrastructure necessary for this green revolution, the demand for rare earth elements—cobalt, nickel, and manganese—will skyrocket by 400 to 600 percent in the coming decades. This staggering increase has led many nations and corporations to look beneath the waves, where vast reserves of these elements lie waiting on the ocean floor.
Deep-sea mining, unlike its terrestrial counterpart, promises to alleviate some of the economic, environmental, and human rights challenges that plague land-based operations. Environmentalists have long criticized terrestrial mining for its destructive nature—land clearing, excessive water consumption, and the collateral damage inflicted on surrounding ecosystems. In contrast, deep-sea mining operates primarily in “the Area,” a section of the seabed beyond national jurisdiction, governed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The International Seabed Authority (ISA) was established to manage these resources, ensuring they remain the common heritage of mankind.
However, the ISA’s regulations, which limit exploration and mining activities, face scrutiny. Environmental advocates are calling for a moratorium on deep-sea mining until its ecological impacts are fully understood. Critics argue that while the minerals are essential for green energy, the potential for releasing trapped carbon dioxide and causing biodiversity loss poses a significant risk. The noise and light pollution from mining operations could disrupt fragile marine ecosystems, and the trade-offs between terrestrial and underwater mining have ignited a heated international debate.
The ISA has been proactive, hosting semi-annual conferences aimed at refining regulations by 2025. Recent discussions have centered around the idea of a Seabed Sustainability Fund, proposed by Daniel Wilde and his team, which seeks to invest in research and mitigate mining-related harms. They argue that the economic benefits of deep-sea mining must be equitably distributed and that developing countries need a seat at the table to ensure their interests aren’t sidelined.
Further, research from Xingsen Guo and colleagues highlights the potential for improving mining efficiency and emphasizes the need for regulations that facilitate environmental recovery post-mining. They advocate for restorative practices, such as creating artificial algae farms and planting mangroves to absorb heavy metals, which could help restore ecological balance.
Steven Katona and his team stress that comparing biodiversity loss across ecosystems is crucial but insufficient. They call for qualitative assessments to complement quantitative studies, ensuring that moral and ethical considerations are part of the decision-making process.
Caitlin Keating-Bitonti’s Congressional Research Service report suggests that the United States could enhance its involvement in deep-sea mining by joining UNCLOS, which would streamline the process for American companies seeking ISA contracts. She emphasizes the need for robust research to prevent negative environmental impacts.
Finally, the ongoing negotiations must incorporate ecological and management thresholds, as argued by Becky Hitchin and her coauthors. Identifying these thresholds is essential for crafting regulations that promote economic development without surpassing ecological limits.
Incorporating “Best Practices” standards, as proposed by Xiangxin Xu and her team, will be crucial for the long-term effectiveness of these regulations. The challenge lies in operationalizing these standards to ensure they adapt to new scientific discoveries and environmental insights.
The stakes are high, and the future of deep-sea mining hangs in the balance. As stakeholders grapple with these complex issues, the dialogue must remain open and inclusive, ensuring that the benefits of this emerging industry do not come at an unacceptable cost to our oceans and their fragile ecosystems.
