It's colonialism and exploitation of a different kind.
I'm not expecting you to single handedly put a stop to it or anything but it's not unreasonable to expect that you can recognize and acknowledge it instead of pretending it doesn't exist and saying that those sort of things only happened a long time ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Seabed_Authority
I'm not sure this adds anything to the observation that there's a distinction between this and British empire colonialism.
What's driving our current exploration binge? Land for development and resources for extraction.
Regardless of intent, they share many of the same incentive structures.
That being said, I'm quite surprised by the partner list from the project website. I may be discounting conservation from my analysis.
From that perspective, comparing it to subjugating human populations seems like a non-sequitur, though one I respect.
The good news is that the impact of sea bed mining on the human population of the deep ocean appears negligible! The bad news is that the environmental impact is still quite uncertain, and the lack of resident humans could make advocacy more challenging.
From the Wikipedia article I linked about the ISA:
> The ISA is funded by UNCLOS members and mining contractors and led by Secretary-General Michael Lodge, a British barrister who oversees a 47-member administrative body and has come under criticism for close ties to the mining industry and support for deep sea robotic exploration to develop renewable energy.
Also, I feel compelled to respond to to the comment that it's "incredibly non-invasive," as I'm not sure that's how it actually works out. In theory, we can simply pluck the nodules from the seabed. In practice this requires sending a multi-ton robot vacuum cleaner down to suck up and sift through the top layer of the seafloor, pump the chunks back to the surface for processing, and spit the silt back overboard. Here's a video of how we currently mine shallow-water deposits by hand. (Deep sea nodules are a bit different, they sit on the surface, so less disruption to the seabed is required. Less isn't none though, and surface is where life concentrates.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYAw26nSzBA
In this light I'm actually quite enheartened by the partner list of the Seabed2030 project.
...you've never used a map in a different way? When we draw maps of the galaxy, are we imminently planning on dividing it up?
Sure. But the USGS doesn't publish precise up to date topological maps of every square inch of the United States for the purpose of guiding backpackers with compasses. They do it to divide up political boundaries, delimit resource rights, and guide commercial activity. This goes for just about any other large scale mapping effort (on earth).
Besides, maps are very much about taxation, balistics, and administration. Much more than just ownership.
Just like we've benefitted enormously from "exploiting" land resources.
Not saying things will be perfect, of course. They never are.
More seriously, I'd expect greater resource availability to result in fewer wars over it. That's pretty consistent with human history.
We grew from 50 million hunter gatherers to 8000 millions mostly living longer better lives, and have access to Hacker News.
So for me that's a very strong Yes.
How do we ant colony our way out of this bitch before we all die?
I'll give you my favorite answer. You probably won't like it.
For reasons I don't claim to know, humanity always expect the world to end. It's in all the religions. Christians has expected the Last Judgment any day now for 2000 years.
In this century we don't express that urge in religious term. It manifests in worries that pollution or overpopulation or nuclear war will bring the end of times. I've seen enough of these predictions over the last 50 years to stop worrying too much about the new ones that keep popping up.
Of course non of this proves we won't speed into one of these brick walls. None of us knows the future, and that's certainly a possible one.
Civilizational collapse is real. It has happened many times to flourishing cultures and might happen again. Most cultures never recover*. The difference is that previously there was always another culture that was not pulled into the abyss as well and could pick up the leftovers.
And regular conductors …
the entirety of modern society, good and bad... the computer or phone you're typing this with, your job, etc
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-12-22/us-claims... ("US Claims Huge Chunk of Seabed Amid Strategic Push for Resources", https://archive.is/9Uyg4 )
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/products/us-extended-continental-s... ("U.S. Extended Continental Shelf Data")
- "The mission of the U.S. Extended Continental Shelf (ECS) Project is to establish the full extent of the U.S. continental shelf, consistent with international law. "
- "Data collected for the project include bathymetric, subbottom, gravity, magnetic, seismic , and geologic sample data from the U.S. coastal waters to the deep ocean. U.S. ECS project data are in the public domain."
No, it doesn't. (Beyond that part of the Arctic Ocean already generally recognized as US territorial waters.)
“Continental shelf” is not “territorial waters”, it is a whole different legal category. The project to identify the extent of what qualifies under international law as continental shelf beyond the 200nm presumed limit is not about extending territorial waters.
The US makes a several orders of magnitude more money from the Statue of Liberty where it is than they would get from its scrap value.
Could it? We can measure the cash flow the Statue of Liberty produces relative to its commodity value. A pristine deep sea certainly has value. But it's difficult to argue that every square inch of it is more valuable than the commodities on and below it. Particularly when you start trading off extraction there against terrestrial mining.
Make the difference.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
It's remarkable how people forget how we all got here.
Because it was gift. It was supported in the US locally by donations, but it was conceived and built in France as a gift to a younger nation.
But if you rephrase it as "Are those resources more valuable just sitting at the bottom of a deep sea instead of mixing them into our bodies and environment?" my reaction is now: Yes
To be clear, I'm not sure if either of those hypotheticals are true, but I have a feeling, as with many things in life is "It's complicated".
Being good stewards of our resources with careful management / regulation is the answer, rather than unfettered exploitation or outright bans.
So, yes, they are better left to their own devices.
It would be nice to document and observe first, rather than barging in to get the riches as fast as possible once again. ( riche in that point being « nodules » it’s a fun resource ! )