The Arendal Week: "Seabed Minerals Are Already Outdated"

The parties strongly disagreed when the Norwegian debate arena, the Arendal Week, addressed the matter of seabed mining and rare minerals in the Arctic seabed.

As the consultation deadline in September is nearing, the debate got heated for Norways Minister of Energy Terje Aasland (Labor) and State Secretary for the MFA Maria Varteressian (Labor) as they were to defend the exploration of seabed minerals on the Norwegian continental shelf.

In June, the Norwegian Ministry of Energy sent out a proposal for the first round of concessions for seabed minerals for public consultation. These are areas where companies will be able to apply for extraction permits so that "the work of exploring and gathering knowledge on whether there is a basis for sustainable mineral extraction on the Norwegian continental shelf can start," according to the Norwegian government.

Already outdated

But the debate is already outdated, and Norway will look for minerals the world does not want, say both the Green Party and Lise Øverås, professor of microbiology at the University of Bergen and president of the Norwegian Academy of Science.

State Secretary Varteressian argues that mineral exploration based on independence from Chinese import, as well as five global megatrends she believes will hit a small country like Norway hard;

"War and conflict, competition between great powers, climate change, and China. And artificial intelligence. These are all connected and contribute to weakening trust in authorities. Now, regionalization is key, and what we do in the regions has increased significance," says Varteressian during a debate under the auspices of the Fridtjof Nansen Institute (FNI).

The only right thing

"You're either sitting at the table or you're on the menu. When we shift from fossil to renewable energy, we must have an honest discussion about what the green shift entails and its costs. And also about minerals," believes the Labor politician.

She received great resistance from co-debater Rasmus Hansson, Green Party parliament member, who believes a moratorium, a halt, to fill knowledge gaps instead of opening up for extraction, is the only right thing to do.

"Instead, activity with documented harmful consequences will be initiated. We know this is the natural area we know the least about. Areas around the rift between the Eurasian and American continents are drifting apart, and much of what is emerging creates an unknown biology that is changing, and it is an obviously vulnerable area. For example, oxygen can be produced there, says Hansson, referring to recent discoveries of what scientists call dark oxygen, produced deep below the sea surface in the Arctic.

Established solutions

Hansson also believes that the government practically invites countries such as Russia and China to follow suit. If the government is just looking for critical minerals, the parliamentary representative believes that there are good solutions on land in already established mines.

But it is by no means certain that the world needs or wants the seabed treasures that the Norwegian government believes are necessary to implement the green shift.

Kaja Lønne Fjærtoft, senior adviser for sustainable oceans at the environmental organization World Wide Fund for Nature, says the organization knows of more than 30 countries requesting a pause in the investigation to obtain more information about the deep sea. 

New battery type 

"The world no longer needs as much cobalt, for example. Research on a new type of battery for electric cars is now underway, which already takes up over 40 percent of production. This would make seabed minerals less important," argues Fjærtoft. 

In China, research is being done to replace lithium in batteries. Thus, it may already be too late when Norway is ready to use the minerals in ten to 15 years.

Says no thanks

Global companies also say no thanks to seabed minerals, including Google, BMW, Volvo, and Samsung SDI, to name a few.

"Battery manufacturers such as Swedish North Wolt, as well," says Fjærtoft.

Nor can the Norwegian Environment Agency support the extraction of minerals from the seabed. The agency believes there is neither a professional nor a legal basis for initiating seabed mining and points to significant shortcomings in the government's impact assessment.

Strange decision

"We don't know a damn thing," thunders MDG's Hansson.

"We must initiate research to fill the knowledge gaps."

Another controversial topic is where this research should come from. As it stands now, this is left to the commercial players with financial interests in the minerals, a bit like letting the fox guard the henhouse.

Poor craftsmanship

Arild Moe, senior researcher at Fridtjof Nansen Institute, believes that the government's presentation of the plans for mineral activities on the Norwegian continental shelf is poor craftsmanship. He believes Norwegian diplomats will receive much resistance when explaining this to the outside world.

"But the exploration applications could be denied, of course. And maybe we don't need the minerals either," says Moe.

Major consumers in Norway

Minister of Energy Terje Aasland (Labor) believes it is important that Norway checks whether it is possible to extract the minerals sustainably.

"Norwegians are major consumers of minerals," says the minister.

He also believes that it is morally reprehensible to import minerals from countries violating human rights.

Not enough knowledge

For Une Bastholm, parliamentary representative for the Green Party, sustainable extraction for Norway is a contradiction.

"It is not even possible to set requirements for sustainable frameworks because we have enough knowledge to know what sustainability in this area is," says Bastholm during one of the central debates during the Arendal Week.

Another argument is that the minerals the government wants already exist in drawers and cupboards across the country.

Circular economy

"We have a lot of minerals in our economy, in cables, telephones, computers, and more. Get the circular economy in place first," says Bastholm.

Lise Øvreås, professor of microbiology at the University of Bergen, says it is too early. We don't know enough about the deep sea.

The Minister of Energy, for his part, emphasizes that an extraction permit is not the same as the right to extract.

Not necessary

"But has the government ever said no to someone in oil and gas, for example?" asks moderator Veslemøy Østrem, the Editor-in-Chief of Alting.

"That has not been necessary," replies Terje Aasland.

"But is it true that you cannot set a standard for sustainable extraction? Is there a figure for how many species can acceptably disappear?"

"We have to get knowledge on the table," says Aasland without answering.

Limited area

Anette Broch Mathisen, the general manager of Adepth Minerals, says they will only search in an area the size of two football pitches and only in areas with "limited occurrences of life."

Researcher and professor Lise Øverås is disappointed with the government's case handling.

"We have to pull the emergency brake. Why doesn't the government use free and independent research instead of commercial actors to obtain knowledge? Is the need for minerals really as great as they present it?" Øverås asks with skepticism.

"Yes, we need these minerals," argues the energy minister.

"For the green shift, although it will take time. I am also worried about the deep sea if this is not done sustainably. But this room for action needs clarifying," concludes Terje Aasland.