Extraction of minerals at the bottom of the sea can threaten fauna – 01/05/2023 – Environment

The deepest parts of the Pacific Ocean have rested undisturbed for millennia. But now the creatures that live thousands of meters below the surface may stumble upon new visitors: companies extracting minerals that are essential for the transition to green energy.

The International Seabed Authority (ISA), the UN-backed organization that regulates the seabed, is set to review the first application for a commercial deep-sea mining license in July, despite many of its Member states warn that it is too early for mining to move from land to water.

Two years ago, Nauru kicked off the countdown to the potential start of deepwater commercial mining, a practice hotly debated since the 1960s. according to a basic scheme created for prospecting, if the entity fails to agree on a complete set of safeguards for the sector before the middle of this year.

In view of this deadline, companies and countries are racing to influence what happens next. While Nauru is explicitly calling for permit applications to be reviewed from July onwards, countries such as Norway have taken a more lenient pro-extraction stance, opposing proposals to ease the veto of applications. Several European countries are urging caution as they carry out their own prospecting work, and China is also sending vessels to scour the seabed for minerals such as cobalt, nickel, manganese and copper.

Environmentalists have warned of the risks. Countries are trying to weigh the effort to move away from fossil fuels and balance it against the need to protect marine ecosystems, noting that ecological standards and accountability mechanisms will still be in limbo when the deadline runs out. Ecological treasures at the bottom of the sea include creatures such as the rare ghost fish, the dumbo octopus and the giant sea anemone, as well as microscopic worms that scientists say may hold the key to understanding human evolution.

“We need these commodities,” noted Michael Widmer, metals strategist at Bank of America. But, he asked, “Is it justifiable to destroy the seabed to facilitate the energy transition?”

Companies can currently prospect international waters for minerals, but they cannot extract the minerals. The Nauru initiative, which is sponsoring Vancouver-based mining company The Metals Company (TMC), could accelerate the arrival of mining on a commercial scale.

Proponents of deep-sea mining say the transition is necessary because land-based mining can’t satisfy demand for metals that are needed for batteries, wiring and other hardware critical to moving away from fossil fuels. The boom in electric cars and mains batteries resulting from the effort to meet the terms of the Paris Climate Pact means that demand for minerals is expected to quadruple by 2040, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). Increasing land mining to that extent would mean relying on China and would come at a huge environmental cost.

Offshore groups are testing three ways to extract minerals. The most promising option involves sucking up individual polymetallic nodules from the ocean floor, which are then transported by flexible hoses four kilometers long to ships moored at sea. These nodules contain copper, cobalt, nickel and manganese —metals that are already controversial because their extraction on land is linked to deforestation, forced labor and the displacement of communities.

At the center of the dispute over the future of offshore mining is the ISA, an organization created in 1982 to ensure that the extraction of minerals from international waters would benefit humanity. Its decisions are taken by a small council of member states who take turns deciding on behalf of 167 countries plus the EU. The United States never joined the ISA. As of July, after analyzing applications for a year, this council can approve exploration permits, with the support of a third of its members being enough.

Some diplomats accuse the ISA of taking an excessively favorable stance towards mining. At a conference last year, the organization’s secretary general, Britain’s Michael Lodge, attributed opposition to deep-sea mining to “growing environmental extremism and dogmatism, which in some instances borders on fanaticism”.

Lodge had previously said that a mining moratorium would be “contrary to science, knowledge, development and international law” and appeared in a promotional video for mining company TMC. It said Lodge visited its prospecting vessel in 2018 and “agreed to share via video his views on the development of this industry”.

A member of the ISA’s governing council said Lodge sparked unease among diplomats in February when he shared a statement seen as an attempt to assert his organization’s supremacy over a landmark UN treaty to protect marine biodiversity. The new agreement will create a body that can intervene in the event of a man-made marine disaster. The treaty “should not replace or weaken” the ISA, Lodge wrote in a February statement seen by the Financial Times.

A member of the German delegation to the ISA wrote to Lodge in March to convey concern that Lodge was resisting efforts by some delegates to slow down the approval process for commercial mining deals. In a letter first obtained by the New York Times and seen by the FT, Lodge dismissed those concerns, saying they were “bold and unfounded.”

The ISA said it would take a “precautionary approach” to requests for permits to extract minerals from the seabed and welcomed the new UN treaty. She added that Lodge’s characterization of deepwater mining comments was “misleading” and that he had not agreed to appear in TMC’s video. He further said that she welcomes the conclusion of a new UN treaty, whose objectives are “at the heart of the ISA’s mission”.

Some European countries seem to be biding their time. France, Germany and Spain sponsor offshore prospecting licenses. But at meetings in Jamaica last month, they called for a pre-emptive halt to seabed mining. After recommendations from scientists that the role of the sea floor in storing carbon and sustaining natural fauna and flora is still little known, at least a dozen countries have asked for a temporary suspension of activity.

The British government, which is funding a $6 million scientific research project in its own Pacific exploration zones, said in March it would not champion commercial mining in those areas until the ISA could succeed. agree global rules.

China sponsors more prospecting licenses than any other country. But analysts say their dominance of supply chains for critical minerals could be threatened if deep-sea mining starts before Beijing is ready. At ISA meetings last month, according to two people present at the meetings, Chinese diplomats did not give their immediate endorsement, but argued that environmental concerns should not outweigh the economic benefits of extraction.

With the backing of FTSE 100 mining company Glencore and Swiss subsea infrastructure company Allseas, as well as Nauru, TMC is taking its order forward. Its executive director, Gerard Barron, confirmed that it intends to file this year for a permit for the commercial extraction of minerals from the seabed.

“We have a legal right to do so,” Barron said. “ISA is finalizing the exploration rules. It’s not sitting around deciding whether or not exploration will happen.”

TMC extracted 4,400 tons of polymetallic nodules in a test carried out last year and, from the moment it has a commercial exploration license, it intends to extract 1.3 million tons a year. The loss-making firm has pledged that by 2024 it will start making money from commercial mining.

Its position is at odds with that of other offshore mining companies, which have said they need regulatory certainty now to be able to start commercial operations towards the end of the decade.

“Nobody but TMC wants to start extracting minerals from the deep sea, at least not in the next few years,” said Duncan Currie, a lawyer for the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition. “This has created enormous tension, diplomatic anxiety, frustration and activity all on one company.”

According to a scientific paper co-written by Adrian Glover, a scientist at the Natural History Museum in London who returned last month from a British government-funded deep-sea exploration mission, the Clarion-Clipperton Zone in the Pacific Ocean, where the largest part of the prospecting has been carried out, it is “one of the marine sedimentary habitats that has the greatest biodiversity on our planet”.

Environmentalists say the cloud of wastewater emitted by mining machinery in deep waters could disturb the so-called “sea snow”, formed by particles of biological matter rich in carbon and nutrients, which usually settle on the sea floor. Noise pollution can disturb marine mammals.

Deep-sea ecosystems “take millennia to create and can take seconds to destroy,” said oceanographer Tony Worby of the Australian nonprofit Minderoo Foundation. “We’re playing with fire if we think we can go down to the depths of the sea and mine destructively without massive repercussions.”

“It’s a tradeoff,” said Kris Van Nijen, managing director of Belgian deepwater mining company Global Sea Mineral Resources. “If we extract minerals in Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and the Philippines and destroy their rainforests, to what extent can polymetallic nodules be a better natural resource than minerals mined on land?”

There are other unanswered questions regarding offshore mining. For example, if a mining company released wastewater too close to the surface or if it seriously damaged the seabed, it is not clear who would be responsible for compensation.

“We could end up in a situation where Nori [uma subsidiária da TMC] or any mining company could go bankrupt or default, without access to cash [para pagar multas]”, said Pradeep Singh, expert in maritime law at the German Research Institute for Sustainability.

Offshore mining would also have to demonstrate that it can compete on costs with land-based mining. And it would have to gain buy-in from car manufacturers and consumers.

Yet another issue is profit sharing between member states. According to the ISA, it will be calculated based on each State’s population, its investments in offshore mining and lost revenue from land mining.

For Glover, any decision to go ahead with offshore mining will be unscientific. “It’s a political decision. It just depends on how much risk we’re willing to take.”

_{Translated by Clara Allain}