A number of countries are listed as having signed up for a moratorium, pause, or ban. It primarily signifies that:
- Legal structures should be in place to properly regulate deep-sea mining and
- Deep-sea mining should only occur if it can be managed in a way that ensures effective protection of the marine environment.
These principles align with the purpose of the approval processes established by regulators such as the International Seabed Authority (ISA) and other national regulators, including the Cook Islands Seabed Minerals Authority (SBMA) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM).
A key component of the regulatory process is the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), which must be approved by the regulator before any mining can commence. The EIA documents the potential impacts of a particular mining project in a particular location, and outlines prevention and mitigation measures. Based on this assessment, the ISA determines whether the net impact is acceptable and whether mining can proceed.
The similarity in the purpose of moratoriums and approval processes gives the impression that jurisdictions are saying “no” to DSM. However, this isn’t entirely accurate. Essentially, signing onto a moratorium means supporting the completion of a robust mining code—something these countries are already doing, and a goal that Impossible Metals shares.
To date, 40 countries have adopted national legislation for deep sea mining and are listed in the ISA database. See more in our blog post: What Does It Mean to Support a Deep-Sea Mining Moratorium?
