-1-1.png?height=120&name=Curation%20Logo%20Transparent%20(1)-1-1.png)
The Trump administration has reignited interest in deep-sea mining by issuing an executive order to fast-track US licensing for the extraction of critical minerals, bypassing international frameworks. The move aims to secure domestic access to key resources such as cobalt and nickel used in electric vehicle batteries, countering China’s dominance in global supply chains. A US subsidiary of The Metals Company (TMC) became the first firm to apply for a licence to mine international seabed areas under the new directive. However, the move faces major legal, environmental and technological challenges. (Bloomberg)
Why does this matter? While US support for deep sea mining had been framed as essential to securing critical minerals for clean energy and economic competitiveness, the risks are significant and poorly understood. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) prohibits unilateral mining, requiring the International Seabed Authority (ISA) to regulate such activity. Thirty-seven ISA member states now support a moratorium on seabed mining until its ecological impacts are better understood, making the US-led push for ocean mining a highly political issue.
Despite growing demand for minerals such as cobalt, nickel and rare earth elements, the deep ocean remains largely uncharted, with scientists estimating that only 0.001% of the deep seafloor has been explored. A recent study in Nature showed that mining scars from a 1979 test in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ) remain clearly visible today, with limited recovery observed after more than 40 years. Large, sessile species have not returned, indicating that some deep-sea habitats may never recover. Moreover, a 2023 study in the CCZ discovered 5,000 new species previously unknown to science. Mining operations, particularly those targeting polymetallic nodules, could irreversibly damage marine ecosystems that we are only just discovering.
The International Seabed Authority (ISA), which has issued 31 exploration contracts across nearly one million sq km of ocean floor, is still developing a mining code to govern commercial extraction. The UN Secretary-General António Guterres asserts that the seabed beyond national jurisdiction is the "common heritage of humankind" and must be managed collectively, not unilaterally. Leticia Carvalho, the ISA’s Secretary-General, has warned that efforts to bypass ISA authority threaten to turn the deep-sea into “the Wild West” of exploitation. UNCLOS, which the US has not ratified, explicitly prohibits unilateral mining in international waters.
If the US proceeds without ISA approval, it could undermine years of negotiations and strain relationships with countries that support global governance of ocean resources and set a president for other mining companies to follow suit. Furthermore, minerals extracted without ISA consent may be considered illicit under international law, complicating their sale, use and processing. The US lacks the infrastructure to refine nodules domestically, requiring billions in investment and years of development. Overseas processors such as Pacific Metals and Korea Zinc have shown interest but stress compliance with international rules.
For mining companies such as Rio Tinto, focus should be put on scalable sustainable alternatives to deep sea mining available on land such as mineral recycling. The International Energy Agency estimates that improved recycling could reduce demand for newly mined copper and nickel by up to 40% by 2050. Until the ISA finalises and enforces a global mining code grounded in science, any commercial exploitation of the deep-sea risks irreversible ecological damage, legal conflict and a weakening of international cooperation. Rio Tinto should continue its anti deep-sea mining policy to maintain its sustainability orientated reputation.