Deep sea mining and the Blue Economy
This should represent a big problem for the U.N.’s credibility as they preach the end of the world through “climate change”. UNESCO has been on overdrive alerting humanity that “postericide” is a “climate change” crime. Agenda 21, which has drummed up widespread “green support” with “climate science”, is causing many to think twice about what this agenda really means for our environment, especially with the dawn of deep-sea mining.
In 2019 Greenpeace had professed faith in “a strong Global Ocean Treaty that can protect marine life from exploitation.” It has come to nothing. deep-sea-mining-no-future
In 2022, reports The Guardian, “UN member states have failed to agree on a treaty to protect the high seas from exploitation.” ocean-treaty
Now deep-sea mining is touted to arrive in earnest by 2023 as the UN draws up regulations for it.
This burgeoning “blue economy” represents a huge opportunity for TNCs to further exploit the ocean while claiming it is being done “sustainably”. However, the hunt for polymetallic nodules by rock grinding robots will release stored carbon (which has deposited over millions of years) from the seabed.
Further, the light emitting, sonar pulsing, rock crashing robots will noisily and violently trash deep sea ecosystems and further degrade the environment through the toxic processes from refining the harvested polymetallic nodules on land.
A tip from the Ministry of Defence
The UK Ministry of Defence has acknowledged the environmental risks of deep-sea mining. On page 56 of the sixth edition of “Global Strategic Trends: The Future Starts Today, published in 2018, the UK Ministry of Defence stated “deep sea mining is likely to become commercially viable. The environmental damage from this type of mining could, however, be substantial.” global-strategic-trends
Today, according to a review of the scientific literature, there are already concerns about the burgeoning industry. “Many Pacific islanders express concern about the social, economic and environmental impacts they anticipate deep sea mining would have on their lives. The body of knowledge validating these concerns is slowly growing. Deep sea habitats are rich in biodiversity of which only a fraction is known to science… Almost nothing is known about the species and diversity of deep-sea environments across the rest of the region.” impacts-of-mining-deep-sea
Maritime Law and the Exploitation of the Seas
Like all U.N. member states invested in the “blue economy” U.N. founding member China expects big gains from deep sea mining. In relation to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), a multilateral treaty created to both exploit and protect the sea environment, “China [like the other member states] has formed its own practices and policies.” The extent to which the environmental protections espoused by UNCLOS will be implemented or enforced remains a concern. journals
As of July 2019, the Chinese government released 161,211.2 kilometres of ocean ecosystems for deep sea mining exploration. This has amounted to 263 different licenses. Many contractors are poised globally to exploit the new “ecosystem economy”. statista.com
The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) was also established in 1982. This framework of the UNCLOS agreements recommended an environmentally protective precautionary approach. However, a consistent approach isn’t enforceable and so the precautionary principle according to each state varies “according to their capabilities.” There is clear scope to abuse the environment in favour of profitable industrial gains.
We know nations can be exploited at the economic political geographic level, and this has reliably served transnational corporations in flouting environmental regulations where they are less stringently enforced. itlos.org
Deep sea mining is a nascent industry so it has little scientific research to its name. The ISA (International Seabed Authority) recommends deep sea mining contractors supply Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). However, this research is often poorly conducted far from reliable. Anyone concerned about the environment, sustainability, and what the U.N. regards as climate change, is encouraged to scrutinise EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) research data.
Many failures of EIAs have been identified. One major failure is that they “they prioritize infrastructural development over the need to protect the ecosystems.” Other EIA issues can be summarised as failures to inform local communities, reliance on unprofessional government bodies tasked with conducting EIAs, creating low quality EIA data, a lack of political goodwill to implement EIAs, a lack of public participation in EIA processes, and finally interference by developers, who don’t take EIAs seriously, nor value the tools or the outcome of EIAs because of their potential to derail projects. failures-of-eia
Robots on Standby
In 2014 the world’s first deep sea robot sat idle on the factory floor of Soil Machine Dynamics (SMD) in Newcastle, in the North of England “waiting to claw up high grade copper and gold from the seabed off Papua New Guinea (PNG) – when a wrangle over terms is solved. ” At this time, the rules governing deep sea mining were far from resolved by the U.N.’s International Sea Beds Authority (ISA). Regardless, in 2014 the ISA was already “doling out exploration licenses.” reuters.com
Fast forward to 2020 and ISA Secretary-General, Michael W Lodge, spelled out the importance of deep-sea mining, aligning it with the U.N.’s goal of “limiting global warming”. He played the “race against time” card for the industry, stating that “the world bank estimates that more than 3 billiontons of minerals and metals will be needed by 2050 to achieve the goals of the paris agreement and limit global warming to 2°C or less.”
Playing the scarcity card, Lodge then proceeded to describe how “many of these critical minerals are found in the deep seabed” and reminded us of “ISA’s mandate under international law…to ensure these minerals are extracted in a sustainable way.” how-to-mine-the-oceans-sustainably
To this end the industry relies on robots. It’s seven years now since Soil Machine Dynamics’ deep sea mining machine was designed and the initial “wrangle over terms” challenged the burgeoning
industry. The robot’s mission is to work “by [ocean] vents where black soot spurts from the ocean crust and it will sometimes be near impossible to see anything…[as it] cuts up the sea floor and sucks the rocks through a pipe to deposit it in mounds behind.” uk-mining-deepsea
The time for these machines to be unleashed is nearing. In 2021, owing to a “sub-clause in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) that allows countries to pull a ‘two-year trigger’ if they feel negotiations are going too slowly” the UN began the process of signing over our seas for deep sea mining. bbc
Environmental Concerns and “Ecosystem Services”
Environmental impacts are a central concern. Dr Catherine Coumans of MiningWatch Canada has argued that Canadian deep-sea mining start-up company DeepGreen will damage the Earth in ways that few would ever imagine possible. She said, “The rocks that DeepGreen ‘The Metals Company’ plans to mine have taken millions of years to form and host diverse and unique life forms.
Scientists warn that the destruction of this seabed ecosystem will affect the health of our oceans and planet.” Coumans has predicted extensive and severe impacts “that could last for generations.” stopdeepseamining
We should be in little doubt that her fears are well justified, considering what has ben documented about surface mining. However, deep sea mining is being born into unique circumstances. As we are only too aware, post-pandemic economic recoveries are being claimed on the back of burgeoning “sustainable” industries, with deep sea mining being touted as one of them. The ocean is a colossal resource supporting what the UN has called “ecosystem services” such as fishing, and the proposed venture of deep-sea mining.
These businesses, however, are mutually incompatible, as sea mining is predicted to cause decline of ecosystems and species so the future of fishing may be put at considerable risk. The threat to ocean ecosystems by deep sea mining comes from primarily from the technologies employed by the sea mining companies. They use suction to bring deep sea sediments to the surface for analysis which are soon spewed back into the waters. Robotic vehicles to scour the ocean basins and suction pumps to churn up the pristine carbon-storing sea floor. It doesn’t stop there.
The nodules must then be processed.
A “Study to investigate state of knowledge of Deep-Sea Mining” commissioned by the European Commission stated that, “Polymetallic Nodules are oxides ores. Hence, mineral extraction requires” processes that “effectively dissolve/reduce the manganese dioxide in order to free the economic amounts of cobalt, nickel and copper.” The Cuprion process being proposed for their refinement has environmental implications. Manganese is toxic, as are many of the minerals required for the manufacture of “sustainable” technologies and so-called “clean energy” sources such as lithium batteries.
Refinement will happen on land. Processing will create toxic slurries and caustic emissions that promote acid rain which “can cause damage to crops, trees and buildings for many miles.” Deep Sea Mining clearly is not sustainable, nor does it create clean energy without toxic consequences for humans and ecosystems. environmental-impact The hunt for mineral rich polymetallic nodules around the deep abyssal sea beds will also release carbon trapped in sediments by drilling which will influence ocean acidification, and causesuffocation and damage to complex and delicate ecosystems in the deep-sea biome.
Our Addiction to Technology: Catalysing Deep Sea Mining
Our addiction to technology compels this desperately insidious ocean raiding because our technology relies on those rare metals and minerals. We may have invested in SDGs, and feel empowered by supporting “sustainable goals”, but to what avail? The commercial impetus for sea mining is based on scarcity and the politically driven market for “clean energy”, which caters for a future of electric vehicles and the smart, digital society necessitating continued mineral extraction. We are witnessing an explosion of e-waste year upon year. This all contradicts U.N. SDGs.
It has been reported, “At least $10bn (£7.9bn) worth of gold, platinum and other precious metals are dumped every year in the growing mountain of electronic waste that is polluting the planet” according to the globalewaste report of 2019. theguardian
The Guardian, highlighting the 2019 UN report stated, “the amount of e-waste is rising three times faster than the world’s population, and only 17 percent of it was recycled in 2019.” Clearly, we are a huge part of the problem, not just in our fostered e-consumption, but in our education. Why do we believe we can solve environmental issues by “decarbonisation” policies alone?
Clearly, we need to consider the combined environmental footprint of our digital age and address e-wate. Our resource hungry technologies, requiring semiconductors and lithium batteries, are rich in metals and minerals, have shaped life and the economy to such an extent this leads us into denials about their ultimate impact on our future, which is clear and present today.
In our throwaway society technological addiction creates the huge problem of e-waste. Having adopted much of our technology based on green principles, like recyclability or “clean energy” we might think e-waste presents an opportunity to recover vital minerals in sustainable way. However, recycling isn’t being promoted, and the drivers of “sustainable goals”, the U.N. and the TNCs, are fully aware of and remain complacent about the problem, as are we.
Our sustainability commitments to the UN have done little to resolve this highly polluting environmental catastrophe. E-waste is being glossed over in the drive to achievable-sounding goals like “net zero” and “decarbonisation” being implemented through governments who deliver us digital infrastructure and technologies green-washed by Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
U.N. SDGs: Rebranding Capitalism “Green”
SDGs were arguably devised by self-serving Transnational Corporations (TNCs) that make up the U.N. and World Economic Forum (WEF) membership to steer global polices through lobbying and stakeholder influence. Many industries have been plundering the “blue economy” to maximise unique patenting opportunities while promoting new frontiers of resources for sustained profitability, such as deep-sea mining.
WEF tells us “The 100 largest companies by revenue in the blue economy earned over $1 trillion in 2018” and they promote the “Ocean 100,” the world’s largest TNCs deriving profits from the ocean and its ecosystems. Science Daily confirms “evidence of large TNCs leading sustainability efforts to meet long-established goals is scant.” I think we can read into this that sea mining will be a continuation along these lines, considering TNCs favour backtracking on their sustainability commitments over profits. science.org
Based on SDGs, industries like deep sea mining, make claims that their research and pursuit of profits represents viable solutions for “clean energy” demand and help deliver a “sustainable future.” deepsea-mining-alliance
Making claims of environmental and economic gains covers up the environmental marauding and profiteering of deep-sea mining. Its known as “green-washing” their activities. Green-washing has become a necessary tenet of the survival of capitalism and the TNCs in the 21st century. Let us not forget our present context is coloured by the U.N. to the extent the world is threatened by global warming, mass extinctions, and resource shortages.
It’s a perfect recipe fuelling a resources grab that as a result, may just bring about what has been predicted, as ecosystems are wrecked by hungry TNCs flaunting SDG “haloes”.
Mining DNA and Ore for “The Blue Economy”
It is not just the harvesting of ore and minerals we should be concerned about. In 2018, “a team of researchers decided to quantify how many genes from sea creatures have become patented. After wading through some 38 million records of genetic patents from around the world, they found almost 13,000 patented genes from 862 species of ocean life…[It was found that the TNC] BASF owns 5,701 patents on sea life genes—more than any of the other 220 gene-patenting companies combined.
Other major players include Dow Dupont, Bayer, Monsanto, Syngenta, but collectively, these company have 236 patents. The rest belong to smaller biotech companies, universities, and non-profit research centers.” basf
BASF (a chemicals and metals corporation) has always been a powerful committee member of UNEP (United Nations Development Program), the 2000 Davos Global Compact (GC). The GC, staged by the WEF and hosted by UN Secretary Kofi Anan, in 1999, encouraged participation of Transnational corporations and (TNCs) and medium sized operations (SME’s). The initiative “swiftly emerged as the world’s leading corporate responsibility initiative with currently close to 7,000 business and more than 3,000 non-business participants in nearly 140 countries.” sagepub
The GC has been central to making the “blue economy” maximally profitable can be described as a multistakeholder (yet business-led) initiative that enlists corporations” in support of UN principles as enshrined in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which soon evolved into the Agenda 21 SDGs ratified in 2012.
Whether the establishment of UNEP, the GC or MDGs and SDGs can really be said to be protecting our planet remains very questionable. In an article about marine patents by biospace.com we learn that, “By 2025, the global market for marine biotechnology is expected to reach $6.4 billion and span a broad range of commercial purposes for pharmaceutical, biofuel and chemical industries,” colette-wabnitz, research associate at the university-of-british-columbia’s Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries and co-author on the study, said in a press release.
On many levels the marine environment is being pillaged. The pillage of marine genes represents the shrewd “exploitation of genes collected in the open ocean, beyond any nation’s jurisdiction.” biospace.com
Scientists Pushback While Ecosystems Fall
Owing to the profound lack of reliable data concerning deep sea mining “…more than 350 scientists from 44 countries signed a petition calling for a moratorium on deep-sea mining…until sufficient androbust scientific information has been obtained”. deep-sea-mining
Following drilling and deep-sea mining projects in the benthic (seabed) habitats, according to studies, some fauna eventually recovers. However, such resilience is not common to all species. One study (by Miljutin, 2011) revealed “deep-sea nematode assemblage has not recovered after 26 years since experimental mining”.
It’s not hard to appreciate from this example how vulnerable species dependent on such organisms could equally disappear and bring whole ecosystems into profound decline. This would for example, have profound implications for the fishing industry, if food chains were being disrupted by pervasive deep-sea mining in this way. iaia.org
The threat of deep-sea mining shows how the blue economy leaves our ocean vulnerable to TNCs. Another way this is happening also relates to our digital addiction, fostered by the concept of “connectivity.” The Internet of Oceans is under development with “around 380 underwater cables in operation around the world, spanning a length of over 1.2 million kilometres (745,645 miles)” driving the evolution global internet coverage with fibreoptic cables for 5G, and the anticipated 6G technological paradigm shift to a virtual reality service economy. undersea-cables
Conclusion
We are witnessing the exploitation of the “blue economy” at any cost, with grand scope for mismanagement and a vague sense of the precautionary principle thrown in as seasoning. The domino effect of deep-sea mining and the harvesting of species for profitable patents impacts undersea habitats, which is set to resonate for generations to come.
The U.N. preaching to us about climate, or protection of the sea, has learned no lessons and appears to be a vehicle to carry scarcity capitalism, betrothed to SDG principles, over the threshold into a green-washed marriage of popular convenience. “Decarbonisation” and “clean energy” are merely slogans of the ill-gotten romance. The UN in its infatuation with industry and the environmentally ruinous “technological salvation” narrative that SDGs are guiding is failing to protect our planet from unbridled oceanic marauding and has empowered transnational corporations.
TNCs are powerful commercial entities predisposed to trigger mechanisms like deregulation and contradict SDGs because sustainable development is just a facile rebrand for “business as usual” capitalism.
SDGs provide an “easy steps to a green future” framework but are a surface gloss for the benefit of consumers. SDGs are of no avail in improving the environment or protecting ecosystems for future generations. The contemporary mining of ore and mineral extractions from the deep sea has been justified anew by our insatiable appetite for technology, liberally seasoned with the threat of scarcity.
Industry 4.0’s exploitation of “the blue economy” has just begun. Calls for moratoriums relating to technologies and consumer markets have fallen on deaf ears in recent years. SDGs are conferring
haloes but do nothing, other than legitimise a resource bonanza fuelling continued, resource-hungry technological addiction. All of this happens to the tune of the 21st century agenda of the UN, which is promising a “clean energy” future that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
Header image: Academy Award Best Picture Winners
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.