[Text/Observer Network Wang Yi] The United States has been at odds over whether to mine the seabed. Five days after U.S. President Trump ignored opposition and signed an executive order allowing seabed mining, the U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on the matter on April 29 local time.

Some mining executives and Republicans at the hearing praised Trump's executive order, claiming that it is crucial for breaking China's dominance in the field of critical minerals.

"The Trump administration has been making relentless efforts to release America's natural resources and restore our country's energy and mineral revenues," said Paul Gosar, a Republican representative from Arizona. "Nothing could make our rivals, such as China, happier than slowing down America's progress."

Arizona Republican Representative Paul Gosar Video Screenshot

Since returning to the White House for a hundred days, Trump has indeed been plotting the world's mineral resources. He pressured Ukraine to hand over $50 billion worth of rare earth minerals to pay for American military aid; he sought control of Greenland, eyeing its vast ice-covered area with its rich untapped mineral reserves; he invoked emergency wartime powers to plan an increase in the production of critical minerals and rare earths in the United States.

On April 24, he also signed an executive order to develop critical minerals and resources in U.S. offshore areas to revitalize America's dominance in seabed mining and counter China's influence in this field.

According to a report by the South China Morning Post on April 30, China currently controls about 60% of the global output of critical minerals, 90% of processing, and 75% of manufacturing. Many potato-sized polymetallic nodules containing key minerals such as nickel, cobalt, and manganese have been found on the seabed, becoming a tool for the U.S. to break China's control over key minerals.

At the hearing on April 24, Gerard Barron, CEO of Canadian Metals Company, also "praised" Trump's "leadership," stating that they had specially placed a polymetallic nodule on his desk.

Barron claimed, "China dominates the critical mineral processing sector on land, and seabed mining will clearly become one of their core strategies," adding that "the U.S. is at a critical juncture where it can play a leading role in this field."

The company attempted to instill the idea in the House Committee on Natural Resources that the economic benefits brought by seabed mining to the U.S. outweigh the damage to marine ecosystems, enabling the U.S. to break China's dominance in the critical mineral supply chain. The metal company claims they have conducted ten years of costly environmental research to support this conclusion.

According to estimates by the U.S. Geological Survey, the nodules in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone in the eastern Pacific contain more nickel, cobalt, and manganese than all land-based reserves combined. This area, located between Mexico and Hawaii, covers an area approximately half the size of the continental United States.

Polymetallic Nodules NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)

However, the company's arguments were quickly debunked by scientists and Democrats at the hearing. They argued that the technology required for operations at depths of 13,000 feet (approximately 3,960 meters) or deeper has not yet been approved, and such actions would be neither economical nor environmentally friendly.

Representative Maxine Dexter of Oregon criticized, "We don't need to flatten the seabed to power our future clean energy." Trump's executive order is undemocratic and appeases vested interests.

"The economic argument is just an illusion. The financial risks are enormous, and the impact on ecosystems, fisheries, indigenous communities, and our local climate cannot be ignored," Dexter stated.

Others pointed out that implementing these projects would take years, if not decades. Meanwhile, advancements in mineral recycling technologies are also progressing, which can significantly reduce demand for various minerals such as nickel, cobalt, copper, and manganese. For instance, Tesla, Elon Musk's electric vehicle manufacturing company, has halved the amount of nickel and cobalt in its electric vehicles in recent years. This suggests that humanity may not need to produce so many new minerals in the future.

"This is a subsidy-driven plunder," Jared Huffman, a Democratic representative from California, criticized. "We should not pursue this reckless fantasy but instead expand known effective solutions—batteries, innovation, recycling, infrastructure, product redesign—to build a true circular economy, ensuring continuous material use and protecting the integrity of ecosystems." He noted that some electric vehicle manufacturers have begun producing batteries without cobalt and nickel.

All along, the general consensus in the international community has been that economic interests should not supersede environmental risks. Seabed mining could potentially harm fisheries and marine food chains and affect the ocean's critical role in absorbing carbon dioxide.

The Washington Post previously mentioned that current seabed mining activities have been banned. The EU, Russia, China, and 167 other countries are trying to reach agreements on how to regulate such activities. However, due to the U.S. not ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, it does not have voting rights.

The 1994 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea stipulates that each country has exclusive economic rights within 200 nautical miles of its coast, but international waters are under the jurisdiction of the International Seabed Authority (ISA). ISA has the authority to regulate the extraction of seabed resources in international waters. According to the institution's regulations, deep-sea mining cannot commence until mining licenses are issued. This means that if there is no legislation, mining companies cannot begin deep-sea mining.

Trump's executive order, which defies international opinion by allowing mining companies to mine the seabed, has faced unanimous opposition and condemnation from the international community. Greenpeace previously criticized it as a slap in the face of international cooperation and an insult to multilateralism.

Lisa Levin, an oceanographer at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, warned that ecosystems are crucial to global cycles, enriching the oceans and nurturing fish and shellfish to provide food for humans. All these ecosystems are interconnected, and if one system is damaged, the consequences could be unpredictable.

A RAND Corporation report on April 29 also cautioned that seabed mining might violate international law and isolate the United States.

The report stated that if the U.S. proceeds, including China, other countries will be encouraged to take similar actions and engage in seabed mining in international waters. The "geopolitical consequences" of the U.S. taking the lead in mining could be catastrophic, exacerbating disputes and even potentially triggering conflicts.

This article is an exclusive piece by the Observer Network and cannot be reprinted without permission.

Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7498980507464499775/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author. You are welcome to express your opinions by clicking the 'Like' or 'Dislike' buttons below.