A key point often missed in discussions about deep-sea mining is that the seafloor nodules only contain four economically viable metals: nickel, cobalt, copper, and manganese. Given the abundance of copper and manganese on land, the focus is primarily on nickel and cobalt. Furthermore, contrary to some claims, these nodules do not contain significant amounts of rare earth elements.
In the early 2020s, deep-sea mining was promoted as a source for metals crucial to electric vehicle (EV) batteries. However, battery technology has evolved, with new chemistries using affordable iron, phosphorus, and sodium instead of cobalt or nickel. Cobalt and nickel prices have plummeted since 2022 due to a global oversupply. Therefore, batteries relying on cobalt and nickel are becoming obsolete.
As the EV battery market shifts, The Metals Company (TMC), a Canadian deep-sea mining firm, now argues that seafloor mining would allow the United States to reduce its reliance on China. China dominates the processing of critical metals, not the mining of raw ore. While China mines less than 5% of the world’s nickel or cobalt ore, it controls approximately 75% of global nickel and cobalt processing and sales.
To secure its metal supply chains, the United States should streamline permitting for domestic critical metal processing or collaborate with allies, instead of deep-sea mining. China imports ore from Indonesia and the Congo to maintain its dominance in nickel and cobalt. The U.S. could easily and affordably replicate this strategy with its allies, compared to seafloor mining. TMC projects an annual output of 119,000 tons of nickel and 9,000 tons of cobalt in eight to ten years, which would only represent about 3% of the projected global production for each metal in 2025. The remaining 97% would still come from terrestrial sources.
The cost estimates for deep-sea mining seem to disregard inflation and interest rate changes. TMC’s 2021 public filings estimated total costs through 2046 at nearly $3 billion. However, there has been no public revision to this figure despite significant inflation and a doubling of offshore interest rates since then.
Regarding environmental impact, TMC argues that it is preferable to extract critical minerals from areas with minimal life, rather than from biodiverse areas such as Indonesian rainforests. However, this is a false comparison as mines exist in non-rainforest regions like Australia and Canada. Moreover, terrestrial mines yield an average of 564 tons of nickel per hectare over their lifespan, whereas the seafloor yields only 1.5 tons per hectare. Consequently, seafloor mining would require mining 500 to 2,000 times more area to obtain the same amount of metal. Additionally, the deep ocean remains largely unexplored, so the full extent of potential harm is still unknown.
Deep-sea mining is governed by the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which 169 countries have ratified. The Secretary General of the International Seabed Authority has stated that any unilateral action would violate international law. Unable to secure a mining permit from the U.N., TMC is proceeding outside of UNCLOS, relying on support from the United States, the only country that has not ratified UNCLOS.
However, this strategy replaces one problem—lack of U.N. approval—with another. It raises the question of which companies will actually undertake the mining. TMC’s operational partners, Allseas and Glencore, are Swiss firms. Will they disregard international norms that Switzerland adheres to? What about the insurance and finance companies needed to support seafloor miners? Will these minerals be considered conflict minerals on the international market? They should be.
To secure critical minerals affordably and with minimal risk, the United States should invest in domestic mining and processing facilities, or collaborate with allies like Canada and Australia, who possess larger metal reserves. The recent partnership with Ukraine exemplifies how to secure critical minerals while strengthening alliances, avoiding international law violations, and discouraging hostile nations from doing the same.
Proponents of deep-sea mining advocate investing billions in an unproven technology to secure two metals whose predicted shortages are now in doubt, all to benefit an industry struggling for relevance and solvency. Supporting seafloor mining could become a costly failure, akin to Solyndra.
“`
