Deep-sea mining: The new frontier
Formed over millions of years and habitat to otherworldly organisms, the metals and minerals found at the bottom of the sea have long since claimed their place within Earth’s diverse ecosystem. Now, pumped up by terms like ‘Energy Transition’, alongside the adoption of electric cars and smartphones, deep-sea mining appears to be at a pivotal moment in time. But between up-in-the-air regulation and mining companies with their own personal timelines, there is an underlying tension growing. As countries and companies alike begin to close in on the precious resources in the deep blue — and the global power shifts that could come with it.
What is deep-sea mining?
It all starts on the seabed in the deep sea, an environment that is said to be as unknown to us as the vastness that is space. Put simply, it’s the removal of metals and minerals, usually found thousands of feet under sea level. These include cobalt, nickel, seafloor massive sulfides and polymetallic nodules — with the last two being particularly sought after in the commercial sector, due to their high concentration of precious metals and minerals, and perceived economic value in a tech-first world.
On average, these mineral-rich chunks can range from pea sized to 20cm in thickness, and contain resources that help to power everything from wind turbines and military technology to laptops, speakers or the (always-dying) battery in your favourite gaming console.
The current focus for many mining companies is the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ) in the Pacific Ocean, a vast area in international waters between Hawaii and Mexico, and home to an estimated 21 billion tons of polymetallic nodules.
The world is watching
Due to its location, the CCZ isn’t actually ‘owned’ by any particular country, instead it’s governed by the International Seabed Authority (ISA). Headquartered in Kingston, Jamaica, it is an ‘autonomous international organisation created under the United Nations’, responsible for deep-sea mining regulation in the area, as well as the protection of marine life from the harmful effects that come from human interference on the international seabed.
This means the ISA is currently at the center of one of the biggest global discussions: should we mine one of Earth’s untouched ecosystems to support the projected demand for resource-rich technologies?
The answer to that question seems obvious for various stakeholders, but for different reasons. A look at the online FAQ of mining company, The Metals Company (TMC), under “Why do we need deep-sea mining?”, provides their point of view: ‘While there may be technically enough metal-bearing deposits on land to meet future demand1, those resources can only be extracted at increasingly high economic, social, and environmental cost. We believe that polymetallic nodules could contribute to supplying metal resources and alleviate some of the pressures on fragile terrestrial ecosystems.’
It represents the continuation of the same extractive model that we have seen with oil and gas and will only serve to open the last remaining frontiers of the world - the deep ocean - to massive destruction
Obviously, organisations like Greenpeace have a different take. At a 2023 meeting of the ISA Council, François Chartier, (the head of the Greenpeace International delegation attending the negotiations), states in an official press release: “Contrary to what the deep sea mining industry claims, deep sea mining is not a solution to the climate crisis. Deep sea minerals are not needed for a green energy transition. Instead, it represents the continuation of the same extractive model that we have seen with oil and gas and will only serve to open the last remaining frontiers of the world - the deep ocean - to massive destruction.”
The ISA is currently performing a balancing act, one which some say is moving too fast while others say it’s moving far too slow.
As of now, no commercial deep-sea mining has taken place - because there are no official laws that govern mining in the Area. And while the ISA continues to write and re-write the rules in real time, they have currently approved 31 contracts to 22 contractors for exploration only, with interested parties ranging from countries to private firms2.
What does it mean for the environment and humans?
We don’t know exactly what the long term effects of deep-sea mining could mean for the planet. The remote nature and environmental conditions such as immense pressure and cold temperatures make it one of the least explored parts of Earth. While uninhabitable to humans, the harsh environment has made it a home to a diverse, unique and slow-moving world which we are still beginning to understand. A recent article by the World Resources Institute states, “To date, tens of thousands of species have been found in the deep ocean. Estimates say there could be millions more. In the Clarion-Clipperton Zone alone, a key area of interest for deep-sea mining, researchers have recently discovered over 5,000 species that were entirely new to science.”3
A study released in March 2025 looked into the ability of seafloor ecosystems to recover after mining activities4. The research revisited a 1979 test-mining site in the CCZ and showed that 44 years later persistent scarring could still be seen on the ground, and biological impact on some of the organisms was also discovered, “Although some aspects of the modern collector design may cause reduced physical impact compared to this test mining experiment, our results show that mining impacts in the abyssal ocean will be persistent over at least decadal timeframes and communities will remain altered in directly disturbed areas, despite some recolonisation.”
There are also questions around the actual process of extracting the metals and minerals from the seabed. Sediment plumes are a by-product of the ‘crawlers’ that are deployed along the seabed. These machines vacuum the nodules up to a boat on the surface, where the nodules are separated from any sea water or mud etc. Whatever organic waste is remaining, after the nodules are procured, is then pumped back into the sea. More research is needed on the long term effects here, but the fear is that the sediment disturbance created during this operation could lead to suffocation and burial of Benthic fauna (Miljutin et al., 2011)5.
And worryingly, alongside other issues like noise pollution, research has shown that polymetallic nodule fields appear to be home to vulnerable organisms, who either attach to them or dwell underneath. In an article by the IUCN NL, a non-governmental international nature organisation based in Amsterdam, they advise, “The majority of species are yet to be discovered but scientists think that as many as 10 million species may inhabit the deep sea. A recent study concluded that over 90% of the species observed within the Clarion Clipperton Zone, one of the first potential areas to be open to commercial deep-sea mining, are currently undescribed by science, highlighting just how little we know about deep-sea ecosystems6.”
On the horizon
While a finalised regulatory mining code is still absent from the conversation7, campaigners and scientists continue to advocate for the vulnerable ecosystem down below. Earlier this year the international MiningImpact3 consortium received €1.4 million via their dutch contributing partners from NIOZ, Utrecht University, Naturalis, and TU Delft. The research project’s aim is to gain more knowledge about these unique environments whilst looking into the potential impacts of deep-sea mining, possibly supporting decisions made by the ISA in the future.
On the other side of the coin the Canadian based company, TMC, and several other companies have reportedly shown interest in taking advantage of a new jump-off point into the deep sea. A new executive order recently passed under the Trump administration aims to fast-track deep-sea mining within American and international waters — obviously accelerating matters on all fronts. This raises all-new questions and could potentially be a breach of international law.
For the ISA, the assembly’s most recent session was held from 21 to 25 July at its HQ in Jamaica, but concluded with no consensus on official mining regulation. ISA Secretary-General Ms. Leticia Carvalho states, the deep seabed must be governed not for the few, but for the benefit of all humankind. We are shaping a future that is equitable, science-based and firmly anchored in international law.”8 Regarding the recent executive order, Carvalho expressed ‘deep concern’ in an official statement on the announcement by TMC9. Their website sums up their position: ‘It is important to state that the legal mandate to regulate mineral-related activities in the seabed beyond coastal countries’ national jurisdictions (the Area) rests solely with the International Seabed Authority (ISA), as enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).”
(1) Demand side: World Bank. (2020, April). The Mineral Intensity of the Clean Energy Transition; supply side: U.S. Geological Survey. USGS.gov | Science for a changing world. (n.d.). usgs.gov.
(2) ISA - annual report, read
(3) WRI - What we know bout deep sea mining, read
(4) Jones, D.O.B., Arias, M.B., Van Audenhaege, L. et al. Long-term impact and biological recovery in a deep-sea mining track. Nature 642, 112–118 (2025). Read
(5) Frontiers in Marine Science, read
(6) Current Biology, read
(7) ISA - The Mining Code, read
(8) ISA - International Seabed Authority holds a landmark 30th session, read
(9) ISA - Statement on the announcement by The Metals Company, read