随着美国规划深海采矿路线,金属公司正在申请许可证

金属公司首席财务官克雷格·谢斯基 (Craig Shesky) 相信公司有能力通过深海采矿满足美国的关键矿产需求。


美国总统唐纳德·特朗普最近发布的针对深海矿物开采的行政命令可能有助于金属公司 (TMC) 踏上期待已久的商业规模之旅。

预计此举还将有助于减少美国对包括中国在内的外国在钴、铜、锰和镍等关键矿产方面的依赖。这些关键矿产对于电池储能系统等技术以及航空航天和国防等行业使用的雷达、声纳和激光制导系统等设备至关重要。

这家总部位于加拿大的公司被认为是深海多金属结核开采领域的全球领导者。多金属结核是一种土豆大小的矿藏,蕴藏着宝贵的关键矿物。该公司在太平洋克拉里昂-克利珀顿区开展的工作包括与主要合作伙伴Allseas公司及其他公司合作开发和测试技术,使用一种专门的机器人潜水器(或称收集器)连接到改装的超深水钻井船上从海底打捞结核。该公司还研究了开采结核对环境的影响,并测试了从结核中提取高品位电池金属的精炼工艺。

美国金属公司 (TMC) 首席财务官 Craig Shesky 向 Hart Energy 表示,美国意识到并担心将这一领域的竞争拱手让给中国,尤其是当美国实体——TMC——是该技术开发的全球领导者时。“我认为,如果美国放弃这一领先地位,那将是一种耻辱,而且本届政府显然没有这样做的意图。”

国际海底管理局(负责监管国际水域深海采矿)十多年来一直未能最终出台相关法规,加之外界担忧其可能破坏或损害海洋生态系统,导致关键矿物的深海采矿活动举步维艰。反对者认为,海底采矿可能会损害或破坏海洋生态系统;然而,支持者则声称,其破坏性将小于陆地采矿,包括雨林采矿。

目前,商业采矿对环境的影响尚不清楚,因为尚未有人进行过。特朗普的举动可能会加速这一进程。

海底矿产行政命令要求包括国家海洋和大气管理局(NOAA)等美国机构加快深海采矿许可证的发放,编写一份报告,探讨私营部门勘探和开发矿产的机会;设计一份列有优先区域的矿产地图;建立快速许可证审批程序和勘探、开发和生产租约等。

《深海海底硬矿产资源法》于1980年生效,授权美国国家海洋和大气管理局(NOAA)向美国实体颁发在国际水域进行深海采矿的勘探和商业开采许可证。NOAA自20世纪70年代以来一直致力于关键矿物的深海采矿和结核矿的采集。TMC是第一家根据该法案申请商业采矿许可证的公司。

谢斯基表示:“美国一直是该领域的领导者,我们认为这项行政命令提醒世界,美国已准备好重返这一地位。”

舍斯基是众多高管之一,在《石油与天然气投资者》杂志2025年6月刊上分享了对政府关键矿产政策的看法。以下是部分对话内容,为清晰起见,篇幅和风格进行了编辑。

维尔达·艾迪生:您是否认为海底行政命令标志着美国对中国在资源领域的主导地位采取了更为强硬的立场?

克雷格·谢斯基:是的,确实如此。“中国一直在努力提升其收集结核的能力,并利用深海采矿技术,坦率地说,以此摆脱许多依赖其原料的国家的掣肘。中国主要主导着加工和精炼环节,而这些环节依赖于其他国家的矿石供应。中国将深海采矿视为在下一个关键矿产竞争中占据主导地位的一种方式。我们也看到中国开始利用深海采矿作为诱饵,拉拢一些太平洋岛国,例如库克群岛和基里巴斯,这两个国家都在与中国探讨签署深海矿产勘探协议。这两项声明都是在今年发布的。”中国想向太平洋岛国表明,“如果你们想发展经济,我们可以通过深海采矿帮助你们。”现在我认为美国已经看到这种情况发生,而美国国务院当然不希望这种情况发生。

VA:TMC 如何应对来自环保组织和保护组织的一些阻力?

CS:许多环保组织没有在实地观测研究上投入任何资金。我们与全球一些顶尖的研究机构合作,在环境研究上投入了超过2亿美元。这些领域的专家曾多次表示,一些非政府组织的猜测现已被推翻。关于地幔柱(从海底采集结核时卷起的尘埃)的问题,非政府组织多年来一直推测,这些地幔柱可能流动数万公里,最终到达夏威夷。这些都是推测,任何人都可以推测,但当实地观测数据反驳这些推测时,对它的描述应该会改变。为此,麻省理工学院的托马斯·皮科克博士,也是研究羽流的顶尖专家,于4月29日在众议院自然资源委员会作证。他的证词重点指出,非政府组织在这个问题上犯了错误,关于羽流吸收碳的推测性说法已被证伪。令人沮丧的是,这种说法已经取代了科学数据。“麻省理工学院向全世界公开分享其数据。这才是获得优质科学成果的方式,但这也意味着,当结论没有证据支持时,例如非政府组织提出的结论,这些结论就必须被摒弃。”

VA:TMC 最近向 NOAA 提交了两张勘探许可证和一张商业许可证的申请。您能简单介绍一下勘探许可证的情况吗?你们计划钻探多深?有哪些目标和资源潜力?

施蒂利亚斯:资源潜力非常巨大。这些结核位于海平面以下约4000多米处,位于海底。通过这些申请,我们只希望收集那些松散地附着在海底的多金属结核,无需任何挖掘、爆破或钻探即可采集。无需砍伐森林,无需尾矿,几乎不产生固体废物。在我们申请勘探的区域,我们拥有符合美国证券交易委员会(SEC)和加拿大标准的资源声明,表明多金属结核资源量高达16亿吨。因此,这是一个巨大的资源量。 “如果你思考一下美国对这些金属的需求,以及TMC能提供什么,假设10亿吨结核,这比我们正在勘探的总量还少,就能满足美国目前81年的镍、165年的钴和456年的锰的消耗。这个解决方案将使美国在未来几十年内从完全依赖进口这三种关键金属,转变为完全自给自足。”

VA:首次商业开采和加工的时间表是怎样的?

CS:鉴于行政命令指示商务部(NOAA作为我们的主要监管机构)加快审批速度,我们相信我们可以在2027年开始商业化生产。这并不意味着跳过任何步骤,只是意味着确保所有工作都在非常紧凑的时间内完成,避免任何来回浪费时间或任何停滞不前的情况。前提是我们能在2026年获得许可证,并在2027年开始运营。我们有可能加快审批速度,但我们希望在NOAA的审批过程中,能够进行利益相关者磋商和公众意见征询期,我们希望这些因素在申请过程中尽可能完善。因此,我们非常高兴能够从一家经验丰富、深海研究能力超强的监管机构获得这条新的、更清晰的推进路径。

VA:TMC 在深海矿物开采中可能面临的主要技术挑战是什么?您计划如何克服这些挑战?

CS:我们已经证明能够大规模收集结核。由于这是首次进行商业化操作,因此没有什么是容易的。我们主要考虑的问题之一是如何通过尽可能增大收集器的尺寸来最大化收集重量。但如果尺寸过大或过重,收集器可能会沉得太深,而海底的黏土质地非常厚。因此,要考虑浮力和重量。我们的作业深度超过4000米,那里环境寒冷高压。当然,我们必须确保拥有像AlIseas这样精通深海作业的工程师。但我想说,根据TMC已经进行的测试,所有这些挑战都已有效降低风险。现在,问题是提高产量并达到我们想要的生产水平。

VA:就潜在买家而言,你们的目标客户是谁?你们有没有与美国国防部、能源行业的公司或汽车制造商达成承购协议?你们的目标承购对象是谁?

CS:行政命令指示国防部和能源部探索这种材料的承购。请继续关注。这几周前刚刚发布在行政命令中。除此之外,我们确实与嘉能可(Glencore)签订了协议,承购我们NORI地区一半的镍和铜。但前提是这些镍和铜是由TMC旗下的工厂生产的。我们现在已经明确表示,我们将首先在日本现有的加工厂与合作伙伴太平洋金属公司(Pacific Metals)合作,利用这些结核生产金属,他们成功地将这些结核冶炼成高品位的镍铜钴合金和硅酸锰产品。就在几周前,我们进行了一次现场考察,南区研究社区(Southside Research Community)的成员以及电池制造商、钢铁制造商和前体生产商都参观了该工厂,对潜在的承购机会感兴趣。所以,我想说,这些对话仍在进行中——而美国政府可能希望参与其中,这可能会使这些讨论更加容易。

VA:深海采矿领域目前是否存在一些新兴的合作伙伴关系,尤其是与挪威这样的国家。您提到了日本。您认为未来是否有可能建立进一步的合作伙伴关系?

CS:当然。这一点很重要,因为在过去的18个月里,挪威、瑞典、日本、韩国、印度等国家都开展了一系列活动,这些国家都因有意探索或可能进入深海采矿商业化生产而登上了各大媒体的头条。对于TMC来说,令人兴奋的一点是,我们现在已经通过美国的程序提交了申请。我们认为,就深海采矿专业知识而言,我们拥有全球最优秀的团队,我们有机会为那些想要迎头赶上并在其领海或国际水域开采此类资源的国家和承包商提供服务。我之前提到的几个国家已经与TMC接洽,希望他们能为他们提供服务。无论是现金支付、项目的潜在股权还是特许权使用费,这都是TMC利用我们团队已积累的专业知识来扩展资源组合的绝佳途径。

VA:您是否认为深海采矿能够在未来五到十年内切实减少美国对中国的依赖?为什么?

CS: 100%。因为美国目前镍、锰、钴等金属的原生矿产量为零或极低。目前唯一运营的镍钴矿是密歇根州北部的鹰矿,而且该矿只剩下几年的开采量。因此,美国将完全依赖外国镍、锰、钴资源,而中国在这三种金属的加工领域占据主导地位。因此,TMC在运营第一年为美国带来的海上资源,或许无法解决美国的所有需求,但到2030年代初,我们预计能够满足美国对镍、锰、钴的大部分(如果不是全部的话)需求。“这是一个提供清洁转型所需金属的完整解决方案,同时也能提供我列出的所有航空航天和国防所需的金属。所以,是的,绝对可以。”

评论

添加新评论

本次对话将根据 Hart Energy 社区规则进行。请在加入讨论前阅读规则。如果您遇到任何技术问题,请联系我们的客服团队。

富文本编辑器,评论字段
原文链接/HartEnergy

As US Charts Course for Deepsea Mining, The Metals Company Pursues Licenses

The Metals Company CFO Craig Shesky is confident of the company’s ability to help meet U.S. critical mineral needs with deepsea mining.


U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent executive order targeting deepsea minerals mining could help put The Metals Company (TMC) on a long-awaited commercial-scale journey.

It is also expected to help reduce U.S. reliance on foreign countries—including China—for critical minerals such as cobalt, copper, manganese and nickel. Critical minerals are essential to technologies such as battery energy storage systems and equipment used by industries that include aerospace and national defense for radar, sonar and laser guidance systems.

The Canada-based company is considered the world’s leader in the deepsea mining of polymetallic nodules, the potato-sized deposits that contain valuable critical minerals. Its efforts in Pacific Ocean’s Clarion-Clipperton Zone have included developing and testing technology with main partner Allseas and others to retrieve nodules from the seafloor using a specialized robotic vehicle, or collector, attached to a modified ultra-deepwater drillship. It has also researched the environmental impacts of harvesting the nodules and tested the refining process of extracting high-grade battery metals from the nodules.

The U.S. is aware and wary of ceding this area of competition to China, especially when a U.S. entity—TMC—is a global leader in development of this technology, Craig Shesky, CFO for The Metals Company (TMC), told Hart Energy. “It would be a shame, I think, for the U.S. to give up that lead, and certainly this administration shows no intention of doing so.”

The absence of finalized regulations from the International Seabed Authority, which regulates deepsea mining in international waters, after more than a decade coupled with environmental concerns about potential to disrupt or damage marine ecosystems, have stymied deepsea mining of critical minerals. Opponents say seabed mining could harm or disrupt marine ecosystems; however, supporters claim it will be less destructive than mining on land, including in rainforests.

For now, the environmental impacts of commercial mining are unknown because it hasn’t been done. Trump’s move could jumpstart the process.

The executive order for seabed minerals calls on U.S. agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), among others, to expedite deep sea mining permits, produce a report exploring opportunities for the private sector to explore and develop the minerals; devise a mineral map with priority areas; and set up an expedited permit approval process and leases for exploration, development and production, among other directives.

The Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act, which became law in 1980, authorizes NOAA—which has studied deepsea mining of critical minerals and nodule collection since the 1970s—to issue exploration and commercial recovery permits to U.S. entities for deepsea mining in international waters. TMC is the first firm to apply for a commercial mining license under the law.

“The U.S. has always been the leader in the space and we feel this executive order reminds the world that the U.S. is ready to return to that seat,” Shesky said.

Shesky was among the executives who shared thoughts on the administration’s critical minerals efforts for the June 2025 issue of Oil and Gas Investor magazine. Here is part of that conversation, which has been edited for clarity, length and style.

Velda Addison: Do you believe that the seabed executive order signals a more aggressive U.S. stance against China’s dominance in resources?

Craig Shesky: Yes, it does. “China has been working to build up their capacity to collect nodules and use deep-sea mining to, frankly, disintermediate many of the countries with whom they’re dependent for feedstock. It’s mainly China dominating processing and refining, which depends on other countries for ore. China views deepsea mining as a way for them to dominate in this next vector of critical minerals competition. We’ve also seen China start to use deep sea mining as a carrot to bring into the fold some Pacific Island nations, such as the Cook Islands and Kiribati, both of which are exploring deep-sea mineral exploration agreements with China. Both of those announcements occurred this year. China wants to show the Pacific Island nations, “hey, if you want to build up your economies, we can help you do it through deep sea mining.” And now I think the United States has seen that happen, and the State Department certainly does not want that to happen.

VA: How is TMC addressing some of this pushback from environmental groups and conservation groups?

CS: Many of those conservation groups have spent no money on in-field observed studies. We’ve spent over $200 million on environmental studies in partnership with some of the best research institutions on the planet. … Experts on these topics have stated many times that the speculation from some of these NGOs has now been disproven. On the issue of plumes—the dust that get picked up when nodules are collected off the seafloor—NGOs have been speculating for years that those plumes might travel for tens of thousands of kilometers and they might reach Hawaii. These are speculative claims, anybody’s able to speculate, but when it's then countered with in-field observed data, the narrative on it should change. And to that end, Dr. Thomas Peacock from MIT, who is the foremost expert on plumes, testified [on April 29] to the House Natural Resource Committee and the thrust of his testimony was that the NGOs have gotten this wrong and that the speculative claims about a plume-insorbed carbon have been disproven. It’s frustrating that the narrative has taken over the scientific data. …TMC shares its data openly with the entire world. That’s how you get good science, but it also means that when conclusions are not supported by evidence, such as those being put forward by the NGOs, those have to be left behind.

VA: TMC recently filed applications for two exploration licenses and one commercial license with NOAA. Can you tell me a little bit about the exploration license? How deep are you all planning to go and what are some of the targets and resource potential?

CS: The resource potential is very large. The nodules are approximately a little over 4,000 meters below the ocean surface. They are lying on top of the seafloor. Through these applications, we are only looking to collect polymetallic nodules that are loosely attached to the seafloor and can be collected without any digging or blasting or drilling. No deforestation, no tailings, nearly zero solid waste. And over the areas with which we applied for exploration, we have SEC compliant and Canadian compliant resource statements indicating a resource of 1.6 billion tons of polymetallic nodules. So this is a resource that is massive. … If you’re thinking about what U.S. needs are for some of these metals, what TMC could provide, let’s just say with 1 billion tons of nodules, which is less than the total amount that we have under exploration, we could provide current U. S. consumption of 81 years of nickel, 165 years of cobalt and 456 years of manganese. This is a solution that takes the U.S. from total import dependency on these three critical metals to total self-sufficiency in all three for many, many decades to come.

VA: What is your timeline for first commercial extraction and processing?

CS: We believe we can be in commercial production in 2027, given the fact that the executive order has directed the Commerce Department—under which NOAA sits as our main regulator—to expedite permitting. That does not mean skipping over any steps. It just means ensuring that everything is on a very tight timeframe and there isn’t any wasted back and forth or anything getting stuck. That would assume we can get our permits in 2026 and begin operations in 2027. There are possibilities to accelerate that, but we want to ensure that going through this NOAA process there is going to be stakeholder consultations, public comment periods, and those are elements in the application that we want to be as robust as possible. So, we’re very excited to have this new, more clear path forward from a regulator, frankly, that has more experience and deepsea ocean research than any other agency on the planet.

VA: What are some of the primary technical challenges TMC may face in deepsea mineral extractions and how are you planning to overcome those?

CS: We’ve already proven that we can collect the nodules at scale. Nothing is easy as you’re doing it commercially for the first time. One of the main things that we’re considering is how to maximize the weights of collection by making the collector vehicle as big as possible. But if you make it a bit too big or too massive, you’re potentially having the collector vehicle sink a little too far into what is a very clay-like seafloor. So, getting the buoyancy right, getting the weight right, those are considerations. We’re also operating at over 4,000 meters, which is a very cold, high-pressure environment. So, of course, you have to ensure you have engineers such as AlIseas who are very capable of working in the deep ocean. But I would say all of these challenges have effectively been de-risked based on the tests TMC has already run. Now, it’s a matter of ramping up and getting to the production levels that we want to.

VA: Who are you targeting as far as prospective buyers? Have you lined up any offtake with, let’s say, I guess, U.S. Defense, any companies in the energy sector, or auto OEMs? Who are your targeted offtakers?

CS: The executive order directed the Defense and Energy Departments to explore offtake of this material. So, stay tuned on that. That just came in the executive order a couple of weeks ago. Beyond that, we do have an offtake with Glencore for half of the nickel and copper from our NORI Area. But that’s only if it’s produced by a TMC-owned facility. We have now made clear that we will be producing the metal from these nodules initially at an existing processing facility in Japan with a partner, Pacific Metals, and they successfully smelted these nodules into high-grade nickel-copper cobalt alloy and manganese silicate product. We had a site visit just a few weeks ago where members of the Southside Research Community as well as battery makers, steel makers, precursor producers, all also toured the facility with interest in potential offtake. So, I would say those conversations are ongoing … and the fact that the U.S. government potentially wants to get involved could make those discussions even easier.

VA: Are there any partnerships emerging in the deepsea mining space, particularly with nations like Norway. You mentioned Japan. Do you see potential for any further partnerships forming?

CS: Absolutely, and that’s a great point in that over the last 18 months, you’ve seen a flurry of activities from countries such as Norway, Sweden, Japan, South Korea, India—all of which have had major headlines regarding those countries’ intentions to explore for or potentially move into commercial production for deepsea mining. For TMC, one of the exciting parts is we have now submitted our application through this U.S. process. And we have, in our view, the best team in the world in terms of deepsea mining expertise, and we have an opportunity to provide services to some of those countries and contractors who want to catch up and who want to pursue this resource either in their own territorial or international waters. TMC has already been approached by multiple parties from states that I mentioned earlier to provide services to them. Whether that takes the form of cash payments or potential equity in their projects or royalties, this is a great way for TMC to potentially expand a resource portfolio using the expertise that our team has already gathered.

VA: Do you believe deepsea mining can realistically reduce U.S. dependence on China within the next five to 10 years and why?

CS: 100%. Because the U.S. currently has zero or de minimis primary production of metals such as nickel, manganese and cobalt. The only nickel and cobalt mine currently operating is the Eagle Mine in northern Michigan, and that only has a few years left of ore. So, the U.S. will be totally dependent on foreign sources for nickel, manganese and cobalt, and China dominates processing for all three of those. So what TMC can bring to the U.S. offshore in the first year of operation, it may not solve all of the U.S. needs, but by the time we get ramped up and to early 2030s, we anticipate being able to provide the majority of, if not all, of the U.S. needs required for nickel, manganese and cobalt. … This is a total solution for providing metals needed for the clean transition, but also all the metals I listed there are necessary for aerospace and defense. So yes, absolutely.

Comments

Add new comment

This conversation is moderated according to Hart Energy community rules. Please read the rules before joining the discussion. If you’re experiencing any technical problems, please contact our customer care team.

Rich Text Editor, Comment field