Deep sea mining is the process of removing minerals from the deep ocean floor. The most valuable minerals are called polymetallic nodules, which are found at depths of 4–6 kilometers (2.5–3.7 miles) mainly on the abyssal plain. The Clarion–Clipperton zone (CCZ) has more than 21 billion metric tons of these nodules. These nodules contain minerals like copper, nickel, cobalt, and manganese, which make up about 30% of their weight. Experts believe the entire ocean floor holds more than 120 million tons of cobalt, five times the amount found on land.

Studies show that mining methods that create plumes of dust can harm marine life, affecting areas far beyond where mining occurs.

As of July 2024, only exploration permits have been issued, and no large-scale deep sea mining has started. The International Seabed Authority (ISA) manages all mining activities in international waters. It has given 31 exploration licenses: 19 for polymetallic nodules, mostly in the CCZ; 7 for polymetallic sulphides in mid-ocean ridges; and 5 for cobalt-rich crusts in the Western Pacific Ocean. Some groups want deep sea mining to begin by 2025, when the ISA is expected to finalize its rules.

In April 2025, U.S. President Trump signed an order asking the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to speed up permits for companies to mine in international and U.S. waters, based on the Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Resource Act of 1980.

Deep sea mining is also being considered in the exclusive economic zones (EEZs) of countries like Norway. In January 2024, Norway said it would allow companies to apply for exploration permits in 2025. However, in December 2024, Norway paused its plans after the Socialist Left Party blocked a licensing round during budget talks. In 2022, the Cook Islands Seabed Minerals Authority granted three exploration licenses for cobalt-rich polymetallic nodules within its EEZ. In 2025, the Cook Islands signed an agreement with China focused on deep-sea mining. Papua New Guinea was the first country to approve a deep sea mining permit in its waters for the Solwara 1 project, despite three reviews pointing out serious problems in the environmental impact report.

The most common mining method involves using a caterpillar-track machine to collect minerals and a riser system to bring the ore to a ship. The ship then releases waste material into the ocean below 2,000 meters. Other technologies include robotic machines, ships, and refineries on land. Many deep-sea metals, such as nickel and manganese, are used in steel, wind farms, solar panels, electric vehicles, and batteries. Demand for electric vehicle batteries is a major reason for wanting to mine these metals, along with needs for aerospace, defense, and infrastructure.

The environmental effects of deep sea mining are debated. Groups like Greenpeace and the Deep Sea Mining Campaign say mining could harm ocean ecosystems and spread pollution from heavy metal dust. Some people argue that mining should be stopped or limited. Countries with large deposits in their EEZs, such as Norway, Cook Islands, India, and Brazil, are studying the issue. Studies also note that indigenous communities may lose cultural or spiritual values tied to the ocean, but these concerns are not yet addressed in international laws.

As of 2021, most marine mining happened in shallow waters, less than 200 meters deep, where sand, silt, and mineral-rich sands containing ilmenite and diamonds are found.

Deposit types

Deep sea ore deposits are divided into three main types: polymetallic nodules, polymetallic sulfide deposits, and cobalt-rich crusts.

Polymetallic nodules are found at depths of 4–6 km (2.5–3.7 mi) in all major oceans. Those in the Pacific Ocean are most valuable for mining. These nodules can also be found in shallow waters, such as the Baltic Sea and freshwater lakes. They are the easiest deep sea ore to mine. These nodules are usually 4–14 cm (1.6–5.5 in) in size, though some may be as large as 15 cm (5.9 in).

Manganese and similar materials form around small objects, like a shark’s tooth or a grain of quartz, in ocean water or water from the sediment. This process creates potato-shaped nodules about 4–14 cm (1.6–5.5 in) in size. These nodules grow very slowly, at a rate of 1–15 mm every million years. They contain metals such as rare earth elements, cobalt, nickel, copper, molybdenum, and yttrium.

The Clipperton fracture zone has the world’s largest nickel deposit. These nodules rest on the seafloor and do not require drilling or digging. Nickel, cobalt, copper, and manganese make up nearly 30% of the material in these nodules.

Polymetallic sulfide deposits form in areas where the ocean floor is actively moving, such as near island arcs, back-arcs, and mid-ocean ridges. These deposits are linked to hydrothermal activity and hydrothermal vents, which are found at depths of 1–4 km (0.62–2.5 mi). These minerals are rich in copper, gold, lead, silver, and other metals.

Polymetallic sulfides form on the seafloor as mineral-rich water flows out from hydrothermal vents. When hot, mineral-filled water meets cold seawater, metals and sulfides in the water settle and form solid deposits. The structures near hydrothermal vents can become highly mineralized.

Cobalt-rich crusts (CRCs) form on rock surfaces that are not covered by sediment, such as seamounts, ocean plateaus, and other raised areas. These deposits are found at depths of 600–7,000 m (2,000–23,000 ft) and create layers about 30 cm (12 in) thick. These crusts contain metals like cobalt, tellurium, nickel, copper, platinum, zirconium, tungsten, and rare earth elements. Factors such as temperature, depth, and seawater sources influence how these crusts grow.

Cobalt-rich crusts are divided into two types based on where they form:
– Hydrogenetic cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts grow slowly, at 1–5 mm per million years, and have high concentrations of important metals.
– Hydrothermal crusts and encrustations form quickly, at 1,600–1,800 mm per million years, and develop in hot hydrothermal fluids at about 200°C (392°F).

Submarine seamount provinces are connected to hotspots and seafloor spreading and vary in depth. These areas have distinct patterns. In the Western Pacific, a study found that cobalt crusts are most common on slopes less than 20°, within a region located between 150°E–140°W and 30°S–30°N.

Diamonds are mined from the ocean floor by companies such as De Beers.

Deposit sites

Deep sea mining areas have polymetallic nodules or are near active or inactive hydrothermal vents at depths of about 3,000–6,500 meters (10,000–21,000 feet). These vents form sulfide deposits that contain metals like silver, gold, copper, manganese, cobalt, and zinc. The deposits are mined using hydraulic pumps or bucket systems.

The largest deposits are found in the Clarion–Clipperton zone in the Pacific Ocean. This area covers 4.5 million square kilometers of the Northern Pacific Ocean between Hawaii and Mexico. Across the abyssal plain, trillions of polymetallic nodules—rocklike deposits the size of potatoes—contain minerals such as manganese, nickel, copper, zinc, and cobalt.

The Cook Islands have the world's fourth-largest deposit in the South Penrhyn basin near the Manihiki Plateau.

Although the most commercially valuable nodule fields are in the eastern Pacific, polymetallic nodules are also found in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge system, near Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Tonga, and the Peru Basin.

Cobalt-rich crusts are found on seamounts in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans, as well as in areas like the Pacific Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, and Kiribati.

On November 10, 2020, the Chinese submersible Striver reached the bottom of the Mariana Trench, which is 10,909 meters (35,790 feet) deep. Chief designer Ye Cong stated the seabed has many resources and described it as a "treasure map."

Promising sulfide deposits (an average of 26 parts per million) were found in the Central and Eastern Manus Basin near Papua New Guinea and in the crater of Conical Seamount to the east. These areas have relatively shallow water depths of 1,050 meters and are near a gold refinery.

A 2023 study identified four regions in U.S. territorial waters where deep sea mining could occur: the Hawaiian Islands, the southeastern Blake Plateau, California, and the Gulf of Alaska. Hawaii has both nodules and cobalt-rich crusts, while the other areas have cobalt-rich crusts. Each region has unique risks. Mining in Hawaii might create plumes that could harm important fish populations and other marine life. California's waters have heavy ship traffic and communication cables. Alaska's waters are home to valuable bottom-dwelling sea life.

In April 2025, U.S. President Trump signed an Executive Order directing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to speed up permits for companies to mine in international and U.S. territorial waters, citing the Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Resource Act of 1980. This would allow deep sea mining in the United States for the first time.

Deep sea mining projects

In 2017, Japan's Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC) conducted the first large-scale mining of minerals from underwater vents. This work took place near the 'Izena hole/cauldron' vent field in the Okinawa Trough, a region with 15 known vent fields, according to the InterRidge Vents Database. The mining was done using the research vessel Hakurei.

The Solwara 1 Project was the first legal agreement for deep-sea mining. It occurred near Papua New Guinea (PNG), off the coast of New Ireland province. The project was a partnership between PNG and Nautilus Minerals Inc., a Canadian company. Nautilus owned 70% of the project, while PNG owned 30%. PNG's economy depends on mining, which contributes about 30–35% of its GDP. The project was approved in January 2011 by PNG's Minister for Mining, John Pundari. Nautilus leased 59 square kilometers of the seabed in the Bismarck Sea and was allowed to mine at a depth of 1,600 meters for 20 years. The goal was to extract 80,000 tons of high-grade copper and 150,000 to 200,000 ounces of gold from a weakly active vent over three years. The company used underwater robots developed by Soil Machine Dynamics, a UK-based firm.

Community and environmental groups opposed the Solwara 1 Project. They formed the Deep Sea Mining Campaign and the Alliance of Solwara Warriors, which included 20 communities in the Bismarck and Solomon Seas. Their efforts lasted nine years and led to the Australian government banning seabed mining in the Northern Territory. In 2019, the group asked PNG's government to cancel all seabed mining licenses, arguing that PNG's economy could rely on its fisheries, agriculture, and marine life instead. They claimed seabed mining benefits only a few wealthy people and not local communities or Indigenous groups. Some activists, like Joy Enomoto, created art to raise awareness, such as a series of woodcut prints titled Nautilus the Protector. Activists also said the government did not properly consult affected communities or follow the precautionary principle.

In December 2017, Nautilus struggled to raise money and could not pay a Chinese shipyard for a vessel. This led to the loss of equipment and access to the ship. In August 2019, Nautilus went bankrupt, was removed from the Toronto Stock Exchange, and was liquidated. PNG lost over $120 million. Nautilus was later purchased by Deep Sea Mining Finance LTD, but PNG has not canceled the mining license.

In the 1970s, companies like Shell, Rio Tinto (Kennecott), and Sumitomo tested mining methods in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ), recovering over 10,000 tons of nodules. Today, the International Seabed Authority (ISA) manages licenses for mineral exploration in areas beyond national jurisdiction. As of June 2025, the ISA has signed 17 contracts for polymetallic nodules in the CCZ, one for the Central Indian Ocean Basin, and one for the Prime Crust Zone in the Western Pacific.

In 2019, the Cook Islands passed laws to manage seabed minerals responsibly and benefit future generations. Additional laws were passed in 2020 and 2021. In 2022, the Cook Islands Seabed Minerals Agency awarded three five-year exploration licenses to companies: Moana Minerals Limited, the Cook Islands Consortium, and Cook Islands Investment Corporation – Seabed Resources.

Moana Minerals is owned by Ocean Minerals LLC, a US-based firm led by Hans Smit, who previously worked on seabed mining projects in PNG and underwater diamond mining. In 2023, the Cook Islands Seabed Minerals Agency released a report on polymetallic nodules in its waters, based on data from past and recent studies. The report estimated 6.7 billion tons of nodules in the area, containing metals like cobalt, copper, and nickel.

In 2025, the Cook Islands signed a five-year agreement with China for research on seabed minerals. In 2011, Nauru obtained an ISA exploration license for seabed minerals through its company, Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. (NORI), which is owned by The Metals Company, a Canadian firm. The Metals Company has conducted 22 research campaigns in the Nauru area. In 2021, Nauru asked the ISA to finalize a Mining Code within two years, a deadline that passed in 2023. This allowed The Metals Company and others to apply for commercial mining.

The Metals Company also holds exploration licenses in the CCZ through Kiribati-based Marawa Research and Exploration Ltd. and its Tongan subsidiary, Tonga Offshore Mining Limited (TOML). In 2025, following a U.S. executive order, The Metals Company applied for a commercial mining permit and two exploration licenses in U.S. waters.

In 2024, Norway's government allowed companies to submit applications to explore seabed minerals, including Seafloor Massive Sulfides and Cobalt-rich crusts, in its exclusive economic zone and on its continental shelf.

Extraction methods

Scientists are developing robotics and artificial intelligence to carefully collect nodules from the ocean floor while reducing harm to the deep sea environment.

Remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) are used to gather mineral samples from possible mining areas. These machines use drills and cutting tools to collect materials, which are then brought to a ship or station for processing.

The continuous-line bucket system (CLB) is an older method. It works like a conveyor belt, moving from the ocean floor to the surface where a ship or platform collects the minerals. Waste material is sent back to the ocean through the same system.

Hydraulic suction mining uses a pipe lowered to the seafloor. This pipe pumps nodules up to a ship, and another pipe sends waste material back to the ocean floor.

Borehole mining is a method used to extract natural resources located below the ocean floor.

Process

Deep-sea mining has three main stages: prospecting, exploration, and exploitation. During prospecting, scientists search for minerals and estimate their size, shape, and value. Exploration involves studying the resources, testing how easily they can be recovered, and examining their economic and environmental effects. Exploitation refers to the actual process of extracting these resources.

Resource assessment and pilot mining are steps within exploration. If resources are found to be usable, they are classified as "reserves." Technologies such as echo-sounders, side scan sonars, deep-towed photography, remotely operated vehicles, and autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV) are used for bottom scanning and sampling.

Extraction includes gathering materials, moving them vertically, storing them, transferring them to ships, transporting them, and processing them to extract useful metals.

Polymetallic minerals need special handling. Challenges include spreading waste material on the seafloor, creating clouds of sediment, disturbing the ocean floor habitat, and studying areas affected by mining equipment.

Environmental impacts

Deep sea mining can harm the environment. Scientists have studied how mining polymetallic nodules on the seafloor affects the ocean. Research from MIT found that mining equipment creates plumes of sediment that move along the seafloor like a slow, cloudy current. Another study showed that models can predict how these plumes behave in the water, depending on how much sediment is released and how turbulent the water is.

A review of 11 studies showed that after mining, many sea creatures experience major changes in their numbers and variety. Most species recover within one year, but few return to their original numbers after 20 years. A study by Benchmark Mineral Intelligence found that mining nodules in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ) may be better for the environment than land-based mining, producing 54-70% less heat-trapping gases due to renewable energy and efficient methods. Another study showed that making 1 billion electric vehicles using nodules could reduce carbon emissions by 90% compared to land-based mining. However, scientists still do not fully understand all the effects of deep-sea mining, such as sediment plumes, seabed damage, and chemical risks.

New technologies are being developed to reduce harm, such as tools that pick up nodules without disturbing living organisms. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) says deep-sea mining should be carefully studied before it starts. This includes examining mining at depths of 3–6.5 km (1.9–4.0 mi) for nodules, 1–4 km (0.62–2.5 mi) for sulfides, and <400 m to 3.5 km for cobalt-rich crusts. Only 24.9% of the deep seabed has been mapped, and these areas are important for ocean health and carbon cycles. Many scientists and governments want a pause on mining until risks are fully understood. Regulations for deep-sea mining are expected by 2025, and a new agreement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea was adopted in June 2023.

Sediment plumes form when mining equipment mixes water and sediment, making the water cloudy. These plumes are different from land mining waste because deep-sea sediment is natural, not chemically treated. Plumes can spread near the seafloor or surface, with surface release being cheaper but allowing more spread. Sediment can smother sea creatures on the seafloor and harm animals in the water column, such as jellyfish and fish.

Fine particles can stay in the water for a long time, spreading over large areas. In shallow water, storms can stir up sediment, causing repeated harm. Studies show most sediment settles within 2 km of the mining site, with most settling within 9 km. Removing parts of the seafloor, such as for sulfides or cobalt crusts, can damage the homes of bottom-dwelling creatures.

A study of 11 mining tests found that sea creature numbers and variety drop quickly after mining. Some ecosystems take 26 years to recover, while others, like small creatures, recover faster. Research in the CCZ found that nodule fields support many species, including sea stars, fish, and tiny organisms. Over 1,000 species were found in the area, with many relying on nodules for survival.

Deep-sea mining creates noise in quiet areas, but planned operations will avoid loud sonar and are expected to be similar to normal shipping noise. Light from mining equipment can harm sea creatures, such as shrimp near vents, which suffered eye damage from bright lights. Changes in light may affect how animals move, communicate, or find food.

Nodules are important for deep-sea life, providing homes for many species. Sediment can block sea creatures that filter water, like manta rays, and reduce sunlight, harming plants like phytoplankton. These plants are the base of the ocean food chain, so fewer phytoplankton means less food for other animals. Metals in plumes can build up in shellfish, harming predators, including humans. Mining may also harm seabed egg-laying species and cause breathing problems from disturbed debris.

A recent study found that nodules can produce electricity, similar to a battery, by splitting water molecules. This process could be used for energy production in the future.

Laws and regulations

Deep-sea mining is managed by the International Seabed Authority (ISA), an independent international group created by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This agreement was made to oversee and control all activities related to mining minerals in the seabed beyond the borders of any country.

Historically, the ocean was viewed as a place without rules, as shown by the 17th-century idea called Mare Liberum, or "freedom of the sea." This idea, introduced by Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius, stated that all countries could use the sea for navigation and trade, supporting Dutch expansion. However, as technology improved and human activity in the ocean increased, disagreements about control arose. This led to the competing idea of Mare Clausum, or "closed sea," proposed by English jurist John Selden in 1635. Mare Clausum suggested that coastal countries had control over nearby waters, aligning with England’s goals to manage trade and fishing.

As ocean use became more complex and conflicts between Mare Liberum and Mare Clausum grew, a clear legal system was needed. Early efforts, like the United Nations Conferences on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS I in 1958 and UNCLOS II in 1960), failed because of disagreements about balancing freedom and control. These issues were resolved with the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in 1982. This agreement provided a widely accepted legal framework. Changes to the deep-sea mining rules led to the 1994 Agreement and the Part XI Implementation Agreement, which became effective in 1994. These agreements supported the United Nations’ role and its goal to protect ocean health, as outlined in Sustainable Development Goal 14.

UNCLOS, which includes over 400 articles and nine sections, is the most detailed international agreement on maritime law ever created. It was shaped by long debates and changing uses of the sea. The convention was adopted after nine years of discussions and is seen as a major achievement in international law, even though some parts remain challenging to agree on.

UNCLOS created three important institutions to manage ocean activities. First, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), which acts as a court to settle disputes about the convention. Second, the International Seabed Authority (ISA), which oversees and controls all mining activities on the seabed beyond national borders. The ISA is responsible for protecting the ocean environment from harm caused by mining. Third, the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS), which helps define the outer edges of a country’s continental shelf.

Another institution is the Meeting of States Parties (MSP), which allows member countries to discuss and coordinate the implementation of the convention. It also handles administrative tasks, such as electing members of ITLOS and CLCS.

In the 20th century, claims over ocean resources challenged the idea of free access to the sea. In 1945, the Truman Doctrine set a precedent by claiming U.S. control over natural resources on the continental shelf. This was followed by the 1952 Santiago Declaration, where Chile, Ecuador, and Peru claimed full control over their seabed and subsoil up to 200 nautical miles, including the water and air above. The movement toward independence after colonial rule also led new countries to focus on controlling ocean resources for economic growth. These actions influenced the 1982 Law of the Sea, especially the creation of exclusive economic zones and the definition of continental shelf limits. This marked a shift toward dividing the ocean into zones with different rules for control and freedom.

Under UNCLOS, countries have rights and responsibilities to manage activities in their coastal waters and continental shelf. These areas are divided into zones:
– The Territorial Sea, which extends up to 12 nautical miles from a country’s coast, where the country can set laws and manage resources. Foreign ships may pass through if their actions are peaceful.
– The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), which stretches up to 200 nautical miles, where the country has exclusive rights to use resources but cannot block foreign ships.
– The Extended Continental Shelf, which allows countries to claim up to 350 nautical miles beyond their shelf, based on specific rules.
– The Area, which is the seabed beyond national control, designated as the "common heritage of humankind." This means no country or private group can claim ownership, and resources must be used for peaceful purposes and shared fairly.

UNCLOS also addresses straits, ensuring the right of ships to pass through without interference, though countries can set rules for safety and the environment. The flag state (the country where a ship is registered) is responsible for ensuring its ships follow international laws.

The International Seabed Authority (ISA) was created in 1982 under UNCLOS as an independent international group. After the 1994 Agreement, the ISA held its first meeting in Jamaica and gained recognition as a legal entity by the United Nations in 1996.

Under UNCLOS, the ISA is responsible for managing activities in the Area, which is considered the "common heritage of humankind." This role has become more important as more countries and companies seek to mine ocean minerals. The ISA is managed by three groups: the Assembly, which includes all 168 member countries and oversees the ISA’s budget; the Council, which makes decisions about seabed mining; and the Secretariat, which handles daily operations.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) governs deep-sea mining in areas beyond national borders. It is one of the most successful international agreements, covering topics like ocean boundaries, navigation rights, and resource use. Under UNCLOS, mining in the deep sea must be done through agreements with the ISA, following its rules and procedures.

Moratorium debate

In June 2021, the Pacific island nation of Nauru told the ISA that it would support a mining application by The Metals Company. This action started a rule in UNCLOS called the "two-year rule." This rule required the ISA to finish rules for mining within two years or consider applications using current rules. The deadline passed in July 2023 without final rules, and as of late 2025, the Mining Code is still not complete.

The two-year rule made the slow regulatory process faster, causing debate about whether mining should start before full environmental rules are ready. Since then, more countries, scientists, and companies have asked for a pause or temporary stop.

People who support a pause say it matches UNCLOS and may be required by law. Article 145 of UNCLOS says countries must protect the ocean from harm caused by seabed activities. Article 140 says activities in the deep sea must benefit all people. Legal experts say if these rules cannot be met because of limited scientific knowledge or rules, a pause is needed.

A 2023 report by The Pew Charitable Trusts said deep seabed mining must be delayed because of three reasons: not enough science on deep-sea ecosystems, incomplete rules, and the ISA’s limited ability to act. The report said a pause is not only allowed by UNCLOS but required by it.

Critics say public input in ISA decisions is weak, and some experts say public involvement is a legal requirement, not just a choice.

People who oppose a pause say UNCLOS allows mining applications even without final rules. A 1994 agreement lets the ISA review and approve mining plans before rules are complete. Some experts say the precautionary principle is not a strict rule in international law and cannot override UNCLOS.

As of December 2025, about 40 countries have asked for a pause, ban, or temporary stop on deep seabed mining. These include Pacific Island nations like Palau, Fiji, Samoa, and the Marshall Islands, as well as European countries like France, Germany, the UK, Finland, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, and Sweden. In 2022, Palau’s president started an Alliance for a Deep-Sea Mining Moratorium at the UN Ocean Conference in Lisbon.

Norway approved seabed exploration in January 2024 but later stopped all licenses until at least 2029 and reduced funding for seabed mapping. UN experts said this decision matched the precautionary principle and legal duties.

The United States has not joined UNCLOS or the ISA. In April 2025, President Trump ordered federal agencies to speed up permits for seabed mining under a U.S. law from 1980.

Soon after, The Metals Company applied to NOAA for exploration licenses and a permit to mine over 25,000 square kilometers in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. The ISA said it is the only legal authority for seabed mining and that ignoring its rules would break international law. France’s ocean minister called the plan "environmental piracy," and China’s foreign ministry said seabed mining must follow UNCLOS.

More than 940 scientists and experts from over 70 countries have asked for a pause. They say not enough is known about deep-sea ecosystems to protect them from harm. Some environmental methods exist but are incomplete without clear rules for defining harm.

A 2023 study found that over 90% of species in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone are not yet described by science. A 2025 study found that after a 2022 mining test, animal numbers dropped 37% and species diversity fell 32% in disturbed areas. Another study showed that impacts from a 1970s test site still lasted decades later, though some life returned.

Over 65 companies and financial groups have supported a pause. In 2021, BMW, Volvo, Samsung SDI, and Google said they would not use seabed minerals and would avoid them in their supply chains. Other companies like Renault, Volkswagen, Rivian, Apple, Microsoft, Salesforce, and Philips made similar promises.

A group of 40 financial institutions with over €3.8 trillion in assets asked governments to stop seabed mining. The European Investment Bank said deep-sea mining is environmentally harmful.

The debate over a pause shows different views: some say mining is needed for clean energy and mineral security, while others say not enough is known about the deep sea and it should remain untouched.

People who support a pause say: science is not complete to understand risks; deep-sea ecosystems may take decades or centuries to recover; metals can be found through recycling, better efficiency, and land mining; and the "common heritage of mankind" principle means protecting the deep sea for future generations.

People who oppose a pause say: UNCLOS allows mining and a pause goes against the treaty; deep-sea minerals are needed for clean energy; exploration gives important scientific data; and companies have rights based on current rules.

In July 2025, the ISA finished reviewing draft mining rules for a second time, but major disagreements remain. No Mining Code was approved, and no deadline was set. The Council agreed to investigate possible rule-breaking after The Metals Company’s U.S. application, showing that ignoring the ISA is not allowed. Negotiations continue, with the next meeting planned for 2026.

Economic perspective

Deep-sea mining has the potential to provide economic benefits because there is a growing need for important minerals used in green technologies, such as batteries, electric vehicles, and renewable energy systems. Some estimates suggest that the global economic opportunity from seabed mining could be as high as $20 trillion. For example, mining 75,000 square kilometers of the seabed could create $21–$42 billion in value from metals over 20 years.

Deep-sea mining could be an important part of the global effort to transition to cleaner energy. However, challenges such as high costs, environmental risks, and unclear rules must be addressed to fully use this opportunity. To ensure the industry is sustainable and fair, it will need investments, international teamwork, and strong rules.

The economic value of deep-sea mining comes from the large amounts of valuable resources found in the ocean. The Clarion-Clipperton Zone in the Pacific Ocean has 3.4–5 times more cobalt and 1.8–3 times more nickel than land-based reserves worldwide. These minerals are needed to make low-carbon technologies, such as electric vehicle batteries, renewable energy storage systems, and steel used in infrastructure.

Deep-sea mining also has advantages over land-based mining. The minerals found in the ocean are often in high-quality deposits, and mining operations may cost less because they do not need to remove as much material from the surface. Using shallower trenches can reduce mining time by 26% and increase the value of deposits by 53%. This process also produces less carbon dioxide than land-based mining. A study showed that making battery metals for 1 billion electric vehicles using ocean minerals could produce 90% less carbon dioxide than using land-based methods.

Economically, deep-sea mining is becoming more popular because it helps meet the rising demand for rare metals. These metals are used in laptops, phones, electric cars, renewable energy technology, and electricity storage systems.

From an economic perspective, deep-sea mining can help diversify the sources of global minerals and reduce reliance on land-based mining. Countries with access to seabed resources may gain an advantage in securing materials for modern technologies. Sustainable seabed mining could also reduce the environmental harm caused by land-based mining.

Deep-sea mining can offer economic opportunities for developing nations, especially small island countries. Money earned from mining could support economic growth in areas that need it most. The International Seabed Authority (ISA) works to ensure that poorer nations benefit fairly from mining activities. This income could help reduce global economic inequalities and support fair growth.

Despite these benefits, deep-sea mining faces economic challenges. High costs for technology and infrastructure, along with ongoing expenses, make it difficult for many countries and companies to start mining operations. The success of these projects depends on factors like global mineral prices and the availability of ocean resources.

Environmental harm could create long-term economic problems. Destroying habitats and disrupting ecosystems, such as those involved in carbon cycling and biodiversity, might cost more than $465 billion in lost natural resources. Some experts believe these environmental risks could outweigh the short-term financial benefits of mining.

To fully use the economic potential of deep-sea mining, strong rules are needed. The ISA’s Mining Code aims to balance economic benefits with environmental protection, ensuring fair and sustainable practices. Without proper rules, environmental damage and unfair profit sharing could harm the industry’s long-term success.

Geopolitical aspects of deep sea mining

Academic research on deep-sea mining (DSM) has mainly focused on whether it is technically possible, how it affects the environment, and whether it is economically useful. Recently, more attention has been given to how DSM relates to global politics and how resources are shared among countries. Studies examine issues like who can access seabed resources, how benefits are shared, practices in countries like Norway and Japan, how risks are managed, and the roles of governments and private companies in mining, production, and distribution.

Many studies look at DSM from different angles, such as analyzing how people talk about it, considering how non-human life and environmental changes affect it, using ethical and legal frameworks, studying cultures and communities, and examining historical patterns of power. Other studies highlight that DSM research combines knowledge from many fields, including biology, geology, anthropology, economics, political science, and international relations.

Common challenges in the research include: (a) managing areas of the ocean not owned by any country under the idea that resources belong to all humans; (b) competition over minerals needed for clean energy technologies like batteries and electric vehicles; and (c) ensuring fair sharing of benefits and risks between wealthy and poorer countries, especially small island nations and Indigenous communities. These challenges are often studied through three themes: 1) how countries and companies compete for control of seabed resources, 2) how power is shared between governments and private groups, and 3) concerns about fairness and environmental harm.

More recent research connects DSM to larger global political issues. Scholars say DSM is important because it provides minerals like nickel, cobalt, manganese, and rare earth elements needed for renewable energy and green technology. Events like China’s Belt and Road Initiative and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have made people more interested in how seabed resources affect global politics.

DSM is often seen as part of efforts to move away from fossil fuels, with deep-sea minerals acting as both an economic resource and a tool in global competition. Countries view seabed resources not only as a way to secure supplies but also as a way to gain influence, especially between major powers like the United States and China, and their allies in the Indo-Pacific region. Studies note that there are many risks, including technological challenges, unknown environmental effects, and unclear rules. Scholars suggest combining innovation, sustainability, and cooperation with global goals to address these risks.

Some research looks beyond governments to include companies. The idea of the "blue economy" has created conditions that support corporate interests in mining, especially in the metals industry. This view shows that DSM involves interactions between governments, international groups, and private companies. Other studies explore how DSM can be made sustainable, arguing that success depends on solving five linked problems: technological progress, environmental protection, economic value, strong rules, and public support. Progress requires improvements in all these areas at the same time.

Research on the politics of DSM examines how power is connected to access, ability, and dependence. Key questions include which countries have contracts to explore the seabed, which have the technology and money to mine resources, and which might rely on others. DSM is compared to mining on land, with competition happening both in international waters and near the coastal areas of island and ocean nations. In this way, the "New Frontiers" of the deep sea are seen as a place full of resources that can be explored and controlled, leading to competition between countries.

DSM is often described as a new political challenge shaped by different ideas about resource security, progress, environmental risks, and caution. Many studies still focus on how countries interact but do not fully consider the unique environmental and ecological conditions of the deep sea. Scholars suggest that DSM politics is not only about where resources are found but also about long-term environmental and social changes. This idea is also important in research about Indigenous and local communities, showing how Pacific Island nations have played a key role in deciding how deep-sea minerals are treated as resources. Other studies note that the concentration of minerals in areas like the Indian Ocean could increase conflicts over ocean territories.

Most academic studies on politics have focused on countries as the main actors shaping global power and strategies. However, more recent research suggests looking at a wider range of groups, including companies, international organizations, social movements, Indigenous communities, and even natural forces. This approach shows that political outcomes are not only shaped by governments but also by economic systems, technology, environmental factors, and ecological limits. It also highlights the need to study oceans, polar regions, and the deep sea as active parts of global politics, not just areas where humans act. These views help create a more complete understanding of how environmental systems influence power, land claims, and resource management.

Distributional aspects of deep-sea mining

Distributional questions are an important topic in discussions about deep-sea mining (DSM). These questions focus on how the benefits and challenges of mining are shared among countries, companies, communities, and future generations. Experts identify four main viewpoints in these discussions: 1) creating a green economy using ocean resources, 2) sharing profits from mining fairly, 3) concerns about the unknown effects on deep-sea ecosystems, and 4) arguments for not mining certain minerals at all. These viewpoints show different opinions about who should benefit from DSM and whether these benefits can be shared equally.

When comparing DSM to mining on land and in space, experts say competition for valuable minerals could increase conflicts between countries and strengthen the power of some nations. They warn that fighting over resources in the ocean, on land, and in space might lead to new conflicts. A major concern is that countries with deep-sea resources—often developing nations or small island states—may not have the tools or power to ensure fair deals or long-term benefits. This could lead to a "resource curse" in the deep sea, where wealth from mining causes more harm than good. In areas not owned by any country, the idea that resources belong to all people globally suggests benefits should be shared worldwide. Some researchers also note that past rules about ownership and current plans for sharing resources might ignore the cultural connections of Indigenous groups to the deep sea, affecting both current and future generations.

Distributional issues in DSM involve how environmental, social, and economic risks and benefits are divided among different groups and regions. Deep-sea ecosystems are among the least studied parts of Earth, and research shows that damage to these areas can take a very long time to heal, with some effects possibly lasting forever. Even with these unknowns, decisions about DSM are often made by people far from the affected areas, such as governments, international organizations, and companies. Experts say this system may shift environmental harm to the global community or to communities with little power to influence decisions, especially in developing countries or regions with limited input in global discussions. There are also worries about unequal access to scientific knowledge, which could worsen unfair power dynamics in DSM management.

To address these challenges, researchers suggest combining efforts to solve economic, environmental, social, and legal problems together, rather than treating them as separate issues. These approaches aim to balance possible economic gains with careful environmental protection and fairness in how benefits and risks are shared. The focus of this work is on how global society can benefit from safe and responsible mining practices, while reducing harm to the environment and ensuring that risks and benefits are shared fairly among people today and in the future.

Environmental justice and regulation

The rules and laws that control deep-sea mining (DSM), especially in areas not owned by any country, are a major topic in research and policy discussions. The International Seabed Authority (ISA), created under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), is required to organize, manage, and control mineral-related activities in international waters on behalf of all people. However, many studies show that the ISA's "mining code" is still not complete. Rules about how mining can happen are still not decided after many years of talks. This long period of uncertainty has raised concerns about whether environmental protection is strong enough, whether decisions are made openly, and whether current organizations can handle risks to the deep-sea environment.

From an environmental justice perspective, the lack of final rules about mining has big effects on how benefits are shared and how harm is handled. Unclear rules make it hard to decide how benefits from DSM should be shared, how environmental harm can be avoided or fixed, and who is responsible for damage to ocean life. Experts say weak or unclear standards might unfairly harm developing countries and future generations, especially if major loss of ocean life happens before strong protections are in place. Research shows the need for careful planning and clear environmental limits that consider both scientific uncertainty and fairness for future generations.

Fairness in decision-making is another key issue in DSM rules. The ISA's decision-making process has been criticized for not being open enough and for not including enough voices from groups like non-government organizations, Indigenous communities, and others who might be affected by mining. Some researchers say environmental justice ideas should be included more in ocean governance, such as giving people who are affected a real say in decisions, sharing information openly, and creating systems to hold organizations accountable beyond just the countries and companies involved. Without these steps, DSM rules might worsen unfairness in how oceans are managed globally.

In areas near coastlines, countries have more control over DSM activities and can directly negotiate with mining companies. While this control allows countries to create rules that fit their own needs, research shows big differences in how well countries can manage these rules, their technical skills, and their power to negotiate. These differences might lead to unfair deals, poor environmental checks, or poor sharing of money from mining, especially in small island countries and the least developed nations. Because of this, environmental justice issues in these areas often connect with bigger problems like development, how governments work, and dependence on resources.

In contrast, activities in international waters must be carried out for the benefit of all people, with fair sharing of financial and economic benefits as a key rule. However, turning this rule into practice is still debated. Research shows that how minerals are processed and made into products in industrialized countries can limit the benefits that reach the countries where mining happens. For example, if factories to process minerals are in rich countries, much of the money from mining might go to those countries instead of the ones where the mining takes place. This raises questions about whether current systems for sharing benefits can truly fix unfairness in the global mineral trade.

Experts say environmental justice is an important way to evaluate DSM rules. They argue that without clear rules, strong environmental protections, and fair sharing of benefits, DSM management might favor business and political goals over protecting the environment and fairness. As debates about mining rules continue, environmental justice ideas are becoming more important for making sure deep-sea mining is managed in a way that is both fair and lasts over time.

Reasons for deep sea mining

As land-based supplies of important minerals decrease, countries are looking for other sources, such as deep-sea minerals. The ISA, an organization that manages these resources, is involved because the need for seabed mining is influenced by several factors, including the growth of green technologies, increased use of electronics, and political tensions in Europe. According to the U.S. Department of Defense, they achieved a new record for sales through the foreign military sales system, with more than $80 billion in sales and grant assistance. The main buyers included countries like Sweden, Poland, and the Netherlands.

As nations such as the U.S., Japan, and Norway push to extract deep-sea resources more quickly, the ISA's role becomes more important. This is because countries must balance economic growth with protecting the environment. The focus on energy security and the economic effects of sanctions, such as those against Russia due to the conflict with Ukraine, highlight the need for reliable alternative resources like deep-sea minerals.

China currently controls about 90% of the world's refined critical minerals. This has caused concern in the U.S., Australia, and Europe, as these countries aim to reduce their dependence on Chinese supplies. The global shift toward securing seabed resources is changing how the ISA governs these materials. By gaining access to deep-sea minerals, countries hope to challenge China's control over mineral production and reshape global supply chains. At the same time, China is also seeking faster access to rare materials found in the deep sea.

As seabed mining becomes more important, new political disagreements are forming within groups of allied nations, including some NATO members. Countries like the U.S., Japan, and Norway support faster extraction of seabed resources because they need critical minerals for green technologies. In contrast, nations such as France and Germany emphasize environmental protection and advocate for stronger rules to limit seabed mining. The ISA plays a key role in these discussions, as it is responsible for managing the exploration and use of these resources. The debate within the ISA reflects larger conflicts between economic growth and environmental protection, with different countries pushing for different approaches in regulations.

The ISA's current structure is being tested by the increasing demand for seabed resources. As countries compete to access deep-sea minerals, the ISA's ability to manage these activities through its existing rules is being questioned. Some critics argue that the ISA issues exploration and mining licenses too quickly and that environmental protections may not be strong enough. This issue highlights the differing priorities of member states, with some focusing on economic development and others, like France and Germany, calling for stricter environmental rules. As these challenges continue, the ISA's ability to address both economic and environmental concerns in deep-sea mining becomes a key topic in global resource management.

Future trends and technologies

Deep-sea mining focuses on three main sources of minerals: polymetallic nodules, polymetallic sulfides, and cobalt-rich crusts. The International Energy Agency (IEA, 2022) states that the clean energy sector will need more metals like copper, nickel, cobalt, rare-earth elements, and lithium. This need is expected to grow quickly over the next 20 years, especially for lithium. As land-based resources become limited, interest in deep-sea mining is increasing as a way to obtain these important materials. The IEA (2022) predicts that the clean energy sector will use a larger share of critical raw materials (CRMs) in the coming decades. By 2040, lithium demand is expected to increase more than 40 times, while demand for graphite, cobalt, and nickel may rise 20 to 25 times. This growing need raises concerns about the availability of CRMs, which are also important for industries like information technology and defense. The European Commission continues to track supply risks for these materials (EC 2020c, 2023).

Future trends in deep-sea mining are connected to recycling critical raw materials (CRMs). Recycling may help meet rising demand, especially in Europe, where CRMs like cobalt, nickel, and lithium are vital for clean energy technologies. By 2050, recycling could supply up to 77% of Europe’s metal needs. However, challenges such as limited recycling capacity, collection, and sorting must be solved. New rules are being created to set minimum recycling rates for battery metals, aiming to support this shift.

Future trends in deep-sea mining depend on technology and changes in demand for critical materials. Projections for nickel demand by 2050 range from 24 to 100 million tons. New technologies, like lithium-sulfur and sodium-ion batteries, may reduce the need for some minerals, such as nickel and cobalt. The International Seabed Authority (ISA, 2022) estimates that by 2035, deep-sea mining could produce up to 36 million tons of nodules yearly, meeting a large part of the world’s demand for manganese, nickel, and cobalt. However, changes in market prices and progress in recycling may affect how practical these mining efforts are.

History

In the 1960s, scientists studied the possibility of deep-sea mining in a book called Mineral Resources of the Sea by J. L. Mero. Countries such as France, Germany, and the United States sent research ships to look for valuable deposits. Early predictions about the success of deep-sea mining were too high. Lower metal prices caused most mining projects to stop by 1982. Between the 1960s and 1984, about US$650 million was spent on these efforts, but very little was gained.

A 2018 article stated that the "new global gold rush" of deep-sea mining has similarities to past resource searches, including not paying enough attention to environmental and social effects, and ignoring the rights of indigenous peoples.

• In 2001, the China Ocean Mineral Resources Research and Development Association (COMRA) received permission to explore the ocean floor for minerals in China.

Protests

In December 2023, the research ship MV Coco was interrupted by Greenpeace activists who blocked its work to collect data for a mining permit. Activists used small boats to stop the ship, but the ship used water hoses to prevent this. The MV Coco was conducting research for The Metals Company and is owned by Magellan.

In October 2023, BMW promised not to use materials from DSM in its cars. At the same time, the UK joined Canada and New Zealand in asking for a temporary pause on deep sea mining. In early August 2024, 32 countries opposed starting deep sea mining immediately. In December 2025, Norway decided to stop deep sea mining projects within its territory until at least 2029.

For many Indigenous communities, the ocean is an important part of their stories about where they come from. Even for communities not directly connected to the ocean, it is often linked to sacred traditions. In Pacific Island States, using the ocean for travel is a traditional skill that depends on things like the ocean’s color, wave shapes, and the movement of sea animals. These practices could be harmed by deep sea mining. Although Indigenous communities are important in discussions about ocean rights and deep sea mining, they have often been excluded from major international talks. In 2021, 72 Indigenous groups worldwide formed the Blue Climate Initiative and called for an immediate ban on deep sea mining. Similarly, the Saami people of Norway urged their government to stop deep sea mining and to include Indigenous knowledge in decisions about sustainability.

Alternatives

The environmental group "The Oxygen Project" suggests changing systems to more sustainable ways of using resources, instead of deep sea mining. The Environmental Justice Foundation and Greenpeace recommend using a circular economy, improving public transportation, reducing reliance on cars, increasing energy efficiency, and using resources more wisely.

One possible solution is to make mining tools lighter. This could help reduce some environmental problems, such as underwater plumes, damage to the sea floor, and harm to underwater habitats. Other options include using a device to collect debris and reduce disturbance in water columns, or using strip-mining to leave parts of the sea floor untouched, spreading out the impact. Other ways to protect the environment involve changing how materials are processed, moved, and transported. Many problems, like improper waste disposal, material spills, and oil spills, occur during these steps. Following rules and being careful during these stages is important to reduce waste.