ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ต.ค. 2023
- We have a lot to gain - and a lot to lose - from deep-sea mining.
Help keep Vox free for everybody: www.vox.com/give-now
Subscribe to our channel and turn on notifications (🔔) so you don't miss any videos: goo.gl/0bsAjO
There are metallic deposits scattered throughout our ocean floors - among hydrothermal vents, under the crust of seamounts, and scattered along sea plains in the form of rocks. As it happens, in our search for climate solutions, these metals have become more critical than ever to help us transition away from fossil fuels. We need them for everything like electric car batteries, copper wiring for electrification and wind turbines. Our land-based deposits have met our needs so far, but it’s unclear whether they will continue to, or whether we’ll want to keep destroying the environment to do so.
This video explains the history and the debate over mining metals in the deep sea and why one Canadian company, The Metals Company, is leading the rush there. There are huge environmental implications for digging up seafloor ecosystems as well as ethical ones: Metal-rich zones like the Clarion-Clipperton Zone lie in international waters that technically belong to everyone. A United Nations body located in Kingston, Jamaica, the International Seabed Authority, is faced with an urgent dilemma over how to regulate mining, whether the environmental harm is worth the benefits to solving our climate crisis, and how to fairly share the profits from this shared resource.
Correction: at 7:45, the company rang the opening bell at Nasdaq not New York Stock Exchange.
You can dig into the exploration contracts issued by the International Seabed Authority here:
www.isa.org.jm/exploration-co...
The New York Times has done some important investigative work on deep sea mining:
www.nytimes.com/2022/08/29/wo...
This study provides a thorough overview of some of the ecosystems with metallic deposits:
www.frontiersin.org/articles/...
Here is more information about DeepCCZ, which is leading research on the ecosystem of the Clarion-Clipperton Zone:
oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explor...
Note: In a previous version of this video, the voice-over incorrectly stated miles instead of meters at 0:15. It has since been corrected.
Vox is on a mission is to help everyone, regardless of income or status, understand our complicated world so that we can all help shape it. Part of that mission is keeping our work free.
You can help us do that by making a gift: www.vox.com/give-now
Watch our full video catalog: goo.gl/IZONyE
Follow Vox on TikTok: / voxdotcom
Check out our articles: www.vox.com/
Listen to our podcasts: www.vox.com/podcasts
Wow it’s almost counter intuitive that our quest for raw material to solve the climate crisis would lead to a chain of detrimental impacts to our marine seabed.
And there is the dilemma for the “green people” 😂😂😂
Because the human method of solving problems is by creating bigger problems. Always.
unless... nuclear!
Cause some people wants Yards,mantions,porsches and Jets,without this luxury items,ther is no problem❤
@@michaelolmedo6764please learn math❤
I personally have experience conducting research using polymetallic nodule samples provided by The Metals Company, so let me come out and say there are so many different facets in which this could harm the deep-sea ecosystem, many in which most people fail to understand or even think of. My work focused on the small animals (nematodes & copepods) that inhabit the folds and crevices on the nodules themselves, and most of the current research shows that they are vital habitats for these organisms, which of course are a foundation of the food-web in deep-sea communities. Mining will undoubtedly destroy virtually every single aspect of these ecosystems for multiple decades; entire communities dead bottom to top.
break eggs, omelettes, in a relatively tiny tiny tiny tiny area of the vastnessssssssss.
doesnt justify the damage...logical fallacy
@@Veldtian1
@@Veldtian1the apologist enters the chat, the end doesn't justify the means
@@cesrod5580@modofoosb9983
How big of an area would be affected?
yo what does polymetallic nodule samples mean are u speaking yappinese righ now
Nauru's land was almost completely destroyed due to phosphate mining, it's tragic seeing exactly the same devastation about to be unleashed on the ocean also.
One thing not mentioned here is the fact that Clipperton Island belongs to France, and it has been inhabited in the past. Under the UN rules, would not a 200 nautical mile radius around it become a French Exclusive Economic Zone?
@@charlesyoung7436 From the looks of things, Clipperton Island's EEZ would be a tiny portion in the southeast corner of the island. The zone is ~4500 miles long.
Looking at a map of ISA approved areas, they start ~400 miles from Clipperton Island in the south and the Revillagigedo Islands belonging to Mexico in the north.
Who cares about a tiny piece of the ocean if it helps end global warming? Sacrifice a piece to safe the planet
@@charlesyoung7436This gets addressed 1:30 into the video. Bruh.
@@charlesyoung7436There Is a movement here un México to claim that island.
Vox is really good at finding these weird topics that no one knows about but yet are incredibly interesting
It's worth mentioning that another Canadian company called Impossible Metals is developing a low impact method for extracting these nodules that doesn't rely on giant robotic vacuums crawling across the sea floor, swallowing up and burying everything in their path under a huge plume of dust. Impossibel Metals have developed an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) that will hover over the seabed instead of crawling over it and uses machine vision and AI to identify and pick up specific nodules (and just the nodules) using robotic manipulator arms. The system uses a buoyancy engine to remain aloft, so it won't kick up literal tons of sediment so it can pick up the nodules and leave the surrounding environment untouched.
Imagine you have a ton of dandelions in your yard that you want to get rid of. One way to do it would be to take a lawnmower and level everything in your yard. You'll get the dandelions, but you cut everything else in the process. That would be like the extraction method you mentioned in the video. The new system would be akin to a few people going out into the yard, each with a pair of scissors, cutting the dandelions and leaving the rest untouched.
Unfortunately, there's no way to extract any kind of natural resources from anywhere on the planet that won't have some sort of impact on the environment, but at least there are smarter, lower impact ways to do it, that may also help us fight climate change.
We need to incentivize using these methods, even when they're slower or more expensive than wasteful or more damaging practices.
Yeah I heard about this on the radio lab podcast. Using AI and cameras to automate the process and leaving behind the nodules that certain species of mollusk are attached to. I think this is the compromise we need and it wasn't mentioned. 😢
PREACH
Look at the share price of The Metals Company every time there's a youtube vid about the price jumps
B
@@satyris410hmm. Ya mean like this 1?
Living in the 50s must have been so nice with how ignorant we all were to environmental impact. “Oh! Wanna mine? Yes! Let’s make lots of money and build stuff to help society!”
The 50's had its issues, dw
are you serious? in the 50s it was more like: let's make a lot of money, if the miners strike we will literally shoot them
in the 1950s it was: let's make a lot of money, fortunately we can still shoot the miners in the 3rd world
Yes...mine lead and use it as a gasoline additive to prevent knocking. What could be the problem with that. Asbestos cigarette filters....on and on...
Correct until that "and build stuff to help society"
@@custos3249No. That was the goal. That has almost always been the goal. It's the same for oil and gas companies, and basically most people in the world. Everyone is the hero of their own story. People don't normally go out of their way to destroy the planet or other people. That's the realm of cartoon villains. We go out of our way to help ourselves, our friends and family and whatever other groups we identify with - normally a country or an ideological or religious movement. That's what most greed is based around - helping other people. We can get tangled in our own thoughts and goals, we can lose sight of the damage we cause or be completely ignorant of it. We can be in denial of what we've done and what we continue to do, or perhaps most normally, we can believe the price is worth the cost, that the good we gain is worth the cost we pay - sometimes (often) because that cost is distributed among a far larger and perhaps a different group, or it's just insidious or hard to understand.
Human beings are so rarely villains. We're all human, most of us try to do what we believe is right for our current situation, both for ourselves and others. It's just that we have so much trouble categorising things, people and situations. We think so differently, we fail to see our own flaws.
I truly believe 98% of people (on both sides of this debate) want to do the right thing. They just don't agree on what the right thing is.
On top of the biologic disruption of the benthos, there are also concerns that mining will allow carbon stored in deep sea sediments to be reintroduced into the atmosphere. It is important to keep in mind that the ocean is the largest carbon sink.
Imagine a company could give a deadline to an international coalition.
Lol, that's the power big international companies have. It's polite of the Canadians to wait if the ISA can get their act together. United States have not ratified the treaty, so American companies may just start mining.
This is absolutely bonkers, categorically unethical and exceedingly unfair to most countries of the world. Unless every nation gets an equal share of the deposit, NO mining should commence in the Area. Period.
Imagine thinking you own the ocean cause your an elite regulatory body.
@@thatWanderingSoul Why should everyone get a share? And how big is the share, based on the amount of population? Let's say so, then China and India would get a bigger share. Vatican or Somalia would also get a share, but what are they going to do with it, without any industry to put it to good use? So they are just going to sell it to... China or India again. So what's the point?
@@thatWanderingSouloh shush, thats even stupider than mining all of it. The world isn't equal and of course the handful of nations with the ability to mine will be the ones to benefit.
If anyone has looked at the mining machines that go underwater, it looks exactly like the Spice Harvester's from Dune. Life really does imitate fiction at times.
Harley Phan, Fiction is life at this point. contagion or is cogestion. the tv show looks exactly like the c19 pandemic era and it was made a few years earlier only
at times? i'd say most of the time.
thats funny, the first time I heard someone say this was about the Hughes Glomar Explorer.
But in the end that was also just a coverup.
I doubt these ones are real...
Lol that's hilarious, the irony...
The spice must flow
As an enviromental scientist (my day job as it were), this is one of the many "rock and a hard place" scenarios we run into. Obviously, electric cars are not the solution, we really need public transit not cars, but we still need much more batteries to not use fossil fuels reguardless. China is in one of the worst spots in this problem, as need the green energy sector for their economy, and thus need metals, but getting those metals will utterly destroy already very depleted wild seafood stocks, an essential protein that the country has been economically and culturally reliant on for thousands of years. Because of economic incentives, deep sea mining will almost certainly happen (regulated and legal or not), so most likely we will have to prepare for major seafood shortages in the future, and potentially millions of deaths due to malnourisment.
also why do u need metals and cobalt to solve climate change? dont you realize co2 has a half life of 120 years? it hasnt even been enough time for all the legacy industrial revolution co2 to begin dropping off the chart. what would actually solve climate change without needing 6x as much metals is having 1-2 kids instead of pumping out 6 and then those 6 pump out another 6. thats over population and the reason were in a crisis atm. too many people too fast is our sole reason.
I thought the point was that this one zone - small in relation to the oceans as a whole - has the entire unmet need. I understand overfishing is already a problem. So isn't farmed protein sources, whether animal or vegetable, the future as world population expands. I think wild seafood as a contestant in the end of the human race sweepstakes is pretty far down the list.
🙏
China is the world's largest fossil fuel user, not because it needs that much fossil fuel but BECAUSE using more fossil fuels makes their products cheaper against other producers.
@@owenwilson25 It's mainly due to the cheap labor, not energy source used. Even in Europe there are countries that are using similar amount of fossil fuels (percentage wise) and their products aren't as cheap due to better compensation for workers. Profiteering is another issue
I research deep-sea coral communities and this is devastating. Corals love hard substrates like rocks to live on so this could have horrific impacts. Benthic communities are full of life that is completely destroyed when a giant dulldozer comes In to scoop rocks (but realistically everything) up.
CORALS can ONLY survive at 3 to 20m of sea level. Once below 30m it is JUST ...... DARK SPACE as little lights gets thru. Without light .... CORALS, PLANTS, FISHES, live will not survive. More worrying is the FUKUSHIMA Radioactive Release of Water into the Oceans. Perhaps on day ,,,, Fishes are so badly poison that is s TOO late. Yet .... NONE of the WESTERN MEDIA made any NEWS about it ! Talk about DOUBLE standards !!!!!
Like they care about anything else other than money 😅
So alternatively, we should use oil and gas products until a different alterative not using these metals is found. (because that IS the only other realistic, not daydreaming, alternative)
Isn't this at the bottom of the ocean? No where near light?
so there are corals at the abyssal depths? wow, learn something new every day
The world needs these metals. Its between hurting the sea and having the world burn. Ill pick horrific sea damage over climate change any day.
Fantastic coverage, animation, and explanation! Thanks, Vox!
Yup 👍 we love Vox
😢😢
INFORMATION IS FALSE. PRESIDENT OBAMA EXTENDED THE NORTHERN TERRITORIES OF HAWAI'I BY 1000 MILES, AS AN EXCLUSIVE NATURE PRESERVE.
fairty shallow coverage no? To me I feelI do not have enough information for or against
No! the map of mines is completely wrong China sits on the main mines with these rare earths and the map shows the opposite. This is the reason "the west" is willing to annihilate the ocean floor; just so we are not dependent on China
Considering that 70% of the surface area of our planet is ocean, it follows that most of the world is seabed and that perhaps most of its inhabitants live there. Many climate systems rely on ocean currents and the giantness of the ocean to work. Life itself exists because of water and the ocean.
Let's hope we don't dig too deep, as I'm sure it is inevitable someone(s) will start digging, and probably already have in other areas.
Hardly anything lives on the seabed. The majority of sea life lives within the first few hundred meters from the surface.
@@lysolmaxyes but we cannot know what would happen if we dig up the sea bed. What could the plumes of sea floor debris do? It’s to risky
@@lysolmaxdid you not see the video? There are plenty of species living on the seabed
@@tonynixonmavely9753 The amount of biomass far away from the shores is very sparse, almost barren due to the fact that food sources are extremely limited there compared to the coastal areas. On the other hand we have unique species who could persever in those harsh conditions nevertheless and are essentially endangered right from the get-go just from the nature of their environment.
most ocean life is at the surface of the water and within the first 100 ish meters, the abyssal plains are not devoid of life but they are also not abundant, think of them as... deserts?
Digging for MORE natural resources in this way is just maddening.. IT WILL HAVE CONSEQUENCES!
As an Artist, i deeply Appreciated the music choices for the context, etc... it is something that requiring a passionate process. Shoutout for the Vox Team Always
This just screams for massive (environmental) problems.
And if we don't do it, it will scream for massive (environmental) problems. Conundrum yay.
@@coondog7934
We can hypothetically stop using fossil fuels tomorrow then switch to clean energy and would change the future temperate by 1 degree at best ad this the process would never work. Bottom Line I’m not against clean energy but the climate changes from time to time on earth and the damage is already done now it time to protect the coastal populations from the impact. Don’t put much faith in those domesday sea rise projections because we simple he no idea what rise will be and they just want to scare you.
You're right let's continue to use oil.
I am SO tired of hypocritical environmentalists, who hold signs for net-zero, but then hold signs for no mining of metals, who then hold signs for no nuclear, who then hold signs..... and on and on and on...ANY ANSWERS?
Ong but what other options people have though. Even though obtaining metal causes environmental impact, it's much better than using oil.
I don't know how mining regulations are always so loose. One solution could be to have strict regulations regarding the extraction, so first plooms are minimized, noise and light emissions of the operations are regulated.. I mean we will permanently erase certain species through this still but also keep others alive. I think it is also naive to think that rare metals are primarily mined to efficiently prevent a climate crisis, so there has to be regulation that sets that as a clear target
also why do u need metals and cobalt to solve climate change? dont you realize co2 has a half life of 120 years? it hasnt even been enough time for all the legacy industrial revolution co2 to begin dropping off the chart. what would actually solve climate change without needing 6x as much metals is having 1-2 kids instead of pumping out 6 and then those 6 pump out another 6. thats over population and the reason were in a crisis atm. too many people too fast is our sole reason.
The mining in that zone will never take place. As soon as I saw that america was not part of the treaty- it’s few hundred miles away from Hawaii and the sky above that sea is already controlled by USA via the FAA (internationally recognized). So there is 0% chance that another country will be mining in there without USA trying to stop it or trying to exploit it.
They’re loose because the mining companies buy their way to making it loose and the public doesn’t care enough to counterbalance that, not too complicated unfortunately
@@Amalingyup, the old support the companies and the young doesn't care or aren't informed enough. Even if they were informed, there's not much they can do to protest it.
Look up regulatory capture. Happened to the USA in their food department, their transportation department, and latest, education
Thank you for this eye opener. This just a bit unsettling to know how these companies will go above and beyond to get their way, regardless of the long term consequences we’ll end up paying for.
I donated today for the first time to a TH-cam contributor VOX because I believe in the journalism principles and hard work being dedicated to educating the world on issues we simply don't have time or the resources to investigate ourselves. Thank you. VOX team and keep up the good work.
You just donated to CNN as they own Vox
If the past is prologue, this could be an unmitigated ecological disaster.
Do your part by throwing away all your electronics.
@@michaelhutchings6602 Do you part by not using any electronics.
@@michaelhutchings6602 very intelligent response
@@michaelhutchings6602why are YOU using them then?
@@michaelhutchings6602 You first lol
Renewables do NOT require Nickel or Cobalt for renewables; for Power grid scale electrical storage we can use old fashion Iron-Salt batteries , they are heavy but have virtually unlimited recharge capacity and are totally recyclable. There just isn't as much money for energy companies unless they can sell some new chemistry/design that they hold a patent for.
There's more money in a sale that happens than one that doesn't. If these batteries are so viable and cheap, you'd be able to bid for the same contracts and come out WAY ahead. So go ahead and do it.
If it was as easy as some guy on TH-cam wrote a comment, i tell you the companies would do it...
@@SqueakyNebbut the deals are done, it's just a more long-run investment cycle.
You do realize just how much energy there is going to be? Those old batteries wouldn’t but a dent in it without an excessive amount of batteries
that was so informational. I bet it took a lot of time to research and create this video. Thank you so much! I will be sharing this information with my middle school students!
0:15 The sea floor at it's deepest is 11km. Nothing is thousands of miles below the surface of the ocean.
yeah I think she meant to say thousands of feet
I've told you a billion times, I never exaggerate.
She could be still right, though =) There could be some minerals thousands of miles below the surface of the oceans. Below the earth's crust not on the seabed.
@@Mackcolak-xf5bk The problem is that she said "on its SEA FLOOR", and didn't include the concept of drilling/mining down below the sea floor. Yes, it could be poor wording.
Glad they saw your comment and thanked you for catching that. "It's the largest livable space on our planet, and there's more life there than anywhere else on Earth. Consider the size of the ocean. Its surface area is about 360 million square kilometers (139 million square miles), and its average depth is 3,682 meters (12,080 feet). Throughout these depths, there is life."
Multinational mining companies searching the seabed for essential metals for the progression of human kind ….. what could possibly go wrong?
This is heartbreaking. Deep sea vents are incredibly fragile. I hope this never happens.
Too late, it most probably will. The calculations you see of how much metals we'll need is if we continue business as usual . That is do everything for profit, generate tremendous waste and superficial use, and to continue having an expanding growth-based economy.
I hope this happens sooner and faster, otherwise every fragile environment on earth will be destroyed by greenhouse gases. The ones refusing to make sacrifices are their own kind of evil.
@@ObjectsInMotion sooner and faster is redundant 🧐
@@zachapplegate9534 while they are similar, they are not redundant, especially in this case where the mining hasn’t actually started yet.
“This job can be done in 2 years and we can start in 2025 so expect 2027”
“I want it done sooner” “ok we’ll start in 2024 but it’ll still take two years so expect 2026”
“I want it done faster” “ok we still won’t be able to start until 2025 but we’ll do it in a year so expect 2026”
“Sooner and faster!” “Okay done by 2025 it is!”
@@ObjectsInMotionhow about you make the real sacrifice, economics, by buying products that use metals from asteroids and not earth
one time, one of my professors told me this:
„no matter how much the resources we had, at the end the issue wasn’t about how to utilize for greater good at all.
the main issue was, how to teach future generations to be able to live with so much limitations,
because we (human) already digging too much that resources until nothing left to hide.“
after watching this video, i guess i understand now what he meant.
Humans: We f**ked up the forests
Humans: We f**ked up the land
Humans: We f**ked up the air
Humans: We f**ked up the climate
Humans: We need to unf**k the situation. Let's f**k up the ocean
Next are other planets in our solar system, beginning with the moon and mars
@@stokbroodthat should be the ideal. No life we know so far exist so its basically a big planet kf resources
that's why earth should be a sanctuary planet, basically a protected preserve on a planet-wide scale. all resource extraction operations that leave permanent terraforming and ecological impacts should happen in outerspace
@@stokbrood Why do you care about inert rocks? People need somewhere to live and living in space has no environmental impact on earth.
I feel like the vacuuming up the whole surface thing is kinda... barbaric. We need a much more surgical approach to mining that deep. What I envision is autonomous subs with the tools to break the nodules of metals free from the sea floor without kicking up massive clouds of debris, and then maybe either attaching a winch and bringing them up that way, or maybe wrapping them in chains then attaching some kind of bladder that could be filled with air to cause it to float to the surface and be picked up from there. Just a couple ideas of a more precise way to go about this delicate work, that I do think we need to do in order to curb the destruction in Africa and South America currently happening.
yea i've wondered for years why they cant use baskets to bring the materials up instead of pumping it up. inflatable bladders is a good idea too. I'd think it would require far less fuel use onbehalf of the mothership which costs a fortune to run..... well see more designs as interest grows.
Thanks for covering this topic. After hearing about this a year ago I've wanted more information.
Hi Vox. Please consult or better yet confer with Aurore Stéphant, French geologist on this question, perhaps for a follow-up video! I'm sure you will appreciate not only her expertise on the matter, but her perspective. CCZ is not all it's cracked up to be, it is 3X the size of India and as you might guess resources aren't evenly distributed, mining it is currently beyond our technical reach, and there remain other questions of a more fundamental nature to consider in this project.
I'm just waiting for them to dig too deep and unleash some slumbering Eldritch beast that will wipe out all of humany
dont jinx it
Marine methane clathrates?
@@Flex-xl3ty Don't they form mostly in shallow waters though.
Thank you for spoting the light on this subject
Mashallah ! important but scary still.
_Don't say it, don't say it, don't say it..._
"Rock and Stone!"
This is such a scary notion that rich nations will largely use all the resources overtime while poor, incapable countries will remain poor and will fight its way through long beauraucracy
But of course since this will happen at the bottom of a sea in the middle of nowhere, ecological devastation will be hidden away 🤷♂.
It will come to the surface in a few years, after destroying the foundations for surface marine ecosystems, which rely on marine life from the deep sea)
There's no ecology down there that matters. I don't eat the animals that live on the bottom of the ocean, so why should I care?
great video, very knowledgeable. thank you for producing and sharing
Spectacular video. This was very serious and insightful. Thank you very much.
This would also give those countries and companies ideas to check other parts of the ocean to exploit those natural resources. About half of the oxygen comes from our ocean so eventually this will yield to more global calamity since we have almost destroyed the land base resources.
yup
If every source of oxygen disappeared tomorrow, the earth's oxygen concentration would drop bo 0.007% per year.
Humans would start to encounter health effects after a little over 200 years
Actually it would be a fair bit longer: a significant percentage of oxygen uptake is plants, and if they aren't producing oxygen, they also aren't using it. If there aren't any plants, there aren't going to be many animals either, because they will starve, so oxygen consumption drops further.
This "X makes our oxygen so it's important" is just something people who haven't done the maths say.
Remove all the plants and every animal other than humans (fed on what?), and we'd start to have health problems in... About 25 thousand years.
Great explainer video. One thing I do wish you'd mentioned is that the need for these metals to help us decarbonize is not a given. There are other strategies that can help us fight climate change that don't require a huge increase in mining, those strategies are just more of a challenge. And it's usually a political challenge more than a scientific or engineering challenge.
As if we actually need 69420% more battery production. The world is moving from one mafia industry to another.
So many problems could be solved if everyone just adopted nuclear power, forgot about cars and adopted large scale public transportation such as trains. If money is put into it, we could solve all of its major problems (slow speed, infrequency, non-electrified railways, lack of rail infrastructure).
Pretty much this.
Though i should add that there is significant interest in mining (precious) metals outside of renewable energy
one of the best produced videos on this subject, and I’ve seen several by this point
Clearly haulting all mining effort will be extremely difficult if not impossible at this point. What was made clear by this video was how effective research is in mitigating the desatorous effects of this mining. how might we (as the public, concerned viewers) best support those research efforts?
rather interesting how instead of mining on land and using better environmental and sustainable practices, which we know about
companies want to mine the ocean floor where all we know about the environmental impact is that it would be way worse
im starting to think it was never about the environment
Here in Switzerland we could be making solar panels mandatory on roofs where the infrastructure is already existing, but energy companies are pushing to open up alpine regions and especially areas protected in the last two decades. Opening these areas up under pressure from climate change will likely get the support from the population. Imagine if these energy companies weren't producers anymore but merely facilitators for everyone owning a roof. Preposterous!
thank you vox! keep it up, tough times will go through!
I have seen a few videos on this topic but no one seems to point out the clipperton island which is in this area and is part of France so they have an exclusive economic zone in this area
Thank you for the documentary .it's well detailed
Countries should only be allowed to perform comercial operations on their national waters.
All international waters should be considered a natural reserve. Current human-centric policy is destroying the environment.
is this 3 miles, 12 miles or 300 miles
200 nautic miles @@seandepagnier
@@silvinho5860 600 if your china - because reasons.
Humans make human centric decisions, caring more about the well being of humans than the environment.
Maybe we should stop being hypocryts, admit the environment is a nice bonus, but we don't care that much.
thats like saying you need food, and its 20 feet away from you, but its too far so you wont get up.
So glad you covered this topic.. Thank you, Vox!
i like how the end message of the video had to be "wEve gOt tO sOlve ouR cLimAte cRisIs"
This is such an amazing and informative video
We don't need more metals. We could just work less.
Let the people and the planet rest!
Planned obsolescence should be illegal!
Recycle more!!
Mine the garbage dumps!!
No more evictions!
Price caps on all healthcare!!
Property ownership caps!
lower dependency on corporations.
You can make flour out of acorns
Animal horns are pliable when heated. It was what we used before plastic
You can make lenseless glasses by poking needle sized holes in basically anything. Ive been using cut up egg carton bits
You can eat every part of a dandelion!
Some Lichen are antibacterial and antifungal
There's a native source of caffeine on every continent
Super interesting great story. Do a follow up story about the wildlife researchers have found in the area and methods they use to do so.
Love the content the team puts together
This video is as objective and neutral as it gets, great job
been watching Vox for a few years now, since I got a job recently I feel like a few dollars per month is definitely worth spending to support you guys' reporting
Robin, aww Honey, congrats on the new job. May God bless you with more money. current economy is tricky so anyone with a well paid deserves kudos
You need to get leechpilled ASAP
Really difficult but interesting topic, where it is fascinatingly hard to say who's in the right. Very well covered.
I’d wanna thank Vox for making this video and more of such content that enlightens the people around the globe.
Having people work from home will also help. For the ones working in retail, they really have to work at their workplace. But for the ones working in offices, which is the majority, they can all work from home. That would reduce fuel consumption and electric consumption. Also, there won't be a need to build large buildings for offices. The land can be converted to a green space. Just imagine New York city w/o it's large office buildings. Oh wait, the gov't doesn't want that. It'll reduce the money politicians can pocket.
Seems like there is a solution here, and if the Metals Company really wanted to improve the environment they would propose several requirements:
- habitat remediation by substituting surface rock for the mined rock
- wildlife preserves to ensure some areas are simply never mined, or at least not mined until sufficient time has passed in mined areas (backed by independent studies) for ecosystems to recover
- caps on mining activity in any given area, with sufficient time for recovery between mining operations.
We _probably_ can have mining activity on the sea floor while minimizing ecological disruptions, but we also need to fund research groups to monitor impacts to make sure the ecological disruption is kept within safe margins. We also probably _need_ to do this mining to save the ecology of those same areas from the impacts of climate change.
Even then, while surface rocks do provide a harder surface for corals to grow, they don't have the same chemical composition that the polymetallic nodules have (especially for some of the microflora, which survive in areas with high concentrations of manganese)
Very sensible comment. One point overlooked by the video and the comments is that The Metals Company is working with scientists to provide and publish a huge amount of data on the deep sea environment and the impacts of mining. For those of us who don't want to live in the Stone Age, we can at least work of a full set of facts to let us minimise and mitigate our impacts on the natural world.
Disclosure - I have a small personal investment in TMC, because I see this as the future.
The thing is, we dońt even know what the safe margins are! There’s little we know about how these ecosystems work, let alone how much damage we can inflict without completely losing it forever.
@@michaelr3647I will never trust any research that is done in partnership with a publicly traded company. Independent research is needed regardless of the intentions of TMC
These sort of deep sea/middle of nowhere ocean areas are BY FAR more impacted by habitat destruction and overfishing than climate change. I’m telling you this as an ecologist and conservation biologist, this is not to say climate change isn’t an issue it’s a gigantic issue but if you care about glaciers melting yes climate change is the main big factor. But if you care about ecology all the main historical culprits, not climate change, are way way way more important for the future of ecosystems. It’s unfortunate how much our field and the media have failed in communicating this concept, making you believe that last statement is real. Your last sentence is just false, this seabed would almost certainly fare better if the resources were not extracted and global temperatures were whatever decimal of a degree higher
If this goes ahead, ISA should develop clauses where the resources will be directed towards climate action or developing countries. I don't want to further destroy the earth to feed our consumerism.
Wow! Great video! Seems like a topic that gets overlooked in conventional media but is important to our future!
The seabed is one of the last truly pristine locations on the earth, nearly untouched by human activities. This level of industrial mining can and will destroy this delicate ecosystem that we barely understand.
OK. Hope you're prepared to have your electricity turned off at 9pm in 2040.
Here's a radical idea: instead of using the metals that are still untapped, why not try and set up a recycling system and reuse the metals that has already been thrown away? Like those in old cars, fridges and phones.
Battery recycling has made tremendous headway lately, but is still a lossy process. Unfortunately, most of our materials cannot be recycled in infinitum, not yet at least. We're getting there, but until it's more expensive to mine these materials than it is to recycle, the market won't care.
Won't hit the 2050 deadline
I don't understand why they HAVE TO use such destructive methods just to pick up rocks on the seabed, are robotic grabbers not enough?
Look into and perhaps you will understand better. I agree that less invasive/desctructive methods could be designed (liekly already are in development). the truth is that on the scale these companies want to mine there is no way to do it without disturbing the seabed to some degree. The method shown in this video just so happens to be (relatively) easy and quick without requiring some innovative new technology. Ideally I could see a slower method using magnets to lift the mettalic nodules whilst the mining machine glides over the floor like a manta ray. Who knows what will happen in the end...
what will they do if its underground though? scrape at the rock with a tiny metal arm for 50 years before you actually reach the metal?
Excellent research and production. Thank you for sharing this issue with us and for raising awareness to protect our lovely planet 🌍
amazingly made. good work Vox
Would be interesting to hear about some alternatives like asteroid mining, which will require continued investment into space exploration. Unrelated to alternatives to resource gathering, is how can we reduce use of these needed metals. For example, if people used their smart phones for 5 years rather than 1-2 (whatever the average is), how would that help reduce our need for these resources.
Not until the phone companies like Apple stop purposefully making their phones have a lifespan of 1-2 years so people will buy more phones earlier.
The question is that we don't consider, is how do we get the minerals down to Earth? It's delicate enough to get crews back down from the ISS without them crashing into the sea, or worse, an inhabited area.
its not really risky, weve been doing it for decades now we have it figured out for the most part. if we couldnt figure out how to get a tiny capsule down to the surface, do you really think we would already be making landable, reusable inhabited rockets?@@ryanartward
Dig up forests. Or: Stop everyone from needing metals (recycling is not enough).
Even if we could somehow do asteroid mining in the short term, that has its own pollution.
There is no free ride, you can't just grow metals. You need to mine somewhere. Nobody is saying destroy the ocean, there is a balance. But completely destroy the land, forest, animals so that we can keep the ocean pristine? And is the ocean already not being messed with from rising temps, pollution, sound pollution etc.
Everything that is most important to us is on the land and the world is mostly ocean, if something has to be mined seems like ocean is better. Especially if its just a vacuum?
People keep talking about corals, do corals grow that deep?
But what about the sensitive alien ecosystem?
So good to see this issue getting more coverage
Excellent video,animation,narration, great job...loved it!!
Canada being the equivalent of a tax haven since Steven Harper's administration, it is no surprise that the company is Canadian considering that a lot of mining company moved to Canada since they face less regulations.
The tropical rainforests(which are just as underexplored as the deep sea) contain way more complexity and biodiversity than the deep sea, thats why it is simply less damaging than land based mining in countries like Indonesia or Brazil. Also land based mining emits way more CO2
Interesting that "green" energy requires so much environmental destruction. The answer is to consume less. Reduce, reuse, repair.
After watching I understand one thing humans we are all mine anything and extract everything from each and every part of the earth.
I learnt a lot thank you Vox
Important to note: Nauru was a once-idyllic tropical island that was completely destroyed by phosphate mining.
Just wanted to say thank you for taking the time in looking up the correct pronunciation of "Kiribati". 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🇰🇮🇰🇮🇰🇮🇰🇮
Great story and demonstration👍
We spend so much money on mining and yet we have terrible terrible recycling procedures. I wonder how much of all these resources end up in the dump.
less than 5% of plastic in the United States actually gets recycled; in Canada, it's about 9%. So, recycling is pretty much a farce.
This was a fantastic video. Thank you!
You did a great job on this.
Imagine disrupting one of the last untouched habitats, silting up the oceans, destroying so much life, all because we couldn’t figure out how to go renewable without still destroying the ecosystem. Limited tests show that these habitats do not recover when disturbed, and the added disruption to marine habitats coming from this mining will do real economic damage. Deep sea mining will be completely unsustainable in the long term, but profitable in the short term, so we can already project this industries future.
This has nothing to do with going renewable. It's a profitable business idea, so somebody goes for it. Tell them they are not allowed to damage anything beyond repair, and it stops being profitable.
Alrighty. So, how do you want to get lithium and copper and cobalt?
"Thousands of miles below the surface" 0:14
Assume they meant feet
Assuming they meant metres
Really the best way to solve climate crisis is to research so that we can have clarity on what we're doing, what impacts our actions will cause. Thanks vox for great explainer!
Excellent video. A ton of greed in this equation. There's a good chance they're already mining.
Sorry to break it but Clipperton island and 200nm around it is EEZ of France. Any boat there needs a license to explore and mine. It is 435 000 square km.
I loved this video. It makes us aware of things that aren’t shown in the mainstream media.
All this shows is how reliant on energy we've become to fulfill our comforts, conveniences, and luxuries. We never stop wanting.
Will they stop it if I give my smart phone back?
okay but im sure you wouldnt be happy if someone took your phone, laptop, home, air conditioning or anything else technological
Thank You for making this informative video
Nice vid, glad you're talking about it
Battery storage for renewables should always be the last resort as there are many cleaner, safer, cheaper alternatives which should be considered first
I don't think you understand the purpose of a battery mate. It doesn't matter how clean, safe, or cheap your fuel source is if you can't tap into it when required. Batteries allow us to do this regardless of the initial energy source, and use that power even if the original source isn't producing. Grid Batteries are the number 1 way to fully take advantage of renewables.
@@sirsluginston Sir. 'Last resort' does not mean never. Just means not allowing certain parties to lobby for use of their product when a more suitable one is available (like that never happens)
@@richardh8082 What is a better technology than a battery to store excess power to be used at a later time when the source isn’t active? You claim a more suitable technology exists, what is it?
@@sirsluginston I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are either not being serious or are a Troll
@@richardh8082 Don't. I'm being serious. You said there is a more suitable product to use than a battery, so what is it?
Surely changing the method of extraction would help?
The research has been done. This is the cleanest, most environmentally friendly way for us to transition away from oil. Use your head. Read the research or watch a webinar about the recent research done on mining here.
Amazing and at the same time, extremely scaring !
The political and environmental impacts certainly make me wonder how space mining will unfold. I know it's still a far-reaching goal for mankind, but imagining a space exploration dedicated to mining resources from another planet is fascinating. The geopolitical implications and the new avenues for debate are intriguing. We are undoubtedly moving towards the possibility of colonizing space, and the collective exploration and its distant impact on people, even those not directly involved in it, sound like a plot from a science fiction movie like Dune or so 🌟
I must have war on the brain because I read the title as a different type of mine.
Hahahaha same here, I was watching Ukraine war footage then this video popped up.
Well done ! The more the public is informed about environmental set backs to degradation due to switching the to renewable energy sources the better . Is looks to be a catch 22 in the making but human engineering ingenuity will have to expand to safer extration methods to make it happen . Recycled mindset is key
Nuclear power is an overlooked partial solution to this problem, because it is far less material intensive than renewables. iIt produces energy constantly and where it’s needed, with few material consumption and few grids needed: just look at Toronto, Lyon, Zurich… All this cities get most of their electricity from nearby nuclear plants, avoiding the need for higher quantities of renewables and grids (1GW of nuclear produces contastly, while 1GW of solar will only produce about 20% of the time: you need approximately 5 times more solar installed to get the same amount of energy. This also needs way more power lines. This all drives material consumption)
Look at how well terrestrial mining has gone; what could possibly go wrong on the ocean floor as far out of sight and out of mind as anything can possibly get while still being on the planet?
Does France have any right over this because it remains in its territory?
Exactly what I thought, the area is part of the Clipperton EEZ
Wow, this is great journalism! Thank you
The need to decarbonize is more important than some ecosystems on the seafloor. The climate will always be more important than some local environment. You cannot be held up from creating a wind farm on a hill because you’d displace 5 families of foxes.
How can we decarbonize the world if we destroyed 50 percent of our oxygen source .