The E-Waste Column no. 212

10 minutes ago
3 min read

Today, we are taking a look at the role the EU plays in the future of deep-sea mining.

🌱 Why is deep-sea mining deemed as risky?

Scientists warn that deep-sea mining “could unleash noise, light and suffocating dust storms” that “could have disastrous consequences for biodiversity and an ecosystem that has yet to be fully studied”. In light of this, the EU and over 46 countries globally have called for a precautionary pause or a moratorium on deep sea mining.

🌱 Why does the position of the EU matter?

Given the size of the EU market, its “approach could have implications well beyond Europe”. Many campaigners advocating against deep-sea mining even believe that Europe has the power to stop deep-sea mining. If the EU wanted to, it would have the legal authority to keep products made with minerals extracted from the international seabed in breach of international treaties off of its market. Given its market position, the EU can also contribute to “shaping investment decisions and the future direction of this emerging industry”.

🌱 Can circularity eliminate the need for deep-sea mining?

A study from the Institute for Sustainable Futures and Greenpeace titled “Beyond Extraction” argues “that circular economy measures, resource efficiency and innovation can help meet critical raw material needs without opening a new extractive frontier in the deep ocean”. It holds “that public transportation, improved recycling programmes, and advanced battery technologies are the real critical solutions for a green transition” and not deep-sea mining. The question where the raw materials for “Europe's green energy and digital ambitions” should come from is also one that Matija Kajić from Triodos recently posed. She argues that virgin mining – as is, for example, “currently re-enforced by the EU Critical Raw Materials Act” – may not be the most strategic pathway to take and that “[i]f Europe wants strategic autonomy, [it] need[s] to think beyond simply extracting more”. In line with this, she calls on decisionmakers to “rethink sourcing” and “advocat[es] for an approach that prioritizes: demand reduction, substitution, urban mining & anthropogenic stocks, a re-evaluation of secondary geological stock, and new extraction only as a last resort”. She argues that a new hierarchy like this one could “help align resource security with environmental sustainability and long-term resilience”.

🌱 How are financial institutions and companies reacting?

In addition to governments, many financial institutions and companies are also taking a precautionary approach to deep sea mining. Over 82 financial institutions globally, managing over EUR 24 trillion in assets in total, have expressed concern and established explicit policies to exclude or restrict their financing of deep-sea mining. Beyond this, several tech and automotive companies have put in place policies blocking the sourcing of ocean-mined minerals for their production. Reputational and environmental liabilities are driving much of this behavior, and this is effectively leaving deep-sea mining companies with a smaller set of investors and buyers. A.P. Moller – Maersk, the BMW Group, Google, PAMCO, Samsung Electronics, and the Volvo Group belong to the companies taking measures to ensure they are not financing deep-sea mining.

💡 In next week’s column, we will be taking a closer look at the role deep-sea mining plays for economic development and security – so stay tuned.