As governments race to secure critical minerals, a new policy analysis argues that the deep sea may be better protected, mapped, and studied before it is mined.
Race to the Bottom: Is Seabed Mining Worth the Cost? Image credit: AI-generated image created using ChatGPT/OpenAI
A recent policy-focused paper by Linda Nhon, PhD, a Resident Research Fellow at the Global and National Security Institute at the University of South Florida, examines why seabed mining faces steep commercial, environmental, and regulatory barriers as a potential source of critical materials for modern technologies.
Growing demand for cobalt, nickel, copper, and other battery-related metals has renewed interest in extracting polymetallic nodules from the deep ocean floor. Rather than prioritizing rapid commercial development, Nhon advocates for greater investment in ocean research, environmental monitoring, and international scientific cooperation to support long-term resource stewardship and U.S. strategic interests.
Balancing Resource Demand and Risk
Critical minerals are essential to modern technologies and the global transition toward electrification. Metals such as cobalt, nickel, copper, and manganese play key roles in lithium-ion batteries, energy storage systems, electronic devices, and advanced alloys. As demand for these resources continues to grow, researchers and policymakers are exploring alternative sources beyond conventional terrestrial deposits. One frequently discussed option is the extraction of polymetallic nodules, mineral-rich concretions found across vast areas of the deep-ocean floor.
Nhon evaluates the potential of seabed mining as a future source of critical materials. Although deep-sea mineral deposits contain significant quantities of strategically important metals, several factors continue to limit commercial development. These include competition from established terrestrial supply chains, uncertainty surrounding environmental impacts, commodity price volatility, and unresolved regulatory frameworks.
The paper therefore explores how future critical material needs can be balanced with environmental stewardship and responsible resource management. The author argues that expanding scientific knowledge of deep-sea environments should remain a priority before large-scale seabed mining is treated as a commercially viable component of the global materials supply chain.
Evaluating Economic, Environmental, and Regulatory Barriers
The paper draws on historical, market, environmental, and regulatory analysis to evaluate the feasibility of seabed mining as a future source of critical materials. The author assesses historical developments, market trends, environmental studies, and regulatory frameworks related to seabed mining. The analysis focuses on polymetallic nodules, which are rich in critical materials such as cobalt, nickel, copper, and manganese.
The analysis reviews global production trends, mineral reserves, and pricing dynamics for key battery and alloying metals to assess resource and market viability. The author compares projected future demand with available terrestrial resources and examines how changes in global supply have influenced commodity markets and resource security strategies.
The paper also evaluates environmental considerations by reviewing deep-sea biodiversity research and environmental impact assessments conducted in prospective mining regions. Special attention is given to baseline geological and ecological surveys, as well as recent field studies investigating ecosystem responses to experimental nodule collection.
In addition, the author examines regulatory frameworks governing seabed resource development. The analysis compares the international system administered by the International Seabed Authority with the United States regulatory approach, highlighting differences in permitting requirements, environmental oversight, and commercial incentives. It gives particular attention to U.S. non-ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, reliance on the Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Act, and concerns that parallel U.S. and international pathways could allow companies to exploit regulatory gaps.
Obstacles to Commercial Development
The analysis suggests that resource scarcity is not the primary challenge facing critical mineral supply chains. Current terrestrial reserves appear sufficient to meet projected demand for cobalt, nickel, and copper. Instead, economic conditions, geopolitical developments, and market volatility increasingly shape supply security and long-term resource availability. At the same time, a limited understanding of deep-sea ecosystems raises important issues about the environmental consequences of large-scale seabed mineral extraction.
Despite growing interest in diversifying critical mineral supplies, the paper identifies several barriers that continue to hinder the development of a commercial seabed mining industry. Terrestrial mining remains the dominant source of cobalt, nickel, and copper, supported by established infrastructure, mature supply chains, and ongoing investments that continue to expand production capacity. As a result, seabed mining operations must compete with well-established land-based producers in an already competitive market.
Fluctuations in cobalt markets are driven by periods of oversupply and changing demand, creating significant financial uncertainty for emerging seabed mining ventures. The high capital costs and long development timelines associated with deep-sea operations further increase investment risks.
Recent studies have reported declines in species numbers, species richness, and biodiversity near experimental mining sites and sediment plume zones, highlighting the ecological uncertainties associated with deep-sea resource extraction. One cited field study reported an approximately 40% decline in species numbers close to collector tracks and an approximately 30% decline in species richness after experimental nodule collection.
Ongoing negotiations over international mining regulations and differences between national and international governance frameworks continue to create legal and investment ambiguity for developers. As a result, the viability of large-scale seabed mining remains uncertain.
Prioritizing Science Before Extraction
The paper concludes that seabed mining involves far more than resource extraction. While deep-sea mineral deposits contain valuable metals needed for batteries, electronics, and advanced materials, significant uncertainties remain regarding their economic viability, environmental impacts, and regulatory oversight.
The author recommends that the United States pivot away from subsidizing offshore mineral extraction and instead reassert leadership in deep-ocean science, workforce development, open data, and international cooperation.
The paper frames this shift as relevant to national security, U.S.-China strategic competition, freedom of navigation, and the protection of U.S. influence in the maritime domain.
Advanced tools such as artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, advanced sonar mapping, high-resolution data collection, seabed mapping, and oceanographic technologies could improve understanding of deep-ocean ecosystems and mineral resources.
Nhon also recommends sustained support for oceanographic research, the creation of an International Seabed Open Database curated for polymetallic nodules and other marine minerals, and stronger international cooperation on ocean governance.
It further proposes a U.S.-led “Poseidon Accords” framework to establish shared principles for responsible civil ocean exploration, transparency of seabed data, environmental baseline studies, and scientific collaboration.
These measures could improve data transparency, integrate seabed mapping, environmental baselines, and biodiversity assessments, strengthen environmental monitoring, and establish common standards for future deep-sea activities.
Together, the findings highlight the importance of balancing critical mineral supply with environmental stewardship and scientific understanding.
Download your PDF copy by clicking here.
Disclaimer: The views expressed here are those of the author expressed in their private capacity and do not necessarily represent the views of AZoM.com Limited T/A AZoNetwork the owner and operator of this website. This disclaimer forms part of the Terms and conditions of use of this website.