{"id":40090321,"date":"2021-12-07T12:24:41","date_gmt":"2021-12-07T06:54:41","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/china-dialogue-ocean-staging.darkbluehq.com\/uncategorized\/19905-sandor-mulsow-isa-not-suited-to-regulate-oceans\/"},"modified":"2022-02-10T23:02:45","modified_gmt":"2022-02-10T17:32:45","slug":"19905-sandor-mulsow-isa-not-suited-to-regulate-oceans","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/ocean\/19905-sandor-mulsow-isa-not-suited-to-regulate-oceans\/","title":{"rendered":"Sandor Mulsow: \u2018The ISA is not fit to regulate any activity in the oceans\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"

The deep-sea floor is peppered with unknown quantities of minerals, formed over millions of years. Iron and manganese are the most abundant, but there are also deposits of copper, nickel, cobalt, zinc and a variety of rare earths. These minerals have long been mined on land and are essential to everyday objects including smartphones, televisions and cars.<\/p>\n

They are also crucial ingredients in technology that delivers renewable energy, such as solar panels and batteries. Some argue<\/a> that the world cannot decarbonise unless we begin to mine these minerals from the deep sea floor. They say terrestrial mining causes far worse ecological impacts and greenhouse gas emissions.<\/p>\n

But increasing numbers of scientists and civil society groups are calling for a moratorium<\/a> on deep-sea mining. They argue the global ocean is already severely stressed by climate change, pollution and overfishing, and that mining regulations are being developed without a full understanding of the risks. Their stance has recently been supported<\/a> by prominent companies including BMW, Volvo, Samsung and Google.<\/p>\n

Dr Sandor Mulsow stands firmly on this side of the debate. A Chilean professor of marine geology, from 2013 to 2019 he was head of the Office of Environmental Management and Mineral Resources at the International Seabed Authority (ISA).<\/p>\n

The ISA is the UN-appointed body charged with developing rules that will govern eventual mining. It is due to resume negotiations around the issue at its headquarters in Kingston, Jamaica, from 6\u201315 December, although finalising regulations, known as the Mining Code, will no longer be on the agenda because of Covid-19 travel restrictions.<\/p>\n

Mulsow, who has more than 30 scientific articles and hundreds of legal reports on the ocean to his name, is currently based at the Universidad Austral in Chile\u2019s southern coastal city of Valdivia.<\/p>\n

He spoke to China Dialogue Ocean via video call.<\/p>\n


\nChina Dialogue Ocean: What is the tragedy you say is about to happen?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Sandor Mulsow: There is currently a movement that is looking to start mining the seabed for minerals. And when that happens, there is no going back. It\u2019s a lot cheaper to mine the seabed, which is very attractive to industries, and it would be done in very remote places, where nobody can complain.<\/p>\n


\nWhat is the problem with mining in the deep ocean?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

We only have one planet. And we have to protect it. We have always been told that the oceans are gigantic. Seventy per cent of the surface of our planet is ocean and we think it can hold everything. That\u2019s why every country in the world dumps everything into the sea, so that it will supposedly be lost. But when I do the analysis, in terms of volume, of all the water in the ocean, it becomes a tiny little ball that is 1,000 times smaller than the Earth. In other words, it is a tremendously fragile environment, but we are not protecting it as we need to.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\"Deep
Machines designed for mining the deep-sea floor (Image \u00a9 Nautilus Minerals)<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

Who is in charge of ensuring the protection of the oceans?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

The International Seabed Authority is the one that should. However, in practice it does not do so. There are other interests behind it. At the moment, the ISA has two mandates that are counterproductive<\/a>. One, which is in articles 136 to 145 [of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea], has to do with the common heritage of mankind, with the search for equality of all countries, the promotion of research, and very positive things. But, on the other hand, it has articles 150, 151 and 152 that focus on production, exploitation and profits.<\/p>\n


\nSo, their mandate is positive…<\/strong><\/h3>\n

It would be positive if we had knowledge available. We know very little about the seabed. We don\u2019t have enough data and research to understand what is going on at the bottom of the oceans. During my five years as director of ISA\u2019s environmental management and mineral resources office, I saw a lot of irregularities.<\/p>\n


\nWhat would be an example of an irregularity? <\/strong><\/h3>\n

The Clarion-Clipperton Zone, which is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean between Mexico and Hawaii, is one of the most heavily explored areas. It is estimated to be almost twice the size of Mexico and there are 17 exploration contracts of 75,000 square kilometres each. There are contractors who send 100 samples of what they find in their concession \u2013 which is nothing. It\u2019s as if we were to go to the middle of Central Park in New York, which is 3.4 square kilometres, and do a test with a 10-centimetre tube to determine how many worms there are in the whole place. Is it possible to measure biodiversity like that? How are we going to measure the real impact we are generating? You can\u2019t with that data. But with just that data, they want to promote underwater mining.<\/p>\n \n\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\tAn interactive map showing what could be mined and where\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\tToggle zones on \/ off<\/span>\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t