The Next Gold Rush Will Be 5,000 Feet Under the Sea, With Robot Drones (vice.com)

merbs writes: In Papua New Guinea, one well-financed, first-mover company is about to pioneer deep sea mining. And that will mean dispatching a fleet of giant remote-operated robotic miners 5,000 feet below the surface to harvest the riches scattered across ocean floor. These mammoth underwater vehicles look like they've been hauled off the set of a sci-fi film—think Avatar meets The Abyss. And they'll be dredging up copper, gold, and other valuable minerals, far beneath the gaze of human eyes.

Comments

That will go well

[retroworks]

Metal mining is the #1, #2 AND #3 most polluting industry. 14/15 largest superfund sites, etc. Primary barrier to cyanide treatment and tailing ponds is the property value of abutting land. This is what has driven mining out west in the USA, to rain forests, and now to the ocean, where no on can hear you scream.

Re:That will go well

[gurps_npc]

Normal gold mining is known for using vile chemicals (mercury, cyanide) to seperate out small percentages (1%) of gold from non-gold. Deep sea gold mining avoids this problem. They go to hot vents where the gold is much higher percentages. So they don;t use mercury or cyanide.

They do however involve large transportation of materials up from the sea bed, most of which is released to float down.

The risks are radically different than land based mining and relatively unknown.

But I am a firm believer in diversification of risk. I'd rather have some coal and some nuclear, rather than just one, as the risks are different.

Similarly, undersea gold mining is worth a pilot project or two to see how it affects the local ecology.

Re:That will go well

[Applehu Akbar]

Hasn't offshore gold dredging been done for years in Alaska? The environmental effects should be well known by now.

Yeah right.

[Harlequin80]

This has to compete against mines on land operating with excellent infrastructure and somehow do it for less money.

I'm sorry but it just isn't going to happen any time soon. Olympic Dam in South Australia has absolutely massive gold, copper and uranium deposits but the economics of that mine couldn't be made to stack up in the current market. There is no way that untested, experimental mining in an incredibly hostile environment stands a chance.

Re:Who cares?

[Harlequin80]

Uh-huh. Gold is useful BECAUSE it isn't reactive. It is highly ductile, doesn't corrode quickly and it conducts electricity well.

Re:Time to short Manganese ?

[Tim the Gecko]

When I was a kid I read about manganese nodule mining on the sea floor. It later turned out that it was Project Azorian, where the nodules were a cover story for a CIA-funded attempt to lift a Soviet sub from the sea floor.

Re:horrible

[ColdWetDog]

what a disaster this will be for the ocean life for hundreds or thousands of miles around the site surely, not to mention any coral and deep sealife in the direct area, and whales and other migratory sea animals will be affected too

Hyperbolic much? Hundreds or thousands of miles around the site? They're dredges, not hydrogen bombs. Yes, they will create a mess - as does mining everywhere. It will be fairly localized. And likely remain a rounding error in the grand scheme of horrible things we do to the ocean floor (e.g. trawler fishing).