Will the US move towards Deep-Sea Mining? What’s Really at Stake for the Ocean and Our Future

0:00 Over the past number of years, I've had Dr. Andrew Thaler on the podcast to talk about deep sea mining. It is a very interesting topic to discuss, but it's also one of the scariest things because we just don't know at all anything about the deep sea compared to what we're gonna do to the deep sea by mining these polymetallic nodules and extracting them from the surface and bringing them up to the surface of the Ocean. This is something that we need to talk about, and I've had Andrew on a number of times, but this time we had him on because he contacted me. He's like, Hey, Andrew. Do you wanna talk about how I testified at a congress committee on deep sea mining last week, and I was like, absolutely. I watched some of it. I was very intrigued.

0:40 It was very cool to see my buddy Andrew on tv or on YouTube, I guess where it was shown, but also surrounded really in between two of the biggest CEOs in deep sea mining history, I guess at this point. 'cause there's not much history, but there is history. And so we talked about what it was like to testify, how he decided to testify and what it was all about and how he felt. So we're gonna talk about that. On today's episode of the How to Protect the Ocean Podcast, let's start the show. Hey everybody. Welcome back to another exciting episode of the How to Protect the Ocean Podcast. I'm your host, Andrew Lewin, Marine biologist and science communicator here to tell you what's happening with the Ocean, how you can speak up for the Ocean, and what you can do to live for a better Ocean by taking action. Now, over the last month or so, or maybe two months, we've seen a lot of requests for information on deep sea mining for the American Samoa.

1:26 We've seen it for the Marion Islands. We've seen it now going to part like a little different type of mining for Virginia, and now it was just about to be released Alaska, that they're looking to do deep sea mining up in Alaska. And we saw, you know what the expectation is for public comment, people can put in their public comments. We saw what those comments were for American Samoa, for Marion Islands, it was very heavily in favor against. Doing any type of deep sea mining without more information and how it will benefit those islands because it's messing up their sea. It's very far from mainland US and it's messing up the territories around them and what's gonna happen to their islands. Those are the ones that are gonna be affected, And so we're seeing a lot of that build up the public comment.

2:09 But the other parts. Process, our public hearings and these hearings are very important to find out what we have on record, no matter what happens. To have on record the advantages and disadvantages of doing deep sea mining. And Dr. Andrew Thaler, a good friend of mine, a colleague friend of the podcast, has been on this podcast a number of times to talk about deep sea mining among other things, all the other stuff that he does. This is sort of like his true core talking points and what he knows about, he did his PhD on it. He was the editor of the Deep Sea Observer, which is a magazine, the industry magazine. He talked to the CEOs of the metals company, talked to a bunch of other CEOs, got to know the industry, got to be plugged into the industry. But being a scientist and a deep sea ecologist, so really understanding and bringing to light.

2:54 All the environmental factors that play into how dangerous this could be for the future of our planet, for the future of our Ocean. And so having him on the podcast to talk about how he testified at a congressional committee on deep sea mining was very enlightening for me. It was very cool to have him on the podcast. He came in, he was jazzed up to do this. He emailed me over the week and he said, Hey, you know what I wanna talk about? Do you wanna talk about it in the pockets? I said, absolutely, I do. We got a time together and we put it together. And this is really informational for me, I assume for you as well. One, I'm Canadian, I'm not American, so I'm not used to the process as he mentions to be able to have. Information on record for any other administration that comes through or any other flip of Congress.

3:35 If Congress flips in 2026 during the midterms or even the Senate flips, we'll have that information on record that they can use either for or against deep sea mining. So I think it'll be interesting to see what happens there. But let's get to the interview of Dr. Andrew Thaer of his testimony on the Committee for Deep Sea Mining. Enjoy the interview and I'll talk to you after. Andrew Thaler. Welcome back to the How to Protect the Ocean Podcast. Are you ready to talk about not only deep sea mining, but talking about deep sea mining in front of a committee, like a government, a federal government committee? You testified. We're gonna find out all about that. Are you ready to talk about it? I am ready. Right on.

4:15 I can't tell you enough, Andrew, how one proud I was as a friend of yours, um, to see you, you know, in a suit, first of all, in a suit, you know, in front. Is it a Senate committee? Was that what it was? Or was it like a, a subcommittee? Is that is a house. So House of Representatives. Uh, right. Subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee. Um, So it's the, uh, energy and Minerals subcommittee. Okay. Okay, cool. Well, I'll tell you, I was so proud to see you are one of three people. Thank you. Testifying. Uh, you know, about deep sea mining and, and you know, you like, there were two sort of industry players that were in there and we'll get into who they are.

4:56 But then there was you who's, you know, I, I think it's funny you were, you were a true scientist in there because you were like playing the middle. You were like, look, I, like, I have my own opinions of it. But also I see both sides, and here's the technology and here's, you know, the, the, um, sort of here's the, the, the ethical side and the environmental side that I'm concerned about. And this is why I'm here. And I'm glad that they chose you to do that. Um, before we get into all of that conversation of how it came to be and how you felt throughout the time and how you feel now, um, can you just give people an idea of who you are and what you do, just to remind them if they haven't, if they haven't met you before. Absolutely, I'd be happy to.

5:37 So, I am Dr. Andrew Thaler. I am a deep sea ecologist, a conservation technologist, and an Ocean educator. Uh, and my work primarily focuses on how humans use technology to explore, exploit, protect, and plunder the deep oceans. Right on. I love it. Alright, let's, let's get right into it because know people who have, who've, who've seen you before. They know all about you. They know your history with deep sea mining, uh, and, and, and like deep sea ecology and, and your, I guess, relationship with deep sea mining throughout your career has been quite close. Um, you are a, an expert in, in looking at the issues around it, looking at the policy, looking at the environmental, uh, influence and, and what we might or might not expect from it.

6:22 And you've been on the podcast a number of times. I can't even count any more of like how many times you've been on this podcast. It's been more than a few, bit more than a few. Uh, and, and, uh, I'll tell you like, it's, it's always interesting having you on to, to be able to talk about this. But let's just get to this, uh, committee meeting. How did it all come about? How did you get involved in this type of thing? How, and like, how does one get involved in this type of test of testifying? So this was, um, the house put out an announcement that there would be a, uh, subcommittee hearing, uh, on the policy barriers to deep sea mining. Right. Uh, right now the US House of Remi representatives is controlled by the Republicans.

7:03 So the Republicans are the ones who, who hosted the hearing. Uh, generally what happens is, um, the majority party gets to pick, uh, two or three witnesses, and the minority party gets to supply a single witness to, to testify on their side. So, okay. Uh, a similar hearing happened, uh, earlier this year. Uh, and I, I think we talked about it when that hearing happened as well. Yeah. It had many of the same, uh, people involved the two, I think the two deep sea mining CEOs were the same. Uh, And then it was, uh, Duncan Curry who was representing, or who was the witness for the Democrats. So I've been involved in deep sea mining policy as well as deep sea mining environmental science for a long time.

7:46 Um, you know, I'd like to say it's like, oh, it's, you know, my vast reputation and all the relationships I've built over time and all these other things. But the reality is, um, particularly for this hearing, I think the overwhelming factor that got me into the hearing was, uh, there was no travel budget. And I live very close to DC And then probably the closest DC mining expert to the physical hearing room understood underst hey, which is not, it's all about location, location, location, right? Which is, you know, not, not to minimize any, like, it's an honor to be invited. It's, it was an incredible opportunity. An incredible experience. Um. But, you know, it was like the, the tone of the meeting and the setting of the meeting.

8:29 I could have, I, there were other people I could have recommended as well. Um, but it was, it was a fast turnaround. They needed an expert who was local to, to DC and I was absolutely happy to represent the Deep Sea, represent the environment, and represent science in front of the US House of Representatives. Perfect. That's awesome. Um, it's, it's, yeah, it's, it's interesting when a committee meeting happens, uh, and, and of course your friends involved, you know, somebody who obviously you're, you're very well qualified. I know you said it's location, location, but you know, you're obviously a, a, a person that is, is perfect for that type of, of of work. Uh, when, when you were approached to do this, were you, uh, nervous?

9:12 Like, did you, did you be like, I gotta brush up on some things? Like what, what was your reaction when you were like, oh, I'm, I'm doing this. So it was, um, I mean, it is, it's very nerve wracking. Um, right. You know, it is. You know, not necessarily a, um, you know, when you're testifying in front of Congress, and especially when you're representing the minority party, you don't expect it to be a particularly, uh, welcoming group. Right. Um, it's, it's generally an antagonistic hearing. Um, I had been, uh, tapped as an alternate for an earlier hearing, so I had gone through some hearing prep before. Okay. So I sort of knew what the process was there, and there's, you know, we had about a week of warning, And so we did a week of prep for the hearing.

9:53 Um, I, you know, I worked with the House Dems on my testimony. Um, I, we did a couple rounds of practice questions to really get into the field of things. And to be honest, the questions we did in the practice rounds were much, uh, harsher and more, uh, more challenging than the ones we actually had in the hearing, which I think helped. Helped immensely. Yeah, for sure. But no, absolutely. Going into, I mean, it's, it's the US Congress and it was my first time really testifying in front of. You know, the actual US Congress. So it's, it's, it's absolutely a nerve wracking experience. It's now, uh, five days in the past and I'm still coming down off the adrenaline high a little bit. Um, it was the rare sighting of, of Dr. Andrew Thaler in a suit, as you said. Yeah.

10:33 Which happens about three times a year. Lucky. You're lucky. I feel, if you're lucky, feel like every scientist has one suit. Right. And you use that suit. I'm all, I'm all about that. I have one suit that I use over and over. I, you know, I have worn chest waiters in December more than I've worn a suit in 2025 and 2026. Well, you're starting 2026 off strong. 'cause you've already worn won. Right. So you Absolutely. That's awesome. Um, okay, so, so. When you get there and you've gone through the prep, you know what to expect. You've seen how some of these play on like the, the deep sea mining ones. Yeah. Uh, who were you testifying with? Who were the, there, you said, you mentioned there were CEOs from the, basically the top mining, deep sea mining companies.

11:15 There was the Metals company, I forget what the other companies. Can you just kind of give us a breakdown of each one of those? Yeah. So it was, uh, Gerard Barron from the Metals Company, who I've known for 15 years now, uh, at this point. Okay. Um, I even did early environmental work on one of his older companies way, way back in the day. Right. Um, So, so we've, we go back a ways. Um, And then it was Oliver, uh, gun Sakara. Uh, okay. Who is Impossible Medals, who I think you've interacted with a few times. And I know he Yes, yes. On, on LinkedIn. He's always like, lemme come on the show. And I'm, one day, one day I, you know, he'd be a great interview. Yeah. He's, he, he, he, he is a nice guy. He is very earnest. He believes in what he is doing.

11:55 Um, right. He'd be a great interview. Uh, you don't have to agree with everything he is doing to, of course. Yeah. To appreciate the value of his work. Uh, And then there was also a third witness, which was Eric, uh, Milito, who, uh, was new to me, who is a lobbyist with, uh, one of the big, uh, offshore energy development NGOs, Um, So he's primarily, uh, offshore oil and Nat gas, but also offshore wind and offshore minerals, so. Gotcha. He's kind of, he is a lobbyist for, for that industry. Okay. Now, you, you said you had relationship with, uh, Gerard Barron before. So what's that relationship like now? Is it like, you know, you guys, he knows, you know, each other. It is cordial. You've, you've had con I assume a number of conversations with him about deep sea mining.

12:40 You, I, I assume there's some things you agree on, there's some things you agree to disagree. Is that, how, is that how it works? I mean, we're professionally cordial. We, we know each other well. We worked with each other, other on multiple things when I was the editor in Chief of the Deep Sea Mining Observer. Um, yeah, he was always a very forthcoming source when I needed to talk with a representative from a mining company and get their opinions. So, um, yeah, you know, we have a respectful, uh, cordial professional relationship. Yeah. You know, we're not best friends, but No, no, of course not. Yeah. Yeah. You don't have to be. Yeah, no, I think it's just, but it was, you know, the surprising thing was like, um, you know, it's not like the witnesses are not a particularly antagonistic group. Like we all know each other. Right. Yeah. And like, it's a small, it's a small industry, it's a small community.

13:20 Um, yeah. We've all had it out with our various positions on things and that's been going on for a long time, so it's not like there were gonna be any surprises in the hearing either. Yeah. Which I think is kind of nice too. I think a lot of times we've been, uh, the viewers have been, uh, sort of exposed to other, probably maybe larger like senate committees, I would imagine, and even house committees that. Are, are a little bit more controversial, uh, topics, you know? Oh, yeah. Uh, especially these days. And you see, you know, congress members and, and senate members going at it with the, with the, uh, with the witnesses and, and, and being very harsh and, and things like that.

14:00 This is more of, was this more of a, so let's, let's, let's, let's kind of lay the situation down. So there's been, um, at least two, uh, deep sea mining, um, I guess inquiries or, or, or, or like a, a request for information. Yeah. So RFIs, RFIs, request for information. Right. So for Samoa as well as, uh, for the Mariana Islands, and they've Mariana Islands. Yep. Yep. The, the public periods have, like, the public common periods have actually ended for both of those at this point. Um, my understanding recently, like, like the last couple of days, there's been another one that's been mm-hmm.

14:42 Uh, put out for, uh, Alaska. Yeah. And, and is it, is it, is there one put out for ver around Virginia too? Like off the shores of Virginia? So, so the current state is, um, we've had RFIs go out for American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands. Those have opened and closed and received a tremendous amount of comments right from the people of American Samoa, Guam and Northern Mariana Islands in particular. Yeah. There will be one going out for Alaska tomorrow is I tomorrow think when it will be published to the Federal Register. Okay. So by time this is published, this, this will be, there'll be an RFI out for that. Um, there was a press release about, uh, metal rich sands and phosphates off the coast of Virginia.

15:25 Gotcha. We've seen the press release. There's no date for when there will be, uh, an RFI fit filed to the Federal Register Um, So we don't know what is the status of that one yet, and we'll have more clarity once, once they put out a formal RFI. In addition to that, Noah has put out the new rules for expediting deep sea mining permitting in the high Seas, which is areas beyond national jurisdiction, which if you are a country who is a member state of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea, you can't mine without the consent of the International Seabed Authority. The US is the one country that has a major economy that has not signed on to the UN convention, the law, the sea. So we're kind of going a little rogue there.

16:06 Yeah. And that is, um, you know, I, I'm very comfortable saying I think that is largely going to be an illegal move that is gonna be challenged in court quite substantially. I also think it's wildly unethical while the ISA is in the midst of deliberating and negotiating how we're gonna parcel out these resources to say. You know, forget, you guys we're just gonna do it ourselves. Um, yeah. And I have to admit, it boggles my mind that that's how it works. So the members of unclothed, like the UN Law of the SEA Convention of Law of the Sea, cannot mine in the high Seas because they are part, it's part of that binding agreement. They can't mind yet.

16:47 They're in the process of developing the rules. Right. So they're waiting for these rules to be developed before they even think about doing anything. But the ones who don't, the countries who don't sign can do whatever the hell they want. Yeah. If they so desire, I feel like that's backwards in a way. You know what I mean? Like, not only is it backwards, but when this treaty was being negotiated, and especially when the implementation agreement to create the International Sea B Authority was being negotiated, it was negotiated in a way to be extremely favorable to the United States. Um, So the United States stands to benefit tremendously from joining the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea.

17:30 Um, they immediate, if the UN ratifies the treaty I, not the un, if the US ratifies the treaty, they immediately get a seat on the council. They immediately get access to putting their experts on the legal and technical commission. They immediately get a tremendous amount of influence over the deliberations and the US negotiated in good faith to get all those carve outs put in when the treaty was live And then chose not to ratify. And when was that, like when, when was the treaty like live? When did that come in place? Do you remember? So it went into effect in 94. That was the implementation agreement for the ISA. The UN Convention of the Law of the Sea was in the eighties. And it was Reagan who ultimately decided not to, uh, ratify the treaty.

18:13 And do we know why? Do we have any idea? I know it's a long time ago, and I don't know if you. So there's, um, you know, there was, there was opposition to, uh, the US kind of giving away what they perceived to be their resources. Mm-hmm. At the time the US was the major, uh, driver of deep sea mining. Um mm-hmm. We had most of the technology development, we had the at sea capacity. Um, we were really running the show. And so there was a perception that, you know, if we sign this treaty, we're giving away an advantage that we have. Turns out that advantage was largely artificial, especially in the eighties. Mm-hmm. Um, and that's, I think we've done a, a podcast on the Glomar Explorer and Project Zoan and how that kind of borked the entire industry for 20 years.

18:54 Right. Yeah. But basically the financial estimates for the value of deep sea mining in the seventies and eighties was. Fabricated, and it was fabricated as part of a, a government front to recover some Soviet nuclear submarine. Uh, it's hard, it's hard to talk about that without sounding like a crazy conspiracy theorist, but it Right. Largely the case that, yeah, the early moves towards deep sea mining only happened because they had so much support from the federal government for clandestine operations. Yeah. Well, and I mean, like, that was the like, height of the cold war too, in the eighties. Oh, absolutely. You know, it was, it was, uh, there were some things that were happening, so, um, yeah. Inter Interesting.

19:35 Yeah. Okay. So that's where we're at. This, so this committee hearing happens. Uh, is this part of the, a regular process? Like, I'll be honest, I'm surprised Republicans want to have a hearing in general just because I, you know, they haven't come out, you know, they've come out publicly say they, they want this obviously by putting out the RFIs. Yeah. But you know, you have seen, well, in addition to the RFIs, there's also an executive order. An executive order. Yeah. Uh, uh, I, I think the motivation for the hearing was that, um, you know, the timeline that was set by the executive order was coming up. Mm-hmm. And they needed to get some statements on the record about, you know, what are the permitting and policy hurdles to getting this done in the us Gotcha.

20:18 What are the potential implications? Um, and this was, you know, because it was a Republican sponsored hearing, it almost certainly the goal was to help promote the industry ahead of the new rules coming out. Gotcha. Um, and to get some of the industry representatives on the record talking about the value that they're going to be providing to the United States economy and to our, you know, alleged need for, for these specific critical minerals. Um, And so having the opportunity to be kind of the one voice that gets to push back on that was, you know, a lonely opportunity, but a nice one. I'm not, you know, I'm not often the only one in the room that's, that's arguing for the environment, but, and of course the, the democrats in the committee were of course arguing for the environment as well.

21:02 And especially, um, one of the nice things that happened is that the, um, the chair of the committee let the representatives from Guam and American Samoa and, uh, the CNMI wave in which, Yeah, nice. US territories elect congresspeople. They each get won. Uh, they're allowed to go to Congress. They are, uh, allowed to participate in the hearings. They're allowed to ask questions. They're allowed to address Congress. They don't have voting authority. Gotcha Um, So really their one ability to represent, uh, their constituents is in these kinds of hearings where they can ask questions relevant to their constituencies and bring that information back. So having the ability to bring in, uh, those representatives and let them speak for the people who will be most directly affected by deep sea mining and US waters, I think was really important and really a valuable thing to have.

21:52 Absolutely. I know it was a pretty powerful message, what they said. We will talk about it in a second. So, so you're, you're, you're kind of surrounded by these other, uh, three guys. Three guys who are, who are sitting up there and they're, they're testifying, they're everybody's asking questions. So you had the committee members asking questions. Um, overall, how do you feel it went in terms of giving information, uh, for, for deep sea mining in, in the us? So, um, you know, how it went is kind of. You know, I don't have any illusions that this hearing is going to reshape the current administration's priorities on deep sea mining or, you know, uh, change the hearts of, of the Republicans on the committee.

22:39 Um, uh, I think what's important is that, uh, it's on the congressional record, uh, what the environmental impacts are. It's on the congressional record that these are some of the limitations. Um, and it's laying the groundwork for, you know, if there is a, a change in power in US Congress, which likely will happen in in 2028. Um, you know, if normal political tides behave like normal political sides do, for those who are listening on audio, I'm crossing my fingers. Yeah. And my toes like everything's being crossed. Yes. Yeah. I mean, generally speaking, party, party and power in Congress shifts halfway through a presidential term. Who knows what will actually happen during this presidential term, but you know, right.

23:20 Assuming that the Democrats take control, we've, we've laid some groundwork for, uh, where, uh, we feel that there is, um, you know, weaknesses in the permitting process and weaknesses in the development of the industry. Um, and, you know, the industry's not ready to mine today anyway. No. Like, you know, the, the earliest timeline I heard, uh, came from the metals company. They said they could be ready to mine in two years. I think that's very optimistic. And I think even if they are ready to mine in two years, them going after the Clarion Clipper and zone, the high Seas areas beyond national jurisdiction means that, you know, even if they attempt to mine, they're, they're gonna be faced with a lot of legal hurdles before that happens. Oh, I'm sure. Um, and, you know, these are, all of these are international companies with, you know, international supply chains, international logistics.

24:06 Like the ship is is based in the Netherlands, I think. Yeah. One of the, one of the Nordic, the ship's based in the Netherlands. I think it's owned by a, a Swiss company. Like they'll flag it in the us but like. They have partners that are, uh, housed in countries that are, uh, ISA member states. I mean, they, their, their main company is Canada, which, you know, great. The, what, what do you say? The, the, the big north wild and free Great North Wild and Free Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that's true. North. Strong and free. Yeah, true. North strong free. Sorry, Yeah. Yeah. So, you know, Canada is a member state, so there will be, you know, they will face legal challenges for sure. Yeah. Whether or not they'll prevail, you know, kind of defend Yeah. Depends on the prevailing winds and, and the, the legal arguments being made.

24:49 But like, I don't, don't, it also takes time. It takes time. I don't think two years is a realistic framework for No. Anyone being able to, to mine at a commercial scale. Right. I think that it's very likely we'll see, uh, the first of the experimental, uh, deep sea mining test operations that are done not at full commercial scale, but are done at a much larger scale than what we've seen before. Um, And so I think it's very important to have the environmental issues. In the records and to have dialogues going with these companies about, you know, what, what we think would be an appropriate way to truly assess the environmental impacts. Um, and we've done several, several podcasts on the environmental impacts. I think, you know, for this one we can talk more about, like, some of the other big issues, including the stakeholders, the people who are directly impacted by this.

25:35 Because, you know, the one thing I think few people appreciate is that like these deep sea mining sites don't happen in the middle of nowhere. Like they're happening in US territories where there are islands that are populated, uh, with people who have tremendous cultural and personal ties to the Ocean and who have historically felt like they've been excluded from these decision making processes. So when the RFIs for American Samoa and the CNMI went out, you know, they were met with overwhelming and overwhelmingly bipartisan opposition to proposals to start deep sea mining. Um, you know, the, the, the, the Pacific Territories are largely Republican.

26:18 I think American Samoa has a Republican governor, the CNMI has a Republican governor. Um, American Samoa sends more, um, citizens into the US military than any other, uh, region per capita. Um, really, I was not to say state, but you know, because we have, yeah. Than any state or territory per capita. American Samoa sends more people to fight for the United States. Um, and, you know, there, there is a, a deep and complex history, especially with the Pacific Islands, uh, with uh, not just colonialism, but with a perception of the United States as in some ways and in some places a liberator. So, yeah. Um, 'cause the US came in during World War II and. You know, a lot of these places were, you know, the Mariana Islands are called the Mariana Islands because Spain said these are ours and we're gonna name 'em after Queen Mariana.

27:06 Jeez. Um, yeah, I didn't know that. So people have, that's crazy. You know, it's, it's this, it's this fascinating, you know, it's this complex interaction between Pacific identity and also like complicated feelings towards the United States that aren't always what you might expect them to be. Yeah. It's, it's interesting. I've always, my, my argument's always been, you know, the territory should have statehood, and if we do all six of them at once, I think that's the best possible outcome. Oh yeah. Because it almost, it gives a balance because if you do all six territories at once, my, uh, my guess is very strongly, three of them will lean pretty heavily Republican. Three of them will lean Yeah. Very heavily Democrat.

27:46 And so it won't immediately upset the balance in a way that say like, yeah, we'll give, you know, statehood to DC and Puerto. Right, right. Because it's, you know, Washington, DC, Puerto Rico, us Virgin Islands would, would probably, if they got statehood, um, lean, fairly Democrat. Yeah. Um, and the, the Pacific ones would, would likely lean fairly Republican at least re for the moment. Yeah. Although, we'll see what happens if, if someone starts mining their waters. Yeah. 'cause like, my understanding is from the, the comments that were provided in, in the American Samoa and the Marion Islands, they were largely against the mining. Oh yes. The deep sea mining. Right.

28:26 Extremely against, extremely against 95, 90 6% of the comments coming from the island. Yeah. And, and Guam isn't even like, I think they've passed laws, like they're not even considering it. Right. Like, they're just like, it's, it's over. Like they're, they're so Guam and American Samoa have, um, bans on deep sea mining in their waters, but as territories, they only control their territorial waters out to 12 miles. Ah, the exclusive economic zone that stretches out 200 miles Yeah. Yeah. So that 12 mile to 200 mile zone is federal waters. Right. And so the federal government can do what it it wants. That's a lot. Water. Yes. It's a ton of water. It's a lot of water. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Interesting. Okay. So, so the, like, talk to me about some of the questions that were asked, like, what stood out for you during this session?

29:14 Because it was, it was a fairly long session. It was about two hours. About two hours. Two hours, yeah. Um, talk to me about some of the questions that stood out to you that, that maybe even surprised you at times, um, that were asked that you were just like, oh, okay. Like, we're gonna have to answer this. Or even some of the answers that were given too. Yeah. So the question I got that, that surprised me the most, because, you know, if you watched, I was not the main person being, being grilled. Um, a lot of the objectives of the Democrats were to get mining CEOs on the record about specific initiatives that they had. So, um, I got. The, the questions you would expect from the Democrats about what are the environmental impacts? Can you monitor this? Who can monitor this?

29:55 Yes. Um, and I think that was a really important one because the answer to who's gonna monitor this, who has the capacity to monitor this right now, is the mining companies, the only people really, you have the capacity to do environmental monitoring of deep sea mining site is a company doing deep sea mining. And in fact, right now, even the federal government doesn't have the capacity because we fired, you know, 25% of the workforce Um, So there is a tremendous deficit of capacity within the federal government, within the regulatory agencies to do the kind of monitoring that would be necessary. And so it requires really tight partnerships with the mining companies, which, you know, depending on who the mining companies are and how you feel their relationships are, and how you, you feel, whether or not they're operating in, um, you know, they're, they're coming from a, a good faith, uh, position.

30:42 Um, you know, some people may be very opposed to saying, we can't let. The, the people doing the exploitation also do the monitoring. Of course we have to have some way to, to balance that against something else. Yeah. Um, you know, the, the, the one curve ball question I got, 'cause you know, with the, with the Democrats on the, on the hearing, I knew what questions they were gonna ask me ahead of time. Yeah. 'cause Yeah. Yeah. They told you. We rehearsed and we talked about it and they discussed it and they said what they wanted to have on, on the record, Um, So with, um, the, the curve ball questions came from the Republicans and the one that I thought was really interesting and, and a little bit surprising was from, uh, Congressman Bagge, uh, from Alaska. So he is Alaska's Republican Congressman, uh, congressman at large.

31:23 'cause Alaska gets one. Um, 'cause they don't have a lot of people. Right. Um, and he asked, you know, what, what thresholds would you need to see in order to, to let deep sea mining progress? Um, and that's, that's, yeah, I, I appreciate that kind of question because now we're thinking about this in terms of. You know, what do we really believe are acceptable environmental impacts with deep sea mining? What do we really, you know, what kinds of studies would we actually need to see to get there? Because right now we get studies from the mining companies and they decide to measure their impacts. And you know, you'll see a lot of them saying, oh look, we, we did a plume study. And it showed that the, the impact of the, the plume is only like immediately around the site that's directly being mined and it doesn't spread.

32:07 And then you dig into the details And then you realize they're only talking about the benthic plume. They're not talking about the midwater plume, they're not talking about accidental surface discharge. Um, and when they're looking at the chemistry, they're not talking about the dewatering plume, they're talking about the plume produced when you literally pick a rock off the sea floor. And so, like, you know, while they're driving the show, you know, and I, I don't wanna say that their environmental studies are suspect because they do good environmental work and they work with good scientists too. But the environmental studies are geared towards, uh, a positive outcome. And, you know, as a scientist, my goal is always to disprove my own hypothesis, right? And so if you're going in with the hypothesis, there's not gonna be any harm.

32:48 You're like, you need to, you need to be designing your studies to, to really reflect what maximal harm would actually look like. Um, yeah. And I think that's where, you know, that's where having the ability to do independent studies, um, to work with Bo and with Bessie, which it is the, the federal agency is called Bessie. Um, it's, it's fantastic. It's a great name for the, the one of the regulatory agencies that oversees mineral extraction in, in the Ocean, um, right. But to have those be designed not by the mining company. But by the regulators to say, okay, this is, we've worked with our scientific experts. 'cause the US has a tremendous amount of scientific expertise on the deep sea.

33:29 You know, we've worked with our US scientific experts, um, they've defined what they believe to be critical thresholds. We've designed the experiment. You go out and do it and we will review it. And I think that's the kind of thing we need to start seeing. Um, studies designed by independent, uh, regulatory agencies that are then conducted by the mining companies. 'cause they're the only ones who can really afford to do them. One of the questions I had when you, when you were talking about, you know, the different types of, of like scientists doing the work and doing the impact assessments and environmental assessments as well as, you know, during the operations, uh, having the mining companies look after it. Like, I've worked as an environmental consultant before, you know, a lot of times I know how they work.

34:13 They usually hire an outside consulting firm. The outside consulting firm will have a, hopefully a good reputation. They will do the, the work And then, you know, it gets scrutinized, but it's based on science and Right. And, and a lot of information and, And so forth. And the government kind of looks through it and makes sure that it's done properly And then they, they do it. And, and if, if people don't think it's done properly, we've seen this in the oil and gas industry. Then environmental NGOs will actually sue to make sure that they do a proper job. Yes, we saw that in the North slope and, and that worked and, and although it's a lot of work, it doesn't happen often, but although it's a lot of work, it does happen. And in that case, they were, uh, the environmental consultants or the environmental NGOs were very, uh, successful in, in stopping that without a better environmental impact assessment.

34:56 But when we talk about the actual operation of the work, like I remember working as an, uh, an environmental consultant with seismic survey. I was actually like a Marine mammal observer on the ships in the Arctic. And so, you know, we were looking at whales when they were coming in. You know, if they came in within a certain distance, we had to shut down the instrumentation right. And, And so forth. So we had, we were representing the government on that. We were being paid by the companies, but we were representing the government and, you know, we were making sure that everything was done properly. If fisheries that happens to where you have fisheries observers on board, are there such thing as, and, and I know this industry's fairly new and hasn't really been done, are there such thing as, you know, deep sea mining observers to make sure that everything is done properly, to make sure there's, if there's a, a spill or something going wrong, like how and how does that even work?

35:44 Because fisheries observers will come on and when the fish are coming on the boat, they count them, they make sure everything's fine and blah, blah, blah. When you're doing Marine mammals reserving, you can actually see the whales. You look at binoculars, there's actually a scientific process through that. Do you see mining you can't see underneath, especially that, that deep. Is that possible? Has that been discussed at all? Uh, did it come up during the, during the hearing? So it did come up during the hearing. Um, and I think, you know, the answer to that is that, um, there are not deep sea mining observers yet, although observer gets to be a very confusing term because it's also the term used for the organizations at the ISA that aren't, uh, representing countries. Mm-hmm. Uh, and it's also the name of the trade journal that I used to run.

36:26 So there's like DC Body Observer, so there's like four different things that are called observers in the deep sea mining world. Might have to change the, that, the, the name. But, uh, regulatory observers, I think, I think it'll be absolutely necessary to have people on the boats. Yeah. Okay. Uh, monitoring and that, you know, that can get hairy because, you know, you're, you're alone in the middle of the Ocean. We've seen it with fisheries observers where they can get in a lot of trouble if something goes wrong. Yeah. And when we're talking about, you know, the potential to shut down, you know, millions or potentially billions of dollars of, of ore coming on board, like. Things can get hairy for people. So having, having that program in place in a way that's reliable and can build trust, I think is gonna be absolutely essential.

37:07 Um, you know, thing, there are things they can do, like they can live stream the RV feed from the mining tool and from the machines that are observing the mining tool. So Right. Those are live stream to the cloud will be able to, to watch in real time from mm-hmm. Uh, other locations, but like, you know, if things get hairy, you can turn those off. Um, yep. That's certainly not, and they do with GPS all the time. Absolutely. With fisheries, absolutely. Turn off their is s and fisheries all the time. Yeah. Yeah. Um, but in terms of like that actual observation capacity, oh, and also with the Marine mammals, like, you know, I just finished that big report on highly migratory species. Yeah. We had John for that. I think they will have to have, you know, Marine mammal observers on the boat as well. Um, and that, you know, that's raised an interesting question and a conversation I've had with, with other representatives from, from the deep sea mining world of like, you know what, what's gonna happen when there's a situation that mandates an all stop?

37:56 Yeah. Um, because, you know, the reality of the deep Ocean is that we have explored almost none of it. Um, less than 1% has been observed. At almost every time we go down as scientists, we discover something new and, you know, to the tune of about once every decade we discover something entirely new. That was completely unexpected. You know, we found hydrothermal vent, then we found cold seeps, then we found whale falls and wood falls and all these other kind of food falls. Um, very recently, a a Chinese research team found the deepest chemosynthetic ecosystems. It's this, it's this deep, uh, worm colony that's, that's existing off of hydrocarbons at like six or seven or 8,000 meters Um, So we find new things all the time, and there is absolutely gonna be a situation in deep sea mining if it progresses at commercial scale and becomes the largest observer of the sea floor in history.

38:49 Um, you know, one year of a deep sea mining operation will observe more of the sea floor than the entirety of the last 150 years of scientific exploration. Um, they're gonna find something new and they're gonna find something novel. Like, it's, it's guaranteed that you're gonna, you're gonna stumble upon a new ecosystem that we probably haven't even begun to imagine yet, because we keep getting surprised from the deep sea. Um, how do you trigger an all stop in that kit situation? Like, how do we get to a point where you're like, Hey guys, this is like hydrothermal vent level discovery right here. Uh, you have to stop and now we have to spend the next 30 years studying this thing. Mm-hmm. Um, mm-hmm. I, you know, I can guarantee that is going to, like, if deep sea mining progresses at full commercial scale, it's almost guaranteed that that's at least gonna happen once, probably twice, probably once a decade for the entire operation of the industry.

39:39 And we need to have like a plan in place for what do we do when they're, 'cause now we have the bb and j treaty as well, the high Seas. Yeah. That defines Marine genetic resources and, you know. The Marine genetic resources that we've discovered from deep sea hydrothermal vents and the economic value that has come directly from that one discovery vastly dwarfs any prediction for the total value of the deep sea mining industry. So there is a real economic conflict between Marine genetic resources of the deep sea and the potential value of war from deep sea mining. And like they're gonna stumble on a new cool ecosystem because we do it all the time because the deep sea is full of amazing stuff. Uh, Yeah. And it surprises us very frequently.

40:21 And so figuring out how we handle that moment, I think is the next big conversation we need to have as a deep sea mining community. Yeah. As a community of practitioners working for or against, or with or in the development of best practices, uh mm-hmm. Or however you want to parse your role within deep sea mining, I think that's a conversation that needs to be had. Yeah. Yeah. And, and even thinking like, not even just unique habitats that are stationary that we come across, but also the connectivity of the Deep sea. Absolutely. We did an episode with Ocean Networks Canada recently, where they were talking about volcanic activity on underneath the, in the deep sea, like basically underneath the water. And how that's the pillars of smoke would go across the Pacific.

41:03 Mm-hmm. Absolutely. We still don't know what value or, or you know, desecration that brings, you know, across the deep sea, but it's there for a reason. It's, it's happening. And what if you come across like a plume of smoke that comes in every once in a while and it, it disrupts it somehow, or it, it causes it problems. And that is a, is a, a key ecological function or a key geophysical function that we do not know anything about at this time. Right. You know, we just know that it goes somewhere. We don't know where it ends up. We don't know how far it goes. And, And so I think there's so much there, there's so many unknowns in, in the deep sea. I think we're starting to discover more and more and, and I, you know, I, I talked to you before we, we, we did this, uh, interview before we pressed record.

41:49 Uh, you know, I, beyond Jaws, we just did an interview, which would probably be published by the time we published this episode, uh, where we looked at the, uh, you know, where, where they looked at like deep sea rubs, stereo rubs. Oh, yeah. Where they could, you know, look at what species are down there, like down at 900 meters plus, and, you know, measure how long they are. And we will be discovering new species, or species that haven't been seen in a long time. Uh, it's, it's gonna be incredible. You just said two months ago there was a new mm-hmm. Uh, was it squid? That was just, uh, that was deep sea squid. Oh, the, the stalker squid. Yes. The stalker squid. Yeah. So there, there's a deep sea squid that, that hangs out in nodule fields. It varies itself. Nodule field itself. Yeah. It buried, well it was discovered in, in, in a, in a nodule field survey.

42:32 Yeah. To look at the potential value for these resources. And it varies itself in nodule fields. Hangs two of its tentacles out and it just kind of waits to, to ambush its prey. Yeah. And we have no idea how that is going. Like if we, if we start grabbing some or that animal gets affected, we have no idea what that's like, what that's gonna happen, and all the other animals that are doing things like this that are in those fields, uh, that are there. So I, I think it's, it's just really interesting. So bringing it back to the hearing, with all this stuff coming up and known, how did like the two CEOs, like the two industry people, uh, react to any of those? Or how did they discuss those? Or were they asked those in the questions?

43:13 Like, what, you know, we're talking about thresholds here. What was their threshold to be like, what are we expecting or what are we, uh, looking to say, Hey, you know what, we're okay with. Doing this much damage. So they weren't, um, I don't recall if they were actually asked about thresholds. This was pretty close to the end of the hearing was year. Yeah. Right. And everyone has, everyone, all the congressmen have a limited amount of time to ask questions. Gotcha. And so people were really dialed into their specific things. The mining company CEOs were primarily talking about the permitting process, the value to the US economy, um, their specific technologies and, you know, the, the, um, steps they're taking to mitigate some environmental harm.

43:54 Although they didn't spend a ton of time talking about environmental work because No, the focus of the hearing itself was not particularly on the environment. It was more on Right. The permitting and the, um, the regulatory process. And you know a lot about, you know, stakeholder opinions. And making sure that the Pacific Islands are well represented. And they were, they were grilled a bit about some comments they had made about, uh, the Pacific Islands, that that revealed a little bit of naivety about Yeah, the politics of the Pacific and how that's all gonna function. But, um, you know, I think on that front, it's gonna be a learning experience for these mining companies as they get more and more involved in, uh, Pacific Island politics. Um, yeah, it seems like they, they don't really, I don't know if it's not taking it seriously or just kind of uh, well, I think it's a lack of awareness.

44:41 Think it's, I think that's what it is. Yeah. Well, you know, they're, you know, it's a deep sea mining, a very technical operation, uh mm-hmm. And a lot of the people who are kind of at the forefront are technology people. They're really excited about the robotics. They're really excited about the potential of the, or they're really excited about the logistical challenges, those kinds of things. And they're not necessarily the people who are thinking about, you know, the politics and the getting the social licens. And, you know, making sure that you are making the cultural connections you need in order to get, uh, support from the communities you're working in. And not like, I don't expect any mining company to get a hundred percent support from any community they're working in, but there has to at least be, you know, a level of mutual respect between the communities they're working in and the mining company that is reflected in, you know, day-to-day operations.

45:28 You know, if, if you have a mining operation off the coast of American Samoa, you've gotta use American Samoan airports. You are using their hotels. Yeah. You're getting their rental cars, you are using their ports, you know? Mm-hmm. The people loading and unloading the boats are from American Samoa. Like your employees, when they have downtime between, you know, duty shifts are gonna be, you know mm-hmm. Recreating an American Samoa, like, if you don't have at least at some level of mutual respect within the community, that becomes really expensive and really challenging and. Also very demoralizing. 'cause you know, yeah. You know, imagine you're on a two week on, two week off stint on a mining ship, and the two weeks you're spending in American Samoa, everyone just hates you. Oh yeah. You're wondering if every time you go out to eat someone's spitting in your food.

46:11 Like you, you can't operate like that. And that, you know, crushes your, your employee enthusiasm. So when you see like 95% opposition to the development of the industry, you have to take a step back and be like, we need to do community building before we send our robots down, you know? Absolutely. Absolutely. And I, I think that's necessary. Now, do you think from that hearing, uh, I know you said it's more informational than anything else, and it's building on it, do you think, uh, the, the, the, uh, Republicans on the committee are going to take that seriously? Do you think that's a, a possibility that they'll look at that and be like, Hey, maybe we should pump the brakes a little bit and, and let's do some more community building.

46:53 Um, I don't think there's gonna be a pump that breaks, um, with this, with this Congress. Um, you know, I do think that there was recognition that the, the representatives coming from the Pacific Islands were also Republicans. Yeah, I noticed that. Yeah. And so, you know, the opposition is coming from within their own party and I think, you know, to some extent they have to respect that. But, you know, the reality on the ground is one, there's so many years before the mining's actually gonna begin that. I think it's like kind of a secondary issue at the moment. Mm-hmm. And two, there's such a desire to get this industry moving because I think the industry itself is in a race against time too. Um, So there's this desire to get the industry moving as quickly as possible.

47:35 Um, for one, because there, there's this perception that we have to beat China at critical minerals, and especially with deep sea mining, despite the fact that polymetallic nodules, we're only talking about cobalt, nickel, and manganese. Um, right. Which are all minerals that we get from our allies. Um, right. And also we don't have any refining capacity for these nodules anywhere. So even if we're somewhere else, even if we're harvesting them, no. Like we, the collective planetary, we Oh, like humans at the moment, there's no fin, like there are lots of proposals to build refining capacity. Yeah. Um, you know, there's no point in, in developing this further if, if the refineries are just gonna be in China again.

48:16 Um mm-hmm. Because, but you know, there's no, there's certainly no US capacity to refine these metals yet. Um, And then what do these refineries look like compared to like, you know, I, I'm thinking oil and gas refineries, chemical alley and things like that. Like, is that. Is it gonna be similar to like the, like the types of outputs in terms of, of, to extract the metals from these nodules? So my, my expertise ends at the, at the shore. Okay. Um, gotcha. You know, I've seen some proposals for, for what some of the refineries look like, and, you know, they, they are next generation refineries too. Like, they're not like giant oil derricks, you know? Right, right. But, um, uh, we just, we don't have them in the US right now. So even if you look at a lot of the, um, the proposals coming out and the responses to the RFIs from the mining companies, they're talking about stockpiling.

49:02 And one of the points I made in my testimony is, you know, the cheapest place to stockpile these is to leave them on the sea floor. Like if we don't, if we don't have the capacity to, don't move, if we don't have the capacity to process 'em yet, they're not, these metals aren't entering the, the commodity supply chain anytime soon. Right. Um, why don't we get the refining capacity up first, and why don't we develop the refining capacity that can also take advantage of existing sources of these metals within the us. Mm-hmm. There's been some studies that have come out. That show that we can meet almost a hundred percent of our critical metals needs by, um, looking at the byproducts from existing mines. So metals that have already been mined. Um, the mining tailings, the mining waste, the environmental impact that has already happened, that has, you know, the damage has already been done.

49:47 Mm-hmm. Going back into those tailings and maximizing the amount of metals we get out of Yeah. The harm we've already caused before we begin exploring a new frontier. And what's the response to the industry when they, when, when you bring that kind of stuff up. Oh, it's too complex. But deep sea mining is, is almost certainly one of the most complicated industries Yeah. Uh, that we've ever conceived of. And it's taken us 70 years to get to this point without producing a single ounce of commercial or so. It's all complex. It's all complex. If you're not willing to dive into something complicated, then you're in the wrong industry, you know? Exactly. Now, one thing that I, I, and you kind of reminded me just by mentioning it, that came up a lot, and I know with the way geopolitics is kind of, uh, stemming out for the US and the world, uh, the country, China came up a lot in this hearing.

50:35 Yes. I was surprised, uh, to hear it. Surprised and not surprised. I wasn't expecting it to be mentioned that much, but it seems like a bit of a race, uh, because like they're saying, China's already doing this, China's already ready to do this, and they're, they're, it sounded like they've already been. Deep sea money. Has that happened? Uh, and was I just mistaken? Was that said at the hearing? But there seems to be a lot of concern over China and, and the US wanting to beat China to the punch. So there is a lot of, uh, xenophobia going on in, in US politics right now. Fear of China surpassing us in. Right. A lot of different ways. And part of that is that China does currently control something like 95% of the refining capacity for critical minerals for the world supply.

51:22 So, gotcha. You know, they're not all mined in China, but almost all of them go to China for, uh, refining. Yeah. And then get That makes sense. And then get distributed. Those are, that's for terrestrial mining. Yes. China has not mined the deep sea. They have invested in deep sea exploration. They have invested a tremendous amount in deep sea exploration. They have invested in deep sea mining technology. They have lease blocks with the International Seabed Authority for polymetallic nodule fields as well as cobalt rich crusts and sea floor massive sulfites. So hydrothermal vent mining. Um, they are pursuing, uh, a, a future that involves deep sea mining within the framework of the ISA China did ratify the Con Convention on the Law of the Sea.

52:03 They are party of that treaty. They are beholden to the international sea, but authority, um, you know, I think there was a lot of, you know, using China as a boogeyman mm-hmm. To address Yeah. Yeah. The US' own, uh, production inadequacies within our country because we have focused on building a service economy for so long. Mm-hmm. And have lost a lot of our manufacturing and, uh, material production capacity. Um. I am not particularly like I I I, I do to some extent agree that like you sh one actor controlling 95% of a supply chain. Yeah. Not good. Next Generation minerals is not great. Yeah. We should be investing in, in refining technology in the US and in Canada and in our allies and everywhere else because diversifying, diversifying that supply benefits everyone.

52:53 Um, I very much disagree with the idea that China is gonna like beat us to the deep sea and take over the high Seas and, you know, beat us to the punch on deep sea mining. I think if anything, China is very, very happy with the current state of affairs. We're deep sea mining is moving incredibly slowly And so potential competitors are not coming online to challenge their supply stream. Yeah. I think looking at how they've acted within the ISA and how they've promoted the development of the regulations, I think they are, um. Not unhappy with the current pace of DC mining negotiations, while of course they're working on developing technology and studying resources and all these other things.

53:33 Um, you know, that being said, China is a boogeyman for us. Politics is not something that ever sits particularly well with me. Um, you know, China is an economic powerhouse and we do a lot of trade with them and mm-hmm. You know, we should treat our trade partners like partners and not adversaries. Um, you know, even if there are tremendous political disagreements, there are also like tremendous positions of agreement as well. And in addition to that, China is facing one of the biggest demographic cliffs in, um, the, the world right now and in world history. Um, because the, you know, the population explosion that fueled a lot of their economic power in the nineties is petering out. The one child policy, one child policy put tremendous pressure on their demographics.

54:15 Yeah. Um, you know, they're looking at, you know, an aging population. Um, they're looking at, uh, transitioning into a service-based economy to take care of their older citizens. And, you know, I think, you know, the, these, these projections of China as this great enemy that we're gonna be facing over the next 50 years is just completely unfounded. Mm-hmm. We're all gonna be, we're all gonna be in it together, especially as climate change. Uh Oh Yeah. Accelerates and like, you know, either we're all in it together or we all drown alone. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And, uh, unfortunately the ladder seems to be going very strong over the last couple of months and the last couple in the last year or so.

54:57 Um, but yeah, I, I find that interesting. Now, overall, getting back to the hearing, overall your experience, like, how do you rate it one outta 10, your experience with this, with this hearing? So this is not, um, you know, this is not something I would, I would. Uh, enjoy doing or, or suggest that you, you, you pursue for fun. Everybody's gonna do it at one point. Um, you know, it wasn't, it was a collegial experience. Right. And it was, you know, it was a, it was a, it was entirely, you know, it was not adversarial. Uh, the Jack Smith hearings were happening in, in the main halls of Congress, um, that morning. So there was a much more contentious hearing that was conflicting with ours.

55:39 So if you actually looked at the, um, at the congressional seats in the subcommittee, you saw there was never more than five or six congressmen in the hearing at any one time. 'cause they were going back and forth. Um, you know, I'm glad I did it. It was an experience and, you know, I hope I added something of value to the conversation. Mm-hmm. And made sure that the environment, environment was represented, um, in the congressional record. Um, you know. I'm going to a wedding this week, and I'm way looking more forward to that. Nobody's gonna be grilling you about questions. Forget, oh, they'll grill me about deep sea mining for sure. Yeah, but forget Andrew in a suit. You get the once in a decade, Andrew, in a tuxedo.

56:22 Oh, there we go. Yes, yes. So I don't know if I'd, I'd rate the experiences as anything. Yeah. But it was certainly. I'm, I'm glad I did it, and it was certainly, um, I feel like a worthwhile thing to, to help contribute and, you know, well, I'm glad you did it too. It's on the record. It's, uh, you know, it's information that needed to be on the record. As you said, you never know what's gonna happen in November at the midterms. Uh, in 2026, uh, hopefully, you know, we see some changes. Uh, if we do, then this, this, uh, hearing becomes all that much more important, uh, in, in the way it go. It moves forward. And I, I thought, uh, as, as your friend, as your colleague, you were amazing.

57:02 Um, you know, it was, uh, phenomenal to see you up there, you know, giving your expertise. I know you've, you've lent your expertise on this podcast so many times and educated myself as well as the audience. Uh, you know, about deep sea mining so many times. You do it such a great way, in a very scientific way. You're not necessarily biased, one or the other. When you give the information, you're very upfront, and I, and we appreciate that. I'm a little biased. I'd be a little biased, but, but when you give it, I mean, I did, I I did make a point of, you know, kind of the deep sea world, according to Andrew, is that, you know, sea floor, massive sulfite, hydrothermal vent mining. Absolutely not. Never. Yeah. Can never be done with environmental responsibility. Cobalt, rich crust mining on sea mounts. No, not a chance. Can't be done right.

57:42 Polymetallic, nodule mining. Maybe, but I remain unconvinced. Yeah, for sure. There's too many, there's too many unknowns and, and totally understandable. As I said, you let the science speak for yourself, uh, speak, speak for itself. Um, but then you, you also, I have found, you also talked a lot about the advancement of the technologies of DC mining over the last years and how it's becoming better and better, uh, which is improving sort of the, the outlook if this ever happens. Um, and I thought that was really good. I thought it was really good that you mentioned that it shows that, that, you know, you're, you're looking at it from a scientific lens, and I think that's, that's really important. So I'm proud of you, man. Uh, I don't know how much that's worth, but I'm proud of you and, and, and we appreciate all the work you do and, and, uh, you know, this is a lot on your own time.

58:24 You know, and, and you know, it, it, I think it'll continue to, um, you know, fit the, the, the legacy of Dr. Andrew tha in, in terms of what he's doing to, uh, you know, from, from, from title gauges all the way to Senate, uh, to, to committee, congress, congressional committee, uh, test testifying, uh, absolutely amazing. Uh, you continue to, to put me in awe of what you're able to do. So thank you so much for, for doing that. And thank you so much for coming on, Andrew. Can't wait to to have you back. We're working on some stuff Oh, Yeah. Behind the scenes folks. And, and, um, you'll be seeing a lot more of Andrew soon Enough. Uh, which will, which will be great. I can't wait. So, uh, thank you so much for joining us, Andrew. Appreciate it. And thank you so much. I'm, I'm a amped.

59:06 Right on. Talk to you soon. Right. Thank you, Andrew, for joining us again on the How to Protect the Ocean Podcast. Great to have you on. Looking forward to having you on again, like I said before, we got some stuff that we're talking about of doing on a little bit more semi-permanent basis, I guess, where gonna be on a lot more. Than he is now, which is great. Love it. Because Andrew always brings the heat when he brings the content. So we're gonna talk about that. We'll let you know as this develops, but it's gonna be a lot of fun. I hope you enjoyed the interview. I hope you enjoyed what goes on in looking at a committee and people who testify. It's great when a buddy of yours testifies and you really get his feelings. Another buddy of ours who is my co-host on the Polar Bears and Flip Flops podcast, it was in the background and I remember him sending me pictures of him in the background with Andrew in the foreground.

59:50 You know, two great buddies, two great Ocean conservation people that are in the industry, making sure that they know, and they represent science and conservation and the people that are being affected, especially the territories that are being affected by potential deep sea mining. And I thought it was great to see for the territories, to have the ability, Guam, marina Islands, American Samoa, to be able to speak out and be like, Hey, you haven't included us during the process and we're gonna be affected by it. We need to be part of the conversation. You need to include us in. I thought that was great that they got to say that and it's on record. I also thought it was interesting Andrew's point about who's gonna be observing, not, you can't be the mining company. Somebody's gotta be observing what they're doing and if anything goes wrong, what that shutdown would look like, what the studies would look like after that, how the effect would happen and what that overall effect is if the shutdowns don't happen, and how long they go down for if they, or if they don't even go down at all.

1:00:42 A lot of things to consider. And Andrew kind of, he went on, it was kind of cool, he went on a bit of a rant of what is the realities of this type of information, of this type of process. And you know, at the end he says the hydrogen sulfide mining no good, the sea mount mining, no good polymetallic nodules potentially, but he's not convinced. There's still a lot of questions that go around the effects that we have. The connectivity within the Deep Sea is still not known. The amount of unique habitats that could be supporting our Ocean processes, we just don't know about and we don't know where they are. We're discovering 'em all the time. There's new technology that can help, but we still have a lot more work to do.

1:01:24 So even if this all happens. We don't even have refineries to actually refine them and to get them to extract the metals from the nodules. And so is this all for naught? Are we rushing into this? Just for rushing into it? As Andrew says, if you're gonna put a stockpile 'em on land, why don't you just leave 'em in the Ocean for now and not disturb anything? A lot of questions to be had, and I would love to hear your questions or comments on this episode. If you're watching this on YouTube, put it in the comedy section below. If you're listening to this on your favorite podcast app, I would love to hear your feedback. Go to speak up for blue.com/feedback. I'd love to hear what you have to say. Questions, comments. You can put in as a voicemail. You can put it in as written. I would love to hear what you have to say about deep sea mining 'cause this is the start of a conversation.

1:02:05 I'd love to continue that with you and hear your thoughts and what you wanna see happen with deep sea mining in the US as well as beyond in the high Seas. So I wanna thank you so much everybody, and thank you obviously to Andrew Thaler for joining us on today's episode of the How to Protect the Ocean Podcast. I'm your host Angel and from the true Nordstrom and free, have a great day. We'll talk to you next time and happy conservation.