The climate goals agreed upon in the last few years have resulted in a stark increase in demand for cobalt, copper, lithium, nickel, manganese, and other rare earth elements that could be used in the manufacturing of batteries. Demand is high and expected to increase further, with forecasts projecting that copper demand will double and lithium demand will quadruple by 2030 [2], [3]. As a result, energy and mining companies are actively looking for new frontiers in which to extract this latest commodity, and have settled on the deep-sea floor as a potential source of the minerals for this century [4]. As of 2021, different mining companies had secured deep-sea exploration permits covering areas as large as France and Germany combined [1]. With these companies not being able to start commercial operations until the UN’s International Seabed Authority (ISA) passed the relevant international regulation, Nauru triggered a rule that gave the ISA only two years to reach a final regulatory framework. This was done in close cooperation with Nauru Ocean Resources Inc (NORI), a subsidiary of Canada-based The Metals Company (TMC), with the chairman of the company representing Nauru at an ISA plenary meeting [1]. Though most of the planning is done at TMC, the mining is officially done on behalf of the subsidiary; a practice that often reduces transparency as well as legal and monetary liability in case of accidents, presenting a larger risk to the host countries [1]. 

The ISA has the dual mission of authorizing and controlling the “development of mineral related operations in the international seabed” and to “protect the ecosystem of the seabed, ocean floor and subsoil ” in international waters [5]. Some believe that the agency in reality prioritizes the first part of the mission, given that the commission never rejected an exploration application, and charges $500,000 in application fees [1]. The agency itself also has several connections to mining executives, which further reduces the hopes of a decision based on scientific evidence [1], [6]. So now we ask, why does it matter that the ISA allows deep-sea mining?

For one, disturbing the ocean floor will inevitably result in sediment debris being scattered from the ocean floor to higher levels in the ocean, which scientists insist could harm ecosystems by limiting light penetration and releasing harmful toxins [7]. While mining companies have not yet tired of claiming that this is not likely because of their practices, a video was recently leaked that showed TMC dumping sediment into the ocean during one of their pilots [7]. In another instance, a subcontractor deliberately created a disturbance in the water to facilitate the mining process, then attempted to “influence independent scientific sampling activities”, as reported by those same scientists [7]. Though ecosystems have proved to be key in maintaining a stable climate, there is another, more pressing issue regarding disturbing the ocean floor. The ocean is composed of several interacting actors that make it the world’s largest carbon sink, microorganisms consume carbon on the surface, which are later eaten by fish, which eventually die and fall to the bottom of the ocean where the carbon they have trapped stays for millennia [8]. The intense concentration of carbon in the ocean floor is why bottom trawling fishing releases as much carbon dioxide as the entire aviation industry [9]. This means that attempts to mine the ocean floor in the name of “Green Energy” could result in a severe increase in carbon emissions. 

The potential consequences of these activities have not gone unnoticed, with Google, BMW, Volvo Group, and Samsung signing on to a WWF call for a moratorium on deep sea mining [10]. Civil society groups have also organized to raise awareness of the issue and protest. In early February of 2023 the Sustainable Ocean Alliance, the Deep Sea Defenders, and the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition protested at the Fifth International Marine Protected Areas Congress (IMPAC5) in Vancouver, the same city where TMC is headquartered [11]. After the protests, the congress ended with Canada calling for a moratorium, though not a ban, on the activity, citing the need for further risk evaluation [12]. Though it’s a step in the right direction, further action is needed to extend moratoriums or bans in international waters.

The pilot test faced complications, with TMC dumping sediment into the ocean [7]. In another instance, a subcontractor deliberately created a disturbance in the water to facilitate the mining process, then attempted to “influence” independent scientists’ observations [7].