Kingston is rarely the epicenter of international negotiations. In this month of July, however, it is in a gray and featureless building in the capital of Jamaica that part of the future of the great ocean depths is being played out. Gathered in a general assembly, the 168 member countries of the International Seabed Authority (AIFM) must decide on a key point: what should be the regulatory framework for deep-sea mining?
Since its creation in 1994, this authority has governed the authorizations for scientific and industrial exploration of the depths located outside the exclusive economic zones of the States. A maritime space, legally called the Zone, still poorly known but which would be full of mineral resources. Manganese, iron, copper, nickel, cobalt, lead and zinc… Billions of tons of metals of a wide variety, which are found in sulphide deposits at the edge of hot springs, in the cobalt-rich crusts which accumulate along seamounts, and in coveted polymetallic nodules littering the great ocean plains over millions of square kilometres. A “common heritage of humanity”, according to its official name, whose future oscillates between exploitation and protection.
With its staff of around thirty people and its budget of just under $6 million, the AIFM has long remained a discreet entity. But for the past two years, this structure has been the focus of all attention. Because in June 2021, to everyone’s surprise, a small island state in Micronesia, Nauru, filed an application for an operating permit in association with a Canadian mining company, The Metals Company (TMC), thus activating a regulatory provision constraining the authority to define a mining code for exploitation within two years. “Since then, many players have been agitated. Until now, we thought that there was no economic interest in exploiting these resources, but with the energy transition, this is becoming an urgent subject”, underlines Denis Bailly, economist and research professor at the University of Western Brittany. Officially, this “two-year rule”, ended on July 9, but despite this deadline being exceeded, discussions are continuing without a clear framework emerging.
The economic profitability in question
“The task is immense. We are still very far from finalizing it because many players are opposed to this activity”, emphasizes Julien Rochette, who heads the Ocean and International Governance of Biodiversity programs at the Institute for Sustainable Development and international relations (Iddri). For the moment, the lack of a regulatory framework theoretically prevents any issuance of operating permits, but according to some, the ax of the two-year rule could well give free rein to the industrial ambitions of TMC and its CEO Gerard Barron.
With his long hair and his revolutionary entrepreneurial spirit, he built his business promising to exploit an extremely abundant mineral resource with minimal environmental impact. In its line of sight, the Clarion-Clipperton fracture zone, a vast maritime expanse located in the central-northern Pacific at a depth of nearly 5,000 meters and which abounds in strange rocky concretions: polymetallic nodules. These pebbles about ten centimeters in diameter, composed of different agglomerated metals, extend over nearly 5 million square kilometers. An immeasurable treasure of 34 billion tons comprising, according to AIFM estimates, 340 million tons of nickel and 275 million tons of copper. “This deposit contains more nickel, manganese and cobalt than all of the earth’s resources”, even promises a note from Michael Lodge, the Authority’s secretary general.
Today, The Metals Company, ensures that it has sufficient technical capacity to harvest these nodules and transform them. It expects a gain of 31 billion dollars in twenty-five years of operation. “The profitability depends on the quality of the material. However, in the seabed, the resources remain very concentrated. The profit obtained for each ton is therefore much greater than for terrestrial ores”, assures L’Express Gerard Barron. Attractive, of course, but is this discourse really realistic? “In the 1970s to 1990s, we immediately thought that it was the Eldorado of minerals, but we very quickly realized the technical complexity of this activity, and that the economic profitability was far from be guaranteed”, tempers Julien Rochette. In fact, few companies have embarked on the adventure. Only one other mining company, the Belgian company Global Sea Mineral Resources (GSR), has developed a machine to harvest these famous nodules. However, by the very admission of the boss of GSR, Kris Van Nijen, the technical challenges remain very significant and the exploitation of deep seas should not begin before 2028.
A moratorium on environmental consequences
But already, scientific circles, like NGOs, are alarmed by the environmental consequences of such an activity. Because although rich in mineral resources, the abyss still resembles an unknown world from the point of view of research. “We do not know the existing ecosystems, nor their ecological function, and we suspect that the organisms will be strongly impacted by the pollution resulting from the exploitation”, fears the specialist of the seabed, and director of research at the CNRS, Javier Escartin . In question, the plumes of sediment raised by the underwater “harvesters”, but also the noise generated by the machines and the use of powerful headlights which can upset the species present. “We adhere to the scientific consensus which considers that in the current state of science, we do not have enough knowledge to determine the basic state of these ecosystems, and therefore to assess the potential impacts”, abounds Pierre-Marie Sarradin, who studies deep ecosystems at the French Research Institute for the Exploitation of the Sea (Ifremer).
Hearing the concern of scientists, France took a strong position last November through the voice of Emmanuel Macron, who declared that he supported the outright ban on all exploitation of the deep seabed. Around the world, nearly twenty other countries have taken similar positions, asking for a moratorium, like New Zealand or very recently Switzerland, or even a break, as Germany or Spain are calling for. These States have been joined by a few large companies, such as BMW, Renault, or Microsoft, which has decided to exclude metals from the depths in its supply policy, considering that these resource deposits were not necessary on a global scale. overall. “There will be discussions in the coming weeks within the Authority, and we hope to see new States position themselves in favor of the moratorium”, rejoices Anne-Sophie Roux, representative in France of the NGO Sustainable Ocean Alliance. .
But this does not mean that the oceans will escape mining. Last June, Norway aroused the outrage of environmentalists and some of the country’s elected officials by proposing to open 280,000 square kilometers of seabed located in its exclusive economic zone to mineral extraction. “A fundamental question arises: do we really need to seek out these resources or can we do without them by finding other ways to make the ecological transition?” Asks Javier Escartin. A debate that recalls another: that on fossil resources, whose number of active lobbyists on the international scene has never been so high, despite the urgent need to switch to green energy.