Across the world’s seafloor, particularly in the Pacific, lie vast fields of polymetallic nodules. These potato-sized rocks, resting 4–6 kilometres below the surface, contain minerals essential to the green energy revolution. In a patch of the Eastern Pacific Ocean known as the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, there is enough cobalt, nickel, copper and manganese to produce batteries for 280 million electric vehicles – the entire US fleet – just within the claimed territory of one Pacific-backed company.
Conspicuous by its silence on DSM [Deep-sea mining] in the Pacific, especially considering its own mining pedigree and position as a regional leader, is Australia. On a domestic level, Australia has re-asserted its commitment to land-based mining and ramping up its processing and refinement capacity to compete with China, who currently dominates this sector.
But does this mean Australia is anti-DSM altogether? No. Australia is not on the list of countries calling for a moratorium on DSM. It would likely be seen as hypocritical by some of Australia’s Pacific neighbours for it to take a firm anti-mining stance given Australia’s extensive mining history. An anti-DSM agenda from Australia may even be seen as an affront to the sovereignty of Pacific Island nations, and a case of Australia prioritising its own needs at the expense of those nations.
So, does Australia support the faction of Pacific Island nations who are actively exploring, and stand to benefit from, DSM in the Pacific? Again, probably not.
Australia is in a precarious position, with strong environmental and geopolitical reasons to oppose DSM in the Pacific, but limited legitimacy to do so. What is certain is that continued passiveness from Australia risks ceding influence – primarily to China and the United States – and reducing its power in an issue that will have widespread and long-lasting consequences for the region.
https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/deep-sea-mining-australia-s-dilemma-pacific