By Jessica Battle (WWF) and Johan Falk (Exponential Roadmap Initiative)

As governments meet at the International Seabed Authority Assembly this week, the conservation of our planet’s most pristine and unknown ecosystem, the deep sea, must be a paramount priority.

The deep sea, one of Earth’s last true frontiers, plays a vital yet often overlooked role in maintaining the planet’s health. Home to a vast array of unique and largely undiscovered species, it harbours ecosystems essential for global biodiversity and nutrient cycling. Beyond its ecological richness, the deep ocean is a powerful climate ally, acting as a massive carbon sink that helps regulate Earth’s temperature and slow climate change. Its extreme environments also offer exciting frontiers for science and medicine, with deep-sea organisms producing compounds that could lead to breakthroughs in biotechnology and medicine. 

As the race for minerals intensifies, the deep sea—one of Earth’s most mysterious and fragile ecosystems—finds itself in the crosshairs. Some companies and governments are eyeing the deep ocean floor as a potential source of metals for electric vehicles and renewable technologies. However, while proponents portray deep seabed mining as a “green” mining solution for the clean energy transition, the reality beneath the waves is far more troubling. Opening up the deep ocean to industrial extraction without fully understanding the consequences is a risk we cannot afford.

The Current State of Play

From an economic perspective, proponents of deep seabed mining argue that metals such as cobalt, nickel, manganese, and rare earth elements are critical for the global transition to clean energy and electric vehicles. The International Energy Agency projects that mineral requirements for clean energy technologies could quadruple by 2040 to meet the Paris climate goals. However, attempting to mine these resources from the ocean floor is a proposition fraught with uncertainty. The economic viability is unproven, and the environmental cost is almost certain to be irreversible harm to deep-sea ecosystems and the services they provide.

Politically, pressure is mounting around this issue. The International Seabed Authority (ISA) – the body tasked both with regulating deep-sea mining in international waters and with ensuring protection of the marine environment – faces competing demands. A “two-year rule,” invoked in 2021 by Nauru, requires the ISA to consider mining permit applications by mid-2023 even in the absence of agreed-upon exploitation regulations. In response, a growing number of nations are urging restraint. France, Germany, Chile, Palau and others are among 37 countries that have formally called for a precautionary pause, moratorium, or ban on deep-sea mining. This coalition insists that the world should not rush into exploiting the deep seabed without stronger scientific evidence and regulatory safeguards. 

On the social front, the risks are equally profound. Indigenous communities, civil society organisations, and a growing portion of the public are voicing grave concerns about the loss of biodiversity, potential harm to fisheries, and the inequitable distribution of any benefits. Voices from ocean-dependent states – such as Fiji and Palau – and Indigenous Peoples around the world stress their deep cultural and ecological ties to ocean health, warning against repeating the mistakes of destructive extractive industries on land. Even the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the environment, Astrid Puentes Riaño, has stressed that degradation of the ocean threatens humanity, exacerbates inequalities, and disproportionately affects marginalised populations. In other words, ocean destruction isn’t just an environmental issue – it’s fundamentally a human rights issue. 

Meanwhile, a significant and growing segment of the business community is also aligning with calls for caution. Many forward-looking companies are wary of the risks and reputational damage associated with deep-sea mining. Over 65 companies and financial institutions have publicly pledged not to source minerals from the deep seabed and have endorsed a moratorium on deep-sea mining. This list of concerned businesses includes major manufacturers and tech firms – for example, BMW Group, Volvo Group, Samsung SDI, and Google were among the first to back WWF’s call for a moratorium. Their commitment not only shrinks the potential market for deep-sea minerals but also sends a clear signal that industry leaders prefer sustainable alternatives over a reckless venture into the unknown. Additionally, a group of 40 financial institutions, representing over EUR 3.8 trillion of combined assets, reissued a joint statement urging governments to protect the ocean and not go ahead with deep-seabed mining (DSM), furthering the signs of concern across markets around the world.

The Case for Caution: A Science-Based Approach

The case for a moratorium on deep seabed mining is firmly rooted in science and the principle of precaution. The deep sea (areas below 200 meters) remains one of the least explored regions on Earth – most of the deep ocean floor has never been observed directly. Each scientific expedition uncovers new species, habitats, and processes that challenge our understanding of life on Earth. Disturbances from seabed mining could destroy ecosystems that took millions of years to form, eradicate species found nowhere else, and even disrupt the planet’s largest carbon sink. These impacts would be irreversible on human timescales, meaning once damage is done, it will not heal in any timeframe meaningful to our society. 

Scientific evidence is already sounding alarms. A recent long-term study of a deep-sea mining test site provides a stark warning. In 1979, a small-scale test of mining equipment plowed the seafloor in the Pacific’s Clarion-Clipperton Zone. Over 44 years later, the affected sites still exhibit significant ecological alterations. Large, slow-growing creatures like sponges and corals remain scarce in the disturbed tracks, showing little to no recovery even after four decades. Only some smaller mobile organisms have begun to recolonise, and even those only partially; many fauna groups have not returned to their former abundance. In short, there is no evidence that the deep-sea life removed or disrupted has fully come back, even after half a century. 

This underscores that any mining-induced damage would effectively be permanent from our point of view. It is no surprise, then, that the scientific community is urging extreme caution. Over 950 marine science and policy experts from more than 70 countries have signed a statement calling for a pause in the development of deep-seabed mining. 

They point to the gaping holes in our knowledge of deep-sea biology and ecology, and the inability at present to assess cumulative impacts of mining on ocean systems. Without comprehensive baseline data, long-term monitoring, and proven restoration methods (none of which currently exist), proceeding with deep seabed mining is an irresponsible gamble. As the experts’ statement notes, the paucity of scientific information means the risks to deep-ocean biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, and even human well-being “cannot be fully understood” at this time. In their view, any move to open the deep sea to mining should be paused until sufficient and robust science has informed decision-makers whether such mining can occur without significant harm – and if so, under what strict conditions. In plain terms, science has spoken clearly: we are not ready, and until we are, the only responsible course is to press pause.

Building an Alternative: Circularity and Sustainable Innovation

Rather than opening a risky new industrial frontier in the deep sea, we must first make better use of the resources we already have on land. Emerging research and real-world trends show that the supposed “need” for deep-ocean minerals can be averted by innovations in technology, recycling, and circular design. A new analysis by the SINTEF research institute, The Future is Circular: Circular Economy and Critical Minerals for the Green Transition, offers a comprehensive look at how smarter resource strategies can sharply reduce demand for virgin minerals. It finds that through technological innovation and circular economy practices (like recycling and reuse), demand for key transition minerals can be reduced by between 20% and 58% by 2050. 

In particular, new battery and material technologies could cut the need for certain minerals by ~30% overall, with 40–50% reductions for cobalt, nickel, and manganese – by moving to alternatives such as solid-state batteries and iron-phosphate chemistry. Even rare earth element demand could be lowered by about 20% through tech innovation. On top of that, circular economy measures (product life extension, better collection and recycling) could provide an additional ~18% demand reduction. In fact, by 2050, it’s plausible that all new mineral demand could be met through a circular economy approach, without needing to mine new ores. 

These findings bust the myth that we must ravage the deep sea to obtain minerals for the green transition – we have smarter, safer options. 

Around the world, innovative models of mineral circularity are already proving that we can meet the growing demand for critical materials without resorting to environmentally destructive practices like deep-seabed mining. In the automotive sector, for example, Renault Group has announced an ambitious circular economy strategy. The company is developing closed-loop systems for electric vehicle batteries, aiming for 70% of the materials in its new EV batteries to come from recycled sources by 2030 (a bold commitment that both reduces pressure on raw mineral supply and cuts waste). 

Tech giant Apple provides another compelling example: in its 2025 Environmental Progress Report, Apple highlighted major strides in using recycled materials. In 2024, 24% of the material in all Apple products was recycled content, with the MacBook Air leading the pack at 55% recycled material content. Apple is on track to meet its 2025 targets of using 100% recycled rare earth elements in all magnets and 100% recycled cobalt in all Apple-designed batteries  – as of early 2025 they have already reached 99% toward those goals. These initiatives have real environmental payoffs: Apple estimates that using recycled and renewable materials in 2024 avoided 6.2 million metric tons of emissions that would have been generated by using virgin materials. 

In short, recycling and materials innovation are not only technically feasible, but make economic and environmental sense – and leading companies are investing heavily in them. Policy is also catching up with innovation. The European Union recently adopted a landmark EU Batteries Regulation (in force as of 2023) that will significantly reduce reliance on newly mined minerals. Among its provisions, the regulation requires minimum levels of recycled content in new batteries by 2031 – at least 16% recycled cobalt, 6% lithium, and 6% nickel in each battery, with even higher targets by 2036. It also sets very high recovery rates for battery materials (e.g. 90–95% recovery of cobalt, nickel, copper, and lead from battery waste by 2031). 

These measures will ensure that a growing share of battery minerals comes from recycling loops rather than fresh extraction, thereby substantially cutting demand for virgin mining by the mid-2030s. Likewise, other jurisdictions and industry coalitions are developing standards to promote battery recycling, reuse, and material substitution. All these efforts demonstrate that a more sustainable, regenerative approach to resource use is not only possible – it’s already happening. By prioritising circular economy solutions, we can drive the clean energy transition and safeguard natural ecosystems at the same time.

Our call:

In light of the above, we urge the following actions:

• Governments: Enact and support a global pause on deep-seabed mining, and invest in circular economy solutions. No deep-sea mineral extraction should go ahead until the environmental, social, and economic risks are fully understood and it can be proven, based on sound science, that no harm will be done to the marine environment or human well-being. In addition, all alternatives to mining the deep sea (improving recycling, efficiency, substitution, and responsible terrestrial mining) must be thoroughly explored first. Until these conditions are met, nations should work through the ISA to agree on a global moratorium on deep seabed mining and prevent the opening of the fragile deep ocean to industrial exploitation.

   

• Companies: Commit publicly to avoiding deep-sea minerals in your supply chains. We call on businesses to join the growing cohort of companies that have pledged not to source any minerals from the deep sea, nor to finance deep-sea mining activities. By signing on to the global business statement for a moratorium on deep seabed mining, companies can send an ever stronger market signal that they will not purchase minerals obtained at the expense of ocean health. Already, dozens of major companies – including leaders in automotive, tech, and financial sectors – have signed this pledge underlining that a pause on deep-sea mining is both an environmentally responsible and commercially viable stance. More businesses must add their voice, upping the pressure on governments to keep the deep ocean off-limits and instead channel investment into a circular minerals economy that meets our needs without jeopardising the oceans (while also reducing the strain on nature from mining on land).
• All stakeholders: Work together to build a circular economy that reduces the need for new resource extraction. A more circular economy, with high collection and recycling rates and smarter product design, is both possible and necessary for all critical minerals. Embracing circularity presents a win-win opportunity: businesses can unlock new value from recovered materials, access new markets and green investment funds, and innovate new services and products, all while cutting costs and supply risks. Meanwhile, society benefits from reduced pollution and conservation of natural ecosystems. Policymakers must do their part by enacting regulations and incentives that motivate and support companies to adopt these innovative approaches to meeting their resource needs. The evidence is clear that strategies based on circularity and technological innovation can provide viable alternatives to risky extraction projects. By redirecting our collective ingenuity toward better resource efficiency, we can supply the green transition and preserve the integrity of our planet.

The deep sea holds mysteries that may someday save humanity – from new medicines to insights into climate resilience – but only if we leave it intact. The time to choose a wiser path is now.