SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday July 26 2015, @07:26PM
I readily agree but that argument fails to convince those with more short-term interests.
A few months ago the Wall Street Journal ran a lengthy, well-written story on the threats wind and solar power to coal and the electrical grid. Yes: threats.
While well-written I fiund that story sickening bevause its writer and most if its readers were concerned they might lose the money they had invested in legacy electric power. "The grid is a trillion dollar investment, it cost too much moneynto lose." (Paraphrased from memory.)
How much will it cost should we choose not to invest in wind, solar and batteries?
The problem here is that those who have somethingnto lose by a decision are different people than those who have something to gain. Those who stand to gain are in positions of influence in large part because of what they have already gained.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by Francis on Monday July 27 2015, @12:47AM
I'm looking to become a lineman in part because of the renewables. The power grid needs to be updated no matter what we do. Whether it continues to grow or we need to shift to renewables, there's going to be tons more work for the people that maintain the infrastructure. Even without growth there will be more need as equipment requires more and more stability in the actual electricity itself.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @02:07AM
The deep ocean basin where this mining should be done is 2-5 miles under water. This is far below the photic zone. The biodiversity down there is very low, not much lives there, its mostly some bottom feeding communities that feeds on what floats down from the photic zone. Your not going to find any coral reefs that deep. The percentage of the ocean basin that would be mined at a single time would probably be a small percentage of the total, so its not going to impact a large area at once, the impact is probably temporary. To continue to sacrifice land surfaces such as rainforests to mining because you dont want to have some mining on a relatively barren, sparsely populated, deep water basin is just utterly bizarre.
(Score: 2) by morgauxo on Monday July 27 2015, @02:30PM
Sure.. there isn't much there to hurt.. so long as the place isn't covered in that substance that tends to dissolve all the nasty heavy metals and chemicals that are either dug up or used in processing and spread the stuff around to the places that you don't want to damage. Hmm.. what was that substance called again... that stuff that gets terribly polluted whenever mining is done on land and then spreads the pollution both to wildlife and to human population centers...
Oh yah.. it's called water!
You don't think there might be any of that down there do you?