Global negotiations over the future of the deep sea are underway this week in Kingston, Jamaica where member states of the International Seabed Authority have gathered to continue shaping a regulatory framework for commercial mining in international waters.
The three-week summit is dedicated to finalizing a long-debated set of rules known as the Mining Code that would govern how, when and where companies could extract cobalt, nickel and manganese from the ocean floor. These metals are often found in potato sized rock-like mineral deposits called polymetallic nodules. But progress towards adopting the code remains uncertain as critics raise mounting concerns about the harm the industry would cause to marine life.
The talks have taken on an additional sense of urgency since President Donald Trump issued an executive order earlier this year to promote and expedite deep sea mining in international waters. Soon after, a U.S. subsidiary of the Canadian deep-sea mining venture, The Metals Company, announced it had submitted its first application to the U.S. government for a license to exploit seabed minerals in international waters, which many ocean governance experts say would breach international law.
According to an international treaty called the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the International Seabed Authority (ISA) is the only organization that can legally approve mining in ocean areas beyond countries’ national jurisdictions.
To better understand what’s at stake during this month’s negotiations, Inside Climate News spoke with Emma Wilson, who is on the ground in Jamaica where she is advocating for a moratorium on deep sea mining as policy officer for the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition. The group represents more than 100 member organizations from around the world, including large international NGOs like Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), that are committed to protecting the deep sea.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
TERESA TOMASSONI: What is the primary aim of the deep sea mining negotiations happening this month?
EMMA WILSON: The original objective of this week’s ISA council meeting was to review and adopt the draft Mining Code, which has been in existence for about six years. Currently, representatives from ISA member states are negotiating every line of the code with the aim of reaching a kind of final product. But it is becoming clear that most member states have informally decided they will not be ready to adopt the code by the end of this meeting. This is a good thing. A premature adoption of this code could very well be the thing that opens the gates to deep sea mining on a commercial scale. Now, our big concern is that they will place another deadline for the adoption of the regulations. That will be a big decision that will come towards the end of the week— whether there will be a deadline or not.

TOMASSONI: Why is this a concern?
WILSON: Scientists are frequently telling us there is not enough scientific data on deep sea ecosystems and the potential impacts of deep sea mining on them to create adequate regulations for their protection. It’s a very bizarre scenario where negotiators are trying to develop aspects of the regulations where they need scientific information, but the information just isn’t there. The regulations cannot precede science. Setting another deadline on the adoption of the regulations would frankly be quite irresponsible. It’s also worth noting the ISA has previously set several other deadlines for the adoption of these regulations. But each time they haven’t met them. It kind of throws into question the credibility of the institution. Our ask for the ISA council would be to not place a new deadline on the adoption of these regulations, to respect science and to respect the need for due process in these conversations. It has to take the time that it will take.
TOMASSONI: Tell me about the Mining Code. What is it and why is it contentious?
WILSON: The Mining Code has been under development since 2019. Basically, it is a series of regulations that would allow the International Seabed Authority to regulate the activity of deep sea mining. Our big concern is that once that mining code is adopted it essentially opens the gates for deep sea mining to start. There is immense opposition to this industry from multiple sectors and big questions related to the role the deep sea plays in our everyday lives. There is a real risk of adopting a very weak set of regulations that would not ensure environmental protection. The deep sea is a massive hub of biodiversity. We’re discovering incredible things about it on a regular basis. Maybe you read about the dark oxygen discovery that emerged last year. Essentially, a group of scientists found that the polymetallic nodules that are targeted for mining actually produce oxygen. Of course, this is a discovery that’s totally new to science, and kind of mind blowing, that there’s something that is producing oxygen in the total absence of sunlight. They don’t really understand why and how that’s happening yet, and they don’t know, crucially, on what scale it’s happening. This is the kind of research that needs to happen before a mining code can be developed in a responsible manner.
TOMASSONI: Are there aspects of the Mining Code that are raising particular concern amongst delegates or advocates?
WILSON: Yes. For one section in the regulatory framework, they would need to establish thresholds for harm. Essentially, they have to define what is acceptable harm. Of course, we would argue that no level of harm is acceptable. But even with that aside, it is impossible for them to actually develop those thresholds currently, because the data quite simply isn’t there. They don’t have an environmental baseline. Another important discussion point this week, as it relates to the code, has to do with inspection, compliance and enforcement. You can have the strongest regulations possible, but if you can’t enforce them, they serve no purpose. This is a major outstanding issue. The states just cannot seem to reach agreement on how they would carry out inspection, compliance and enforcement. It would be a huge cost to put in place a monitoring mechanism that is effective. There are also questions around the feasibility of practically regulating this sort of activity that would be taking place, hundreds, potentially thousands of kilometers out at sea and several kilometers deep. Currently, the ISA absolutely does not have the budget to be able to implement these kinds of mechanisms, and there is no proof, or no confidence in the fact that it could actually implement that kind of oversight and that regulation.
This story is funded by readers like you.
Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.
TOMASSONI: What are some of the other key issues or decisions that could emerge from this meeting aside from those related to the Mining Code, especially as the ISA faces growing challenges to its authority by the U.S. government and The Metals Company?
WILSON: The Metals Company has abandoned the multilateral structure of the ISA to pursue an application to mine the deep sea via U.S. channels. This was met with universal condemnation from the international community when it was announced earlier this year. TMC has been accused by governments of essentially nudging a major world power, the U.S., towards a breach of international law. So one of the major questions of this meeting is how to deal with this situation. The ISA is a regulator, and this is kind of its first major test. The question really is, “Will TMC be allowed to get away with what they’ve done with impunity, or will the ISA stand up, take action and send some kind of signal that such actions on the part of a company are not acceptable?” We’ll see by the end of the week what comes up.
TOMASSONI: What are some other big issues or themes that will be discussed this month at the negotiations?
WILSON: There is a big ticket item on the agenda for the ISA assembly meeting next week, and that is related to creating an environmental policy that would ensure negotiators prioritize the protection of nature at the forefront of all their deliberations. If approved, this tool, or document, would need to be taken into account and respected by the council, for example, in their negotiations of the mining code. The idea of this policy is that it would be a kind of North Star for ensuring the environmental protection of the deep sea. It’s the kind of thing that should have been in place before they even started negotiating the Mining Code. But it hasn’t worked out like that. It’s been an unfortunately controversial topic for the last two and a half years that it’s been brought up at ISA meetings. We’ve seen this issue discussed three times at the ISA, and cumulatively, it’s received support from more than 80 countries here at the ISA, whereas it’s been blocked by around 15. We’re really hoping for a positive outcome this time. The mandate of the International Seabed Authority is to ensure the effective protection of the marine environment, so that needs to be reflected in all of its activities.
TOMASSONI: Can you explain what a moratorium or precautionary pause on deep sea mining would entail and why the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition and others are calling for this?
WILSON: We use the terms “moratorium” and “precautionary pause” interchangeably. It essentially means the same thing for us. It’s really about the end game. What we want, concretely, is for no deep sea mining to be allowed to go ahead, unless and until a number of conditions are fulfilled. We have a list of conditions, but the number one most important condition for us is the protection of the marine environment and ensuring no biodiversity loss. We have another key condition which states the need for more scientific information and understanding of these fragile ecosystems before any decisions are made. The support for this sort of moratorium or pause is growing all the time. There are 37 countries that are calling for a moratorium or pause. Alongside those states, there are multiple other groups that are joining them. For example, a large group of more than 1,000 scientists who are experts on the deep sea are calling for a precautionary pause on deep sea mining.
TOMASSONI: Can you explain how the deep sea plays a role in regulating climate and how mining this area could potentially disrupt it?
WILSON: I think it’s very important to recognize that much of the deep sea remains a mystery to humans still today. What we do know is that the deep sea plays a vital role in temperature regulation, in nutrient cycles, in carbon storage, carbon sequestration. And of course, the ecosystems and the organisms that live in the deep sea are part of that. So one of the main concerns around deep sea mining is that it might have an impact on the biological carbon pump, which is basically this eternal, never ending cycle of organisms that start at the surface of the ocean, and then go down to the depths of the ocean, and then they come up again to the surface, and then down to the depths. And in that movement, those organisms, through their various functions, including defecation, take carbon from the top down to the bottom. If this cycle is disrupted, it could have major, major impacts. We often say that the deep sea is one of our biggest allies in addressing climate change, because it’s one of the zones that just stores the excess carbon that we as humans are producing.
TOMASSONI: Deep sea mining was originally justified by supporters as necessary to supply metals for the green energy transition. Is that still the case?
WILSON: This is the million dollar question. Until now, we’ve seen the industry basically justifying deep sea mining by saying that we need these metals from the ocean floor in order to feed the technologies of the green transition, specifically, for example, electric vehicle batteries. But we have seen a huge body of research demonstrating that actually that’s not the case at all, mainly because battery technologies are moving away from the kinds of minerals that are found in the deep sea. Tesla now has a battery model that does not use any of the minerals that are found on the deep sea floor. Major Chinese producers are also moving away from the battery technology that previously used those minerals. BYD is a good example. They are the biggest electric vehicle producer in China, and they are no longer using a model that relies on these minerals. In the last few months we have seen the industry shift away from this narrative because it seems that they are starting to realize that it doesn’t fly. There are rumblings of certain companies potentially targeting these minerals for defense uses—weapons. If that’s the case, and those metals are used for defense and military purposes, it would be totally inappropriate. There are clauses in the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea that specify that the common heritage of humankind, which is the status that’s given deep seabed and anything that’s on it, is supposed to—if it’s used at all—to be used only for peaceful purposes.
About This Story
Perhaps you noticed: This story, like all the news we publish, is free to read. That’s because Inside Climate News is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. We do not charge a subscription fee, lock our news behind a paywall, or clutter our website with ads. We make our news on climate and the environment freely available to you and anyone who wants it.
That’s not all. We also share our news for free with scores of other media organizations around the country. Many of them can’t afford to do environmental journalism of their own. We’ve built bureaus from coast to coast to report local stories, collaborate with local newsrooms and co-publish articles so that this vital work is shared as widely as possible.
Two of us launched ICN in 2007. Six years later we earned a Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, and now we run the oldest and largest dedicated climate newsroom in the nation. We tell the story in all its complexity. We hold polluters accountable. We expose environmental injustice. We debunk misinformation. We scrutinize solutions and inspire action.
Donations from readers like you fund every aspect of what we do. If you don’t already, will you support our ongoing work, our reporting on the biggest crisis facing our planet, and help us reach even more readers in more places?
Please take a moment to make a tax-deductible donation. Every one of them makes a difference.
Thank you,
Great Job By Teresa Tomassoni & the Team @ Inside Climate News Source link for sharing this story.