Deep‐sea nodules versus land ores: A comparative systems analysis of mining and processing wastes for battery‐metal supply chains

Abstract

Funding informationThis research was funded by The Metals Company (formerly DeepGreen Metals, Inc.), Vancouver, Canada, of which one coauthor (E. Ilves) is VP of Strategy and Business Development, and which also provided access to data and expertise in both terrestrial and deep-sea extraction and processing techniques.

Ethical opportunities in deep‐sea collection of polymetallic nodules from the Clarion‐Clipperton Zone

“…An ethical approach to deep‐sea mining would have the industry see itself playing a critical role in the global quest for sustainability, as set out in UN (2015), CBD (2020), and related plans. Academic scientists can evaluate existing evidence of favorable climate, waste, water, and human health advantages that nodule mining might provide and encourage contractors to prioritize environmental best practices (see, e.g., Hein et al, 2020; Paulikas, Katona, Ilves, & Ali, 2020; Paulikas, Katona, Ilves, Stone, et al, 2020; Paulikas et al, 2021). The industry and its stakeholders must honestly and transparently acknowledge the harm it inflicts, estimate its extent, and do everything reasonably possible to minimize it.…”

“…Depending on the processes selected, nickel, manganese, cobalt, and copper from nodules could have a lower environmental impact than obtaining those same metals from land ores, including up to 70% less global warming emissions to make one billion EV batteries and up to 94% less sequestered carbon loss (Paulikas, Katona, Ilves, & Ali, 2020), substantially reduced waste streams (Paulikas et al, 2021), up to 90% less freshwater used, fewer toxic exposures, and fewer injuries and fatalities to miners and inhabitants of surrounding communities (Hein et al, 2020; Paulikas, Katona, Ilves, Stone, et al, 2020).…”

“…Ocean uptake of anthropogenic CO 2 has already begun dissolving sedimentary CaCO 3 —which normally neutralizes excess CO 2 and prevents runaway acidification—in sediments of the deep Atlantic Ocean (Sulpis et al, 2018). However, the impact from deep‐sea mining would be dwarfed by ocean uptake of CO 2 from the atmosphere: CCZ nodules needed for one billion batteries would displace 5.83 × 10 8 g of sequestered carbon and disrupt sequestration of an additional 2.44 × 10 8 g for a total of 8.27 × 10 8 g over a ~30‐year period (Paulikas et al, 2021)—seven orders of magnitude less than the 2.5 ± 0.4 PgC/year (±2.5 × 10 15 g) annually absorbed by the ocean (Watson et al, 2020). A third concern is pollution by toxic metals (Chin & Hari, 2020; Christiansen et al, 2020; Greenpeace International, 2019).…”

“…The CCZ's remote location, hundreds of miles from any human habitation, avoids direct harm to communities often encountered in terrestrial mining. Such avoided impacts include pollution of air or freshwater, drawdown of freshwater resources, impacts on human health, desecration or taking of ancestral lands, and reduction or elimination of large, often toxic, tailings ponds, as nodules' high ore grades produce less waste and contain lower levels of heavy elements (e.g., Paulikas et al, 2021 ; Sommerfeld et al, 2018 ).…”

Shallow-water mining undermines global sustainability goals

“…Furthermore, claims of reduced environmental impacts of shallowwater mining are not backed by credible evaluations, but by hopes and assumptions that support a pro-mining narrative. Thus far there are only few comparisons of the impacts of land-based and seabed mining, with little work done independently without support from the seabed mining industry [15]. In the absence of impartial comparisons of the ecological effects of different types of mining practices, there are no environmental or socioeconomic justifications in favour of shallow-water mining.…”