Recently, the International Seabed Authority, the intergovernmental body charged with overseeing deepwater mining in international waters, concluded its recent series of meetings, which took place from July 4th to August 4th, 2022.
The purpose of these meetings was to advance negotiations on mining regulations with a view to mining on the high seas starting in July 2023, after the Pacific island nation of Nauru triggered a rule that could force this.
While many countries appear to support the rapid development of these regulations, an increasing number of other countries have raised concerns about this deadline, signaling a possible turn of events.
Start with small fragments of the seafloor: shark teeth or shell splinters. Then, in a process that can take millions of years, they are coated with layers of liquefied metal, eventually turning into solid, jagged rocks that resemble burnt potatoes. These formations, known as polymetallic nodules, have drawn the attention of international mining companies for what they harbor: rich deposits of commercially sought minerals such as cobalt, nickel, copper and manganesethe same metals used in batteries for renewable technologies like electric cars, wind turbines and solar panels.
But while some experts say we should mine the seafloor to combat climate change, others warn against it, saying we know very little about the damage deep-sea mining would do to vital ocean properties.
First steps in deep sea mining
Actual mining has yet to start, but in June 2021, the small Pacific island nation of Nauru brought the world closer to this possibility, notifying the International Seabed Authority, the intergovernmental body that oversees mining in international waters, that it triggered a crisis. of two years. annual rule in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). In theory, this rule would allow you to start mining in June 2023 under the then current mining rules. Nauru itself does not have a mining company with such an interest, but sponsors a subsidiary of The Metals Company, based in Canada and listed in the United States.
Since then, the ISA has been working to negotiate a set of regulations that would allow it to follow the two-year rule. But in the latest series of meetings that took place between July 4 and August 4 in Kingston, Jamaica, progress on the mining code appears to have stalled, observers reported.
“Overall, the feeling in the room is that there is now a majority of states that recognize that it is unrealistic, unattainable and that would be very irresponsible,” Emma Wilson, a conservation expert who attended recent ISA meetings as a representative of the NGO. OceanCare, he told Mongabay.
Representatives from several countries, including Spain, Chile, New Zealand, Ecuador, Costa Rica, Federated States of Micronesia and Trinidad and Tobago, argued that mining regulations should not be rushed to meet the two-year deadline obligations. rule. The representative of Spain, for example, said that “as a precaution, the time has come to take a break”, while the representative of Costa Rica said that “because we are responsible for the Common Heritage of Humanity, our peoples and future generations, we must proceed with caution.” (UNCLOS defines the seabed and its resources as “the common heritage of humanity”).
Urgent Regulations
Countries such as Australia, the United Kingdom, Tonga and Nauru itself took the position that regulations should be passed without delay. The Tonga representative said the nation is “ready to support the work of the Authority and relevant bodies, especially in completing regulatory frameworks in a timely manner, ensuring due diligence where appropriate.” Even France has stated that it has committed to adopting “a legal framework with stringent environmental protections to ensure that damage to ecosystems in the marine environment is minimised”. This position seemed to contrast with President Emmanuel Macron’s statement at the United Nations Ocean Conference in Lisbon at the end of June that “we have to create the legal framework to stop mining on the high seas and not allow new activities that endanger the ecosystems.
On July 25, the Chilean delegation presented a letter to the ISA Secretary, requesting that a discussion on the year’s rule be converted into an agenda item on the part of the meeting of the August 1st. But that request was ignored, said OceanCare’s Wilson. Instead, the ISA Secretariat relegated it at the end of the meeting to the “any other business” category, which “damaged” it, and the ISA Secretariat even ended the meetings a day earlier, he added.
“One thing that has become very, very apparent this week is that the ISA Secretariat is doing everything it can to sweep the conversation under the rug about [si] there is another possibility of not adopting the regulation,” Wilson said.
Mongabay has previously reported on transparency concerns at recently concluded ISA meetings, including allegations that the ISA had restricted access to important information and undermined interactions between member states and civil society.
Little clarity in the depths
Despite the many setbacks, Matt Gianni, policy and policy adviser to the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC), told Mongabay he was seeing a shift in the negotiations.
“There is widespread recognition that unless something truly incredible happens, these regulations are unlikely to be adopted before July 2023, but probably not for several years,” said Gianni, who attended the meetings as a representative of EarthWorks, a NGO that works to protect communities and the environment from the negative impacts of extractive activities.
Gianni added that the ISA board has not yet agreed on the financial mechanisms under which mining could operate, which must be implemented, in addition to regulations, before the ISA can issue mining permits. However, he said it was still unclear whether deep-sea mining would officially stop.
“It’s a bit like the Titanic,” said Gianni. “We start to see the rivets open and the thing starts to turn slowly. But will the iceberg go unnoticed and go in the direction of protecting the marine environment? That is still an open question.”
By Elizabeth C. Alberts. Article in English