The international debate over deep-sea mining has reached a critical moment, as mining companies set their sights on 2025 to potentially begin harvesting valuable minerals from the seabed. Yet, with no agreement in sight on a regulatory framework from the United Nations-affiliated International Seabed Authority (ISA), the lack of consensus could lead to unilateral actions by nations, raising concerns about the future of international waters.
For more than two decades, the ISA has struggled to finalize a mining code to regulate the extraction of polymetallic nodules—metal-rich, potato-sized rocks found on the ocean floor. These nodules contain essential metals like cobalt and manganese, critical for producing electric car batteries and other green technologies. Despite the urgent need to support renewable energy systems, negotiations remain deadlocked. As New Scientist reports, this ongoing impasse could result in countries acting independently, bypassing international agreements and creating potential conflicts in the oceans.
The Metals Company (TMC), a Canadian-based mining firm, has announced plans to submit its application to the ISA on June 27, 2025. The company is optimistic that the ISA will finalize its long-awaited mining code in time. TMC’s proposed operations in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ) of the Pacific Ocean, a vast area spanning 4.5 million square kilometers, would involve using robotic collectors to harvest nodules. These would then be transported via compressed air through a 4-kilometer pipe to surface vessels. TMC claims that its operations, backed by environmental data from 22 research campaigns, would not cause serious harm to marine ecosystems. Rory Usher of TMC stated that “polymetallic nodules can be collected from the abyssal seafloor without serious harm to the marine environment,” according to New Scientist.
However, environmentalists and scientists remain deeply skeptical. Thirty-two countries and many researchers have raised concerns about the potential ecological damage. Recent discoveries suggest that these nodules may play an unexpected role in oxygen production, pointing to their importance in deep-sea ecosystems. As New Scientist highlighted, Claudio Bozzi of Deakin University in Australia said, “We simply don’t know enough about the deep sea. We don’t know enough about the seabed. We don’t know what the nodules are doing.”
Rich Crane of the University of Exeter echoed these concerns, arguing that there are sufficient land-based deposits and recycling methods to meet metal demands. He questioned the necessity of exploiting the seabed, emphasizing that “beyond the unpredictable risks, there’s the broader question of whether we should exploit a pristine environmental frontier when it may not be necessary.”
Adding to the uncertainty is the election of Brazilian oceanographer Leticia Carvalho as the new secretary-general of the ISA. Her reputation for scientific rigor and a cautious approach to deep-sea mining has raised hopes among opponents of the practice. “Carvalho comes in with an entirely new approach,” said Bozzi. “She’s an oceanographer for a start, so she’s got the science.” According to New Scientist, Carvalho’s overwhelming election victory signaled a mandate for transparency and the establishment of a comprehensive code before any mining licenses are issued.
Despite this, industry frustration is mounting, particularly as geopolitical shifts may favor mining interests. The election of a new US administration, reportedly supportive of deep-sea mining, is expected to accelerate initiatives. Usher noted that “post-election momentum is expected to accelerate deep-sea mineral initiatives,” including the appointment of mining proponents to influential roles within the ISA.
Bozzi warned that if the ISA remains gridlocked, nations might act unilaterally, further complicating the situation. “Power may win in the end,” he cautioned, adding that “we have plenty of examples of countries exploiting the oceans unilaterally for their own purposes at the moment.” As New Scientist reported, Bozzi anticipates a surge in applications to extend continental shelf claims, enabling countries to exploit larger areas of the seabed. The South China Sea is already a contentious example of overlapping claims and unilateral actions, demonstrating the potential for future conflicts.
