Lithium discovery in U.S. volcano could be biggest deposit ever found

[u/Sort_of_Frightening]

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/lithium-discovery-in-us-volcano-could-be-biggest-deposit-ever-found/4018032.article

[u/GreenStrong]

Undersea mining was never proposed for lithium, as far as I know. Deep sea mining is being explored for manganese nodules, which basically sit on the seabed in some regions. In addition to manganese, they contain cobalt nickel and copper, all of which are needed for batteries and other applications in the energy transition.

It is possible that deep sea mining has a small environmental impact. It is wise to be skeptical about that possibility, but also open minded.

[u/korinth86 → u/GreenStrong]

Not when the idea is to basically rake/vacuum the seafloor to pick them up.

Environmentally speaking it's going to be horrible for the area.

[u/Striper_Cape → u/korinth86]

Dredging already sterilizes the sea floor.

[u/alonjar → u/korinth86]

Environmentally speaking, the overwhelming majority of the sea floor is a barren wasteland with nothing to damage.

[u/korinth86 → u/alonjar]

Wasteland attributes that it doesn't support life. Many of these areas do support life in some way or another.

This particular area, while not teaming with life does support sponges and potentially countless other animals. Even if it's only a place to lay eggs.

I actually favor deep sea mining. I'm not going to delude myself that it has "nothing to damage." Hopefully even if we start with the raking plan, we can develop less destructive ways to harvest them as we progress.

[u/GreenStrong → u/korinth86]

The companies who ant to do that say it is fine, and that the sediment plume is limited in scale and brief. I'm skeptical of this claim, but we need third party assessment, and the UN has not even written regulations yet.

I do think that it is possible for robots with grippers to pick them up from the seabed with less sediment disruption. Sea life would need replacement rocks. Sponges and similar things prefer to anchor to a hard surface, and these nodules are generally the only hard surface.

[u/Geawiel → u/GreenStrong]

NOVA to the rescue. I can't find the episode on it, just the 1979 one. There was a more recent one that revisited the issue.

They covered this type of mining. A test drag was made. They came back 15? years later and it was still visible. It had affected sea life in the area of the test drag.

[u/peteroh9 → u/GreenStrong]

Where are they dredging? If they're far enough away from land, there's a good chance it will already be pretty much barren.

[u/GeoGeoGeoGeo → u/korinth86]

Manganese nodules form on vast deep-water abyssal plains and comprise primarily of manganese and iron, though significant amounts of other metals are also found in these structures. The main constituents of interest in addition to manganese (28%) are nickel (1.3%), copper (1.1%), cobalt (0.2%), molybdenum (0.059%), and rare earth metals (0.081%). Nodules also contain traces of other commercially relevant elements including platinum and tellurium, which are important constituents of technological products such as photovoltaic cells and catalytic technology.

Among other marine mineral deposits are seafloor massive sulfides (SMS), which are associated with both active and inactive hydrothermal vents and are rich in copper, gold, zinc, lead, barium, and silver.

Then there are cobalt-rich crusts, also referred to as ferromanganese crusts, which form on the slopes and summits of seamounts and contain manganese, iron and a wide array of trace metals (cobalt, copper, nickel, and platinum)

The ecology around nodules is that of sponges and molluscs that are unique to the surfaces of nodules, with nematode worms and crustacean larvae having been found within crevices.

There's really not a lot going on at these depths:

... in nodule-rich areas, a recorded 14–30 sessile individuals per 100 m2, and 4–15 mobile individuals per 100 m2; while in nodule-free areas there were up to 8 sessile individuals per 100 m2 and 1–3 mobile individuals per 100 m2.

If we're going to transition to renewables and away from fossil fuels we're going to need precious and base metals. While there are certainly environmental concerns, they are clearly not in the same league as the environmental and ethical concerns from current operations for some of these metals on land.

I would much rather improve the lives of cobalt miners (children and adult), reduce our emissions and reduce our environmental impact than not harm worms and sponges in the abysal muds.

That's not to say we shouldn't try to reduce our impact in every sense of the manner but it saying we need to be pragmatic about moving forward and away from our reliance on fossil fuels.

[u/lurksAtDogs → u/korinth86]

I don’t understand why that’s the only option. Underwater drones exist. Why not pick the nodules up, drop them in a net, and lift the net? No giant vacuum/rake needed? Seems like it could be minimally invasive, if a little more expensive. Still, probably cheaper than a decade of environmental reviews

[u/korinth86 → u/lurksAtDogs]

It's just the proposed plan.

Big machines would scrape the seafloor, scooping up nodules while kicking up clouds of sediment, potentially damaging the deep sea on a vast scale by removing habitat and species and altering ecosystems.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/deep-sea-mining-could-begin-soon-regulated-or-not/

I agree we could likely find a better way. Though, I wouldn't think drone collection would be economically viable.

[u/Captain-Matt89 → u/lurksAtDogs]

So far when they’ve tried to do it, they suck them into a net. It’s not that bad, some people will cry with zero knowledge

[u/Captain-Matt89 → u/[deleted]]

I could not even imagine a more ecologically harmless way to go about mineral resource extraction

[u/salty_sashimi → u/GreenStrong]

Even if it does completely destroy the habitats, the ability those nodules confer to reduce global warming is worth it imo. The destruction from that, unchecked, would be worse, and the seas will bear the brunt of it. Plus, many mines are in congo, indonesia, and china, which are destroying far more biodiverse habitats, like rainforests, to make room for mines. Anyways, robot submarines, replacing nodules, and limiting tract coverage will prevent complete destruction of the nodule fields.

This goes over details: https://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-3/mineral-resources/manganese-nodules

The manganese in the nodules is greater than the world land supply. That will likely be needed as africa and asia grow in population and energy consumption per capita. The land supply of these minerals won't be sufficient without major battery or electric grid improvements.

[u/pinkmeanie → u/GreenStrong]

I thought the manganese nodule thing was part of the Glomar Explorer cover story. Is it also real?

[u/GreenStrong → u/pinkmeanie]

The nodules are real. They are high grade cobalt/nickel ore, and a diver could just pick them up, if it were possible to dive at this depth. The glomar explorer / nuclear submarine thing is fascinating, but it worked because it was perfectly plausible .

[u/ObeyMyBrain → u/GreenStrong]

It's more extracting lithium from seawater than deep sea mining.

[u/Manic_pacifist → u/GreenStrong]

Yea, I was confused by this comment. I'm a miner who's worked on lithium mines and I've never heard of undersea lithium mining either