

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The goal of an invitation-only event seemed to be to foster a shared belief among government officials and mining industry executives that deep-sea mining has a future. I’m not sure it worked.
In the chaotic aftermath of Snowmaggedon 2026, I snuck into the Offshore Critical Minerals Exploration and Development Forum at the famed Willard Hotel, known for hosting exclusive insider events and serving as a primary gathering spot for Washington DC’s “movers and shakers.” This event fit that mold—but with the growing secrecy of the deep-sea mining crowd added for extra flavor.
Hosted by the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF), the goal of this invitation-only event seemed to be to foster a shared belief among government officials and mining industry executives that deep-sea mining has a future. I’m not sure it worked.
ACCF’s Michael Zehr set the tone early, making sure everyone understood that “we’re not here to discuss the ISA [International Seabed Authority] and UNCLOS [United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea].”
OK, look, I get it. I’m sure they had to promise that the agenda would steer clear of prickly issues of international law to get the Trump officials to show up. But it’s a bit delusional to assume that the US will just carry on with President Donald Trump’s plan to bypass the International Seabed Authority after Trump is gone, so avoiding this issue completely undermined the whole purpose of the gathering.
Not only does deep-sea mining not yet exist, as Ocean Minerals CEO Hans Smit pointed out, it is an industry that should not exist. Humanity does not have a very good track record when it comes to launching new extractive industries, as even the predictable consequences are often dwarfed by the impacts we didn’t fully see coming. But this was not the group of people who were going to pause for that kind of self-reflection.
Instead, the mining CEOs did their best to convince everyone that deep-sea mining is easy and definitely going to happen while simultaneously making excuses for why it might take a long time. The investors tried to politely raise some of their huge glaring concerns in a way that wouldn’t alarm the government officials. And the Trump administration officials waved away questions about whether future leaders are going to just pull the plug on Trump’s reckless approach. Throughout the day, speakers probably spent more time worrying about environmentalists than the environment, which I suppose was no surprise coming from this bunch.
The speakers responsible for raising the capital to make DSM possible acknowledged that investors are not exactly jumping on this rusty bandwagon. Mining is right up there with tobacco, alcohol, pornography, and gambling for many investors, who categorically exclude financing industries that fail the vice clause screen. Even those who might be willing to overlook the environmental impacts or reputational risks have held back, apparently for two main reasons.
As someone who has worked closely with staff at NOAA, State, and other federal agencies for over 20 years, it was galling to see how completely captured these agencies have become by corporate interests.
First, deep-sea mining is fantastically expensive to get going, and so far no one is close to being ready to operate at commercial scale. No one wants to throw hundreds of millions of dollars into a venture that may well be headed for bankruptcy (again). Which is connected to the second big problem, which came up throughout the day: durability. This administration will be out of office well before commercial mining will be operational, and probably even before it can be permitted. Even Tim Petty, the assistant secretary of commerce, refused to speculate on whether the Trump administration could move fast enough to actually grant permits, looking visibly uncomfortable and just saying, “We’ll see.”
Sometimes, when they avoid the question, it is all the answer you need. Petty also ducked a question about the approach the administration will take to consultation with Pacific stakeholders, responding with a completely unrelated tangent. Then, when he was asked about a comment Rep. Ed Case (D-Hawaii) had just made at a congressional hearing, that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is in bed with The Metals Company, Petty preferred to recount that in his meeting with staffers, “None of the questions about the environment came up”—as if that was some sort of validation.
As someone who has worked closely with staff at NOAA, State, and other federal agencies for over 20 years, it was galling to see how completely captured these agencies have become by corporate interests. Don’t get me wrong, corporations have always had far too much influence over public policy, but hearing NOAA’s Deputy Assistant Secretary Erik Noble say repeatedly that “NOAA is open for business” does not exactly provide much assurance that the agency responsible for stewardship of our oceans is up to the task right now. The general message from NOAA and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) officials to mining execs was clear: We are on your side. Regulations and laws are flexible, money will flow, incentives are coming. Tell us what you need and we will make it happen. To drive the point home even harder, Megan Carr used the gathering as an opportunity to announce that BOEM was launching a new process to start paving the way for deep-sea mining on Alaska’s outer continental shelf.
It was painful to sit through a day of delusional boosterism, especially from agencies that are responsible for protecting our oceans and America’s standing in the world. By the second half of the day, though, it was clear that there were hardly any “investors” in the room, and that the audience was mostly just made up of a rotating group of speakers talking to each other. Two-thirds of the seats were empty, and so, ultimately, was the promise of any real discussion when fundamental issues were off the table, speakers were unwilling to answer questions (from moderators only—no questions were ever taken from the audience), and people with other perspectives were not invited.
"There is still a chance to stop this industry before it begins, but only if governments stand up for science, equity, and precaution now," one campaigner said.
Despite growing momentum, world governments failed to agree to a moratorium on deep-sea mining as the 30th session of the International Seabed Authority wrapped up on Friday.
The authority's July meeting was the first since U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order to expedite permits for deep-sea mining under U.S. authority and The Metals Company (TMC) promptly applied for U.S. permits. Governments rebuked the U.S. and TMC for their unilateral approach and did not agree on a mining code that would allow the controversial practice to move forward under international law. However, campaigners said more decisive action is needed to protect the ocean and its biodiversity.
"Governments have yet to rise to the moment," Greenpeace International campaigner Louisa Casson said in a statement. "They remain disconnected from global concerns and the pressing need for courageous leadership to protect the deep ocean."
Casson continued: "We call on the international community to rise up and defend multilateralism against rogue actors like The Metals Company. Governments must respond by establishing a moratorium and reaffirming that authority over the international seabed lies collectively with all states—for the benefit of humanity as a whole."
The International Seabed Authority (ISA) gains its authority to regulate deep-sea mining under the United Nations Law of the Sea, to which the U.S. is not party. TMC, however, could suffer consequences for bypassing the international process, as other countries and companies may decide not to do business with it.
At the most recent session, the ISA's council decided not to revoke exploratory permits it had previously granted to TMC and its subsidiaries. However, it approved an investigation on Monday into whether mining contractors such as TMC subsidiaries Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. and Tonga Offshore Mining Limited were abiding by their obligations under international law.
"TMC has been testing the limits of what it can get away with, a bit like a child seeing how far it can go with bad behavior," Matthew Gianni, cofounder of the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC), told The New York Times.
"The member countries of the ISA have basically sent a shot across the bow, a warning to TMC that going rogue may well result in the loss of its ISA exploration claims," Gianna explained, adding that the investigation also served as a warning to other companies who might consider following TMC's example.
"The Trump administration's pursuit of deep-sea mining isn't about global stewardship—it's about sidestepping it."
Casson agreed: "The international community's message to The Metals Company is clear: Violating international law, ignoring scientific consensus, and disregarding human rights will have consequences. This is also a warning to any companies or governments choosing to align themselves with [TMC CEO] Gerard Barron's business model—they must be prepared to bear the reputational fallout of trying to destroy the ocean."
At the same time, a U.S. representative spoke on Thursday, doubling down on Trump's dismissal of the international process and earning instant push back from Brazil, France, and China
"As a non-party to the Law of the Sea Convention, the United States is not bound by the convention rules dealing with seabed mining through the International Seabed Authority," the U.S. statement said in part.
The statement came days after Greenpeace released a report titled Deep Deception: How the Deep-Sea Mining Industry is Manipulating Geopolitics to Profit from Ocean Destruction, which details how TMC and other deep-sea mining companies are exploiting national security concerns to lobby U.S. lawmakers to fast track deep-sea mining.
"The U.S. statement confirms what Deep Deception has already exposed: The Trump administration's pursuit of deep-sea mining isn't about global stewardship—it's about sidestepping it," Arlo Hemphill, Greenpeace USA's project lead for the Stop Deep-Sea Mining campaign, said in a statement. "By rejecting the ISA's authority while claiming environmental responsibility, the U.S. is trying to have it both ways—and in doing so is advancing a 'smash and grab' agenda that puts ocean health and international cooperation at serious risk."
Ultimately, ocean advocates agree that the only way to protect the deep sea is for governments to agree to a precautionary pause on a practice they argue would do irreparable harm to ecosystems science barely understands.
The consensus for such a pause is building, with Croatia becoming the 38th nation to support one during the latest ISA meeting.
"The ISA is paralyzed by a small group clinging to outdated extraction agendas while blocking even the most basic reforms," Simon Holmström, the deep-sea mining policy officer for Seas at Risk, said in a statement. "The firm rejection of the U.S. and The Metals Company's power grab, alongside 38 countries now calling for a moratorium or precautionary pause, shows growing resistance to sacrificing the planet's least understood ecosystem for corporate short-term profit."
"To even consider a new form of ecocide on our already ailing planet is both reckless and irrational."
Several nations spoke strongly in favor a moratorium, including Palau, Panama, and France.
"Exploiting the seabed is not a necessity—it is a choice," said His Excellency Surangel S. Whipps Jr., president of the Republic of Palau, on Tuesday. "And it is reckless. It is gambling with the future of Pacific Island children, who will inherit the dire consequences of decisions made far from their shores."
A Pacific leader from Solomon Island also defended the interests of the Pacific Ocean community: "As Pacific people, we continue to carry the trauma of what extractive industries have already done to our homes. Mining companies that came with promises, stripped our lands and waters, and left behind ecological, cultural, and spiritual scars. We cannot let that cycle repeat itself, in the ocean that connects us. That sustains us. And that defines us."
Olivier Poivre d'Arvor of France called for a pause of 10-15 years: "Our message is clear: no deep-sea mining without science, without collective legitimacy, without equity [...] France is calling for a moratorium or a precautionary pause. What for? Because we refuse to mortgage the future for a few nodules extracted in a hurry, in favor of a few."
However, campaigners argued that many governments continued to fall short of the commitments they had made at the U.N. Ocean Conference (UNOC) in Nice in early June.
"Thirty-eight states have now joined the call for a moratorium or precautionary pause, with Croatia joining the coalition during this Assembly," said DSCC campaign director Sofia Tsenikli. "But too many other states, which were bold in their ocean promises at UNOC, are not putting this into action at the ISA. Governments must meet their promises by doing what it takes to implement a moratorium before it's too late."
Farah Obaidullah, founder and director of The Ocean and Us, argued that the ocean already faces too many other threats to add the additional burden of deep-sea mining.
"The health of the high seas including the seabed is critical to our own. Yet our shared heritage faces an onslaught of threats from climate and nature collapse, escalating tensions, and failed leadership," Obaidullah said. "To even consider a new form of ecocide on our already ailing planet is both reckless and irrational. We know that deep-sea mining will devastate life in the deep ocean, wipe out species before they have been discovered, and impact ocean functions, including carbon sequestration. When it comes to the ocean we have no time to lose. We cannot colonize and conquer our shared heritage which belongs to us all. There is only one responsible way forward, and that is to secure a moratorium on deep-sea mining."
DSCC's Gianni also argued strongly for a pause: "Being on the fence or remaining silent is not a politically defensible position. We are risking severe ecological damage, and future generations will ask what we did to stop it. There is still a chance to stop this industry before it begins, but only if governments stand up for science, equity, and precaution now, and take action to prevent companies within their jurisdiction from cooperating with rogue mining operations."
Greenpeace's Hemphill concluded: "Governments must secure a moratorium that leaves no room for a desperate industry to force through a mining code. The science is not ready. The legal framework is not in place. The world must not be bullied into an irreversible mistake for the benefit of a few."
"The harm caused by deep-sea mining isn't restricted to the ocean floor: It will impact the entire water column, top to bottom, and everyone and everything relying on it," one campaigner warned.
Amid global calls for a ban on deep-sea mining to protect marine ecosystems, U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order to advance the risky practice and "restore American dominance in offshore critical minerals and resources."
"The broad order avoids a direct confrontation with the United Nations-backed International Seabed Authority and seeks essentially to jump-start the mining of U.S. waters as part of a push to offset China's sweeping control of the critical minerals industry," noted Reuters, which had previewed the measure aimed at attaining nickel, cobalt, copper, manganese, titanium, and rare earth elements.
"The International Seabed Authority—created by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which the U.S. has not ratified—has for years been considering standards for deep-sea mining in international waters, although it has yet to formalize them due to unresolved differences over acceptable levels of dust, noise, and other factors from the practice," the agency reported.
Trump's order directs Cabinet members including Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick—whose department oversees the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)—to expedite the permit process and work on various related reports.
"Authorizing deep-sea mining outside international law is like lighting a match in a room full of dynamite—it threatens ecosystems, global cooperation, and U.S. credibility all at once."
Deep-sea mining is opposed by over 30 countries as well as academics and advocacy groups worldwide. Among them is Greenpeace USA, whose campaigner Arlo Hemphill said Thursday that "authorizing deep-sea mining outside international law is like lighting a match in a room full of dynamite—it threatens ecosystems, global cooperation, and U.S. credibility all at once."
"We condemn this administration's attempt to launch this destructive industry on the high seas in the Pacific by bypassing the United Nations process," Hemphill declared. "This is an insult to multilateralism and a slap in the face to all the countries and millions of people around the world who oppose this dangerous industry."
"But this executive order is not the start of deep-sea mining. Everywhere governments have tried to start deep-sea mining, they have failed. This will be no different," he added. "We call on the international community to stand against this unacceptable undermining of international cooperation by agreeing to a global moratorium on deep-sea mining. The United States government has no right to unilaterally allow an industry to destroy the common heritage of humankind, and rip up the deep sea for the profit of a few corporations."
No exaggeration, deep sea mining could cause the massive collapse of the entire deep sea ecosystem and food chain. This is an existential risk to every person on this planet. www.nytimes.com/2025/04/24/c...
[image or embed]
— Alejandra Caraballo (@esqueer.net) April 24, 2025 at 5:54 PM
Ocean Conservancy vice president for external affairs Jeff Watters also blasted the move, saying that "this executive order flies in the face of NOAA's mission. NOAA is charged with protecting, not imperiling, the ocean and its economic benefits, including fishing and tourism; and scientists agree that deep-sea mining is a deeply dangerous endeavor for our ocean and all of us who depend on it."
"Areas of the U.S. seafloor where test mining took place over 50 years ago still haven't fully recovered," Watters pointed out. "The harm caused by deep-sea mining isn't restricted to the ocean floor: It will impact the entire water column, top to bottom, and everyone and everything relying on it. Evidence tells us that areas targeted for deep-sea mining often overlap with important fisheries, raising serious concerns about the impacts on the country's $321 billion fishing industry."
He highlighted that "NOAA is already being threatened by this administration's unprecedented cuts. NOAA is the eyes and ears for our water and air. NOAA provides Americans with accessible and accurate weather forecasts; it tracks hurricanes and tsunamis; it responds to oil spills; it keeps seafood on the table; and so much more. Forcing the agency to carry out deep-sea mining permitting while these essential services are slashed will only harm our ocean and our country."
"It's not just our country this executive order would harm: This action has far-reaching implications beyond the U.S.," Watters added, warning that by unilaterally allowing deep-sea mining, "the administration is opening a door for other countries to do the same—and all of us, and the ocean we all depend on, will be worse off for it."
As The New York Times reported:
The executive order could pave the way for the Metals Company, a prominent seabed mining company, to receive an expedited permit from NOAA to actively mine for the first time. The publicly traded company, based in Vancouver, British Columbia, disclosed in March that it would ask the Trump administration through a U.S. subsidiary for approval to mine in international waters. The company has already spent more than $500 million doing exploratory work.
"We have a boat that's production-ready," said Gerard Barron, the company's chief executive, in an interview on Thursday. "We have a means of processing the materials in an allied friendly partner nation. We're just missing the permit to allow us to begin."
In response to the late March disclosure—which came during International Seabed Authority negotiations—Louisa Casson, senior campaigner for Greenpeace International, said that "this is another of the Metals Company's pathetic ploys and an insult to multilateralism. It shows that a moratorium on deep-sea mining is more urgently needed than ever. It also proves that the company's CEO Gerard Barron's plans never focused on solutions for the climate catastrophe."
"The Metals Company is desperate and now is encouraging a breach of customary international law by announcing their intent to mine the international seabed through the United States' Deep-Sea Hard Mineral Resources Act," the camapigner asserted. "This comes after the Metals Company has spent years exerting immense pressure on the International Seabed Authority to try and force governments to allow mining in the international seabed—the common heritage of humankind."
Casson stressed that "states, civil society, scientists, companies, and Indigenous communities continue to resist these efforts. Having tried and failed to pressure the international community to meet their demands, this reckless announcement is a slap in the face to international cooperation."
Less than a week later, the Norwegian deep-sea mining company Loke Marine Minerals declared bankruptcy—which Haldis Tjeldflaat Helle, a campaigner for Greenpeace Nordic, noted came "on the same day that we shut down a deep-sea mining conference in Bergen."
The Norwegian government in December halted plans to move forward with deep-sea mining in the Arctic Ocean, which Steve Trent, CEO and founder of the Environmental Justice Foundation, had called "a testament to the power of principled, courageous political action, and... a moment to celebrate for environmental advocates, ocean ecosystems, and future generations alike."
The multilateral body, recently decried for its seemingly pro-industry stance, should reorient itself back toward its most weighty purpose: protecting the seabed for the benefit of humankind as a whole.
The deep sea, Earth’s last untouched ecological frontier, is an ancient, living system that regulates our climate, stores carbon, and hosts breathtaking biodiversity. It is the common heritage of all of us. It is not a resource bank for speculative profits. And it is not for sale.
Yet, the deep-sea mining industry, led by The Metals Company (TMC), is determined to change that. The company has threatened to submit the world’s first commercial mining application in June 2025—with or without regulations in place. And now, in a desperate new move, it says it will bypass the International Seabed Authority (ISA) altogether and seek mining permits under the United States’ 1980 Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHRMA).
TMC’s reckless and dangerous attempt at a deep-sea neocolonial land grab came on the penultimate day of the ISA’s 30th Council session, ahead of a discussion of its mining application and a Fourth Quarter 2024 Earnings Update call. As it became clear that it would be forced to leave the meeting empty-handed, when nations rejected its wish to secure a process to have its commercial application approved, the company doubled down. Its tactics echo those of the oil and gas industry—manufacturing urgency and demanding fast-tracked approval.
The truth is this: deep-sea mining is a “cause in search of a purpose.” Greed, driven by speculative profit rather than public need, is driving the push for the launch of this destructive industry.
Member states and the ISA’s newly appointed Secretary-General Leticia Carvalho swiftly condemned it as a blatant attempt to sidestep international law and undermine the multilateral governance of the global commons. This pressure from TMC and other industry players forces a defining question for the ISA: Will it uphold its mandate to protect the seabed for the benefit of all humankind, or will it cave to corporate pressure?
Contrary to industry complaints, the careful ISA deliberations that have taken place over the years are safeguards to ensure that crucial unresolved questions around environmental risk, equity, science, and underwater cultural heritage are addressed. Notably, in this session, the African Group spotlighted long-ignored issues of how benefits will be shared and the socioeconomic impacts of seabed mining on terrestrial mining countries. These questions cut to the core of justice and global balance, and they demand answers before any approval can be considered.
Outside the meeting rooms, public opposition is mounting. Greenpeace International and Pacific allies brought the voices of over 11,000 people from 91 countries directly to the ISA urging deep-sea conservation. Thirty-two countries now support a moratorium, ban, or precautionary pause on deep-sea mining. The United Nations Environment Program has echoed these calls, emphasizing the need for robust, independent science before any decisions are made. And legal scholars have dismissed recent threats of lawsuits from contractors as baseless.
The industry is increasingly being recognized for what it is—a false solution. Deep-sea mining proponents claim that mining the seabed would reduce pressure on land-based ecosystems. However, research suggests deep-sea mining is more likely to add to global extraction than replace it. Meanwhile, emerging battery technologies, recycling breakthroughs, and circular economy models are rapidly reducing any purported demand for virgin metals from the seafloor.
With its original green-washing narrative unraveling, TMC and others are now stoking geopolitical tensions, positioning themselves as a strategic necessity for national security. However, the cracks are showing. For instance, TMC recently surrendered a third of its mining contract area in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ), after ending a services agreement with its Kiribati-sponsored partner, Marawa. The industry faces failed mining tests, equipment and vessel delays, no finalized regulations, and growing investor skepticism over the industry’s environmental and financial viability.
The truth is this: deep-sea mining is a “cause in search of a purpose.” Greed, driven by speculative profit rather than public need, is driving the push for the launch of this destructive industry.
And the risks are profound. A recent study published in Nature found reduced biodiversity and ecosystem degradation more than 40 years after a small-scale mining test. Recovery of these nodules, which take millions of years to form, in human timescales is impossible.
But there is still hope. The recent appointment of Leticia Carvalho, a scientist who is calling for transparency, inclusivity, sustainability, environmental protection, and science-driven governance, as the secretary-general of the ISA presents a real opportunity. The multilateral body, recently decried for its seemingly pro-industry stance, should seize it and reorient itself back toward its most weighty purpose: protecting the seabed for the benefit of humankind as a whole.
The ISA’s dual mandate under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)—to both manage the mineral resources of the seabed and ensure the effective protection of the marine environment—has always been fraught with tension. But in this era of climate chaos, biodiversity loss, and ocean degradation, it is precaution and protection that must prevail. The health of the ocean, the rights of future generations, and the principle of the common heritage of humankind demand it.
As the world heads toward the U.N. ocean conference in Nice, France this June—just a few weeks before the July ISA Assembly—leaders will have a crucial chance to show where they stand. They must reject TMC’s and the rest of the deep-sea mining industry’s attempts to force the ocean floor to be opened for exploitation with no assurance of marine protection. They must not allow themselves to be bullied into the adoption of a weak Mining Code built on industry-favored timelines. They must honor their roles as stewards—not sellers—of the international seabed.
The deep sea is not for sale—and the ISA still has a chance to prove it.
As we have begun to unravel the mysteries of the deep sea over the past two decades, the wisdom behind the international community’s commitments to protect it is clearer than ever. Now is time to act.
This week’s United Nations General Assembly marks nearly 20 years since the body first resolved to restrict bottom trawling on the world’s seamounts, submarine mountains that rise thousands of feet above the sea floor and comprise some of the most biologically rich marine ecosystems on the planet.
Led by Palau and other small island nations with generations-long ties to the ocean, the ensuing decades witnessed a raft of subsequent agreements that expanded protections for more of the deep sea—the dark, cold waters below 200 meters—culminating last year with the adoption of a treaty to protect marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
These are important achievements that should be celebrated. But, we have been involved in diplomacy long enough to know that such agreements are often just the beginning of a long and winding journey to full implementation.
Today, for instance, not only does bottom trawling continue on seamounts, it occurs in ever deeper waters, despite scientific evidence of the severe damage it causes to corals and other habitats. In fact, the UN’s most recent World Ocean Assessment found that “fishing, especially bottom trawling, constitutes the greatest current threat to seamount ecosystems”.
A similar story is unfolding elsewhere in the deep sea. Not long ago, the crushing pressure and near total darkness of the mesopelagic layer of the ocean, sometimes referred to as the “twilight zone” (200-1000 meters deep), was thought to be inhospitable to life.
However, technological advances like submersibles and remotely operated vehicles, now offer a window on a world that is alive with deep water fish, squid, and shrimp. It is estimated that this marine realm holds up to 95 percent of all ocean fish by weight and as many as 10 million different species—a level of biodiversity akin to tropical rainforests.
We also now know that the deep sea environment is critical to the health of the ocean’s wider food web, including fish stocks that countless people around the world depend on for food and employment.
Moreover, new research has revealed that the mesopelagic’s staggering biomass plays an indispensable role in the climate system by keeping enormous amounts of heat-trapping gasses out of the atmosphere in a process known as the carbon pump.
However, as overfishing, pollution, and rapidly warming waters continue to take a toll on global fish stocks, nations have increasingly been looking at authorizing their fleets to exploit the deep sea in order to meet the insatiable demand for fish products used in fertilizer, aquaculture, and dietary supplements.
The danger of over-exploitation doesn’t end 1000 meters down. Mining companies have long looked to extend their reach from the land into the deep sea. Today, for example, the UN-affiliated International Seabed Authority, which regulates deep-sea mining, is working on finalizing rules to manage commercial operations on the ocean floor.
It has already permitted exploratory mining voyages in the Pacific’s vast Clarion-Clipperton Zone, where the ships dredge the sea floor 4000-5000 meters below the surface for nodules of nickel, manganese, copper, and cobalt that without government subsidies would never turn a profit.
As elsewhere, the activities could cause irreversible damage to the ecosystem and potentially release carbon that has been stored safely for millennia. If approved, full-scale mining could commence in a few years.
Remarkably (and not without irony), research funded in part by a corporate mining interest recently discovered the presence of “dark oxygen” in the same area of the seabed. It has long been understood that oxygen was created by living organisms in the presence of light through the process of photosynthesis.
However, a study published over the summer suggests that the electrochemical properties of the aforementioned nodules can generate oxygen in total darkness. The findings could have far-reaching implications that help us understand the origins of life and demonstrate the high stakes involved with mining.
As we have begun to unravel the mysteries of the deep sea over the past two decades, the wisdom behind the international community’s commitments to protect it is clearer than ever. Our imperative task today is to fully implement them before it is too late.
A U.S. moratorium would send a strong message that it supports neither destructive seabed mining nor creating a new domestic market for minerals sourced from the ocean.
Five thousand new species were discovered earlier this year on a single research expedition to the Clarion-Clipperton Zone—a 1.7 million square mile area between Hawaii and Mexico. A steady stream of studies like this one reveal that from the darkest depths to the shallows by our shores, there are a multitude of undiscovered species in our oceans.
But the Clarion-Clipperton Zone also possesses a high concentration of minerals, and has therefore captured the eye of a risky new industry: deep-sea mining. If zones like this one are opened up for full-scale industrial mining, numerous newly discovered and undiscovered species will be at risk. Mining threatens to permanently destroy vast sea floors, undersea mountains, and otherworldly hydrothermal vents.
We urge U.S. President Joe Biden and his administration to call for a moratorium on deep-sea mining, and stop this destructive industry from wreaking havoc on our seas. Right now, mining the deep seas is largely illegal under international laws, which means we can still prevent the destruction of untouched ocean areas and the multitudes they contain.
In short, deep-sea mining is an unnecessary threat to our global climate, the stability of our oceans, and the economy that depends on them.
But time is running out. At the end of July, nations will come together in Kingston, Jamaica at the International Seabed Authority (ISA), which oversees commercial seabed mining in international waters, to advance draft mining rules. While the U.S. is not a member of the ISA, a U.S. moratorium would send a strong message that it supports neither destructive seabed mining nor creating a new domestic market for minerals sourced from the ocean. Twenty-five member states of the ISA—along with an increasing number of environmental, scientific, and Indigenous groups—already support a moratorium.
Yet the ISA is on track to allow deep-sea mining to begin–with increasingly lax regulation. In a recent draft of the ISA’s Mining Code, environmental protections for sensitive ecosystems had been stripped out. And in a breach of transparency norms, the identities of those proposing language to accelerate the approval of commercial mining licenses were omitted.
Some in the U.S. Congress are encouraging the acceleration of industrial deep-sea mining in U.S. federal waters, and federal agencies are preparing for the possibility of mining applications in the country, including an area off the Southeast U.S. called the Blake Plateau. This region, still scarred from test mining in the 1970s, is home to one of the world’s largest deep-sea coral reefs. Fishermen have long sought to protect this area, but deep-sea mining could put that protection—and their livelihoods—at risk. Last year, fishing industry groups joined the chorus of opposition to deep-sea mining.
The harm caused by deep-sea mining isn’t restricted to the sea floor. It will impact the entire water column top to bottom, and everyone and everything relying on it. Byproducts from mining could expose economically and culturally important species such as tunas to toxic sediment plumes, potentially contaminating fisheries. These plumes risk damaging known and unknown species at every depth, including those that sequester and transfer massive amounts of carbon.
Pro-mining interests argue that deep-sea minerals are needed for green energy technologies, like batteries for electric vehicles and solar panels, to meet future demand and mitigate climate change. We must not give in to this false choice between oceans and climate, and instead recognize that protecting our ocean is an equally important piece of keeping our planet habitable.
The ocean plays a critical role in global climate stability. Ocean creatures are vital strands in a delicate web of life that touches all of us. They are critical to coastal communities and economies, a potential source of game-changing medicines, and each plays a part in natural processes that help to regulate our climate.
Undermining ocean health to pursue potential mineral deposits is simply unnecessary. Demand for seabed minerals like nickel, copper, and cobalt is expected to level off or decline as clean energy technologies evolve and recycling capabilities improve. For example, batteries without seabed minerals now make up 36% of the electric vehicle market, and this is expected to increase to 60% by 2030.
In short, deep-sea mining is an unnecessary threat to our global climate, the stability of our oceans, and the economy that depends on them.
President Biden’s administration must make it clear that U.S. waters are not open for this destructive business. As nations gather to discuss the future of the industry, the Biden administration should join 25 other countries, including Canada and Mexico, in support of a global moratorium on deep-sea mining. For the sake of our ocean—and for all life on Earth that depends on it.
The ocean is far more than a collection of resources to be exploited; it's a living, breathing entity that sustains life on Earth, and it's our duty to protect it.
In the bustling heart of New York City, where the pulse of global capitalism beats strongest, Greenpeace USA illuminated a towering LED Billboard with a crucial message for the Biden administration and investors: "Stop Deep-Sea Mining."
As an ocean campaigner with Greenpeace, every pixel of that display resonates with me as a beacon of hope in the ongoing battle to safeguard our oceans.
My connection to the ocean runs deep. From my childhood in Coastal California, where the ocean is a central part of our culture and economy, to the privilege I've enjoyed as a campaigner to explore its depths and sail its vast expanses, marveling at its mysteries and the incredible creatures that call it home, to the unparalleled joy of teaching my grandchildren to snorkel. The ocean is far more than a collection of resources to be exploited; it's a living, breathing entity that sustains life on Earth, and it's our duty to protect it.
With our oceans, climate, and planet facing crises, we cannot afford to take unnecessary risks with another ill-conceived and needlessly destructive industry.
And now our oceans, which have already been pushed to the brink, face a new and urgent peril: Deep-Sea Mining. Driven by the insatiable thirst for profit, this industry is poised to unravel the delicate tapestry of life in the most pristine ecosystem on our planet: the deep seas. This is one of the last places in the world that is largely untouched by human activity, a place where scientists are just now discovering thousands of new species, and it's crucial to all life on our planet. In its wake, deep-sea mining could collectively impact an oceanic area greater than the size of the continental U.S. and worsen the already critical state of the world's oceans.
Over 2.8 million people worldwide have signed the Greenpeace petition calling for a moratorium on deep-sea mining because this is about more than just preserving habitats and safeguarding species—it's about protecting a part of ourselves.
We are not alone. The industry faces resistance from international investors and major banks, who have refused to fund deep-sea mining. Businesses such as Google, BMW, Volvo, and Renault have all called for a pause. Governments around the world, the United Nations human rights commissioner, fishing interests, battery manufacturers, Indigenous groups, and thousands of climate and youth activists have also raised objections. As a result, deep-sea mining didn't get the "green light" that was expected at an international meeting last year.
But the threat remains.
Today, as I stand in Times Square surrounded by flashy billboards, our call to protect the ocean stands alongside the seven-story Nasdaq Billboard where The Metals Company (TMC), a leading proponent of deep-sea mining, previously broadcast its entry as a Nasdaq-traded company, and I am reminded of the gravity of what's at stake. The ocean provides over 70% of the oxygen we breathe. It is an essential carbon sink that has helped us to regulate the climate even in the face of our increasing production of greenhouse gasses—buffering us from the worse impacts of climate change.
But it's what we don't know that should give us pause about launching an industry with irreversible impacts in a critical life-sustaining environment. Mining in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone could have unknown impacts on the ocean's carbon cycle. Extracting nodules, disrupting marine habitats, and generating sediment plumes from mining activities may disrupt carbon sequestration and hinder oxygen-producing processes.
This should worry investors buying into the industry's hyperbole of expected returns as, judging from the surge in climate change and biodiversity cases, they could face both litigation and business model risks. Countries, communities, and other stakeholders impacted by seabed mining—like fishing communities—can pursue their perceived losses in international, regional, and national courts.
Until recently, The Metals Company CEO Gerard Barron actively sought investment and political support, promoting seafloor polymetallic nodules as a pivotal resource for electric vehicles, dubbing them a "battery in a rock." However, with the evolution of battery technology diminishing the purported necessity for seafloor minerals coupled with a notable decline in metal prices, and after failing to persuade people that deep-sea minerals are needed to fight climate change, these reckless opportunists have turned their sights on the Pentagon. They are now exploiting geopolitical tensions as they cite China as an alternative market if the U.S. won't help them open the gates to the new extractive industry.
Recently, former military and government officials who should know better lent their names to a letter that supports the right thing for the wrong reasons. The letter, echoing The Metals Company's fear-mongering rhetoric, calls for the U.S. to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) to spur the country's interest in deep-sea mining amid competition with China for critical minerals. There are numerous good reasons for the U.S. to ratify UNCLOS, and being able to vote for a moratorium on deep-sea mining should be at the top of that list.
Instead, The Metals Company is aiming to get deep-sea mining started, ignoring all the reasons not to, possibly because their Nasdaq stock price just hasn't been able to get back up since their bellowing beginning. They announced they will submit an application to begin commercial deep-sea mining following the meeting of the International Seabed Authority this month - even though the organization is very unlikely to adopt a regulatory framework to permit mining this year.
Rather than cowering to an aggressive company seeking to profit off devastating an ocean ecosystem we barely understand, the U.S. government should focus on its responsibility to extend protections for our oceans. Investing billions of dollars in an untested and destructive industry like deep-sea mining is not the answer. It's 2024, a time when prospectors are beginning to look out to other planets for new resources. We have already done so much damage to this blue planet we call Earth, the only place known to harbor life. Isn't it time to finally prioritize preserving the rich life-giving oceans that sustain us? Instead of deep-sea mining, a better choice would be supporting innovative technology and scaling the recycling and reuse of batteries and minerals that are already making this industry obsolete.
It doesn't make sense to destroy little-understood ecosystems just to add a small percentage of world metals production. Investors should be cautious against falling for the poorly veiled greenwashing narrative. With our oceans, climate, and planet facing crises, we cannot afford to take unnecessary risks with another ill-conceived and needlessly destructive industry.
We call on U.S. President Joe Biden to support a moratorium on deep-sea mining and join the other 27 countries that have opposed this industry. This will ensure that corporations like TMC do not destroy another global resource that belongs to us all.
The choices we make today will echo through the generations. Will we choose to exploit the depths of our oceans for profit and weapons of war, or will we unite to protect and preserve the precious blue heart of our planet? The power to decide lies in our collective hands.
As talks resume, supporters of a moratorium are also calling for the ouster of the International Seabed Authority's leader, who faces an election on July 29.
As talks to establish global policies on deep-sea mining resumed in Jamaica on Monday, Greenpeace International renewed its demand for a moratorium on the practice, the path also backed other civil society and Indigenous groups, at least hundreds of science and policy experts, and 27 countries.
"The science is clear—there can't be deep-sea mining without environmental cost and the only solution is a moratorium. The more we know about deep-sea mining, the harder it is to justify it," said Greenpeace campaigner Louisa Casson, who is attending the United Nations-affiliated International Seabed Authority's (ISA) 29th session in Kingston.
"Governments at the ISA must not dance to the tune of the industry and approve rushed regulations for the benefit of a few over the interests of Pacific communities and the opinion of scientists," Casson argued, as companies and countries see chances to cash in on the clean energy transition by extracting metals including cobalt, copper, and nickel.
"The deep ocean sustains crucial processes that make the entire planet habitable, from driving ocean currents that regulate our weather to storing carbon and buffering our planet against the impacts of climate change."
The Associated Press reported Monday that although the ISA has not allowed any extraction during debates, it "has granted 31 mining exploration contracts," and "much of the ongoing exploration is centered in the Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone, which covers 1.7 million square miles (4.5 million square kilometers) between Hawaii and Mexico."
The Mexican government last year endorsed a moratorium and Democratic Hawaii Gov. Josh Green last week signed a bill banning seabed mining in state waters, citing "environmental risks and constitutional rights to have a clean and healthy environment."
Ahead of the meeting in Jamaica, Deep Sea Conservation Coalition campaign lead Sofia Tsenikli highlighted that "gouging minerals from the seafloor poses an existential threat that goes far beyond the immediate destruction of deep-sea wildlife and habitats."
"The deep ocean sustains crucial processes that make the entire planet habitable, from driving ocean currents that regulate our weather to storing carbon and buffering our planet against the impacts of climate change," Tsenikli said. "States must now protect the ocean and not allow any more damage."
The ISA was established under the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea and a related 1994 agreement, and is responsible for waters not under the control of specific nations. As Common Dreams reported earlier this month, some diplomats have accused British lawyer Michael Lodge, its current secretary-general, of trying to speed up the start of mining.
"The rush to complete the mining code was triggered by the Pacific island state of Nauru, which is expected to submit a mining license application on behalf of Canada's the Metals Company (TMC) later this year, regardless of whether or not regulations are complete," Reuters noted Monday.
After ISA's 36-member Council negotiates the "Mining Code" over the next two weeks, its full Assembly is scheduled to meet on July 29 to vote on the next secretary-general, with Lodge facing a challenge from Brazil's Leticia Carvalho for the top post.
"It is time for change at the ISA," Casson of Greenpeace declared Monday. "A third term for Michael Lodge would not only put the oceans under threat but also risk further damaging public trust in the regulator. Mining companies are impatient to get started and mounting evidence indicates that Lodge is overstepping his supposedly-neutral role to align with commercial interests."
"The ISA must listen to millions of people and the growing number of governments calling for a halt to deep-sea mining," she added. "It is time to put conservation at the heart of the ISA's work."
In preparation for the talks in Kingston, Environment Oregon Research & Policy Center, U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) Education Fund, and Frontier Group last month released a report showing that not only would deep-sea mining destroy "a vibrant, biodiverse place, teeming with complex ecosystems and thousands, possibly millions of species," but also it isn't necessary.
"Disposable electronic devices are creating a toxic e-waste mess. Now, some mining companies are trying to convince policymakers that we need to wreak havoc on the ocean to source the materials to make more," said Charlie Fisher of the Oregon State PIRG Foundation. "This report shows that we don't need to ruin the deep sea to make the products we need. There is a more sustainable path: Make long-lasting, fixable electronics and recycle them when they no longer work."
"How can Greenpeace's activists paddling on kayaks be a threat to the environment, but the plundering of the oceans be a solution to the climate catastrophe?"
As the International Seabed Authority kicked off its annual summit in Jamaica on Monday to discuss rules for extracting minerals from the ocean floor, Greenpeace—which could be expelled from the United Nations body over a demonstration targeting a mining company—is urging the ISA to "stop deep-sea mining, not protests."
Representatives of 167 nations are gathering in Kingston to draft the regulatory framework for deep-sea mining, which ISA member states agreed to work out by July 2025. Although there are no current commercial deep seabed mining operations, the ISA has issued exploration licenses to state-owned companies and agencies in China, France, Germany, India, Japan, Russia, and South Korea, and to private corporations including U.K. Seabed Resources, a subsidiary of U.S. military-industrial complex giant Lockheed Martin.
The Metals Company, a Canadian startup looking to make a big splash in deep-sea mining, has been targeted by Greenpeace "kayaktivists," who last November boarded a ship belonging to subsidiary Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. in the Pacific Ocean and occupied the vessel's stern crane to draw attention to the potential harm that mineral extraction would cause to one of the world's last untouched ecosystems.
That peaceful protest could cost Greenpeace its ISA observer status, as members will consider whether to punish the environmental group during this week's conference. ISA Secretary-General Michael Lodge claimed that Greenpeace's kayak protest posed a "serious threat" to company personnel and "the marine environment."
However, last November a Dutch court rejected The Metals Company's request for an injunction against the protesters, finding it "understandable" that Greenpeace took direct action in the face of "possibly very serious consequences" of the company's mining plans.
Greenpeace plans to hold a side event at the ISA conference on Monday focusing on the right to protest.
"If Michael Lodge had put as much effort into properly scrutinizing deep-sea mining companies and ensuring transparent negotiations as he has chasing dissent, a pristine ecosystem would have a fair chance to remain undisturbed," said Greenpeace International Deep-Sea Mining campaign lead Louisa Casson. "How can Greenpeace's activists paddling on kayaks be a threat to the environment, but the plundering of the oceans be a solution to the climate catastrophe?"
This year's ISA conference comes as two dozen nations are calling for a moratorium on deep-sea mining and campaigners are urging the United States to ratify the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, under which the ISA was established.
"Over the past year, it's been outstanding to see the growing call for a moratorium from countries in the Pacific, Europe, and Latin America," said Casson. "Responsible nations at the ISA are listening to the mounting science that shows deep-sea mining would cause irreversible damage to the oceans... The momentum is on the side of a moratorium."
There is also pushback. Last week, more than 350 former military and political leaders in the United States including former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton published a letter urging the U.S. Senate to sign and ratify the Law of the Sea in a bid to boost deep-sea mining amid rising international competition for minerals.
"Almost everyone agrees that the United States should ratify the Law of the Sea—it's a no-brainer and has been since the treaty was adopted over 40 years ago. This might be the only thing that Greenpeace and Big Oil agree with each other on," said Arlo Hemphill, who heads the Oceans Are Life campaign at Greenpeace USA.
"Now, deep-sea mining corporation The Metals Company has jumped on the bandwagon, hoping it will increase their chances of making it big after several costly failed ventures," Hemphill added. "With two dozen countries already on the record opposing the launch of deep-sea mining any time soon, there is little possibility it will be permitted."
However, earlier this year Norway became the first country to green-light deep-sea mining, a decision one environmental campaigner warned will have "severe impacts on ocean wildlife."
"This is a cowboy company running out of cash and trying to ride roughshod over international decisions," said one Greenpeace campaigner.
Greenpeace on Wednesday again took aim at a Canadian startup after the deep-sea mining company announced its expected application costs, development timeline, and production capacity following an international agency's recent meeting that ended without finalized regulations.
"The Metals Company's (TMC) announcement flies in the face of international opposition to deep-sea mining, and it's a big kick in the teeth for governments that spent three long weeks debating the future of the oceans and concluded this industry should not get a green light," said Greenpeace campaigner Louisa Casson in a statement.
"It's clear that trying to mine the oceans is becoming politically toxic—even more so with zero rules in place. This is bullish talk to try and force governments into rushed decisions, but it will come back to bite them," she continued. "TMC are showing their true colors: This is a cowboy company running out of cash and trying to ride roughshod over international decisions."
Casson added that "instead of acting on scientific findings, which conclusively prove this industry will put the oceans in danger, they're announcing fanciful plans to ramp up production in a desperate attempt to reassure their worried investors and save their plummeting share price."
TMC and the Pacific nation of Nauru worked together in 2021 to pressure the International Seabed Authority (ISA)—which already permits companies to explore the deep sea for research—to finalize global rules for commercial mining by July 2023.
As Common Dreams reported last month, when the ISA Council convened in Jamaica, Greenpeace was among the environmental groups and governments that advocated for a ban on "reckless" deep-sea mining. The meeting wrapped up with negotiators deciding that additional talks on regulations were needed through at least the first half of 2024.
As Greenpeace explained last week, the ISA Council's July decisions "effectively mean that a majority of countries—including Brazil, Costa Rica, Chile, Vanuatu, Germany, and Switzerland—did not yield to pressure from the industry—supported by nations such as Norway, Nauru, and Mexico—to fast-track rules for deep-sea mining."
"Industry frontrunner the Metals Company saw its share price plummet as markets reacted to the news," the group noted. "However, the ISA still failed to close a legal loophole for companies to start mining next year."
As The New York Times reported last month:
The area of most intense focus is the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, a remote stretch between Mexico and Hawaii where seabed rocks have the highest concentration of metals. The rocks sit 2.5 miles down, so deep that remotely operated machines are needed to lift them to collection ships.
This is the region where the Metals Company wants to begin its mining operations, convinced it can generate $30 billion in post-tax net cash flow over the 25-year life of the initial project. If it is successful, this small company that has never produced a profit would become one of the largest global suppliers of key metals needed for electric vehicle batteries.
TMC announced Tuesday that "subsidiary Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. (NORI) intends to submit an application to the ISA for an exploitation contract for NORI Area D following the July 2024 meeting of the ISA. Assuming a one-year review process, NORI expects to be in production in the fourth quarter of 2025."
TMC chairman and CEO Gerard Barron said that "NORI will monitor closely the progress that the council makes over the next three meetings" and both the parent company and its subsidiary "are prepared to work within the ISA's new roadmap."
"We are pleased to see the ISA's reiteration of their obligation to consider a plan of work when we are ready to lodge it in consultation with our sponsoring state," he added. "Meanwhile, our teams continue work on the scientific evidence to support NORI's application and we will include a campaign to revisit the site of last year's pilot collection trials in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone to further bolster our environmental knowledge. We will continue to share this data openly, with the entire world."
Some scientists have disputed industry claims about the necessity of deep-sea mining—given that metals used in battery-making can be extracted elsewhere—and warned that such activity could cause "irreparable damage" to fragile ecosystems.