Connect with us

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s move on Thursday to kickstart deep-sea mining could be a lifeline for the Canadian company that is pushing to be the first to supply strategic minerals from the ocean floor.

The firm signalled its intention weeks ago to seek permits from the US administration for the activity in a challenge to UN governance, but whether the gambit pays off remains to be seen. The plan faces strong opposition from many countries and scientists who fear the industry could have catastrophic effects on the ocean ecosystem.

Years of deadlock in global efforts to agree rules for commercial mining of the ocean floor had been straining the finances and patience of the Vancouver-based The Metals Company (TMC) – one of the most prominent among a clutch of aspiring deep-sea mining companies.

Then, in an abrupt shift in company policy, TMC Chief Executive Gerard Barron said in a statement at the end of March that it was time to bypass the International Seabed Authority (ISA) – the little-known UN body created by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

“What we need is a fair hearing and a regulator willing to engage,” said Barron, going on to accuse various actors at the ISA of acting in “bad faith” by obstructing the completion of a mining code.

“Looking back at our 16-year experience of the ISA brand of multilateralism, we believe the United States made the right decision when they chose not to ratify UNCLOS,” Barron said.

Trump tries to upend international order

The company’s share price – which has struggled since it listed in 2021 – jumped this week after Trump signed an executive order calling for deep-sea mining, including beyond US territorial waters, in a bid to secure critical minerals like nickel, cobalt and copper and counter China’s dominance in the sector.

“Vast offshore seabed areas hold critical minerals and energy resources,” Trump said in the order. “These resources are key to strengthening our economy, securing our energy future, and reducing dependence on foreign suppliers for critical minerals.”

Xi commits China to full climate plan but emissions-cutting ambition still unclear

He directed his administration to expedite the issue of mining permits under the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resource Act (DSHMRA), a piece of largely untested legislation dating back to 1980 before UNCLOS existed.

Following Trump’s announcement, TMC’s Barron said that “with a stable, transparent, and enforceable regulatory pathway available under existing US law, we look forward to delivering the world’s first commercial nodule project – responsibly and economically”.

Financial lifeline

Crucially, the step could give TMC some financial breathing space.

“They have had very little money, and a lot of debt, for a long time,” Bobbi-Jo Dobush, a US.-based environmental attorney, told Climate Home before Trump’s order was signed on Thursday.

TMC made a net loss of over $81 million last year, with a total deficit of $631 million piled up since it began operating. According to its latest annual accounts, the company had only $3.5 million in the bank at the end of 2024 and access to a potential $41.5 million loan offered by its main investors, Silicon Valley financier Andrei Karkar and Gerard Barron himself.

A company spokesperson declined to comment on its financial position.

The wider deep-sea mining industry has been in choppy financial waters due to persistent uncertainty over its viability. Norwegian company Loke Marine Minerals filed for bankruptcy earlier this month after a long search for additional capital from investors proved unsuccessful, its CEO Walter Sognnes was quoted as telling Norwegian newspaper DN.

International backlash

The ISA has under its supervision huge swathes of the Pacific Ocean beyond national jurisdictions that hold the world’s largest reserves of polymetallic nodules – potato-sized rocks packed with minerals that have a multitude of industrial uses – from weapons to clean energy technology.

A polymetallic, or manganese, nodule is displayed the the booth of DeepGreen Resources in Toronto, Ontario, Canada March 4, 2019. REUTERS/Chris Helgren

A polymetallic, or manganese, nodule is displayed the the booth of DeepGreen Resources in Toronto, Ontario, Canada March 4, 2019. REUTERS/Chris Helgren

For years, diplomats at the ISA have been trying to hash out deep-sea mining standards but deep divisions persist and much work remains to be done. Thirty-two countries, including France, Germany and Canada, have also called for either a full ban or a precautionary pause in deep-sea mining activities.

That means Trump’s unilateral decision to expedite licences in both US and international waters is likely to spark a backlash from the international community.

“Any unilateral action would constitute a violation of international law and directly undermine the fundamental principles of multilateralism, the peaceful use of the oceans and the collective governance framework,” said Leticia Carvalho, the secretary general of the ISA, when TMC unveiled its plans in March. Dozens of nations, both in the Global North and South, echoed her opposition.

China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakan said on Friday the US move “violates international law and harms the collective interests of the international community”. China holds the largest number of exploration permits in the Pacific Ocean under the ISA, but it has been waiting for the mining rulebook’s completion before conducting any commercial extraction activity.

‘Rip up the deep sea for profit’

Trump’s executive order also drew immediate condemnation from environmentalists who say deep-sea mining would cause irreversible damage to the ocean ecosystem while being financially prohibitive and unnecessary because land-based mineral resources and recycling could cover demand.

“Authorizing deep-sea mining outside international law is like lighting a match in a room full of dynamite – it threatens ecosystems, global cooperation, and US credibility all at once,” said Arlo Hemphill of Greenpeace.

“The United States government has no right to unilaterally allow an industry to destroy the common heritage of humankind, and rip up the deep sea for the profit of a few corporations,” he added.

A Greenpeace activist holds a sign as he confronts the deep sea mining vessel Hidden Gem, commissioned by Canadian miner The Metals Company, as it returned to port from eight weeks of test mining in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone between Mexico and Hawaii, off the coast of Manzanillo, Mexico November 16, 2022. REUTERS/Gustavo Graf

A Greenpeace activist holds a sign as he confronts the deep sea mining vessel Hidden Gem, commissioned by Canadian miner The Metals Company, as it returned to port from eight weeks of test mining in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone between Mexico and Hawaii, off the coast of Manzanillo, Mexico November 16, 2022. REUTERS/Gustavo Graf

TMC is one of the companies with the most to potentially gain.

In a call with analysts in late March, an executive from the Vancouver-based firm indicated that the US backing could be a much-needed spur to attract external investment.

“If we get to the point where regulatory uncertainty is no longer there and, you know, things are moving along at a very fast clip, let’s say through the US process, well that may put us in a different financial position,” said Craig Shesky, the company’s CFO.

TMC’s rapid pivot

As recently as a few months ago, the company was still lobbying US lawmakers to get behind new legislation calling on the US government to support international governance of seafloor resource exploration.

TMC spent $312,000 on US lobbying activities in 2024, according to lobbying disclosure records.

It is unclear why TMC’s longstanding policy position changed, but during a presentation with analysts, company executives name-checked Steven Groves, a former White House staffer during Trump’s first term.

At energy security talks, US pushes gas and derides renewables

Groves is a policy director at the Heritage Foundation, a fossil-fuel funded think-tank that routinely opposes climate policies and casts doubts on universally accepted climate science. He also co-edited ‘Project 2025’, the controversial 900-page conservative policy blueprint for reshaping the federal government.

TMC’s Shesky said Groves agreed that applying for a mining licence under DSHMRA would be “a viable path based on robust and well thought out regulations”.

Choppy waters ahead

But other experts vehemently disagree. Dobush told Climate Home it is “very ironic and highly likely untrue” that going through the United States provides regulatory certainty when the national legislation has never been used for exploitation.

In 2022, weapons maker Lockheed Martin – the only existing holder of DSHMRA exploration permits – said that activities had been delayed as a result of a lack of international recognition of the US licences.

Duncan Currie, legal advisor at the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, said he expected plenty of potential legal issues down the line for TMC before any mining takes place.

For instance, countries like Canada, Switzerland and the Netherlands – where TMC and its partner Allseas are respectively based – could risk breaching the terms of the UNCLOS if they fail to prevent the companies from acting unilaterally, he said.

Nations that rely on the UNCLOS to protect their freedom of navigation or fisheries rights may also be motivated to prevent the US government from setting a precedent in sidestepping international governance.

“Island states and seafaring nations place a great deal of importance on UNCLOS,” added Currie. “I would imagine that those countries will be working to ensure that this doesn’t happen.”

The post Trump throws lifeline to Canadian deep-sea miner, setting scene for international clash appeared first on Climate Home News.

Trump throws lifeline to Canadian deep-sea miner, setting scene for international clash

Continue Reading

Climate Change

The Pacific made history in the courts – now we must do it in the negotiations

Published

on

Vishal Prasad is director of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change.

When the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered its advisory opinion on climate change last year, it marked a turning point not just for the Pacific, but for international climate law.

The court was unambiguous: states have legal obligations to protect the environment from greenhouse gas emissions, and they face accountability when they fail. For those of us who carried this campaign from a classroom in Vanuatu to Europe and New York, it was a moment of profound validation.

World’s top court opens door to compensation from countries responsible for climate crisis

But we have always said that the advisory opinion was a tool, not an endpoint. The ICJ affirmed what many in the Pacific have been saying for some time. Now we have a legal blueprint, we must carry this momentum from the courtrooms to the negotiating rooms.

Potential to shape climate politics

The advisory opinion has already begun to reshape the climate landscape. At COP30 in Belém, we saw countries that had supported the campaign citing the opinion in their interventions, while those blocking progress were clearly concerned of its implications. Its potential to shape climate politics and policy is significant.

This year we have arrived at the mid-year climate negotiations in Bonn not only with the advisory opinion, but with a UN General Assembly resolution endorsing it. Despite a fierce campaign from the usual suspects, just eight countries, including the USA, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran voted against. That is a victory for multilateralism at a moment when multilateralism is under strain.

UN General Assembly backs “climate obligations” set by world’s top court

But we know that advisory opinions alone are not enough. Legal clarity will not automatically translate into reduced emissions, increased finance flows or stronger national climate plans. That translation requires political will in the negotiating rooms, both here in Bonn and all the way through Fiji and finally in Antalya this November. 

What the Pacific needs from this negotiating year

The Pacific put significant political capital into the joint Australia-Pacific bid for COP31. It is fair to say that the compromise of Australia holding the role of president of negotiations while the COP is held and presided over by Türkiye is not what we imagined.

But we in the Pacific are used to looking for silver linings. Both Australia and Türkiye have acknowledged the important role the Pacific will have at COP31, through the appointment of Pacific champions and the hosting of a Pacific Pre-COP in Fiji with a leaders event in Tuvalu. These are genuine opportunities to bring the world to our shores and ensure that Pacific issues are front and centre going into the final negotiations.

But we are not naive. Envoy positions and meeting locations are just the architecture of goodwill. We need to see that goodwill converted into concrete negotiating outcomes and finance.

COP31 leaders unveil global targets, with spotlight on electrification

The Pacific helped put Australia’s climate minister Chris Bowen in this important position, so we expect to see Australia advocate not only for us, but to turn a mirror towards itself as one of the world’s biggest fossil fuel exporters. 

At Bonn, and then in Antalya, we need ambition on mitigation that reflects the ICJ’s clarity on state obligations and the science. That means action on fossil fuels. 

We need climate finance that is new, additional and accessible to the countries that need it most. In the Pacific we have already demonstrated what that looks like.

The Pacific Resilience Facility is the first climate finance facility designed, governed and managed by Pacific people, built specifically to reach the grassroots and community initiatives that larger funds routinely bypass. We need the international community to meet that ambition with contributions that reflect climate justice, starting with pledges to meet the $500-million capitalisation goal.

And we need the oceans – which are the lifeblood of the Pacific and a critical part of the global climate system – treated as a central element of the negotiations rather than a thematic aside.

Energy crisis driven by imported fossil fuels

The days of speaking about climate and fossil fuels purely as a moral issue are long gone. Pacific ministers recently adopted the Tassiriki Call for a Fossil Fuel Free Pacific, in the context of a deepening energy crisis that has triggered states of emergency in several Pacific nations. Our dependence on imported fossil fuels is both a climate and an economic vulnerability.

Conflict in the Middle East is pushing our region into an energy crisis. We are dependent on imported fossil fuels for 80% of our energy needs. My home country of Fiji could see an increased fuel bill of nearly three times our annual healthcare budget.

Comment: COP31 must persuade countries to make fossil fuel transition plans 

We need the technical and financial support to transition to 100% renewable energy. Not only because it is what the world owes us for decades of carbon pollution that continue to render parts of our home uninhabitable, damaging ecosystems and culture. But because we must be part of that transition. Fossil fuels have proven to be the greatest source of damage to our climate, and with their volatility, to our sovereignty as well.

What next?

The demands have not changed. Greater action on mitigation, adaptation, finance, loss and damage: these remain the substance of what the Pacific requires from the international community. What has changed is the legal foundation beneath them.

The ICJ has affirmed that these are not requests. They are obligations. The task this year is to make the negotiations reflect that.

The post The Pacific made history in the courts – now we must do it in the negotiations appeared first on Climate Home News.

The Pacific made history in the courts – now we must do it in the negotiations

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Biscayne Bay Is Slowly Becoming the Ocean

Published

on

A 20-year record reveals an estuary tipping toward a saltier, more acidic state. These conditions threaten its hammerhead shark nursery and the aquifer that supplies Miami’s drinking water.

In the shadow of Miami’s skyline, in water churned daily by boats and jet skis, juvenile great hammerhead sharks—a critically endangered species—spend the first two years of their lives. A few miles from downtown, researchers recently pulled a 12-foot critically endangered sawfish from the same shallows. The species has been dying off in alarming numbers across South Florida’s waters since 2024, in an event scientists suspect was set in motion by record ocean heat.

Biscayne Bay Is Slowly Becoming the Ocean

Continue Reading

Climate Change

An Old Well Gushed Waste, Not Oil, in a Small West Texas Town

Published

on

The Railroad Commission of Texas shut down injection wells to control a leak in a church parking lot. But 1.5 million gallons of toxic wastewater still spilled to the surface.

GRANDFALLS, Texas—An old oil well sprang back to life under the parking lot of the First Baptist Church of Grandfalls in April.

An Old Well Gushed Waste, Not Oil, in a Small West Texas Town

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com