Another ecological disaster just waiting to happen.

[Workingman]

Scientists have discovered that metallic nodules lying on the seabed are producing oxygen and hydrogen. However, mining companies want them because they contain copper, lithium and cobalt necessary to make batteries.

The different potential energies of these elements when immersed in an electrolyte (sea water) makes them act like a battery and so electrolysis happens. The sea water is split into oxygen and hydrogen and, as we all know, oxygen is essential to us for life.

We need to think long and hard about this nodule mining lark.

[cromwell]

We do indeed, but the dice are seemingly weighed in favour of the would be miners.

[Suff]

They don't have sufficient mining skills for this and it is never going to be profitable the way they are going about it.

Unless they get a clue about how to mine them it won't be a big issue.

[Workingman]

They call it mining, but it isn't "mining" in the way we understand it. It is various methods of mineral extraction, including the simplest, dredging, which we have plenty of knowledge about from the fishing industry. They have already developed (and used) others in trials, but they are ready to go large, so there will be BIG problems.

I'll go with what these people, and others are telling us.

Try "Dredging for deep sea nodules" in your favourite search engines and do a bit of reading.

[Suff]

I knew about this a couple of decades ago and touch base with it from time to time. Dredging they may have experience with but dredging at 2,000m they do not. There have been several pilot attempts at dredging and one with a machine which crawls the surface like a tank. The problem with these nodules is sufficient density for relatively narrow mining.

When Lithium was at 5x the price it is today these attempts were seen as practical. However the on land response to Lithium has ramped up and prices have fallen again. The main issue with Lithium today is refined Lithium and with the number of refineries which produce the quality of metal needed for batteries.

There needs to be a better way for them to extract the nodules before it will become a BIG problem. Because they will go bust if they carry out major expenditure on a very minor return. A small change in the price of Lithium will make these operations loss making.

When it moves from "might" and "considering it" I'll focus more on it. Right now there is a strong environmental push to not mine and this is before large scale commercial mining has even begun to be ramped up.

[Workingman]

I knew about this a couple of decades ago...

Aye, and that looks like where your info resides... things have moved on.

https://www.maritimefoundation.uk/publi ... for-metal/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... or-a-curse

https://www.dredging.org/deep-sea-minin ... portal/205

https://eddypump.com/education/subsea-m ... -dredging/

https://www.isa.org.jm/wp-content/uploa ... 6/eng7.pdf

https://www.motherjones.com/environment ... ion-study/

I'll go with what qualified marine biologists, qualified marine geologists and qualified marine engineers are saying about the ongoing next steps.

[Suff]

OK so the CCZ is still the main target, the nodules remain as difficult as ever to get off the sea bed, nobody has more than test equipment for doing sample mining (still), the challenges to getting the crushed slurry remain just as difficult although the creation of eddy pumps make it better.

What has changed is that the environmentalist lobby has stepped up their story to a much higher volume but the same always appilies. Could, might, should, would, maybe, don't know.

Essentially we are one or two small steps forward in the process of doing proving mining runs.

That's about it.

[Workingman]

Dredger sucks up the nodules and the seabed as well as silt and sand and other debris, including marine life. It destroys the oxygen whilst it washes and crushes the nodules and spits out voluminous clouds of debris, including dead marine life, which can flow for thousands of kilometres before settling again.

It then pumps the crushed nodules to a rig or ship where they are washed and the spoil is deposited back into the sea. The spoil is very near the level where most marine life - algae, plankton, fish, seals, dolphins, sea lions, sharks and whales - live and thrive at 80 to 200 metres. The deposits will land on bottom feeders such as dab, plaice, sole, turbot, crabs, clams, lobsters, langoustines, octopus, etc. Some 40% of humanity relies on these resources to survive. The whole process is energy intensive, more so than wind and solar can produce on site - net zero my a..s. But all is OK, eh? For you and yours there's no problem, profits and money are to be made. Drive an EV and you'll save the world.

As part of its plans, Royal IHC has designed a 16-metre-wide robot and built a three-metre test vehicle - called Apollo II - which would be able to gather about 400 tonnes of nodules in an hour and pump them aloft. Over two weeks’ operation, more than 100,000 tonnes could be removed this way. And after operating for 25 to 30 years – the anticipated limit for an ISA extraction licence – about 10,000 square kilometres of the seabed could be strip-mined.

The test vehicle is only 1/5 full scale. There will be many full scale versions made. You do the maths. It's one rig - of many!

[Suff]

Oh I've been doing the math for decades. But for decades they've never got past demo vehicles.

Granted they have more demo vehicles and more capable. But the gap between demo vehicles and full scale, in this environment, is like the gap between putting an airship in space and sending a rocket to the moon.

It is still in IF land right now but the IF is trending to Maybe.

[Workingman]

No it's not. It's "full steam ahead" and you know it. The EU reckons $10 billions worth per annum by 2030. That's not an IF or a Maybe, you just do not want to admit that there will be problems - BIG problems. The truth does not suit your capitalist ideology and that is why you negate the downsides.