Science
The Trump Administration Wants Seafloor Mining. What Does That Mean?
Life at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean is slow, dark and quiet. Strange creatures glitter and glow. Oxygen seeps mysteriously from lumpy, metallic rocks. There is little to disturb these deep-ocean denizens.
“There’s weird life down here,” said Bethany Orcutt, a geomicrobiologist at Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences.
Research in the deep sea is incredibly difficult given the extreme conditions, and rare given the price tag.
On Thursday, President Trump signed an executive order that aims to permit, for the first time, industrial mining of the seabed for minerals. Scientists have expressed deep reservations that mining could irreversibly harm these deep-sea ecosystems before their value and workings are fully understood.
What’s down there, anyway?
Seafloor mining could target three kinds of metal-rich deposits: nodules, crusts and mounds. But right now, it’s all about the nodules. Nodules are of particular value because they contain metals used in the making of electronics, sophisticated weaponry, electric-vehicle batteries and other technologies needed for human development. Nodules are also the easiest seafloor mineral deposit to collect.
Economically viable nodules take millions of years to form, sitting on the seafloor the whole time. A nodule is born when a resilient bit of matter, such as a shark tooth, winds up on the ocean floor. Minerals with iron, manganese and other metals slowly accumulate like a snowball. The largest are the size of a grapefruit.
Life accumulates on the nodules, too. Microbial organisms, invertebrates, corals and sponges all live on the nodules, and sea stars, crustaceans, worms and other life-forms scuttle around them.
About half of the known life in flat, vast expanses of seafloor called the abyssal plain live on these nodules, said Lisa Levin, an oceanographer at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. But “we don’t know how widespread species are, or whether if you mine one area, there would be individuals that could recolonize another place,” she said. “That’s a big unknown.”
How do you mine the sea?
Two main approaches to nodule mining are being developed. One is basically a claw, scraping along the seabed and collecting nodules as it goes. Another is essentially an industrial vacuum for the sea.
In both, the nodules would be brought up to ships on the surface, miles above the ocean floor. Leftover water, rock and other debris would be dropped back into the ocean.
Both dredging and vacuuming would greatly disturb, if not destroy, the seafloor habitat itself. Removing the nodules also means removing what scientists think is the main habitat for organisms on the abyssal plain.
Mining activities would also introduce light and noise pollution not only to the seafloor, but also to the ocean surface where the ship would be.
Of central concern are the plumes of sediment that mining would create, both at the seafloor and at depths around 1,000 meters, which have “some of the clearest ocean waters,” said Jeffrey Drazen, an oceanographer at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. Sediment plumes, which could travel vast distances, could throw life off in unpredictable ways.
Sediment could choke fish and smother filter-feeders like shrimp and sponges. It could block what little light gets transmitted in the ocean, preventing lanternfish from finding mates and anglerfish from luring prey. And laden with discarded metals, there’s also a chance it could pollute the seafood that people eat.
“How likely is it that we would contaminate our food supply?” Dr. Drazen said. Before mining begins, “I really would like an answer to that question. And we don’t have one now.”
What do mining companies say?
Mining companies say that they are developing sustainable, environmentally friendly deep-sea mining approaches through research and engagement with the scientific community.
Their research has included basic studies of seafloor geology, biology and chemistry, documenting thousands of species and providing valuable deep-sea photos and video. Interest in seafloor mining has supported research that might have been challenging to fund otherwise, Dr. Drazen said.
Preliminary tests of recovery equipment have provided some insights into foreseeable effects of their practices like sediment plumes, although modeling can only go so far in predicting what would happen once mining reached a commercial scale.
Impossible Metals, a seafloor mining company based in California, is developing an underwater robot the size of a shipping container that uses artificial intelligence to hand pick nodules without larger organisms, an approach it claims minimizes sediment plumes and biological disturbance. The Metals Company, a Canadian deep-sea mining company, in 2022 successfully recovered roughly 3,000 tons of nodules from the seafloor, collecting data on the plume and other effects in the process.
The Metals Company in March announced that it would seek a permit for seafloor mining through NOAA, circumventing the International Seabed Authority, the United Nations-affiliated organization set up to regulate seafloor mining.
Gerard Barron, the company’s chief executive, said in an interview on Thursday that the executive order was “not a shortcut” past environmental reviews and that the company had “completed more than a decade of environmental research.”
Anna Kelly, a White House spokeswoman, said the United States would abide by two American laws that govern deep-sea exploration and commercial activities in U.S. waters and beyond. “Both of these laws require comprehensive environmental impact assessments and compliance with strong environmental protection standards,” she said.
What are the long-term risks?
Many scientists remain skeptical that enough is known about seafloor mining’s environmental effects to move forward. They can only hypothesize about the long-term consequences.
Disrupting the bottom of the food chain could have ripple effects throughout the ocean environment. An extreme example, Dr. Drazen said, would be if sediment diluted the food supply of plankton. In that case they could starve, unable to scavenge enough organic matter from a cloud of sea dust.
Tiny plankton are a fundamental food source, directly or indirectly, for almost every creature in the ocean, up to and including whales.
Part of the challenge in understanding potential effects is that the pace of life is slow on the seafloor. Deep-sea fish can live hundreds of years. Corals can live thousands.
“It’s a different time scale of life,” Dr. Levin said. “That underpins some of the unknowns about responses to disturbances.” It’s hard for humans to do 500-year-long experiments to understand if or when ecosystems like these can bounce back or adapt.
And there are no guarantees of restoring destroyed habitats or mitigating damage on the seafloor. Unlike mining on land, “we don’t have those strategies for the deep sea,” Dr. Orcutt said. “There’s not currently scientific evidence that we can restore the ecosystem after we’ve damaged it.”
Some scientists question the need for seafloor mining at all, saying that mines on land could meet growing demand for metals.
Proponents of deep-sea mining have claimed that its environmental or carbon footprint would be smaller than traditional mining for those same minerals.
“There has been no actual recovery of minerals to date,” said Amy Gartman, an ocean researcher who leads the United States Geological Survey seabed minerals team, referring to commercial-scale mining. “We’re comparing theoretical versus actual, land-based mining practices. If and when someone actually breaks ground on one of these projects, we’ll get a better idea.”
Eric Lipton contributed reporting.
Science
Video: Rare Giant Phantom Jelly Spotted in Deep Waters Near Argentina
new video loaded: Rare Giant Phantom Jelly Spotted in Deep Waters Near Argentina

By Meg Felling
February 5, 2026
Hundreds of Sea Turtles Rescued Off the Gulf Coast Due to Freezing Cold
1:27
Four Astronauts Splash Down on Earth After Early Return
1:24
Why Exercise Is the Best Thing for Your Brain Health
1:51
Drones Detect Virus in Whale Blow in the Arctic
0:40
Why Scientists Are Performing Brain Surgery on Monarchs
2:24
Engineer Is First Paraplegic Person in Space
0:19
Today’s Videos
U.S.
Politics
Immigration
NY Region
Science
Business
Culture
Books
Wellness
World
Africa
Americas
Asia
South Asia
Donald Trump
Middle East Crisis
Russia-Ukraine Crisis
Visual Investigations
Opinion Video
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
Science
Tuberculosis outbreak reported at Catholic high school in Bay Area. Cases statewide are climbing
Public health officials in Northern California are investigating a tuberculosis outbreak, identifying more than 50 cases at a private Catholic high school and ordering those who are infected to stay home. The outbreak comes as tuberculosis cases have been on the rise statewide since 2023.
The San Francisco Department of Public Health issued a health advisory last week after identifying three active cases and 50 latent cases of tuberculosis at Archbishop Riordan High School in San Francisco. The disease attacks the lungs and remains in the body for years before becoming potentially deadly.
A person with active TB can develop symptoms and is infectious; a person with a latent tuberculosis infection cannot spread the bacteria to others and doesn’t feel sick. However, a person with a latent TB infection is at risk of developing the disease anytime.
The three cases of active TB have been diagnosed at the school since November, according to public health officials. The additional cases of latent TB have been identified in people within the school community.
Archbishop Riordan High School, which recently transitioned from 70 years of exclusively admitting male students to becoming co-ed in 2020, did not immediately respond to the The Times’ request for comment.
School officials told NBC Bay Area news that in-person classes had been canceled and would resume Feb. 9, with hybrid learning in place until Feb. 20. Students who test negative for tuberculosis will be allowed to return to campus even after hybrid learning commences.
Officials with the San Francisco Department of Public Health said the risk to the general population was low. Health officials are currently focused on the high school community.
How serious is a TB diagnosis?
Active TB disease is treatable and curable with appropriate antibiotics if it is identified promptly; some cases require hospitalization. But the percentage of people who have died from the disease is increasing significantly, officials said.
In 2010, 8.4% of Californians with TB died, according to the California Department of Public Health. In 2022, 14% of people in the state with TB died, the highest rate since 1995. Of those who died, 22% died before receiving TB treatment.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that up to 13 million people nationwide live with latent TB.
How does California’s TB rate compare to the country?
Public health officials reported that California’s annual TB incidence rate was 5.4 cases per 100,000 people last year, nearly double the national incidence rate of 3.0 per 100,000 in 2023.
In 2024, 2,109 California residents were reported to have TB compared to 2,114 in 2023 — the latter was about the same as the total number of cases reported in 2019, according to the state Department of Public Health.
The number of TB cases in the state has remained consistent from 2,000 to 2,200 cases since 2012, except during the COVID-19 pandemic from 2020 to 2022.
California’s high TB rates could be caused by a large portion of the population traveling to areas where TB is endemic, said Dr. Shruti Gohil, associate medical director for UCI Health Epidemiology and Infection Prevention.
Nationally, the rates of TB cases have increased in the years following the COVID-19 pandemic, which “was in some ways anticipated,” said Gohil. The increasing number of TB cases nationwide could be due to a disruption in routine care during the pandemic and a boom in travel post-pandemic.
Routine screening is vital in catching latent TB, which can lie dormant in the body for decades. If the illness is identified, treatment could stop it from becoming active. This type of routine screening wasn’t accessible during the pandemic, when healthcare was limited to emergency or essential visits only, Gohil said.
When pandemic restrictions on travel were lifted, people started to travel again and visit areas where TB is endemic, including Asia, Europe and South America, she said.
To address the uptick in cases and suppress spread, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 2132 into law in 2024, which requires adult patients receiving primary care services to be offered tuberculosis screening if risk factors are identified. The law went into effect in 2025.
What is TB?
In the United States, tuberculosis is caused by a germ called Mycobacterium tuberculosis, which primarily affects the lungs and can impact other parts of the body such as the brain, kidneys and spine, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. If not treated properly, TB can be fatal.
TB is spread through the air when an infected person speaks, coughs or sings and a nearby person breathes in the germs.
When a person breathes in the TB germs, they settle in the lungs and can spread through the blood to other parts of the body.
The symptoms of active TB include:
- A cough that lasts three weeks or longer
- Chest pain
- Coughing up blood or phlegm
- Weakness or fatigue
- Weight loss
- Loss of appetite
- Chills
- Fever
- Night sweats
Generally, who is at risk of contracting TB?
Those at higher risk of contracting TB are people who have traveled outside the United States to places where TB rates are high including Asia, the Middle East, Africa, Eastern Europe and Latin America.
A person has an increased risk of getting TB if they live or work in such locations as hospitals, homeless shelters, correctional facilities and nursing homes, according to the CDC.
People with weakened immune systems caused by health conditions that include HIV infection, diabetes, silicosis and severe kidney disease have a higher risk of getting TB.
Others at higher risk of contracting the disease include babies and young children.
Science
Contributor: Animal testing slows medical progress. It wastes money. It’s wrong
I am living with ALS, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, often called Lou Gehrig’s disease. The average survival time after diagnosis is two to five years. I’m in year two.
When you have a disease like ALS, you learn how slowly medical research moves, and how often it fails the people it is supposed to save. You also learn how precious time is.
For decades, the dominant pathway for developing new drugs has relied on animal testing. Most of us grew up believing this was unavoidable: that laboratories full of caged animals were simply the price of medical progress. But experts have known for a long time that data tell a very different story.
The Los Angeles Times reported in 2017: “Roughly 90% of drugs that succeed in animal tests ultimately fail in people, after hundreds of millions of dollars have already been spent.”
The Times editorial board summed it up in 2018: “Animal experiments are expensive, slow and frequently misleading — a major reason why so many drugs that appear promising in animals fail in human trials.”
Then there’s the ethical cost — confining, sickening and killing millions of animals each year for a system that fails 9 times out of 10. As Jane Goodall put it, “We have the choice to use alternatives to animal testing that are not cruel, not unethical, and often more effective.”
Despite overwhelming evidence and well-reasoned arguments against animal-based pipelines, they remain central to U.S. medical research. Funding agencies, academic medical centers, government labs, pharmaceutical companies and even professional societies have been painfully slow to move toward human- and technology-based approaches.
Yet medical journals are filled with successes involving organoids (mini-organs grown in a lab), induced pluripotent stem cells, organ-on-a-chip systems (tiny devices with human cells inside), AI-driven modeling and 3D-bioprinted human tissues. These tools are already transforming how we understand disease.
In ALS research, induced pluripotent stem cells have allowed scientists to grow motor neurons in a dish, using cells derived from actual patients. Researchers have learned how ALS-linked mutations damage those neurons, identified drug candidates that never appeared in animal models and even created personalized “test beds” for individual patients’ cells.
Human-centric pipelines can be dramatically faster. Some are reported to be up to 10 times quicker than animal-based approaches. AI-driven human biology simulations and digital “twins” can test thousands of drug candidates in silico, with a simulation. Some models achieve results hundreds, even thousands, of times faster than conventional animal testing.
For the 30 million Americans living with chronic or fatal diseases, these advances are tantalizing glimpses of a future in which we might not have to suffer and die while waiting for systems that don’t work.
So why aren’t these tools delivering drugs and therapies at scale right now?
The answer is institutional resistance, a force so powerful it can feel almost god-like. As Pulitzer Prize–winning columnist Kathleen Parker wrote in 2021, drug companies and the scientific community “likely will fight … just as they have in past years, if only because they don’t want to change how they do business.”
She reminds us that we’ve seen this before. During the AIDS crisis, activists pushed regulators to move promising drugs rapidly into human testing. Those efforts helped transform AIDS from a death sentence into a chronic condition. We also saw human-centered pipelines deliver COVID vaccines in a matter of months.
Which brings me, surprisingly, to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. In December, Kennedy told Fox News that leaders across the Department of Health and Human Services are “deeply committed to ending animal experimentation.” A department spokesperson later confirmed to CBS News that the agency is “prioritizing human-based research.”
Kennedy is right.
His directive to wind down animal testing is not anti-science. It is pro-patient, pro-ethics and pro-progress. For people like me, living on borrowed time, it is not just good policy, it is hope — and a potential lifeline.
The pressure to end animal testing and let humans step up isn’t new. But it’s getting new traction. The actor Eric Dane, profiled about his personal fight with ALS, speaks for many of us when he expresses his wish to contribute as a test subject: “Not to be overly morbid, but you know, if I’m going out, I’m gonna go out helping somebody.”
If I’m going out, I’d like to go out helping somebody, too.
Kevin J. Morrison is a San Francisco-based writer and ALS activist.
-
Indiana4 days ago13-year-old rider dies following incident at northwest Indiana BMX park
-
Massachusetts5 days agoTV star fisherman, crew all presumed dead after boat sinks off Massachusetts coast
-
Tennessee6 days agoUPDATE: Ohio woman charged in shooting death of West TN deputy
-
Movie Reviews1 week agoVikram Prabhu’s Sirai Telugu Dubbed OTT Movie Review and Rating
-
Indiana3 days ago13-year-old boy dies in BMX accident, officials, Steel Wheels BMX says
-
Politics1 week agoVirginia Democrats seek dozens of new tax hikes, including on dog walking and dry cleaning
-
Austin, TX6 days ago
TEA is on board with almost all of Austin ISD’s turnaround plans
-
Texas5 days agoLive results: Texas state Senate runoff