• The Trump administration is actively promoting deep-sea mining for critical minerals, aiming to secure resources for the United States.
• Scientists and environmental groups warn that deep-sea mining could cause irreversible damage to fragile deep-sea ecosystems and lead to biodiversity loss.
• The International Seabed Authority (ISA) and other nations are calling for a moratorium on deep-sea mining until its environmental impacts are better understood.

Donald Trump's administration is aggressively pursuing deep-sea mining to secure critical minerals such as copper, cobalt, and nickel. This initiative involves potentially extracting resources from the ocean depths, specifically targeting polymetallic nodules, hydrothermal vents, and seamounts. The Clarion-Clipperton Zone in the Pacific Ocean is a primary area of interest for mining companies. However, this push for deep-sea mining is highly controversial due to the potential for severe environmental damage to the largely unknown deep-sea ecosystems.

• What: Deep-sea mining involves extracting valuable minerals from the ocean floor, including polymetallic nodules, hydrothermal vents, and seamounts.
• Who: Key players include the Trump administration, deep-sea mining companies like The Metals Company, the International Seabed Authority, scientists, and environmental groups like Greenpeace.
• When: Trump signed an executive order in April to kickstart the commercial deep-sea mining industry. The ISA has been trying to develop a mining code since 2021. A small-scale mining experiment 44 years ago still shows tread marks on the ocean floor.
• Where: The primary focus is on the Clarion-Clipperton Zone in the Pacific Ocean, but other areas like Norway's Arctic seabed are also being considered.

The push for deep-sea mining highlights a conflict between the need for critical minerals for clean energy and the potential for environmental damage. The deep ocean, a largely unexplored environment, is at risk of irreversible harm due to mining activities. While mining companies argue that the impact is less than land-based mining, scientists and environmental groups raise concerns about biodiversity loss and ecosystem disruption. The lack of a clear regulatory framework and the potential for unilateral action by countries like the US further complicate the issue.

The notion that we don’t know enough about this environment is blatantly wrong.

Starting a whole new extractive industry that scientists have already said will cause irreversible biodiversity loss is not a good idea.

Authorizing deep-sea mining outside international law is like lighting a match in a room full of dynamite — it threatens ecosystems, global cooperation, and US credibility.

In the end, it’s a political decision as to whether the risk is worth taking.

The future of deep-sea mining is at a critical juncture, characterized by a complex interplay of environmental, economic, and geopolitical considerations. While the Trump administration's initial push intensified the debate, a broader global concern has emerged, reflected in the ongoing development of regulations by the International Seabed Authority (ISA) and increasing calls for a moratorium. As of 2024, 32 countries support a pause or ban on deep-sea mining, reflecting apprehension about potentially irreversible biodiversity loss, disruption of carbon sequestration, and habitat destruction. These concerns are amplified by the fact that over 90% of species in potential mining areas remain undescribed, highlighting the knowledge gaps surrounding deep-sea ecosystems. Despite these environmental risks, the demand for critical minerals essential for green technologies and national security is driving interest in deep-sea resources. Minerals such as cobalt, nickel, and manganese, found in polymetallic nodules, are key to battery production and other applications. Some argue that deep-sea mining presents an alternative to terrestrial mining, potentially avoiding deforestation and freshwater pollution. However, the economic viability of deep-sea mining remains uncertain, with technological challenges and volatile metal prices posing significant hurdles. Reports suggest the industry's financial models may be unrealistic, and the capital and operational costs are substantial. The ISA's role in regulating deep-sea mining in international waters is crucial, but its effectiveness is under scrutiny. The development of exploitation regulations has been protracted, and the ISA faces the challenge of balancing economic interests with environmental protection. The "two-year rule," triggered by Nauru, has added pressure to finalize regulations, but disagreements persist. The decision of whether or not to proceed with deep-sea mining demands a comprehensive understanding of the ecological consequences, robust governance structures, and consideration of social concerns, failing which, a precautionary pause or moratorium remains a prudent approach.