Today’s growing world population and a privileged minority’s rapidly rising living standards are driving resource consumption and waste production at a rate requiring the capacities of 1.7 Earths and fuels alarming levels of global warming. And the ocean is increasingly suffering the consequences — not only the well-known large-scale bleaching of tropical corals caused by rising temperatures, but also the less visible risks of ocean-water acidification, and temporal and spatial discrepancies in productivity patterns due to species-specific adaptability.
Earth, and especially the ocean, is thus approaching the tipping point of irreversible degradation.
That would be a tragedy, marked by the ocean’s increasing inability to provide us and future generations with necessities such as healthy food, the carbon cycle, nutrient regeneration and mitigation of global warming.
Illustration: Yusha
As studies and assessments indicate, the world is still able to change course in the face of this threat, if major pressures — including climate change — are mitigated and marine ecosystems restored.
However, a new risk is looming on the horizon: commercial deep-seabed mining for in-demand minerals.
The industry’s prevailing narrative today is that the world needs deep-sea minerals — including rare-earth elements, cobalt, manganese and tellurium — to enable the renewable-energy transition and decarbonize the global economy.
However, economic analyses suggest that existing land-based mining and a transition toward a circular economy can fill possible gaps in mineral supply, and even indicate that surplus mineral production, such as from the deep sea, might cause prices to collapse. So, who will gain from mining the seafloor?
The mining of mineral-rich substrates would potentially affect the largely untouched deep sea at depths of 2,000m to 4,000m in some national waters, as well as the international seabed, known legally as “the Area.”
The 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) declared the Area and its mineral resources to be the “common heritage of mankind,” and established the International Seabed Authority (ISA) — a Jamaica-based body that currently has 168 member states — to manage them.
Since it came into existence in 1994, the ISA has signed 30 mineral-exploration contracts with 21 entities — sponsored by 16 states and one consortium. Industry pressure to start commercial exploitation has increased in the past few years.
Although this impatience is perhaps understandable, seabed mineral deposits are typically found in highly specific and sensitive ecosystems. Older and more ecologically stable locations have more concentrated deposits and thus attract greater mining interest, but the associated ecosystems are more specialized and diverse.
Recent research has revolutionized our view of the deep sea and revealed an extraordinary diversity of small-scale habitats, life forms and strategies.
However, we have yet to uncover most of these ecosystems’ secrets, and our understanding of their complexity and functional relationships is still in its infancy.
Moreover, scientific experiments indicate that habitats affected by commercial deep-seabed mining would not have recovered even after 30 years and would remain functionally disrupted, with an inevitable loss of biodiversity on an unknown scale.
For example, every manganese nodule mining operation would plow through the upper 10cm to 20cm of mineable seabed measuring 200km2 to 800km2 every year for 30 years, causing major disturbance to at least three times as much seafloor.
This dredging not only removes the livelihood of the local fauna, but also causes pollution and clouding of an unknown amount of the clearest water on the planet.
The UNCLOS common-heritage principle was intended to help preserve social equity for current and future generations through fairness, redistribution, and knowledge transfer.
However, for deep-seabed mining to be commercially viable, operators need the ISA to grant favorable long-term contract conditions, including very limited benefit-sharing and restricted environmental regulation.
The risk is that, once the legal framework is in place, a newly emerging industry will operate with (at least) 30-year contracts based on mere assumptions regarding the environmental effects of its untested technologies.
Other benefits accruing to humanity from our common seabed heritage remain uncertain.
However, an effort to resolve the problems that humans have created on land by further expanding our footprint and disregarding planetary boundaries does not appear to be a viable strategy.
Fortunately, alternative development pathways are available. Five years ago, governments adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (with the slogan “Transforming our World”) and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals, with the aim of guiding humanity toward a future based on intact natural environments, prosperous and peaceful societies, and successful action to limit climate change.
The COVID-19 pandemic is a dramatic reminder that the way we are interacting with the biosphere renders our societies less resilient.
However, the world is still struggling to reverse accelerating biodiversity loss and ocean decline.
Preserving our common deep-sea heritage means taking responsibility for the future, responding cautiously to uncertain ongoing changes, such as the effects of global warming on the ocean, and avoiding repetition of past mistakes.
Such a forward-looking vision, building on the philosophy of the commons, should be at the heart of the current negotiations on the legal framework for exploiting minerals in the Area.
Instead of rushing to mine the seabed, we need to pause until we can protect the biodiversity of the high seas and show that exploiting what lies beneath them can yield long-term net benefits for sustainable development.
Sabine Christiansen, a marine biologist, is senior research associate at the Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies in Potsdam, Germany, where she heads an interdisciplinary working group on the legal, financial and environmental governance of deep-seabed mining. Sebastian Unger heads the Ocean Governance Working Group at the institute.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Taiwan’s business-friendly environment and science parks designed to foster technology industries are the key elements of the nation’s winning chip formula, inspiring the US and other countries to try to replicate it. Representatives from US business groups — such as the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office — in July visited the Hsinchu Science Park (新竹科學園區), home to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) headquarters and its first fab. They showed great interest in creating similar science parks, with aims to build an extensive semiconductor chain suitable for the US, with chip designing, packaging and manufacturing. The
RSS