The creatures that could be affected are still being discovered.

Whether these are clams, mussels or shrimp that thrive around hydrothermal
vents, or crabs, corals, anemones or that live on the walls of seamounts, or
sea stars and giant worms on the abyssal plains, these species are still
being found, which increases the uncertainty over what would happen if they
are removed from the ecosystem.

Research has found mining noise and lights could affect sealife, sediment
deposits could bury and wipe out habitats, toxic elements could be released
in the mining process, and mining nodules may even affect oxygen production
processes that we know little about.

There are also concerns that, because these deep-sea communities change slowly, the impacts of any
activity could reach long into the future.

Muriel Rabone, a deep-sea ecologist at the Natural History Museum, pointed
to the specific risks involved in this ecosystem – especially when less than
1% of the seafloor has been fully explored. She said:

This is quite a remarkable high-diversity, low-abundance environment, and
so many organisms that live here have interesting adaptations to deal with
the deep sea. There is a vast reservoir of diversity for human society. For
example, there are species that have antimicrobial adaptations, or sponges
that work like fibreoptics. There is a crazy amount of knowledge that we
could use, whether that’s in industry, medicines or to tackle climate
change.

Do we actually need these metals?

It is claimed by some that the current level of supply cannot match demand
for critical minerals, which could hinder the transition to clean energy.

While technological innovations and societal attitudes make predictions
difficult, the Energy Transition Commission (ETC) has modelled annual supply
estimates running to 2030.

‘Where are we going to put our values?’

The Deep-Ocean Stewardship Initiative (Dosi) project has argued for a “sufficient information requirement” to be surpassed for deep-sea mining,
ensuring that it doesn’t take place until enough is known about the likely effects
to avoid unforeseen damage.

Experts say this information isn’t available. A report from 2022 said that nearly nine in 10 experts agreed that current scientific
knowledge is too sparse to ensure the protection of the marine environment.

Dr David Santillo, a marine scientist with the Greenpeace Research
Laboratories based at the University of Exeter, said:

“Uncertainty is high: that’s almost an inevitability because we’re talking
about an environment that is so deep.

“So the debate comes down to, who do you give the benefit of the doubt to?
Do you give it to the mining industry, and assume that deep-sea mining will
be OK? Or do you say that too little is known and we shouldn’t pursue this?
There’s a growing consensus of scientists and countries coming to the second
conclusion. But then the next question is, could we ever get to a point
where the science would tell us that it is possible to mine the seabed
sustainably?”

There’s also an existential point here: this environment could be one of the
origins of life on Earth. Are we going to impact that for car batteries and
smartphones? Where are we going to put our values?

A growing number of businesses – including car manufacturers such as BMW,
Rivian, Renault, Volvo and Volkswagen, and smartphone leaders Google and
Samsung – support a moratorium on deep-sea mining. Countries including
France, Greece, Canada and Mexico also support it.

As she assumed the role of Secretary-General of the ISA earlier this year,
Leticia Carvalho said:

“The deep seabed is one of Earth’s least explored frontiers, yet its
ecosystems are vital to the health of our ocean and the planet. Our mandate
is both a privilege and a responsibility — to act in the interest of all
humankind and future generations.”

There are concerns that – even without the information gaps being filled –
countries and mining companies might start in the coming years.

The Metals Company, a leading deep-sea mining firm based in Canada, is
aiming to submit its application to the ISA in July and hopes the agency
will finish its mining code in the coming year.

This seems unlikely. Carvalho has said a lot of work needs to be done before
the code is finalised and has spoken of “constructing a consensus” on what
needs to be done in 2025.

In 2023, ISA’s council adopted a decision that underlines that commercial
mining should not be carried out without regulations.

However, countries could act unilaterally, with some predicting that more
countries will apply to the UN to extend their own continental shelf, giving
them the right to exploit a larger area.

While Norway’s plans to exploit its own deep seabed are paused, the
country’s prime minister made it clear that “preparatory work” would
continue on regulations and environmental impact mitigations.

Methodology

The mineral deposits map is sourced from
the US Geological Survey.

The exclusive economic zones (EEZs) map is sourced from
the Flanders Marine Institute.

Data on the number of exploration contracts sponsored by country is sourced
from the International Seabed Authority (ISA).

The Clarion-Clipperton Zone map was sourced from
Thomas Webber and the ISA.

The map of whale and dolphin sightings is sourced from the
OBIS-SEAMAP project
. The full source is Halpin, P.N., A.J. Read, E. Fujioka, B.D. Best, B.
Donnelly, L.J. Hazen, C. Kot, K. Urian, E. LaBrecque, A. Dimatteo, J.
Cleary, C. Good, L.B. Crowder, and K.D. Hyrenbach. The data is filtered to
just show recorded sightings since 2000.