The question of Metallic Nodules being removed from the sands under the seas, so as not to harm seabed inhabitants, is interesting to us in International Business. We ask, how many qualified damage assessments are made wherever a gas or oil core drill holes are dug in any ocean of the world? Are not the nearby fauna displaced by the drilling activity nearby? One might even think that the removal of manganese nodules, for example, which will be ‘quickly’ replaced by the same chemical actions which created them, is less invasive than drilling large pipes thousand of feet into seabeds [and their remaining in place for eons].
One may assume the great ocean currents of the world, in terms of: Variety of seaborn minerals transported; Levels of Oxygen transmitted; Variations of water temperatures; and Strengths of water current are all more encompassing to life in the seas than fauna on the ground. If this is indeed the case, then one can argue that “Seabeds are more ‘dynamic'” than critics of Seabed Mining admit. Seabeds can recover from nodule removal in the dynamic environment in which they reside.
Many people think that Governmental bureaucracies needing more time to evaluate the world oceans [362 million square kilometers (140 million square miles)] is surreptitious scheming and scamming at best. ‘Bureaucratic Inefficiencies’ are well known around the world. It is inherent in their makeups. Left to those government ‘Chaps’, decades upon decades will lead to conclusions of ‘nothingness’ having been achieved [they will have earned many paychecks though]. Has land-based mining been scrutinized to the same level as ‘Nodule Mining’ by these bureaucrats? “No”, are our opinions. Perhaps the ‘bleakness’ of land areas where much land-mining is performed is the reason? Ask the governments’ bureaucrats. Just look at ‘Lithium’ mining around the world, for a start.
A more logical proposition is: Commence “Seabed Nodule Mining” in specific ‘limited-size’ areas of the world’s oceans and review ‘significant changes’ if any thereafter. Investigate values of seabed remediation, following mining activities. Certainly, where the aforementioned gas/oil drilling has been taking place for decades, in many areas of the world, comparisons can be made as to any untoward effects in the seabeds.
We think that the ready availability of mining metals in the ocean has a financial viability few land-based areas can match [Afghanistan, North Korea, Siberia, and Venezuela are exceptions [as they abound in certain mineralizations]. Some of the profits from the seabed mining could go to Oceanographic Institutes for fauna/flora development in seabeds. The great wealth lying on seabeds is a great draw for commerce. ‘Conscientious Capitalists’ who engage in ‘Nodule Mining’ can benefit: Citizens of seaside countries, Seabeds located therein, and certainly themselves for the investment risks taken.
‘Corporate Fashionability’ [against Nodule Mining] articulated by managers, appears to be mere ‘Marketing Ploys’ since land-based mining is only given superficial review, unless a major catastrophe,occurs. [After all, they did not climb their corporate ladders by being ‘Mavericks’ but, by being ‘Yes-Men’, many observers think].
Reality: ‘The Man Upstairs’, in his Wisdom, did not stop placing valuable minerals which his creation, Man, could use, from land to seashores, but beyond as well.
Reference:
