Deep Sea Mining: Good or Bad?

We are all familiar with some of the movements to protect biodiversity on land, but what about biodiversity in the deep sea? There is 10 times more deep sea (up to 4,000-5,000 meters) than shallow continental shelves (up to 200 meters deep) in the world’s oceans.The deep sea is far from a quiet abyss: Consisting of mountain ranges, canyons, trenches, and seamounts, this stunning underwater landscape is the home to a vast amount of organisms. Biodiversity is often used as a gauge for the health of an ecosystem, since too little biodiversity means the ecosystem might be compromised. The diversity of life in the deep sea can also have major effects on conditions on dry land. Depletion of fish populations, climate change effects, and increased greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere are only a few of the major effects that are influenced by deep sea ecosystems. In order to try and avoid these detrimental effects we can work to protect deep sea environments and sites of high biodiversity.

Hydrothermal vents, although extremely volatile, are home to some of the oceans’ most exotic biomass. Since their discovery, these vents have offered insight into how the ocean chemistry, how the Earth’s surface formed, and even how life may have began. These vents are also the sites of abundant manganese nodules that are composed of copper, cobalt, nickel, gold and other commercially valuable minerals. However, these nodules don’t form overnight. In fact, it takes millions of years for these potato-sized nodule deposits to form. Vast mineral resources like these are found far out in international waters and thousands of meters below the ocean’s surface. Various technological advances in remote sensing, remote operated vehicles (ROV’s), and more have made the extraction of these rich minerals possible, although it is still a costly and environmentally risky endeavor.

One of the major issues with deep-sea mining though is that so little is known about its implications on the environment. Scientists are unable to extrapolate what kinds of populations would be affected by extensive mining because the deep sea is still largely unexplored, and the biodiversity in prospective mining areas so incredibly vast. Scientists at the Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory have discovered new evidence of hydrothermal vents in the Antarctic in the past few years, yet understanding the unique environments around these elusive vents still proves to be a challenge. Due to the lack of knowledge about these ecosystems, no one can say whether they are resilient enough to withstand such trauma. These questions only add to the difficulty of creating regulations regarding deep sea environments.

Regulating deep sea mining has also proven to be an onerous task for scientists, mining companies and policymakers alike. One area of mining interest, the Clarion-Clipperton fracture zone, is about 500 miles southeast of Hawaii and 5,000 meters below the ocean surface. Enforcing regulations or even knowing what regulations to put in place is extremely difficult there because the zone crosses political, geographic, and disciplinary boundaries. The International Seabed Authority (ISA), formed by the United Nations Law of the Sea, is in charge of developing the regulations for exploration and extraction while also establishing and enforcing the preservation of areas that will be impacted by mining. They have expanded the marine protected area network to cover 24 percent of the 6 million square kilometers that comprise the Clarion-Clipperton zone management area, representing a major marine ecosystem-based management success using a spatial approach. Despite the conservation groups’ recent successes protecting some deep sea ecosystems, mining companies are still preparing for the difficult dive down to these unforgiving, yet lucrative, environments.

What does this all tell us about deep sea mining? That it is still a mystery to us. Some companies feel that we must at least try it to see whether or not it is harmful to our deep ocean enivornments. Many activists and environmentalists suggest we pass on it for now until we know what it will do or we find a safer alternative. I see both sides of the argument so it is hard for me to say one is right over the other and while I do not have an opinion on which side "wins", I will be curious to see the outcome.