The Elements of Deep Sea Mining

Eric Young

Details and Dialogue Matter tradingoff.substack.com

  1. #46: Conflicting Regimes with Coalter Lathrop

    hace 6 días

    #46: Conflicting Regimes with Coalter Lathrop

    Coalter Lathrop returns ten months after Episode 21, and the DSHMRA application story has grown significantly messier. Five applications are now public on NOAA’s site — four companies, two of which are subsidiaries of American Metal Incorporated, an entity that didn’t exist until January 2025, with one applicant incorporating as recently as August 2025. His read on the motivation ranges from holding licenses as a future bargaining chip if the US eventually joins UNCLOS, to outright stock pumping by finance-world actors betting on a land-rush narrative. The more consequential development is the first genuine spatial conflict in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone between two separate corporate interests — SeaX, an American Metal subsidiary, filing over areas already reserved for Impossible Metals Bahrain under the ISA. That’s a different problem than TMC’s intra-subsidiary overlap, and it puts Article 139’s obligation-to-ensure clause directly in the spotlight. Coalter has mapped at least 17 states parties — including Canada, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the UK, Belgium, Nauru, and Tonga — whose nationals appear in these five DSHMRA applications as applicants, contractors, or named technical partners. With the UK already having enacted domestic legislation tying unlawful seabed activity to money laundering law, and parliamentarians in the Netherlands and Switzerland actively raising the issue, Coalter argues the question is shifting from whether these states have an obligation to act — to which one moves first. Follow Coalter LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/coalter-g-lathrop-7372bb6/ Chapters * 00:00:47 — Coalter’s Work Over the Past 10 Months * 00:08:02 — The New DSHMRA Applications: Who Is Applying and Why? * 00:17:13 — The First Direct Corporate Conflict: SeaX and Impossible Metals Bahrain * 00:30:38 — The Original Purpose of the ISA * 00:31:33 — The 171 Countries and the Obligation to Ensure * 00:38:51 — 17 Countries With Nationals in the DSHMRA Applications * 00:44:44 — How the UK Has Approached Its Treaty Obligations * 00:45:01 — The Need For Subcontractors and Legal Exposure * 00:51:55 — NORI and TOML Bring Cases Against the ISA * 00:57:46 — Dispute Settlement Gets Its First Test Drive * 01:05:08 — What a Realistic Path Forward Could Look Like * 01:08:28 — Kingston Roundtable, July 20th Legal/Regulatory References: * NOAA DSHMRA Applications comments: https://www.regulations.gov/document/NOAA-NOS-2026-0035-0001/comment * UNCLOS Article 139 — Obligation to Ensure: un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements * Seabed Disputes Chamber 2011 Advisory Opinion: https://www.itlos.org/fileadmin/itlos/documents/cases/case_no_17/17_adv_op_010211_en.pdf Event: * Coalter’s ISA Kingston Roundtable — Monday, July 20th, ISA Council Week 2, Kingston, Jamaica (targeting state delegations; topic: Article 139 obligation to ensure) Previous Appearance: #21: Coalter Lathrop on Risks to International Stability This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit tradingoff.substack.com/subscribe

    1 h 14 min
  2. #45 Seamount Crusts with Thomas Kuhn

    17 jun

    #45 Seamount Crusts with Thomas Kuhn

    In this episode, Thomas Kuhn (Marine Geologist and Project Manager, Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources – BGR, Germany) breaks down how ferromanganese crusts form on the ocean floor, and why the scientific community has been looking at the wrong part of the mountain for decades. This conversation gets deep into the chemistry of cobalt enrichment, the role of tidal currents in exposing crust-bearing rock on seamount summits, and why a single underwater plateau could supply Germany’s entire rare earth element demand for eight years — a finding that is genuinely new to the field. Thomas brings a perspective that is rare in the deep-sea mining conversation: three decades of hands-on geological fieldwork combined with the institutional weight of managing Germany’s own exploration licenses. He offers a grounded, evidence-based case for why ferromanganese crusts deserve far more attention than they currently get — and what responsible development of those resources might actually look like. Follow Thomas on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/thomas-kuhn-a02204288/ Chapters: * 00:00:00 – Teaser: One Seamount, Eight Years of Rare Earths * 00:00:18 – Introducing Thomas Kuhn & BGR * 00:01:42 – Thomas’s Path to Marine Geology * 00:06:41 – How Has Public Perception of Deep-Sea Mining Changed? * 00:12:52 – Natural Variability & The Right Timescale * 00:24:47 – Crust Formation 101: How Ferromanganese Crusts Form * 00:29:47 – Why Cobalt Gets Trapped (And Nickel Doesn’t) * 00:40:05 – Water Depth, Growth Rates & Crust Composition * 00:44:32 – The Seamount Summit Discovery * 00:51:23 – Tidal Currents: The Missing Piece * 00:55:08 – Biology, Connectivity & Environmental Recovery * 00:58:24 – How Far Are We From Mining Crusts? * 00:59:38 – Heavy Rare Earths: The Hidden Value * 01:05:09 – Thomas’s Closing Message & Wrap-Up Resources Mentioned: * Hein, Koschinsky & Kuhn (2020) — nodule composition: https://www.nature.com/articles/s43017-020-0027-0 * Cruise report SO313 — Louisville Seamounts: https://doi.org/10.48433/cr_so313 * BGR marine minerals page: https://www.bgr.bund.de/EN/Themen/Rohstoffe/Marine-mineralische/marine-mineralische_node.html * An example of the combination of the occurrence of ferromanganese crusts on top of seamounts in relation to water column currents: https:/ / doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.oregeorev.2019.103131 * An example of the occurrence of ferromanganese crusts on a NW Pacific seamount: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.oregeorev.2016.09.032 This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit tradingoff.substack.com/subscribe

    1 h 14 min
  3. #44 The Common Heritage: Rozemarijn Roland Holst Explains Evolution of an Idealistic Principle

    11 jun

    #44 The Common Heritage: Rozemarijn Roland Holst Explains Evolution of an Idealistic Principle

    In this episode, Dr. Rozemarijn Roland Holst, Lecturer in International Environmental Law at the University of Edinburgh, traces the full arc of the Common Heritage of Mankind principle: how it emerged from Arvid Pardo’s 1967 UN speech, what different states understood it to mean through the UNCLOS negotiations, how the 1994 Implementing Agreement reshaped the regime, and what its open-ended character means for the exploitation regulations still being developed today. Roze also brings two frameworks into the conversation that are increasingly relevant to the ISA’s work — the “epistemology of crisis,” which examines how urgency-based arguments shape which trade-offs get treated as inevitable, and relational approaches to governance, which offer a different lens for understanding how values beyond extraction and conservation tend to get left out of regulatory design. For those following the ISA’s ongoing regulatory process, the BBNJ agreement’s handling of benefit-sharing, or debates around what “equitable distribution” should look like in practice, this episode is a detailed and legally grounded look at the intellectual history behind the concepts still driving those negotiations. Follow Rozemarijn LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rozemarijnrolandholst/ Chapters * 00:00:00 — Introduction * 00:00:24 — Why Deep Sea Mining Is a Test Case for Bigger Questions * 00:12:17 — Arvid Pardo and the Origins of Common Heritage * 00:22:09 — Benefit Sharing and the UNCLOS Negotiations * 00:26:46 — How the 1994 Implementing Agreement Changed Everything * 00:33:01 — What Does "Benefit of Humankind" Actually Mean? * 00:39:14 — Where the Regime Stands Today * 00:45:31 — The Epistemology of Crisis * 00:53:32 — Relational Approaches to Governance * 00:59:45 — How Should We Think About Trade-Offs? * 01:05:09 — The Case for Deliberative Processes * 01:09:01 — Current Research & Recommended Resources Resources Mentioned 1. Arvid Pardo’s 1967 UN Speech The foundational speech designating the deep seabed as “common heritage of mankind.” * UN document reference: A/C.1/PV.1515, 1 November 1967 * Overview & context: https://www.un.org/press/en/1999/19990716.SEA1619.html * Malta government essay on Pardo: https://foreign.gov.mt/malta-360-insights/how-one-maltese-diplomat-gave-the-world-the-law-of-the-sea/ 2. Surabhi Ranganathan (Cambridge) — History of Common Heritage & the Deep Seabed Regime * “Global Commons” article (EJIL, 2016): https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3427314 * “The Seabed and the South: From Stock Stories to New Histories” (2024): https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4730113 * Cambridge faculty page: https://cambridge.academia.edu/SurabhiRanganathan * The Common Heritage of Mankind: Annotations on a Battle | The Battle for International Law: South-North Perspectives on the Decolonization Era | Oxford Academic (not open access) 3. Julia Dehm — Law, Values, and Environmental Trade-offs * Google Scholar profile: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=n-SZpT8AAAAJ * Book Reconsidering REDD+ (Cambridge University Press): https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/reconsidering-redd/5D54EFE59BBA35999FEEBD9ACA8EA449 * Question of Value: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/locating-nature/reconfiguring-environmental-governance-in-the-green-economy/7C1C6F265A28EC180A518507B31F8BCF * Question of Value: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-edit/10.4324/9781003221920-14/legally-constituting-value-nature-julia-dehm 4. Kyle Whyte — Epistemology of Crisis / Indigenous Studies (Referenced by Roze as the source of the “epistemology of crisis” concept) * Faculty page (University of Michigan): https://seas.umich.edu/research/faculty/kyle-whyte * Crisis Epistemology: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3891125 This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit tradingoff.substack.com/subscribe

    1 h 12 min
  4. #43 What DSHMRA Actually Requires Before Anyone Mines the Seabed; Brandon Tuck Explains US Deep Sea Mining Rules

    4 jun

    #43 What DSHMRA Actually Requires Before Anyone Mines the Seabed; Brandon Tuck Explains US Deep Sea Mining Rules

    DSHMRA has been sitting on the shelf for forty years and most people in the deep sea mining space still haven't read it. Brandon Tuck has; and his read is that the framework is significantly more protective than the international discourse gives it credit for. The no-significant-environmental-impacts standard isn't a policy aspiration; it's a statutory prohibition that is more onerous than NEPA requires. NOAA can't blindly issue a permit and move on. They have to make an affirmative finding, backed by a draft EIS, a final EIS, public hearings, and responses to comments. The overall process and substantive standards are more than most US domestic permitting programs require. The "wild west" framing isn't just wrong, Brandon argues. It's the opposite of what the statute actually demands. What most people in the room at Bergen or at any ISA meeting probably don't know: DSHMRA was written with a revenue-sharing trust fund built in, designed to transfer royalties to an international body once the US entered a Law of the Sea treaty. It never got funded. It expired. But the architecture is still there in the statute, and Trump's 2025 executive order quietly directs agencies to study reviving an international benefit-sharing mechanism. Brandon also maps out what the first commercial recovery permit will actually trigger legally — not just a DSHMRA challenge, but simultaneous exposure across ESA consultations, Marine Mammal Protection Act actions, port permits, and onshore processing approvals. Every link in the supply chain is a litigation target, and the groups that come after it may not even care about the project itself. Follow Brandon LinkedIn— https://www.linkedin.com/in/brandontuck/ Follow Vinson & Elkins • Vinson & Elkins Website (velaw.com) • V&E Environmental Law Series (blog/articles) • V&E Article: ‘One International Step Back, and a National Step Forward’ (ISA + NOAA update — co-authored by Brandon Tuck) Chapters 00:00 — Introduction 01:32 — Is DSHMRA Actually a Blank Check? Brandon’s Main Argument 09:02 — What Makes a Good Permitting Program (And What NOAA Is Missing) 15:11 — DSHMRA’s Environmental Standard: Stricter Than NEPA 19:21 — Common Heritage, the Trust Fund Nobody Knew About & the Trump EO 22:29 — What a DSHMRA Permit Actually Gives You (And Doesn’t) 29:34 — The Consolidated Application Update: Efficiency or Shortcut? 40:21 — What Happens After a Permit Is Issued: TCRs, Monitoring & Enforcement 48:22 — Litigation Strategy: The Four Risks Every First Mover Faces 54:01 — The Waterfront Risk: It’s Not Just the Permit They’ll Attack 59:43 — Rule of Law vs. Popular Vote: How Brandon Navigates Controversy 01:08:02 — When to Fight, When to Collaborate 01:11:21 — Why Some Groups Don’t Actually Care About Your Project 01:17:02 — Recommended Reading & Where to Find Brandon Resources Mentioned • DSHMRA — Full Statute Text (30 U.S.C. Chapter 26) via Cornell LII • DSHMRA Congressional Findings & Policy — Section 1401 (the ‘very first section’ Brandon recommends reading) • Executive Order 14285 — ‘Unleashing America’s Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources’ (April 24, 2025) — White House • National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) — Full Text via EPA Additional Resourcs • NOAA Deep Seabed Mining Page — Application Instructions, Final Rule (Jan 21, 2026) • NOAA Final Rule: Revisions to Regulations for Exploration License and Commercial Recovery Permit Applications (Federal Register, Jan 2026) • DSHMRA — Wikipedia Overview This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit tradingoff.substack.com/subscribe

    1 h 19 min
  5. #42 What are China's Deep Sea Research Vessels Actually Doing? Kara Fox and Elizabeth Alberts' Marine Traffic Investigation

    21 may

    #42 What are China's Deep Sea Research Vessels Actually Doing? Kara Fox and Elizabeth Alberts' Marine Traffic Investigation

    In this episode, I’m joined by Kara Fox, an award-winning investigative reporter at CNN International, and Elizabeth Alberts, senior staff writer at Mongabay’s Ocean Desk and Pulitzer Center fellow, who together co-published a major investigation: * CNN article: China’s Growing Influence in the Pacific Is 5,000 Meters Deep * Mongabay article: China’s Deep-Sea Mining Fleet May Also Track US Submarines * Pulitzer Center page: China’s Growing Influence in the Pacific Is 5,000 Meters Deep Their team tracked eight Chinese state-owned research vessels over five years and found their deep sea reserch ships spent only around 6% of their time in China’s actual assigned deep sea mining exploration zones. The rest of the time, they were logging extensive routes through some of the most strategically sensitive waters in the world — near US submarine corridors off Guam, through other nations’ exclusive economic zones, and in proximity to undersea cables. Using marine traffic data, open-source verification, Chinese-language sources, and analysis from maritime intelligence firm Starboard, the investigation makes a careful but compelling case that China’s deep sea mining program appears to serve a “dual use” function: legitimate mineral research on the surface, systematic military-grade seafloor mapping underneath.Kara and Elizabeth walk through their methodology — how they narrowed 40+ vessels down to 8, how they validated findings with defense analysts and civil society experts, and why their language was deliberately couched in “experts say.” They discuss how China’s explicit civilian-military fusion policy makes its position distinct from other maritime powers, even as the US and others also use oceanographic data for strategic ends. Elizabeth makes sure the environmental argument doesn’t get lost: these are ancient, fragile ecosystems that could be permanently altered, and the growing security narrative risks drowning out those concerns. And both journalists hint at what comes next — keeping an eye on the same vessels now that they’re identified, and turning attention toward the US’s own emerging role in this space. Follow Kara Fox * CNN Profile: cnn.com/profiles/kara-fox * LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/kara-danielle-fox * Bluesky: @karadaniellefox.bsky.social Follow Elizabeth Alberts * Personal site: elizabethclairealberts.com * Mongabay author page: news.mongabay.com/by/elizabeth-claire-alberts * LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/elizabeth-alberts-700000118 * Bluesky: @elizabethalberts.bsky.social Chapters * 00:00:20 – Introductions * 00:01:28 – What the Investigation Found * 00:03:11 – Understanding Dual Use * 00:05:42 – How the Investigation Started * 00:07:21 – The Methodology * 00:10:11 – How Kara and Elizabeth Met * 00:11:00 – Is China Exceptional, or Is Everyone Doing This? * 00:13:25 – Taiwan, the South China Sea, and What the Experts Said * 00:17:15 – The Environmental Argument * 00:19:20 – Where Does This Reporting Go Next? * 00:22:08 – Deep Sea Mining Watch Tool + Closing Tools Referenced * Deep Sea Mining Watch: deepseaminingwatch.msi.ucsb.edu (UCSB Benioff Ocean Science Laboratory + Global Fishing Watch) * MarineTraffic: marinetraffic.com * Starboard Maritime Intelligence: starboard.xyz (New Zealand-based maritime data analysis company) Prior Research Referenced * CSIS — “Surveying the Seas: China’s Dual-Use Research Operations in the Indian Ocean” (Jan 2024): features.csis.org/hiddenreach/china-indian-ocean-research-vessels * Darshana Baruah (IISS): Indo-Pacific defense and strategy expert quoted in the investigation — Carnegie Endowment profile This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit tradingoff.substack.com/subscribe

    23 min
  6. #41: Norway Hits Pause and Research Keeps Moving: Anette Tvedt on Processing, Politics, Problem Solving and Potential Futures

    14 may

    #41: Norway Hits Pause and Research Keeps Moving: Anette Tvedt on Processing, Politics, Problem Solving and Potential Futures

    In this episode, Anette Brock-Mathisen-Tvedt, CEO of Adept Minerals, discusses Norway’s decision to pause deep-sea mining licensing and the political debate surrounding seabed mineral development. She shares how her company approaches exploration, technology development, and building a responsible value chain, while navigating regulatory uncertainty and shifting industry dynamics. The conversation also explores how environmental concerns, resource demand, and policy decisions are shaping the future of deep-sea mining. The discussion also touches on lessons from the EMINENT Project, advancements in exploration and processing technologies, and how companies are adapting by looking beyond Norway to international opportunities. Anette reflects on the broader trade-offs involved in deep-sea mining, including supply chain security, environmental responsibility, and economic viability, and what these factors may mean for the future of seabed mineral development. Chapters 00:00 – Intro & CEO Background00:02:18 – What ADEPT Actually Does00:03:36 – The Eminent Project Explained00:06:40 – Norway Policy Setback00:08:30 – How Exploration Really Works00:12:20 – Political & Public Pushback00:14:50 – Industry Challenges & PR Battle00:17:00 – Debate vs Real Solutions00:24:20 – Going Global00:30:10 – Ethics & Trade-offs00:35:00 – Future of Processing Resources Mentioned * EMINENT Project: https://www.eminent-project.com * EMINENT News & Publications: https://www.eminent-project.com/news * Adepth Minerals: https://adepthminerals.com This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit tradingoff.substack.com/subscribe

    40 min
  7. #40 From the Lab to the Legal Text with Kerstin Kröger

    7 may

    #40 From the Lab to the Legal Text with Kerstin Kröger

    Recorded at the Seabed Minerals Conference in Bergen, Norway, this episode features Dr. Kerstin Kröger, a deep-sea ecologist and Marine Management Adviser who, over the course of a 1.5-year sabbatical, dove deep into the legal frameworks governing the world’s ocean floors. Kerstin speaks openly about what it means to operate at the science-policy interface, why scientists must learn the language of law to have their advice heard, and what the landmark BBNJ Agreement — which entered into force on January 17, 2026 — means for the future of deep-sea mining. Together, we unpack the four pillars of the BBNJ Agreement, how it interacts with the International Seabed Authority (ISA), the ongoing fragmentation of ocean governance, and why making decisions in this space can feel like a Greek tragedy because whichever way it’s decided, harm will happen. We also get into the uncomfortable conversation about scientific objectivity, the fear of being “put in a camp,” how framing shapes public perception of impact data, and whether the deep sea was ever truly pristine to begin with. Production Note: Please note there was a brief camera issue around the 3-minute mark. Audio remains unaffected. Apologies for the lack of visual! Follow Kerstin LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/kerstin-kröger-96b88747 Chapters * 00:00 – Intro & Background * 02:30 – Science vs Legal Language * 09:40 – What is BB&J * 15:20 – Marine Resources & Data Sharing * 28:40 – Protected Areas & Governance * 36:30 – Environmental Impact & Rules * 42:00 – Impact on Deep Sea Mining * 49:50 – Debate & Polarization Resources Mentioned * BBNJ Agreement (High Seas Treaty): https://www.un.org/bbnjagreement/en * DOALOS: https://www.un.org/depts/los/index.htm * UNCLOS: https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm * ISA: https://isa.org.jm * DOSI: https://www.dosi-project.org * ACOPS: https://acops.org.uk * OSPAR Commission: https://www.ospar.org This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit tradingoff.substack.com/subscribe

    1 h 10 min
  8. #39 When the Numbers Don't Add Up: Steven Emerman's Independent Assessment of the Metals Company Pre-Feasibility Study

    29 abr

    #39 When the Numbers Don't Add Up: Steven Emerman's Independent Assessment of the Metals Company Pre-Feasibility Study

    Steven Emerman, owner of Malach Consulting and a former Princeton and Cornell-trained geophysicist, brings an unusual perspective to deep sea mining. He came to it from decades of evaluating mining disclosures across the terrestrial mining industry. Commissioned by the Deep Sea Mining Campaign, Greenpeace International, and Mining Watch Canada, Emerman reviewed The Metals Company’s pre-feasibility study not as an ecological or policy document, but strictly as a financial and regulatory one. His conclusion: even under the company’s most optimistic assumptions — best-case metal prices, a below-standard discount rate, and a novel category of “recoverable resources” not recognized under SEC regulations — the project’s own numbers show it terminating at the end of year seven with zero profit. What makes this conversation particularly valuable for listeners tracking the commercial viability debate is Emerman’s grounding in mining industry norms. He walks through why the distinction between reserves and resources matters so much to investors, why the zero-tailings claim reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of ore processing chemistry, and why the assumed smelting and refining capacity in Indonesia involves layers of speculation that the PFS doesn’t adequately address. He’s careful to distinguish what the document does and doesn’t disclose and what it’s required to disclose under SEC regulations. His full report is available publicly and is referenced throughout this episode. * Emerman’s Report: Implications of the Metals Company Pre-Feasibility Study for Next Steps by the Company https://dsm-campaign.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Implications-of-The-Metals-Company-Pre-Feasibility-Study-for-Next-Steps-by-the-Company.pdf Chapters 00:00 – Introduction and context for the conversation01:03 – Who is Steven Emmerman? Background and consulting work04:14 – Previous involvement in deep-sea mining discussions05:20 – How this report came about06:33 – What “independence” means in consulting08:12 – Handling client pressure and report revisions11:02 – Personal views vs scope of the report12:32 – Podcast framing and approach to the discussion15:49 – What is a pre-feasibility study (PFS)?16:24 – The stage-gate process in mining projects18:23 – Internal vs public role of PFS documents20:00 – Regulation and the role of independent experts23:36 – What is a “qualified person”?25:42 – Key conclusion: should the project proceed?26:11 – How this compares to typical PFS evaluations This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit tradingoff.substack.com/subscribe

    1 h 42 min
Ver todo (46)

Calificaciones y reseñas

5
de 5
2 calificaciones

Acerca de

Details and Dialogue Matter tradingoff.substack.com

Información

También te podría interesar