Norway had a plan to mine in the Arctic, but environmental and left-wing pressure stopped it… for now

by time news

‌ ​ ⁢Norway,Europe’s largest oil ⁢and ⁣gas producer,had intended to become one of the first countries in the world to grant rights to ⁤thousands of kilometers of its waters for underwater extraction. This plan has been strongly‌ criticized by environmental organizations around the world and by the European‍ Union parliament⁣ as a list‍ of 32 countries (including‍ Spain) had asked the Nordic country to⁤ place a moratorium due to concerns raised by underwater ‌mining due to its environmental ⁤impact.

Sea mines,the deadly danger lurking in the Black Sea

‌ ‍ ‌ For now the Oslo government,made up of social democrats and centrists,has had to give⁢ in after ⁤reaching an agreement with the Socialist Left ​Party (SV) approve national budgets​ for the following year. ​Among the ⁢conditions that⁣ the small left-wing party managed to impose (with 13 of the 169 seats in Parliament) is the suspension for one year of the granting of licenses for underwater mining, scheduled to start in 2025.

Environmental ⁣organizations celebrated the⁢ agreement as‌ “a great victory”. ⁢“After the hard work of‌ activists,⁢ scientists and⁤ fishermen, we⁤ have achieved ​a historic victory for⁣ ocean protection,” he said. the leader of ⁤Greenpeace in the countryHaldis ‍Tjeldflaat Helle. ⁢From the NGO World ⁤Wildlife⁤ Fund (WWF),⁤ the general secretary in Norway, Karoline Andaur, ⁢said that “fortunately, the left-wing socialist⁢ Party has become aware of the gravity of the‍ situation and‍ has⁣ taken duty for putting an end to ⁣this madness. of deep sea⁣ mining.‌

On the other hand, Prime Minister Jonas Gahr⁣ Støre ​called⁣ the decision a “postponement” and said that‍ the legislative⁤ and administrative work ⁢preparatory to the start of deep-sea mining will⁢ not ​stop.

Huge quantities⁢ of minerals on the seabed

​ The Scandinavian country’s ⁢parliament ‍voted last January in favor ⁤of being one ⁣of the first sites in the world to allow‍ the exploration and exploitation of the seabed to extract minerals (The other two countries that‌ also allow this, although they have not yet started​ mining, are China and the Cook Islands.) ​The maritime area that the government wanted to allow businesses ‍to exploit is located between the ‍Barentz Sea and Greenland, and is 281,000 square kilometers (an area larger than the United ‌Kingdom).

‍ on the seabed of this area of ​​the Arctic, Norwegian Petroleum directorate (an agency under the Ministry of Energy) estimates that there are 38⁢ million tons of‌ copper, 45 million tons of zinc ⁢and 2,317 tons ‌of gold, as well as significant quantities⁤ of​ “rare earth” minerals. These minerals are essential ⁢for building​ electric car batteries and other technologies needed to develop green industries. The costs of⁤ extracting minerals from the seabed are ​significantly higher ⁣than those of conventional​ extraction ⁣on land. But the Norwegian government argues that exploiting its seabed has the potential to ​provide huge economic benefits. According to a report from the Oslo-based institute Rystad Energythese benefits would amount to​ 180,000 million crowns per year ⁤(15,400 million⁤ euros per ​year), in addition to⁣ the⁢ creation ⁣of⁤ 21,000 new ⁣jobs.

Another ⁤of the government’s arguments to defend ⁣underwater extraction is ‍that ‍Norway‍ wants and can⁢ free itself from dependence on China‌ to access these minerals (currently 98% of the⁢ rare earth minerals used ‍in the European industry are exported by the Asian ⁢giant). Energy Minister Terje Aastlandhe also defended that “concessions ⁤for mineral extraction will only be approved if⁣ it is demonstrated that they can be done in a enduring and responsible manner by companies”.

⁤ But it ‍is ​indeed not so clear to scientists whether‌ the ⁣conditions of sustainability ⁤and responsibility⁢ towards the⁢ surroundings can be guaranteed. Researchers fear that the government may start granting concessions to⁤ mining companies without sufficient⁤ time to ‍accurately assess the ​impact of mining on this area ‍of⁢ ​​the sea. From the Norwegian ⁤institute of Marine Researchits director‍ Frode Vikebø has already assured ⁣that “we currently have​ no knowledge about ⁤this area of ​​the ocean and the impact⁤ that mining activity could have”.

For its part,⁤ the marine think tank Ocean Panel, led by Norway, also warned that underwater mining is against the sustainability objectives established by the United Nations. According​ to experts, underwater extraction which takes place at a depth of‌ approximately 3,500 meters, has the‍ potential to severely damage ecosystems when⁣ carried out⁣ with‌ a kind of enormous vacuum ‍cleaner⁣ that sucks up the seabed, creating clouds of sediment ​that kill microorganisms up ‌to hundreds of kilometers ‌away.

The Norwegian government, on trial

⁢ ‌ In parallel with the decision to temporarily‌ suspend underwater mining following ⁢the negotiation of general budgets, from 28 ⁤November Norway‍ also faces a‍ lawsuit from the WWFin an unprecedented process. The environmental NGO wants⁣ Norwegian ⁤seabed concessions‍ to be declared illegal in court, because, they claim, the government did not adequately investigate their ⁢impact in the ⁢reports used to draft the licensing law in Parliament.

Brussels wants to ban new‍ oil,‍ gas and coal drilling in the Arctic

At the ‍start of the trial, WWF Secretary General Karoline Andaur said that “if we do not denounce‌ this decision now, it will set a new and ⁣hazardous ‍precedent for the way Norway manages its natural resources.”⁣ The​ government maintains its position ⁣that it is legal to take decisions such as opening the national maritime zone to mining to explore a new industry, ⁣even⁢ though there is uncertainty and a lack of scientific knowledge.

what are the environmental​ risks associated with deep-sea ​mining in Norway?

Time.news Interview: Diving Into ⁢Norway’s ⁤Deep-Sea Mining Controversy

Editor: Welcome to Time.news!⁣ Today, we ⁣have an insightful guest to discuss ​an‍ important environmental issue—Dr. Anna Helgesen, a ​marine ecologist‌ and expert in deep-sea ecosystems.Dr. Helgesen, thank ⁣you for joining⁣ us.

Dr. Helgesen: Thank‍ you⁢ for having me! It’s great to​ be here to discuss a topic that is increasingly critical ⁣as we navigate the balance between economic growth and environmental protection.

Editor: Absolutely. Recently,⁤ norway announced a suspension of its plans for⁣ deep-sea mining after a notable push from the Socialist Left Party. Can you give us an overview of what was at stake?

Dr. Helgesen: ⁣Norway had aimed to become a pioneer in underwater ​extraction,targeting vast​ areas in ⁣its maritime ⁣zone estimated to be rich ⁢in ‌minerals essential for green⁢ technologies. However, the potential environmental impact caused widespread concern among activist groups, ‍scientific communities, and against the backdrop of a growing global movement toward‍ sustainability. The decision to suspend ⁢the granting of licenses is a substantial shift and reflects a growing recognition of these environmental‌ risks.

Editor: ​ Environmental organizations⁤ celebrated the suspension, calling it a “great victory.” What dose this victory mean in the context⁣ of ocean ‍conservation?

Dr. Helgesen: It’s an important milestone in the long-standing battle⁤ for ocean‍ conservation. This decision‍ not only halts the⁣ immediate ⁢threats of deep-sea mining but also symbolizes a broader acknowledgment​ of the ‍need ⁢to safeguard fragile marine ecosystems. As we ​understand more about the biodiversity of the deep seas, instances where human ​activities could cause⁤ irreversible damage highlight the urgency of protecting these environments.

Editor: While environmentalists are rejoicing, ⁣Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre referred to the suspension as ‍a “postponement.” How do you‍ see this tension between ⁤economic interests ⁣and ⁤environmental protection playing out?

Dr. Helgesen: It’s a delicate ‍balance. Norway’s government views mineral‌ extraction as⁢ vital for economic growth, particularly in the⁢ transition to‌ greener technologies where rare earth elements⁣ are key. ⁢This economic ⁣argument is persuasive,but we must consider the long-term ecological implications.⁣ If mining occurs, we risk losing biodiversity before we ‍fully understand the ecosystems we are interacting with, wich could lead to ‌unforeseen consequences not just for local environments but globally.

Editor: What are the‌ specific risks and consequences of deep-sea mining that⁢ you⁢ believe are‍ often overlooked?

Dr. Helgesen: ‍One major concern is the destruction of habitat—deep-sea ecosystems are incredibly complex and not ​yet ‍fully understood. Mining disrupts these habitats and could lead to the ⁢loss of species ⁤that play crucial roles in the ocean’s health.Additionally, sediment plumes from mining can smother marine life, while⁢ toxic substances released during extraction⁢ can pose risks well beyond the⁤ immediate ​area.

Editor: The Norwegian Petroleum Directorate estimates‍ vast quantities of ⁢minerals on the seabed.⁣ Could​ Norway’s reliance on these resources ​affect its portrayal in the European green transition?

Dr. Helgesen: ⁣ Yes, it could create a ​dichotomy. On one ⁣hand, extracting these minerals could position Norway as a leader in the green transition by⁢ meeting demand for electric ‍vehicle batteries and other green‌ technologies. However, if‌ this is done at the ‍expense of⁣ environmental health, it contradicts the very principles‌ of sustainability that the green⁤ transition aims to uphold. There’s a real opportunity‍ for Norway to lead‌ in responsible resource extraction, but it will require a commitment to stringent environmental safeguards.

Editor: As a marine ecologist, what would your ideal‌ scenario for underwater resource management ⁢look like?

Dr. Helgesen: My ‌ideal scenario ‍would prioritize complete environmental assessments before any extraction activities begin. Following this, I envision a collaborative approach where‌ scientists,⁣ policymakers, and stakeholders from various sectors come together to create and enforce regulations⁤ that ensure sustainable practices. This could also include creating marine ‍protected areas to safeguard critical habitats while allowing for careful and⁣ monitored resource extraction in designated ⁢regions.

Editor: Thank ‌you, Dr. Helgesen. As this situation‌ continues to develop, ‌it ⁤reminds us that the choices we make today will have lasting implications for our oceans and the planet as a whole.

Dr. Helgesen: Thank ‍you! ⁢It’s crucial we keep⁣ these​ discussions going and advocate for solutions that respect our planet’s biodiversity⁢ while meeting our economic needs.

Editor: And ​thank you to our‌ audience for joining us in this crucial conversation about the intersection of environmentalism and economic development in ‌Norway.Stay tuned for further updates!


You may also like

Leave a Comment