Cobalt, manganese, zinc, copper, lithium… Rare ores and metals lie at the bottom of the oceans, attracting the desire of certain states and companies. Norway took a first step towards their exploitation on Tuesday by opening its seabed to mining prospecting. Scientists and NGOs are warning about risks for the environment and the climate.
Is Norway opening Pandora’s box? On Tuesday January 9, the Norwegian parliament voted in favor of opening mining prospecting in a vast maritime region of the Arctic. The country thus became the first in the world to take a step towards exploiting its seabed. In total, nearly 280,000 square kilometers of ocean – almost the size of Italy – can be searched for minerals. A worrying prospect, according to NGOs and environmental defenders who, for many years, have been warning about the danger of sending machines to comb the seabed.
The seabed, often beyond the territorial limits of States, is full of metals, some of which are rare – this is the case for nickel, copper, cobalt, zinc and even lithium. However, these elements are included in the composition of many objects of the ecological transition such as car batteries, wind turbines or solar panels. While moving away from “all oil” and beginning this transition is becoming more and more urgent to fight global warming, some countries consider it essential to increase their access to these materials. According to the International Energy Agency, the demand for minerals will in fact double, or even, depending on the scenarios, quadruple, by 2040.
“This is Norway’s main argument for pushing the project. The country claims to need these minerals to successfully complete its ecological transition,” explains Emma Wilson, political advisor to the NGO Deep Sea Conservation Coalition. Especially since Norwegian waters are very rich: according to an estimate from the Oil Directorate in Oslo, the ocean floor off the Norwegian coast could contain up to 45 million tons of zinc, 38 million tons of copper, as well as enormous quantities of other metals and rare earths.
“We know less about the ocean floor than the surface of the La”
But faced with the ecological argument, scientists and environmental defenders denounce a “false solution”, which would, conversely, have disastrous consequences. “Scientists are unanimous. There is no such thing as sustainable or ecological mining, it’s nonsense. As soon as we place machines at the bottom of the ocean, we will destroy what lives there,” warns Anne-Sophie Roux, campaigner against seabed mining in Europe for the Sustainable Ocean Alliance.
However, we know little about what is happening several hundred meters below the surface, and the ecosystems that live there are still very poorly understood. “We know less about the geography of the abyss than that of the surface of the Moon,” insists the activist, who specifies that 90% of the species living on the seabed have not yet been described by science. “Destroying this environment would amount to destroying systems that we do not know. Before considering any exploitation, scientific research must therefore advance. And in the meantime, the precautionary principle must absolutely prevail.”
Seabed mining could also disrupt the ocean’s capacity to absorb CO2, worries Anne-Sophie Roux. The ocean is in fact the largest carbon sink in the world: it alone absorbs 93% of the excess heat induced by human activities, notes the UN. It is therefore one of the great allies in the fight against global warming. “We cannot afford to take the risk of reducing our capacity to store carbon,” she insists. “And the danger is twofold because by stirring up the seabed, we could also release the CO2 which is already trapped there.”
Technically complicated operation
Beyond these risks, supporters of underwater mining would have to tackle a major obstacle before harvesting the precious ores: finding a way to fetch them from the bottom of the ocean, in areas unknown and high pressure, while ensuring that the operation remains economically viable.
“In reality, these ores and metals are found in three distinct ecosystems. And each poses different problems,” explains Jérôme Dyment, geophysicist specializing in these environments at the Institut de Physique du Globe in Paris. Certain metals are thus found in massive sulphides at the bottom of the ocean. “They are in volcanic areas, at the convergence of tectonic plates. Water infiltrates into faults where it heats up, reaching nearly 350°C, and becomes full of metals. Then it ends up escaping in deep waters, at 2°C and the metals are released under the effect of the temperature difference”, he continues. “Today this is what we know best to look for because the metals are concentrated in one place. You have to go and pick up the bottom with a backhoe and vacuum up the metals. Except that it also sucks up everything that happens around…”
The other type of deposit is found in abyssal plains, very large areas located between 2,000 and 6,000 meters deep, particularly in the Pacific. “Here, the metals accumulate by chemical effects in small crusts,” continues the specialist. “Going to find them would require combing tens of km². Difficult to do from an ecological point of view.”
Finally, cobalt-bearing crusts are mats a few centimeters thick, also rich in metals, which cover the slopes of seamounts. “Today, we wouldn’t know how to go get them without destroying everything,” concludes Jérôme Dyment.
“On paper, looking for metals to increase your economic independence may seem attractive. But when you dig deeper, you quickly realize that, from an economic and financial point of view, it is not as attractive as it seems. “On the contrary”, says Anne-Sophie Roux.
Faced with all of these obstacles and risks, no operating permit has yet been issued by the International Seabed Authority (IAFM), a body created in 1994 to guarantee the protection of the ocean floor and organize the exploration and possible exploitation of coveted minerals. On its site, however, it lists around thirty exploration contracts in the Pacific, Indian and Atlantic oceans.
Towards the adoption of a mining code
“With its decision, however, Norway is sending a signal to the mining industry that the path towards exploitation remains possible,” laments Emma Wilson, of the NGO Deep Sea Conservation Coalition. “The risk is that it sets a precedent and that other states want to do the same.”
The signal sent by Oslo, however, remains mixed. Before its vote, Norway had to face strong mobilization both at home and abroad. In countless columns published by scientists warning about environmental risks, more than half a million people had signed a petition posted online by the NGO Avaaz. Parliamentarians ultimately rejected the government’s request regarding the exploitation of the seabed, and voted only for the possibility of exploration. Before granting operating permits, the question must therefore be submitted to a new vote.
“It would have been preferable if everything had been refused, but the no to exploitation remains a relief,” greets Anne-Sophie Roux. “We have gained time and we can hope that the conclusions of the explorations will lead to a total abandonment of the project.”
Furthermore, if other countries have shown an inclination to search their seabed, such as China and several Pacific islands, more and more States prefer to turn away from the project. In total, 24 countries including France, Germany and Chile are calling for a moratorium on banning the practice. Large companies including Google, BMW and Samsung have also committed to not using minerals from marine environments following an appeal launched in 2021 by the NGO WWF.
At the same time, the AIFM Council has been trying for around ten years to develop a mining code to regulate possible exploitation of the seabed. It has set itself the objective of adopting it by 2025 but faced with divisions, negotiations are slipping. “There remain too many unanswered questions about impacts and feasibility. And we know that more and more companies are thinking about how to do without these metals in the future. Seabed mining will be thus perhaps useless before it can even come to fruition.”
