The International Seabed Authority’s years long inaction on developing proposed rules and mechanisms for mining on the ocean floor has been thrown into disarray by the United States, which recently said it would accelerate the initiation of deep-sea mining in US waters.
Earlier this year, United States President Donald Trump signed an executive order that instructed his administration to fast-track the deep-sea mining industry, with the US Department of Interior announcing in June it would start enacting the executive order with a series of policy reforms.
The rules changes include expediting the permitting process, extending the duration of prospecting permits, and reducing the timelines for environmental reviews.
The focus of seabed mining has been on the extraction of rocky polymetallic nodules, which are strewn across the sea floor in tremendous numbers. Roughly the size of a fist, these nodules contain high concentrations of copper, nickel, manganese, lithium and cobalt, and would likely be extracted from the deep ocean by dredging the seabed.
The nodules form slowly over time – about a centimetre every million years – by absorbing metal compounds in the seawater, usually taking shape around an object like a clamshell.
Mining these nodules is considered by seabed extraction proponents to be a more environmentally-friendly option than land-based mining, with a greater sense of urgency considering looming minerals shortages and the need to decarbonise the global economy.
There is no accepted wider framework or regulation around deep-sea mining in international waters, so in 2012 island nation Nauru sponsored a Canadian company in its bid to mine the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ), a region of the Pacific Ocean that covers about 1.3 per cent of the world’s ocean floor and contains more nickel, cobalt and manganese than all onshore deposits.
This event triggered a sub-clause of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea that requires its related body, the International Seabed Authority (ISA), to develop regulations for seabed extraction in international waters within two years.
The ISA did not reach an agreement before the July 2023 deadline, which would have established initial standards around acceptable sediment disturbance, noise and other environmental factors.
This stall in the process subsequently freed up the company to apply for a commercial permit after July 2024, regardless of the regulations’ status. Being a climate-vulnerable country, Nauru considers deep sea extraction a viable way of slowing the rate of climate change and giving it time to adapt.
As such, the island nation has backed the United States as a deep-sea mining authority, potentially a result of the financial incentive it has to mine under the US pathway instead of the snail-paced ISA. A substantial number of marine scientists and activists have bemoaned the lack of data on the deep sea and are warning of the potential consequences and risks of commercial seabed extraction.
Recent studies have also indicated the presence of ‘dark oxygen’, which is produced by means other than photosynthesis in the depths of the ocean. While not yet conclusive, it is thought that it is generated by the metallic nodules reacting with seawater.
The discovery, therefore, has major implications for potential deep-sea mining and its impacts on marine life. Ocean governance researcher Sebastian Unger from theInstitute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS) in Potsdam, which is an official observer organisation to the ISA, said there were several issues surrounding the prospect of imminent seabed mining.
Unger said: “One is the lack of ecological baselines – if you want to establish whether an activity is harming the environment, you need to establish baseline knowledge on the structure and function of the ecosystem before this activity takes place.
“Starting mining now should not be on the table when the unequivocal demand has not been determined, given the developing circular economy, the potential devastating effects of deep-sea mining on the marine environment cannot yet be evaluated, and the developing regulations and procedures of the ISA do not provide the precautionary approach needed to prevent harmful effects.”
As the seabed regulator (currently meeting in Jamaica)repeats line-by-line readings of the proposed mining code and its100-plus regulations, a research consortium led by CSIRO has developed a comprehensive set of tools and frameworks designedt o support environmental decision-making around potential deep-sea mining activity.
The impetus behind the project is that if deep-sea mining gains momentum and seabed extraction gets underway, this independent, rigorous advice can ensure it is approached with extreme caution and care for the environment through data driven insights that inform policy.
CSIRO’s consortium members include Griffith University,Museums Victoria, the University of the Sunshine Coast, andEarth Sciences New Zealand (formerly National Institute ofWater and Atmospheric Research and GNS Science). They used an ecosystem-based management (EBM) framework to assess environmental risks and develop adaptable management strategies.
The project is the first in which the EBM principles have been applied comprehensively to the deep sea. Commissioned by the Metals Company and focusing on theClarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ) in the Pacific Ocean, the research does not advocate for mining but highlights the role of rigorous research in guiding decisions that balance sustainability, responsibility and long-term impact.
As Australia’s national science agency, CSIRO’s role is to provide independent, science-based evidence to inform decision making amid uncertainty and differing worldviews, despite often being the target of partisan political attacks.
Dr Piers Dunstan, Senior Principal Research Scientist atCSIRO, said science done well could provide the unbiased information that decision makers needed, and emphasised the importance of having a trusted source of information when there were a multitude of different opinions.
Dr Dunstan said: “What attracted us to this project was the opportunity to develop a very high-level assessment to support decision-making – both about whether mining should go ahead and, if so, under what constraints.”
The research was designed as a modular, integrated system of interlinked studies, rather than focusing on a single dataset or indicator, and the body of work now comprises eight different reports.
The key outcomes so far are a clear definition of‘ serious harm’, with a traffic light system of green for minor environmental impacts, orange for moderate, and red for major irreversible damage.
One of the techniques used in the research was to determine functional groups at the species level, with the results showing some groups may be quick to recover if disturbed by mining, while others would be slow or not recover at all.
Dr Dunstan noted that CSIRO’s deep experience in marine ecosystem science positioned the organisation well to contribute rigorous, impartial analysis in an emerging field marked by significant uncertainty.
