Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Sunday July 26 2015, @05:13PM   Printer-friendly
from the deep-dive dept.

The deep oceans span more than half the globe and their frigid depths have long been known to contain vast, untapped deposits of prized minerals. These treasures of the abyss, however, have always been out of reach to miners.

But now, the era of deep seabed mining appears to be dawning fueled by technological advances in robotics and dwindling land-based deposits. Rising demand for copper, cobalt, gold and the rare-earth elements vital in manufacturing smartphones and other high-tech products is causing a prospecting rush to the dark seafloor thousands of meters (yards) beneath the waves.

[...] A group of international scientists, in a [paywalled for some] July 9 article in the journal Science, urged [UN agency] ISA to temporarily halt authorization of new mining contracts until networks of "marine protected areas" are established around areas targeted for mining.

"We owe it to future generations to ensure that we think before we act and gain a thorough understanding of the potential impacts of mining in the deep sea before any mining is permitted," said Matthew Gianni, co-founder of the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, which sent observers to ISA's 21st session in Kingston.

But despite the warnings, in recent days ISA authorized its latest exploration contract, a 72,745 square kilometer (28,087 sq. mile) permit in the Pacific to China Minmetals Corp., sponsored by Beijing. China now has the most permits from the U.N. body with four.

[...] "The terrestrial industrial revolution happened before we had the tools to manage goals for development and goals for sustaining biodiversity. You can't really blame people in the 1700s for the damage they did to the environment..." he said. "But we certainly are to blame if we don't do seabed mining properly."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday July 26 2015, @05:39PM

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday July 26 2015, @05:39PM (#213913) Homepage

    Fucking disgusting. Shameful. The human cancer has literally become a bottom-feeder to sate its gluttonous appetite for consumerism.

    Nothing is sacred to the human cancer. It knows no shame. It will kill its host and then die along with it.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Flamebait=1, Insightful=3, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 26 2015, @06:07PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 26 2015, @06:07PM (#213919)

    Fucking disgusting. Shameful. The human cancer has literally become a bottom-feeder to sate its gluttonous appetite for consumerism.
    Nothing is sacred to the human cancer. It knows no shame. It will kill its host and then die along with it.

    That sounds like anti-spiral propaganda.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEI-NCTsiPE [youtube.com]

  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 26 2015, @09:29PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 26 2015, @09:29PM (#213984)

    It's all dust. There is nothing special about humanity or nature.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @01:43AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @01:43AM (#214041)

    Then why dont you give up all of the consumerist garbage you posted with this and go live out in the woods somewhere like a caveman. You like most envirofascists berate others but consider yourself to be exempt from all of the same ideologies you would force on others because you feel you are especially entitled, like powerful elites that fly on 747s to a global warming conference. Mostly these people want to make average, common people suffer so that they can keep more of the good stuff for themselves. Of course we should seek to protect the environment, i just reject that we need to make people suffer and that this is an acceptable thing to do. The stuff about mining the deep seafloor is a bit shrill since its hard to fathom how mining deep below the photic zone, effecting a much smaller percentage of a habitat area than is effected by on land areas and which has a lower level of biodiversity than say a rainforest could be a net harm since it would reduce the need to mine much more fragile and rich terrestrial and shallow water environments.

    • (Score: 2) by Francis on Monday July 27 2015, @05:24AM

      by Francis (5544) on Monday July 27 2015, @05:24AM (#214098)

      We've been mining only a very small fraction of the seabed along the coast and I haven't noticed anybody suffering because we haven't gone into international waters.

      In general, we have plenty of resources for what people actually need. We just don't have enough resources for people to be driving hummers and eating a half dozen Big Macs every day. Most of the excess consumption that is causing the damage isn't preventing suffering, it's causing it.

      What's more, the people who can genuinely claim to be deprived are by and large not the ones that are over-consuming and destroying the environment.