Support strong Canadian climate journalism for 2025
Everyone knows the story of the old lady who swallowed a fly. In order to solve her problem, she comes up with increasingly outrageous and outlandish solutions, which then force her to do something even more extreme.
It’s hard not to be reminded of this old nursery rhyme as countries gather in Kingston, Jamaica, for a meeting of the International Seabed Authority (ISA), which is working right now to develop rules that could allow deep-sea mining to go ahead as soon as 2024.
To hear proponents tell it, mining the deep seabed is the best way to get the minerals we need to power the electric vehicles that will help us reduce emissions and fight climate change. In order to do so, we simply have to disturb or destroy some of the planet’s last intact ecosystems, which sequester vast amounts of carbon and are so poorly understood that new species are found there on a regular basis.
This plan does not make sense. The twin crises of biodiversity loss and climate change are connected: we can’t keep robbing biodiversity Peter to pay climate Paul. Early evidence suggests that deep-sea ecosystems are very sensitive and, having formed over millennia, take decades or centuries to recover — if they recover at all.
That’s not to mention other effects, such as plumes of sediment that can travel kilometres away from the mine site and affect species throughout the water column. The deep sea helps regulate the climate, supports healthy fisheries and cycles the elements that allow life in the ocean to flourish. At the very least, scientists say, we should wait until we understand more about the deep sea and what impacts that mining is likely to have.
To the companies that now sense there is treasure at the bottom of the ocean, however, taking the time to gather this information is seen as an impediment rather than basic due diligence.
It will ultimately be up to the international community and the leadership of principled, forward-thinking countries to protect these global commons.
So where is Canada right now?
Our country has positioned itself internationally as a global leader in protecting nature. But at the ISA, of which Canada is a member, Canada has failed to provide the leadership that is both expected and needed. Allies like Spain, Germany, New Zealand, Costa Rica and Chile have already called for a pause or moratorium; earlier this week, France joined the chorus, with President Emmanuel Macron arguing for a complete ban on deep-sea mining. However, Canada has yet to come out publicly with a position either way. This is despite the fact that The Metals Company, the deep-sea mining outfit pushing hardest for access to international waters, is based in Vancouver.
Why is a Canadian company looking to mine in international waters rather than closer to home? This is in part because Canada has no official position for or against deep-sea mining, but also because Canada has no legal regime that would categorically allow or prevent it.
We do, however, have legislation that would make it much harder: The Fisheries Act, the Oceans Act and the Species at Risk Act, which protect marine ecosystems and biodiversity from the type and level of harm that is an inevitable byproduct of deep-sea mining. If Canada’s federal regulations would deem deep-sea mining too destructive in our own waters, it seems only fair that Canada should hold the industry to the same standard internationally. The deep sea belongs to all of us.
There is still time before the ISA meetings close on Nov. 11, which means Canada still has an opportunity to end its silence on this issue. In just over a month, the country will host COP15 in Montreal, bringing the world together to discuss what must be done to halt biodiversity loss. By joining other countries calling for a pause on deep-sea mining, Canada could enter the negotiations with recent and tangible proof of its commitment to conservation — and possibly inspire other countries to do more, too.
Deep-sea mining promises a big upside with few downsides. After all, it would be harder to think of a place that is further out of sight — and, therefore, out of mind. But the fact is that we do not actually know what will happen, and history suggests that we are not very good at anticipating the consequences of large-scale ecosystem alteration.
In an era of unprecedented biodiversity loss and significant risks to ocean health from climate change, deep-sea mining is not the kind of economic innovation or leadership we need. It’s time for Canada to take a stand and put a stop to it before it starts — in Canadian waters and on the high seas.
Dr. Susanna Fuller is the vice-president of operations and projects at Oceans North, a Canadian charity that supports marine conservation in partnership with Indigenous and coastal communities.
Comments
David Roberts at Volts.WTF did a nice podcast on this story. Basically, we don't know. The biome waaay down there might be very resilient and not very vulnerable to having rocky tennis-ball-sized lumps picked out of it, or it might not even be very vulnerable to the balls being Hoovered up by a vacuum.
Or, it might be vulnerable, but you're talking about losing a few square miles out of a million, or it might be vulnerable, and vital. We just plain need more research.
But, bluntly, the research really has to involve investigating the habitat, then mining some of it, then investigating the ruins, to see how much worse (if any) that they are. If all that's down there are very small organisms that hardly notice the disturbance, this might work out fine.
The tone of the article pretty much assumes the worst, neglects to even mention the need for research; one suspects in the author's mind, that it's not even a
Not buying Mr. Brander's cautious optimism:
"A remote-operated vehicle would suck a slurry of nodules and sediment off the sea floor, separate the nodules out for transport to the surface, and release fine clay sediment into the water column.
"Removing the nodules, which take a million years to grow only a few millimetres, would destroy the habitat for any creature that depends on that patch of sea floor.
"Sediment plumes clouding the water and noise pollution are also concerns.
"One mining operation would produce noise at levels known to disturb whales about 5 km away, and exceed ambient noise levels up to 500 km away.
"Pressure is on to start mining the deep sea. Is it worth it?" (CBC, Sep 04, 2022)
Canada (i.e., the Trudeau Liberals, with alleged environmentalist Steven Guilbeault installed as Minister of Environment) is once again on the wrong side of science and history:
"Citing climate change, France called for an int'l ban on deep sea mining, upending negotiations by a UN-affiliated organization to allow the exploitation of ocean ecosystems for valuable metals to begin within 2 years.
French Ambassador Olivier Guyonvarch: "As the effects of climate change become increasingly threatening and the erosion of biodiversity continues to accelerate, today it does not seem reasonable to hastily launch a new project, that of deep seabed mining, the environmental impacts of which are not yet known and may be significant for such ancient ecosystems which have a very delicate equilibrium."
"Representatives from Norway, Singapore, Poland, Canada and other countries also questioned France’s position and reiterated their support for the development of mining regulations.:
"France puts future of deep sea mining in doubt" (Bloomberg, Nov 10, 2022)