Considering The Future Environmental Impacts Of Marine Mining
blurb:isstoday19Dec08
19 December 2008: Considering The Future Environmental Impacts Of Marine Mining
Technological improvements mean mining of minerals and metals from the seabed is increasingly feasible. In Africa, companies that are pioneering this new form of mining claim it will not have a detrimental impact on the marine environment - at least it is argued that it is a much cleaner alternative to land based operations. Not all share this optimism, and it appears vital that regulations and environmental studies occur before the growth in marine mining gets underway.
The most significant developments in marine mining are occurring off South-East Asia and in the territorial waters of various Pacific Islands. Australia’s Nautilus Mining company and Canadian Placer Dome lead the way in deep-sea mining off Papua New Guinea for sulfide, gold and copper at depths as far as 1,500 meters below sea level.
In comparison, marine mining remains in its infancy in Africa, but it may increase substantially over the next few years. In addition to diamond mining in the seas of Namibia, undertaken by De Beers since the early 1990s, there are now reports that mining companies have been granted the go-ahead to mine commodities in West African seas. For example, the Canadian registered Marine Mining company is due to commence gold mining off the coast of Ghana, while British Subsea Resources are set to work offshore in Liberia in search for diamonds and other minerals.
The growth of marine mining is potentially very important for the mining sector. The scale of demand for mined commodities is predicted to be enormous in the near future. According to some experts, in order to meet the demand over the next 40 years, mining companies will need to mine five times more than they have ever been mined before. Yet finding new deposits of minerals and metals is becoming increasingly difficult on land, As evident by research from the Metal Economic Group showing that between 2002 and 2006, the amount invested in exploration by mining companies has grown by roughly 250 per cent, while discovery costs have effectively trebled over the past 30 years and the average size of mineral discoveries has diminished. Minerals and metals found in the seabed could therefore represent the new frontier of mining. It is also reported that mining under the sea is not as difficult as many have presumed, a least the challenges of mining hundreds of meters below water are comparable to mining hundreds of meters into rock. In fact, some speculate that soon certain minerals and metals will be significantly cheaper to exploit underwater than on land.
While the potential of marine mining appears exciting, it is vital to contemplate the environmental consequences. It is now well documented that land-based mining has all too often led to pollution and the destruction of critical habitats. The environmental problems of mining exist everywhere, but they are often most acute in developing countries with poor regulations and state capacity. Some of the leading companies engaged in marine mining claim it is in fact environmentally benign compared to land based activities; it is not something that environmentalists should be overly concerned with and perhaps it should be seen as a welcome alternative to land-based operations. Moreover, many of the mining companies working in this field have been proactively engaging with marine scientists to mitigate any potential problems. In 2001, the newly formed International Marine Minerals Society, based in Hawaii published a ‘code for environmental management of marine mining’, which offered general principles of responsible mining in ocean habitats.
A favorable image of marine mining is seemingly reinforced by the experience of Namibia, where offshore diamond mining has had little reported impact on the environment. Diamonds can more or less be “scooped” up from the seabed, after which unwanted sediment is immediately released to the sea bottom, without significantly altering the seabed. Furthermore, De Beers has no need for the use of toxic chemicals and acids. However, the potential impact of marine mining is difficult to generalise on; while marine mining in Namibia may present little cause for concern, the same may not be true for other mining operations in different marine habitats. The consequence of mining could vary widely depending on what mineral or metal is being targeted, what technology is being used and at what depth mining companies are operating. Moreover, negative consequences may be amplified where competition for marine resources are high, such as in tropical waters off West Africa where millions of people depend on small scale fishing for subsistence income and food—a situation far removed from the sparsely populated windswept waters of Namibia.
The truth of the matter is that there has been a dearth of scientific study into this issue. Arguably the most detailed analysis has been conducted in Papua New Guinea, where a group of marine scientists from the University of Santa Barbara in California raised a number of concerns. It was their view that underwater mining could cause lasting destruction to the seabed. Plumes of sediment, as well as noise from drilling and blasts also had the potential to kill wildlife and change ecosystem dynamics. Moreover, due to the nature of the mining operations, there was a high risk of water pollution from accidents in waste disposal and machine faults. Agreeing with the thrust of the report, Jerome Tioti from Papua New Guinea’s National Fisheries Authority argues that pollution from marine mining might have a negative impact on tuna stocks. If pollution occurs, vast areas might be affected due to ocean currents, and with tuna being a highly migratory species, contamination of the stock could have dire consequences for the entire region, far overstretching the immediate impact zone of the mine.
It may be premature and misleading to raise the alarm over the future destruction of marine habitats by voracious mining companies. Indeed, it may be sometime before marine mining in Africa expands into a significant sector and for the time being there may be far greater threats to the ocean than mining, such as commercial fishing. However, marine mining remains poorly understood and there appears to be little work on better regulating this sector, although there are positive signs that existing mining companies venturing beneath the sea are taking into consideration their environmental responsibilities. Effective management of mining in international waters is supposedly enforced by the International Seabed Authority, established through the United Nations Convention on the Laws of the Seas (UNCLOS). Yet in territorial waters of Africa, as well as elsewhere, the necessary expertise and legislation for the management of marine mining appears non-existent.
Jochen Halfar at Stuggart University argues that regulatory efforts to control and manage marine mining should not wait for the boom in this sector to take off – implementing regulations becomes much more difficult once substantial investments are made. Unfortunately, the experience from land-based mining suggests governments, regulators and companies tend to respond meaningfully to environmental problems, if at all, only after disasters have occurred and communities have engaged in costly and long drawn out protests. In other words, careful studies are needed soon that can highlight best practice and identify strategies to mitigate environmental impacts.
Iona Eberle is a volunteer intern working on the natural resource project at the Corruption and Governance programme.
Andre Standing is a senior research at the corruption & governance programme, and leads the project on natural resources in Africa.
