Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Miners Are Pulling Valuable Metals from the Seafloor, and Almost No One Knows about It

News Feed
Tuesday, April 15, 2025

In hindsight, I am still not sure why the operators of the Danish-flagged MV Coco allowed me onboard. By the time I arrived last June, the vessel had been sailing for several weeks in the Bismarck Sea, a part of Papua New Guinea’s territorial waters, digging chunks of metal-rich deposits out of the ocean floor with a 12-ton hydraulic claw. The crew was testing the feasibility of mining seafloor deposits full of copper and some gold. It was probably the closest thing in the world to an operational deep-sea mining site. And the more I learned about the endeavor, the more surprised I became about the project’s very existence.On that summer morning, I arrived on a red catamaran after rolling over six-foot swells in the South Pacific for two hours, and I clambered up a metal ladder hanging down on the Coco’s starboard side. The 270-foot, 4,000-ton vessel towers at its prow, its vast aft deck full of cranes, winches and a remotely operated submersible. I was there at the invitation of Richard Parkinson, who founded Magellan, a company that specializes in deep-sea operations. At the top of the ladder, two crew members hauled me onboard the ship, which was roughly 20 miles from the closest shore, and a British manager for Magellan named James Holt greeted me, his smile sun-creased from more than two decades at sea. After a safety briefing, he ushered me through a heavy door into a dark, windowless shipping container on the rear deck that served as a control room.Inside the hushed cabin was a young Brazilian named Afhonso Perseguin, his face lit by screens displaying digital readings and colorful topographic charts. Gripping a joystick with his right hand, he delicately maneuvered a big, boxy remotely operated vehicle, or ROV, over a patch of seafloor a mile below. I watched on monitors as a robotic arm protruded from the ROV toward a monstrous set of clamshell jaws suspended from a cable that rose all the way up to the ship. Perseguin used the ROV’s arm to steer the jaws as a colleague beside him radioed instructions to a winch operator on deck.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.Hydraulics drove the open clamshell into a gray chunk of flat seafloor ringed by rocky mounds and jagged slopes. The opposing teeth dug in, throwing up clouds of silt that filled the video feeds from the ROV. The robotic arm released, and the winch started hauling the jaws, clamped shut around their rocky cargo, on an hour-long journey up to the ship.Within minutes Perseguin reversed the ROV to survey the wider scene, revealing chimneys of rock looming up from the seafloor, pale yellow and gray in the submersible’s powerful lights. Small mollusk shells dotted their surface; a crab scuttled out of frame. “Quite amazing, really, isn’t it?” murmured John Matheson, a shaven-headed Scot supervising the ROV team. As Perseguin steered the ROV slowly around a column, the cameras suddenly captured a glassy plume of unmistakably warmer water spewing up from a hidden crevice.Hydraulics drove the monstrous clamshell jaws into a gray chunk of seafloor, throwing up clouds of silt that filled the video feeds from the remotely operated vehicle.That hydrothermal vent marked the edge of a tectonic plate in the Bismarck Sea. The metal-rich magma ejected over millennia from several such vents—some dormant, some still active like this one—was Magellan’s prize. The teams on the ship, hired by a company called Deep Sea Mining Finance (DSMF), were conducting bulk seafloor mining tests under a 2011 mining license issued by the Papua New Guinea (PNG) mining regulator. I was the only reporter onboard to witness the operation.Worldwide, oceanographers have found three distinct types of mineral deposits on the deep seafloor. Manganese crust is an inches-thick, metal-rich pavement that builds up over millions of years as dissolved metallic compounds in seawater gradually precipitate on certain seafloor regions. Polymetallic nodules are softball-size, metal-rich rocks strewn across enormous seafloor fields. And massive sulfide deposits, such as the ones being mined by the crew of the Coco, are big mounds and stacks of rock formed around hydrothermal vents. Over the past decade several companies have developed detailed but still hypothetical plans to profit from these deposits, hoping to help meet the world’s surging demand for the valuable metals necessary for batteries, electric cars, electronics, and many other products. Scientists have warned that these efforts risk destroying unique deep-sea habitats that we do not yet fully understand, and governments have been reluctant to grant exploration licenses in their territorial waters. But from what I saw during my two days and one night onboard the Coco, DSMF was digging in, and a new era of deep-sea mining had all but begun.Holt, one of Magellan’s offshore managers, said the aim was to test the physical requirements and environmental impacts of pulling up sulfide deposits. What would soon become unclear, however, was why the operators were stockpiling mounds of excavated rock on the seabed, and who in PNG knew the Coco was there.I was back outside on the rear deck as the sun dipped below the horizon when the cables finally brought the locked clamshell with its heavy contents to the sea surface. The giant yellow jaws emerged from the waves, gleaming under the ship’s floodlights. As they swung over the rear deck, water and small stones dripped from them; apparently the hydraulic system had failed to fully shut the contraption.A handful of us stood watching as it opened, dumping the load with a loud thud onto a massive metal weighing tray. The scales showed that some of the anticipated material was missing, presumably dropped during the mile-long journey to the surface. Crew members who had already completed dozens of similar lifts said this loss was an unusual occurrence. But the failure highlighted just one of the dangers of underwater mining: clouds of sediment leaked during these hauls to the surface or kicked up when the seafloor is ripped apart could suffocate sea creatures or unintentionally disperse harmful minerals.The Coco had been bringing up a jaw-load roughly every 12 hours. Just before this latest cache was swung onboard, an Australian marine scientist named Josh Young had been preparing to drop his testing equipment over the ship’s side. After each haul, he or his Papua New Guinean colleague Nicole Frani tried to measure the size and spread of the silt plume directly underneath the vessel. Using another winch, Young lowered a ring of long plastic cylinders known as Niskin tubes into the surf. Each sampling tube was set to open at a different depth as the ring passed down through the water column for several thousand feet. The scientists wanted to know how widely the cloud of silt “is spreading out and how it can affect the sea life below,” Frani explained.After less than an hour, Young hoisted the ring of tubes back up onto the deck. Peering over his shoulder, I watched an electronic screen reveal the water’s temperature, acidity, salinity, density, cloudiness and oxygen content, as well as its oxidizing capacity and conductivity—proxies for water cleanliness—at each depth.Like many offshore projects, the Coco operation was globalization incarnate. Frani and Young work for Erias, an Australian environmental consultancy that Magellan hired as a contractor for the summer’s endeavor. Magellan also hired the South African and British deckhands helping Young, plus the ROV team and a number of Malaysian hydrographic surveyors. Itself headquartered in Guernsey, an island between the U.K. and France, Magellan had chartered the Coco from a Danish firm, with sailors from the North Atlantic’s Faroe Islands and pursers from the Philippines. Much of the venture’s financing—for daily costs topping tens of thousands of dollars over several months—came from Russian and Omani investors, who had registered DSMF in the tax-friendly British Virgin Islands.Up on the ship’s bridge, Holt told me this enormously expensive exercise was to better understand the speed and power requirements of this mining technique, which relied on off-the-shelf commercial equipment Magellan had modified for underwater use. His remit was also to quantify the environmental impacts that a future vessel even larger than the 270-foot Coco might generate through similar extraction cycles. He told me that before the excursion had started he had been “totally in two minds” about seafloor mining. “But now I’ve seen how rich the deposit is and how little we’ve been disturbing the seabed,” he said. “We haven’t got huge clouds of sediment that are drifting off down in the current, smothering coral reefs, or all this sort of stuff that people are worried about.”I observed the same 12-hour extraction cycle twice during my time onboard. Holt told me that over nearly two months Magellan’s teams were focusing on four separate locations in a wider area collectively designated Solwara 1. In each location, the crew would excavate a number of square plots 33 feet on edge and up to 23 feet deep. He said PNG’s Mineral Resources Authority, or MRA, had approved the extraction of about 200 tons of material—from an ore body estimated at more than two million tons—for removal and further testing on shore. He also explained that to maximize the clamshell jaws’ productivity on the seafloor between each long descent and ascent, Magellan had decided to stockpile more material than the 200 tons permitted for testing—up to 600 tons from each of the four sites—perhaps for collection at a later date. I realized this meant Magellan and DSMF might be digging up more of the seabed than the regulator had anticipated.As with any mining endeavor, Solwara 1’s long-term economic viability would live and die on global metal prices, and in this case the ore’s copper concentration was a crucial factor. Two local geologists onboard seemed enthralled by their initial readings. Leaning over the pile of dark-gray rock that had been dumped onto the rear deck—after it had been smashed into pieces by a large drill—Paul Lahari grabbed some samples and carried them into a cramped prefab shipping container that served as a laboratory. “Anything to do with 0.5 or 1 percent, we’re already excited,” said the Papua New Guinean, who had decades of onshore and offshore mining experience.He was referring to the typical copper concentrations in ore mined on land. Inside the lab he wielded a small instrument that measures x-ray fluorescence, which he said would reveal the elemental composition of each sample. Soon, on its small digital screen, the instrument began to show matches to elements in the periodic table, as well as their estimated concentration in the sample. For copper, it was 12.33 percent. “That’s 10 times more than we get on land,” Lahari said, his voice rising. He noted that the sampling averages so far on the trip had hovered around 7 percent.All 200 tons the Coco recovered and carried onboard would eventually reach an Australian facility, where the rock would be further pulverized. Much smaller samples would then pass through a gauntlet of geochemical tests—heating, fusing, leaching—and the entire batch would be assigned an industry-recognized average copper concentration, or “grade,” alongside a report on the other metals found, including gold.Oceanographers have identified massive sulfide deposits across the Atlantic, Pacific, Indian and Arctic Oceans. Small-scale sample drilling has shown that they often contain similarly high concentrations of copper, alongside zinc and lead. Deposits form close to, if not on, the seafloor surface, meaning there’s far less “overburden”—the valueless material that must be removed to access the ore—than in most land-based mines.Other prospectors have been interested in Solwara’s potential for years. In 2011 executives from Nautilus Minerals, headquartered in Canada, leased the Solwara 1 site from PNG as a 20-year underwater-mining concession. Authorities in the perennially cash-strapped country invested $120 million in the project through a state-owned entity. The country’s taxpayers thus became a junior partner with Nautilus.At the time, Nautilus was hailed as a pioneer—the only company in the world to hold a license for deep-sea mining. But as the project progressed, things went sideways. A coastal nation controls resource exploitation in the waters constituting its exclusive economic zone, which reaches 200 nautical miles out from its shoreline in all directions. Any activities in the international waters between nations’ economic zones, such as deep-sea mining, are regulated by the International Seabed Authority, or ISA, a body established through a treaty sponsored by the United Nations.A Papua New Guinea governor wrote in a statement that he considered the “presence of any [mining] vessel or activity in the area to be illegal.”When PNG issued Nautilus’s license in 2011 for operations in its national waters, it had no specific underwater-mining legislation. The MRA, the country’s mining regulator, issued the license under rules for land-based mining after Nautilus had carried out impact assessments to earn a separate environmental permit. After false starts in sourcing a ship, in 2014 Nautilus commissioned a Chinese shipyard to build a mining vessel, and Nautilus contracted engineers to develop three enormous, tracked vehicles to break up, churn up and then suck up material from a massive sulfide deposit through a mile-long slurry hose connected to the surface vessel. The technique would mean dumping mining water back into the sea—something other mining operators were planning to do, too.But Nautilus began burning through up to $2 million a month, according to 2018 financial disclosures, eventually defaulting on payments to the Chinese shipyard before filing for bankruptcy in 2019. Its remaining assets included the mining permit, a few promising core samples, and the three tracked vehicles, only ever tested in shallow waters, that sat rusting on the edge of PNG’s capital, Port Moresby. After its insolvency, PNG Prime Minister James Marape told a local newspaper that the country had wasted tens of millions of dollars on a “concept that is a total failure.” In 2020 the head of the MRA ruled out any chance of reviving the Solwara project.I disembarked from the Coco less than a day and a half after I had boarded. In blazing afternoon sunshine, a much smaller skiff ferried me back to a remote, pebbly beach on the PNG island of New Ireland. I wanted to know how PNG’s officials and citizens felt about the Coco pulling up their seafloor. A local driver I had hired drove me in the dark over bumpy coastal roads to a guesthouse in the village of Kono.The following morning I sat outside at a rickety wood table, sharing a breakfast of fish, yams and crackers with some of the local men. One of them, Jonathan Mesulam, was a spokesperson for the Alliance of Solwara Warriors, a group that has long demanded a ban on deep-sea mining in the Bismarck Sea. A Fiji-based environmental campaigner had introduced me to him via an encrypted messaging app. As I described what I had seen onboard the Coco, Mesulam shifted from initially incredulous to increasingly agitated. He walked to the home of Kono’s chief, Chris Malagan, to discuss what I had told him ahead of a weekly public meeting Malagan presides over, which attracts many of the village’s 700 residents.Malagan began that afternoon’s meeting underneath large shoreline trees. Nearby, children waded out from the beach to cast lines for small fish in the shallows close to more than a dozen mud and straw huts. Adults sitting among the trees listened intently to Mesulam’s description of the Coco’s operations, which was based on my eyewitness account. Several people stood up to angrily denounce activities they considered threatening to their fish-centered livelihoods.“People are surprised—they are shocked after learning that the new company’s coming back,” Mesulam told me as villagers drifted away. “After all our efforts on campaigning against seabed mining, we thought it was a dead issue now,” he continued, becoming occasionally tearful. “We don’t want to be used as guinea pigs for trial and error,” he said. “These metals that are going to be dug out of our ocean will not benefit anyone from here because nobody here is using electric cars.”The lack of local awareness and the Coco’s stockpiling of seafloor material seemed unusual for a 21st-century extraction project. To better understand the political support and permitting process for deep-sea mining, I left New Ireland on a plane headed to Port Moresby. The capital, with its sprawling neighborhoods, is built around a spectacular natural harbor. In a hilltop hotel, I told a lawyer named Peter Bosip that I had recently been onboard a deep-sea-mining vessel. He seemed upset. He told me neither Nautilus’s 25-year environmental permit nor the MRA’s subsequently issued mining license for Solwara 1 had ever been made public—despite a constitutionally mandated transparency requirement and a decade-long legal battle waged by good-governance and environmental groups. (Parkinson sent me the cover page of the license, but neither he nor Magellan nor PNG regulators provided a full copy.)Such opaqueness was common in PNG, Bosip told me, but meant it was difficult for local communities to hold international companies to account for potential environmental infractions. Bosip is executive director of the Center for Environmental Law and Community Rights in PNG, a public-interest law firm that sued the government for access to the Solwara permit documents. “In PNG,” he told me, “the system is such a way that the responses are not forthcoming.” He apparently meant that government ministries, agencies and regulators rarely shared information willingly.DSMF provided the struggling Nautilus with high-interest loans, and during the 2019 bankruptcy proceedings, the company took possession of Nautilus’s Solwara 1 license. A document from the Supreme Court of British Columbia shows that DSMF’s listed representatives during those proceedings were Christopher Jordinson, an Australian who’d previously pled guilty to insider trading, and Matthias Bolliger, a Swiss national who was subsequently barred from directorships on the Isle of Man. Documents from the bankruptcy proceedings show the pair are listed as points of contact for DSMF’s largest shareholders: Omani tycoon Mohammed Al Barwani, whose family firm owns oil, gas and mining subsidiaries, and Alisher Usmanov, who is among Russia’s wealthiest pro-Putin oligarchs. Usmanov had been involved in Solwara-based mining for almost 20 years, but now—after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022—he tops worldwide sanctions lists.In July 2022 DSMF joined forces with SM2, another company founded by Parkinson, who in turn hired his firm Magellan to operate in PNG waters under Nautilus’s original license. Parkinson told me that in November 2023 he, Bolliger and Jordinson met with New Ireland’s governor. Sometime later various PNG agencies, including the MRA, approved the new mining technique.I spent days chasing down officials across Port Moresby, trying to get clarity on this approval process. After unanswered e-mails and unreturned phone calls, I finally reached the MRA’s managing director, Jerry Garry, by video call. He was in a remote highland region that was slated to host a gold mine, he said, but he told me his officials should be onboard any deep-sea-mining vessel in PNG to monitor operations. When I noted none had been onboard the Coco, he insisted he had no idea the Coco was even in the Bismarck Sea. Garry never again answered my calls.PNG’s attorney general, Pila Kole Niningi, didn’t reply to interview requests. I did reach Fiona Pagla, the PNG Department of Justice’s acting director for the national oceans office, who was at a conference in Bali. She told me that she knew nothing about the Coco but that if it was conducting marine scientific research, a committee inside her department should have been asked for approval. Hours later, when I pressed her for details in WhatsApp messages, Pagla replied, “No comment.”The country’s environment minister, Simon Kilepa, didn’t make himself available for an interview. Jude Tukuliya, head of the PNG Conservation and Environment Protection Authority, and officials at the country’s National Fisheries Authority did not respond to calls and written questions about the Coco and DSMF. Prime Minister Marape’s chief of staff insisted the premier would not discuss deep-sea mining.After returning to London, where I live, I continued my attempted outreach from afar. Late last summer DSMF’s website was taken down and replaced with a fresh one featuring a new entity called Sustainable Mining Solutions (SMS), billed as a joint venture between DSMF and Parkinson’s SM2. The site repeatedly mentioned Nautilus’s mining license and environmental permits—still not public—and said PNG would gain from Solwara 1’s profits and mining royalties, with benefits for local people “currently being negotiated.” Parkinson had told me soon after I’d left the Coco that Magellan and SM2 were not “cutting corners” and were “operating within the laws of that country.” He had also said the Australian lab readings indicated Solwara 1 is “a credible source of copper.” In response to a request for comment I sent in March by e-mail, DSMF wrote that the results “will be provided to the relevant regulatory authorities in due course, once the analyses by internal and third-party experts are completed.”This past January I finally, and unexpectedly, heard from Julius Chan, a PNG prime minister turned New Ireland governor with a national parliamentary seat. He’d previously said deep-sea miners should engage with islanders to provide confidence that a project wouldn’t affect their livelihoods. He wrote in a statement that those involved in Solwara “certainly do not have my government support and approval” and that he considered the “presence of any vessel or activity in the area to be illegal.” He died three weeks later at age 85. In its e-mail response, DSMF wrote, “The Solwara 1 project is compliant with the regulations, having secured a valid mining license as defined in the PNG Mining Act, and is a fully permitted project having met license requirements under relevant Papua New Guinea laws and regulations.” It also noted that “the allowable impacts of mining at Solwara 1 are regulated, managed and conducted in accordance with the Mining Law and Environmental Act (2000).”The Magellan team onboard the Coco had told me it was operating with permission from the MRA, and Parkinson told me before and after my visit to PNG that government officials were aware and supportive of their large-scale extraction tests. Perhaps some people inside the government had not shared details of the Coco’s mission as widely as they could have, I reasoned. But when I was onboard, there seemed to be little stopping the Solwara 1 project from scaling up significantly—unless steep capital costs somehow dissuaded deep-pocketed investors or public uproar in PNG forced a rethink among national politicians, who perhaps might have been hoping to recoup the sizable state investment Nautilus once blew through.What is clear is that deep-sea mining on a commercial scale will begin soon somewhere. Norway, the Cook Islands, Japan and Sweden have approved deep-sea mining in their exclusive economic zones. Norway’s offshore-resources agency says the country’s waters contain manganese crusts, as well as sulfide deposits, and the government had considered awarding exploitation licenses this year. Authorities in the Cook Islands have issued exploration licenses to three operators surveying for polymetallic nodules. Scientists at the University of Tokyo and collaborating institutions recently confirmed a vast nodule field close to Japan’s easternmost island, a tiny atoll called Minamitorishima. Estimates indicate the field contains more than 600,000 tons of cobalt—much more than the total 2023 output from the Democratic Republic of Congo, by far the largest global cobalt producer.A consortium of government agencies, academic institutions and private enterprises plans to extract Japan’s underwater resources in the decades ahead. With enormous deep-sea regions still unmapped, scientists say similar opportunities exist elsewhere. But after a 2023 study found that some polymetallic nodules emitted enough radiation that inappropriate handling could pose health risks, questions have increased about the wisdom of nodule mining. Citing limited scientific data on long-term environmental impacts, many nations, including Germany, Spain and Chile, have called for a pause. Palau and Fiji have advocated for a moratorium, and France wants an outright ban.The ISA has granted more than 30 exploration licenses for international waters, some for each of the three kinds of deposits. It has repeatedly delayed a framework for exploitation licenses, though, to the frustration of some people in the mining industry. The authority’s new secretary-general, Brazilian oceanographer Leticia Carvalho, took charge in January 2025, promising to end what she considers cozy relations between ISA and potential commercial operators. She has also suggested that the new subsea-mining code should be finalized by late this year.Unlike in the early years of, say, coal mining, environmental scientists are deeply involved in the development of seafloor extraction. But much remains unknown about the impacts. Scant studies exist on the consequences for marine life of sulfide-deposit mining like the Coco was carrying out. A case study involving Japanese state entities digging sulfides at a similar depth, several thousand miles north in the Pacific Ocean, gives some idea of what to expect. Researchers assessed the impact on nearby ocean flora and fauna for three years after a brief mining session. They found that populations of organisms less than a tenth of an inch in size may return to normal levels within a year, but larger species may remain depleted more than three years later. That mining lasted only six hours.In its statement, DSMF wrote, “Extensive scientific studies have enabled SMS to assess the risks to marine ecosystems and carefully weigh them against the damage caused by terrestrial mining.” The new SMS website says mining in Solwara 1 “will not adversely affect the marine life habitat” and that with recolonization efforts, three years after mining ends, the environment around any vents will “resemble the pre-mining condition of biomass and diversity.” Marine scientists I spoke to questioned that assertion. The ecosystem will not recover “unless the chemistry and the substrate and the texture and the morphology of the bottom, and the temperature and everything else, are what they were” before a location was disturbed, says Lisa Levin, professor emerita of biological oceanography and marine ecology at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego. “It couldn’t possibly be.” She says certain species exist only near these vents, and after mining it’s “highly likely” those species will become extinct. “People have to be willing to give up the seafloor ecosystems if they want to mine them,” Levin says. She adds that the contamination of fish stocks by chemicals from the seafloor should reasonably concern local societies.Throughout the world’s deep ocean zones, where scientists estimate thousands of species remain undiscovered, heavy mining equipment may harm organisms that are unable to quickly move out of its way. Leaks from mining equipment or mining water dumped from surface vessels could also threaten open-ocean fisheries, and noise and light pollution could impact reproduction or feeding patterns of species already threatened by other human actions. The environmental team onboard the Coco was clearly aware of some of these potential consequences.The juxtapositions I experienced at sea and on land were jarring. The extraordinary scale and power of the Coco’s technology, backed by distant billionaires, were in sharp contrast to subsistence communities where villagers paddle canoes into the surf to fish by hand. The informational asymmetry was striking, too: hydrographers, geologists and environmental scientists with millions of data points designed to gauge surroundings—and profits to be realized thousands of miles away—were set against local residents who seemed to lack access to attested Solwara permits, let alone details of possible environmental drawbacks. For the people who live there, short-term benefits—new local jobs, perhaps, or increased government revenues—might never outweigh stress to the ecosystem and a way of life that depends on it.As this article was going to press, senior PNG officials—including one in the country’s Department of Justice—told me the questions I had asked during my reporting had prompted action. In late February the government introduced new mining legislation that, for the first time, includes specific rules for deep-sea mining. The country’s Marine Scientific Research Committee, which comprises almost two dozen government entities, passed guidelines that will require future deep-sea-mining licenses to have committee approval. Because the legislation is open to public comment, it is not yet clear whether a new mining law will have retroactive force. If it does, officials told me, DSMF might have to reapply for its environmental permits and mining license and publish a fresh environmental impact assessment.Some of the reporting for this story was originally done while Willem Marx was on assignment for PBS.

The owners of a controversial mining license have begun extracting valuable metals from the ocean floor

In hindsight, I am still not sure why the operators of the Danish-flagged MV Coco allowed me onboard. By the time I arrived last June, the vessel had been sailing for several weeks in the Bismarck Sea, a part of Papua New Guinea’s territorial waters, digging chunks of metal-rich deposits out of the ocean floor with a 12-ton hydraulic claw. The crew was testing the feasibility of mining seafloor deposits full of copper and some gold. It was probably the closest thing in the world to an operational deep-sea mining site. And the more I learned about the endeavor, the more surprised I became about the project’s very existence.

On that summer morning, I arrived on a red catamaran after rolling over six-foot swells in the South Pacific for two hours, and I clambered up a metal ladder hanging down on the Coco’s starboard side. The 270-foot, 4,000-ton vessel towers at its prow, its vast aft deck full of cranes, winches and a remotely operated submersible. I was there at the invitation of Richard Parkinson, who founded Magellan, a company that specializes in deep-sea operations. At the top of the ladder, two crew members hauled me onboard the ship, which was roughly 20 miles from the closest shore, and a British manager for Magellan named James Holt greeted me, his smile sun-creased from more than two decades at sea. After a safety briefing, he ushered me through a heavy door into a dark, windowless shipping container on the rear deck that served as a control room.

Inside the hushed cabin was a young Brazilian named Afhonso Perseguin, his face lit by screens displaying digital readings and colorful topographic charts. Gripping a joystick with his right hand, he delicately maneuvered a big, boxy remotely operated vehicle, or ROV, over a patch of seafloor a mile below. I watched on monitors as a robotic arm protruded from the ROV toward a monstrous set of clamshell jaws suspended from a cable that rose all the way up to the ship. Perseguin used the ROV’s arm to steer the jaws as a colleague beside him radioed instructions to a winch operator on deck.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Hydraulics drove the open clamshell into a gray chunk of flat seafloor ringed by rocky mounds and jagged slopes. The opposing teeth dug in, throwing up clouds of silt that filled the video feeds from the ROV. The robotic arm released, and the winch started hauling the jaws, clamped shut around their rocky cargo, on an hour-long journey up to the ship.

Within minutes Perseguin reversed the ROV to survey the wider scene, revealing chimneys of rock looming up from the seafloor, pale yellow and gray in the submersible’s powerful lights. Small mollusk shells dotted their surface; a crab scuttled out of frame. “Quite amazing, really, isn’t it?” murmured John Matheson, a shaven-headed Scot supervising the ROV team. As Perseguin steered the ROV slowly around a column, the cameras suddenly captured a glassy plume of unmistakably warmer water spewing up from a hidden crevice.

Hydraulics drove the monstrous clamshell jaws into a gray chunk of seafloor, throwing up clouds of silt that filled the video feeds from the remotely operated vehicle.

That hydrothermal vent marked the edge of a tectonic plate in the Bismarck Sea. The metal-rich magma ejected over millennia from several such vents—some dormant, some still active like this one—was Magellan’s prize. The teams on the ship, hired by a company called Deep Sea Mining Finance (DSMF), were conducting bulk seafloor mining tests under a 2011 mining license issued by the Papua New Guinea (PNG) mining regulator. I was the only reporter onboard to witness the operation.

Worldwide, oceanographers have found three distinct types of mineral deposits on the deep seafloor. Manganese crust is an inches-thick, metal-rich pavement that builds up over millions of years as dissolved metallic compounds in seawater gradually precipitate on certain seafloor regions. Polymetallic nodules are softball-size, metal-rich rocks strewn across enormous seafloor fields. And massive sulfide deposits, such as the ones being mined by the crew of the Coco, are big mounds and stacks of rock formed around hydrothermal vents. Over the past decade several companies have developed detailed but still hypothetical plans to profit from these deposits, hoping to help meet the world’s surging demand for the valuable metals necessary for batteries, electric cars, electronics, and many other products. Scientists have warned that these efforts risk destroying unique deep-sea habitats that we do not yet fully understand, and governments have been reluctant to grant exploration licenses in their territorial waters. But from what I saw during my two days and one night onboard the Coco, DSMF was digging in, and a new era of deep-sea mining had all but begun.

Holt, one of Magellan’s offshore managers, said the aim was to test the physical requirements and environmental impacts of pulling up sulfide deposits. What would soon become unclear, however, was why the operators were stockpiling mounds of excavated rock on the seabed, and who in PNG knew the Coco was there.


I was back outside on the rear deck as the sun dipped below the horizon when the cables finally brought the locked clamshell with its heavy contents to the sea surface. The giant yellow jaws emerged from the waves, gleaming under the ship’s floodlights. As they swung over the rear deck, water and small stones dripped from them; apparently the hydraulic system had failed to fully shut the contraption.

A handful of us stood watching as it opened, dumping the load with a loud thud onto a massive metal weighing tray. The scales showed that some of the anticipated material was missing, presumably dropped during the mile-long journey to the surface. Crew members who had already completed dozens of similar lifts said this loss was an unusual occurrence. But the failure highlighted just one of the dangers of underwater mining: clouds of sediment leaked during these hauls to the surface or kicked up when the seafloor is ripped apart could suffocate sea creatures or unintentionally disperse harmful minerals.

Man with large pile of dark soil glowing multicolored spheres in dirt

The Coco had been bringing up a jaw-load roughly every 12 hours. Just before this latest cache was swung onboard, an Australian marine scientist named Josh Young had been preparing to drop his testing equipment over the ship’s side. After each haul, he or his Papua New Guinean colleague Nicole Frani tried to measure the size and spread of the silt plume directly underneath the vessel. Using another winch, Young lowered a ring of long plastic cylinders known as Niskin tubes into the surf. Each sampling tube was set to open at a different depth as the ring passed down through the water column for several thousand feet. The scientists wanted to know how widely the cloud of silt “is spreading out and how it can affect the sea life below,” Frani explained.

After less than an hour, Young hoisted the ring of tubes back up onto the deck. Peering over his shoulder, I watched an electronic screen reveal the water’s temperature, acidity, salinity, density, cloudiness and oxygen content, as well as its oxidizing capacity and conductivity—proxies for water cleanliness—at each depth.

Like many offshore projects, the Coco operation was globalization incarnate. Frani and Young work for Erias, an Australian environmental consultancy that Magellan hired as a contractor for the summer’s endeavor. Magellan also hired the South African and British deckhands helping Young, plus the ROV team and a number of Malaysian hydrographic surveyors. Itself headquartered in Guernsey, an island between the U.K. and France, Magellan had chartered the Coco from a Danish firm, with sailors from the North Atlantic’s Faroe Islands and pursers from the Philippines. Much of the venture’s financing—for daily costs topping tens of thousands of dollars over several months—came from Russian and Omani investors, who had registered DSMF in the tax-friendly British Virgin Islands.

Up on the ship’s bridge, Holt told me this enormously expensive exercise was to better understand the speed and power requirements of this mining technique, which relied on off-the-shelf commercial equipment Magellan had modified for underwater use. His remit was also to quantify the environmental impacts that a future vessel even larger than the 270-foot Coco might generate through similar extraction cycles. He told me that before the excursion had started he had been “totally in two minds” about seafloor mining. “But now I’ve seen how rich the deposit is and how little we’ve been disturbing the seabed,” he said. “We haven’t got huge clouds of sediment that are drifting off down in the current, smothering coral reefs, or all this sort of stuff that people are worried about.”

Globe with the Bismarck Sea labeled, just north of Papua New Guinea

I observed the same 12-hour extraction cycle twice during my time onboard. Holt told me that over nearly two months Magellan’s teams were focusing on four separate locations in a wider area collectively designated Solwara 1. In each location, the crew would excavate a number of square plots 33 feet on edge and up to 23 feet deep. He said PNG’s Mineral Resources Authority, or MRA, had approved the extraction of about 200 tons of material—from an ore body estimated at more than two million tons—for removal and further testing on shore. He also explained that to maximize the clamshell jaws’ productivity on the seafloor between each long descent and ascent, Magellan had decided to stockpile more material than the 200 tons permitted for testing—up to 600 tons from each of the four sites—perhaps for collection at a later date. I realized this meant Magellan and DSMF might be digging up more of the seabed than the regulator had anticipated.

As with any mining endeavor, Solwara 1’s long-term economic viability would live and die on global metal prices, and in this case the ore’s copper concentration was a crucial factor. Two local geologists onboard seemed enthralled by their initial readings. Leaning over the pile of dark-gray rock that had been dumped onto the rear deck—after it had been smashed into pieces by a large drill—Paul Lahari grabbed some samples and carried them into a cramped prefab shipping container that served as a laboratory. “Anything to do with 0.5 or 1 percent, we’re already excited,” said the Papua New Guinean, who had decades of onshore and offshore mining experience.

He was referring to the typical copper concentrations in ore mined on land. Inside the lab he wielded a small instrument that measures x-ray fluorescence, which he said would reveal the elemental composition of each sample. Soon, on its small digital screen, the instrument began to show matches to elements in the periodic table, as well as their estimated concentration in the sample. For copper, it was 12.33 percent. “That’s 10 times more than we get on land,” Lahari said, his voice rising. He noted that the sampling averages so far on the trip had hovered around 7 percent.

All 200 tons the Coco recovered and carried onboard would eventually reach an Australian facility, where the rock would be further pulverized. Much smaller samples would then pass through a gauntlet of geochemical tests—heating, fusing, leaching—and the entire batch would be assigned an industry-recognized average copper concentration, or “grade,” alongside a report on the other metals found, including gold.

Oceanographers have identified massive sulfide deposits across the Atlantic, Pacific, Indian and Arctic Oceans. Small-scale sample drilling has shown that they often contain similarly high concentrations of copper, alongside zinc and lead. Deposits form close to, if not on, the seafloor surface, meaning there’s far less “overburden”—the valueless material that must be removed to access the ore—than in most land-based mines.

Other prospectors have been interested in Solwara’s potential for years. In 2011 executives from Nautilus Minerals, headquartered in Canada, leased the Solwara 1 site from PNG as a 20-year underwater-mining concession. Authorities in the perennially cash-strapped country invested $120 million in the project through a state-owned entity. The country’s taxpayers thus became a junior partner with Nautilus.

At the time, Nautilus was hailed as a pioneer—the only company in the world to hold a license for deep-sea mining. But as the project progressed, things went sideways. A coastal nation controls resource exploitation in the waters constituting its exclusive economic zone, which reaches 200 nautical miles out from its shoreline in all directions. Any activities in the international waters between nations’ economic zones, such as deep-sea mining, are regulated by the International Seabed Authority, or ISA, a body established through a treaty sponsored by the United Nations.

A Papua New Guinea governor wrote in a statement that he considered the “presence of any [mining] vessel or activity in the area to be illegal.”

When PNG issued Nautilus’s license in 2011 for operations in its national waters, it had no specific underwater-mining legislation. The MRA, the country’s mining regulator, issued the license under rules for land-based mining after Nautilus had carried out impact assessments to earn a separate environmental permit. After false starts in sourcing a ship, in 2014 Nautilus commissioned a Chinese shipyard to build a mining vessel, and Nautilus contracted engineers to develop three enormous, tracked vehicles to break up, churn up and then suck up material from a massive sulfide deposit through a mile-long slurry hose connected to the surface vessel. The technique would mean dumping mining water back into the sea—something other mining operators were planning to do, too.

But Nautilus began burning through up to $2 million a month, according to 2018 financial disclosures, eventually defaulting on payments to the Chinese shipyard before filing for bankruptcy in 2019. Its remaining assets included the mining permit, a few promising core samples, and the three tracked vehicles, only ever tested in shallow waters, that sat rusting on the edge of PNG’s capital, Port Moresby. After its insolvency, PNG Prime Minister James Marape told a local newspaper that the country had wasted tens of millions of dollars on a “concept that is a total failure.” In 2020 the head of the MRA ruled out any chance of reviving the Solwara project.


I disembarked from the Coco less than a day and a half after I had boarded. In blazing afternoon sunshine, a much smaller skiff ferried me back to a remote, pebbly beach on the PNG island of New Ireland. I wanted to know how PNG’s officials and citizens felt about the Coco pulling up their seafloor. A local driver I had hired drove me in the dark over bumpy coastal roads to a guesthouse in the village of Kono.

The following morning I sat outside at a rickety wood table, sharing a breakfast of fish, yams and crackers with some of the local men. One of them, Jonathan Mesulam, was a spokesperson for the Alliance of Solwara Warriors, a group that has long demanded a ban on deep-sea mining in the Bismarck Sea. A Fiji-based environmental campaigner had introduced me to him via an encrypted messaging app. As I described what I had seen onboard the Coco, Mesulam shifted from initially incredulous to increasingly agitated. He walked to the home of Kono’s chief, Chris Malagan, to discuss what I had told him ahead of a weekly public meeting Malagan presides over, which attracts many of the village’s 700 residents.

Malagan began that afternoon’s meeting underneath large shoreline trees. Nearby, children waded out from the beach to cast lines for small fish in the shallows close to more than a dozen mud and straw huts. Adults sitting among the trees listened intently to Mesulam’s description of the Coco’s operations, which was based on my eyewitness account. Several people stood up to angrily denounce activities they considered threatening to their fish-centered livelihoods.

“People are surprised—they are shocked after learning that the new company’s coming back,” Mesulam told me as villagers drifted away. “After all our efforts on campaigning against seabed mining, we thought it was a dead issue now,” he continued, becoming occasionally tearful. “We don’t want to be used as guinea pigs for trial and error,” he said. “These metals that are going to be dug out of our ocean will not benefit anyone from here because nobody here is using electric cars.”

Men on a ship with large excavator

The lack of local awareness and the Coco’s stockpiling of seafloor material seemed unusual for a 21st-century extraction project. To better understand the political support and permitting process for deep-sea mining, I left New Ireland on a plane headed to Port Moresby. The capital, with its sprawling neighborhoods, is built around a spectacular natural harbor. In a hilltop hotel, I told a lawyer named Peter Bosip that I had recently been onboard a deep-sea-mining vessel. He seemed upset. He told me neither Nautilus’s 25-year environmental permit nor the MRA’s subsequently issued mining license for Solwara 1 had ever been made public—despite a constitutionally mandated transparency requirement and a decade-long legal battle waged by good-governance and environmental groups. (Parkinson sent me the cover page of the license, but neither he nor Magellan nor PNG regulators provided a full copy.)

Such opaqueness was common in PNG, Bosip told me, but meant it was difficult for local communities to hold international companies to account for potential environmental infractions. Bosip is executive director of the Center for Environmental Law and Community Rights in PNG, a public-interest law firm that sued the government for access to the Solwara permit documents. “In PNG,” he told me, “the system is such a way that the responses are not forthcoming.” He apparently meant that government ministries, agencies and regulators rarely shared information willingly.

DSMF provided the struggling Nautilus with high-interest loans, and during the 2019 bankruptcy proceedings, the company took possession of Nautilus’s Solwara 1 license. A document from the Supreme Court of British Columbia shows that DSMF’s listed representatives during those proceedings were Christopher Jordinson, an Australian who’d previously pled guilty to insider trading, and Matthias Bolliger, a Swiss national who was subsequently barred from directorships on the Isle of Man. Documents from the bankruptcy proceedings show the pair are listed as points of contact for DSMF’s largest shareholders: Omani tycoon Mohammed Al Barwani, whose family firm owns oil, gas and mining subsidiaries, and Alisher Usmanov, who is among Russia’s wealthiest pro-Putin oligarchs. Usmanov had been involved in Solwara-based mining for almost 20 years, but now—after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022—he tops worldwide sanctions lists.

In July 2022 DSMF joined forces with SM2, another company founded by Parkinson, who in turn hired his firm Magellan to operate in PNG waters under Nautilus’s original license. Parkinson told me that in November 2023 he, Bolliger and Jordinson met with New Ireland’s governor. Sometime later various PNG agencies, including the MRA, approved the new mining technique.

I spent days chasing down officials across Port Moresby, trying to get clarity on this approval process. After unanswered e-mails and unreturned phone calls, I finally reached the MRA’s managing director, Jerry Garry, by video call. He was in a remote highland region that was slated to host a gold mine, he said, but he told me his officials should be onboard any deep-sea-mining vessel in PNG to monitor operations. When I noted none had been onboard the Coco, he insisted he had no idea the Coco was even in the Bismarck Sea. Garry never again answered my calls.

PNG’s attorney general, Pila Kole Niningi, didn’t reply to interview requests. I did reach Fiona Pagla, the PNG Department of Justice’s acting director for the national oceans office, who was at a conference in Bali. She told me that she knew nothing about the Coco but that if it was conducting marine scientific research, a committee inside her department should have been asked for approval. Hours later, when I pressed her for details in WhatsApp messages, Pagla replied, “No comment.”

The country’s environment minister, Simon Kilepa, didn’t make himself available for an interview. Jude Tukuliya, head of the PNG Conservation and Environment Protection Authority, and officials at the country’s National Fisheries Authority did not respond to calls and written questions about the Coco and DSMF. Prime Minister Marape’s chief of staff insisted the premier would not discuss deep-sea mining.

After returning to London, where I live, I continued my attempted outreach from afar. Late last summer DSMF’s website was taken down and replaced with a fresh one featuring a new entity called Sustainable Mining Solutions (SMS), billed as a joint venture between DSMF and Parkinson’s SM2. The site repeatedly mentioned Nautilus’s mining license and environmental permits—still not public—and said PNG would gain from Solwara 1’s profits and mining royalties, with benefits for local people “currently being negotiated.” Parkinson had told me soon after I’d left the Coco that Magellan and SM2 were not “cutting corners” and were “operating within the laws of that country.” He had also said the Australian lab readings indicated Solwara 1 is “a credible source of copper.” In response to a request for comment I sent in March by e-mail, DSMF wrote that the results “will be provided to the relevant regulatory authorities in due course, once the analyses by internal and third-party experts are completed.”

This past January I finally, and unexpectedly, heard from Julius Chan, a PNG prime minister turned New Ireland governor with a national parliamentary seat. He’d previously said deep-sea miners should engage with islanders to provide confidence that a project wouldn’t affect their livelihoods. He wrote in a statement that those involved in Solwara “certainly do not have my government support and approval” and that he considered the “presence of any vessel or activity in the area to be illegal.” He died three weeks later at age 85. In its e-mail response, DSMF wrote, “The Solwara 1 project is compliant with the regulations, having secured a valid mining license as defined in the PNG Mining Act, and is a fully permitted project having met license requirements under relevant Papua New Guinea laws and regulations.” It also noted that “the allowable impacts of mining at Solwara 1 are regulated, managed and conducted in accordance with the Mining Law and Environmental Act (2000).”

The Magellan team onboard the Coco had told me it was operating with permission from the MRA, and Parkinson told me before and after my visit to PNG that government officials were aware and supportive of their large-scale extraction tests. Perhaps some people inside the government had not shared details of the Coco’s mission as widely as they could have, I reasoned. But when I was onboard, there seemed to be little stopping the Solwara 1 project from scaling up significantly—unless steep capital costs somehow dissuaded deep-pocketed investors or public uproar in PNG forced a rethink among national politicians, who perhaps might have been hoping to recoup the sizable state investment Nautilus once blew through.

What is clear is that deep-sea mining on a commercial scale will begin soon somewhere. Norway, the Cook Islands, Japan and Sweden have approved deep-sea mining in their exclusive economic zones. Norway’s offshore-resources agency says the country’s waters contain manganese crusts, as well as sulfide deposits, and the government had considered awarding exploitation licenses this year. Authorities in the Cook Islands have issued exploration licenses to three operators surveying for polymetallic nodules. Scientists at the University of Tokyo and collaborating institutions recently confirmed a vast nodule field close to Japan’s easternmost island, a tiny atoll called Minamitorishima. Estimates indicate the field contains more than 600,000 tons of cobalt—much more than the total 2023 output from the Democratic Republic of Congo, by far the largest global cobalt producer.

A consortium of government agencies, academic institutions and private enterprises plans to extract Japan’s underwater resources in the decades ahead. With enormous deep-sea regions still unmapped, scientists say similar opportunities exist elsewhere. But after a 2023 study found that some polymetallic nodules emitted enough radiation that inappropriate handling could pose health risks, questions have increased about the wisdom of nodule mining. Citing limited scientific data on long-term environmental impacts, many nations, including Germany, Spain and Chile, have called for a pause. Palau and Fiji have advocated for a moratorium, and France wants an outright ban.

The ISA has granted more than 30 exploration licenses for international waters, some for each of the three kinds of deposits. It has repeatedly delayed a framework for exploitation licenses, though, to the frustration of some people in the mining industry. The authority’s new secretary-general, Brazilian oceanographer Leticia Carvalho, took charge in January 2025, promising to end what she considers cozy relations between ISA and potential commercial operators. She has also suggested that the new subsea-mining code should be finalized by late this year.

Unlike in the early years of, say, coal mining, environmental scientists are deeply involved in the development of seafloor extraction. But much remains unknown about the impacts. Scant studies exist on the consequences for marine life of sulfide-deposit mining like the Coco was carrying out. A case study involving Japanese state entities digging sulfides at a similar depth, several thousand miles north in the Pacific Ocean, gives some idea of what to expect. Researchers assessed the impact on nearby ocean flora and fauna for three years after a brief mining session. They found that populations of organisms less than a tenth of an inch in size may return to normal levels within a year, but larger species may remain depleted more than three years later. That mining lasted only six hours.

In its statement, DSMF wrote, “Extensive scientific studies have enabled SMS to assess the risks to marine ecosystems and carefully weigh them against the damage caused by terrestrial mining.” The new SMS website says mining in Solwara 1 “will not adversely affect the marine life habitat” and that with recolonization efforts, three years after mining ends, the environment around any vents will “resemble the pre-mining condition of biomass and diversity.” Marine scientists I spoke to questioned that assertion. The ecosystem will not recover “unless the chemistry and the substrate and the texture and the morphology of the bottom, and the temperature and everything else, are what they were” before a location was disturbed, says Lisa Levin, professor emerita of biological oceanography and marine ecology at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego. “It couldn’t possibly be.” She says certain species exist only near these vents, and after mining it’s “highly likely” those species will become extinct. “People have to be willing to give up the seafloor ecosystems if they want to mine them,” Levin says. She adds that the contamination of fish stocks by chemicals from the seafloor should reasonably concern local societies.

Throughout the world’s deep ocean zones, where scientists estimate thousands of species remain undiscovered, heavy mining equipment may harm organisms that are unable to quickly move out of its way. Leaks from mining equipment or mining water dumped from surface vessels could also threaten open-ocean fisheries, and noise and light pollution could impact reproduction or feeding patterns of species already threatened by other human actions. The environmental team onboard the Coco was clearly aware of some of these potential consequences.

The juxtapositions I experienced at sea and on land were jarring. The extraordinary scale and power of the Coco’s technology, backed by distant billionaires, were in sharp contrast to subsistence communities where villagers paddle canoes into the surf to fish by hand. The informational asymmetry was striking, too: hydrographers, geologists and environmental scientists with millions of data points designed to gauge surroundings—and profits to be realized thousands of miles away—were set against local residents who seemed to lack access to attested Solwara permits, let alone details of possible environmental drawbacks. For the people who live there, short-term benefits—new local jobs, perhaps, or increased government revenues—might never outweigh stress to the ecosystem and a way of life that depends on it.

As this article was going to press, senior PNG officials—including one in the country’s Department of Justice—told me the questions I had asked during my reporting had prompted action. In late February the government introduced new mining legislation that, for the first time, includes specific rules for deep-sea mining. The country’s Marine Scientific Research Committee, which comprises almost two dozen government entities, passed guidelines that will require future deep-sea-mining licenses to have committee approval. Because the legislation is open to public comment, it is not yet clear whether a new mining law will have retroactive force. If it does, officials told me, DSMF might have to reapply for its environmental permits and mining license and publish a fresh environmental impact assessment.

Some of the reporting for this story was originally done while Willem Marx was on assignment for PBS.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Forever Chemicals' Might Triple Teens' Risk Of Fatty Liver Disease

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterTHURSDAY, Jan. 8, 2026 (HealthDay News) — PFAS “forever chemicals” might nearly triple a young person’s risk...

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterTHURSDAY, Jan. 8, 2026 (HealthDay News) — PFAS “forever chemicals” might nearly triple a young person’s risk of developing fatty liver disease, a new study says.Each doubling in blood levels of the PFAS chemical perfluorooctanoic acid is linked to 2.7 times the odds of fatty liver disease among teenagers, according to findings published in the January issue of the journal Environmental Research.Fatty liver disease — also known as metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) — occurs when fat builds up in the organ, leading to inflammation, scarring and increased risk of cancer.About 10% of all children, and up to 40% of children with obesity, have fatty liver disease, researchers said in background notes.“MASLD can progress silently for years before causing serious health problems,” said senior researcher Dr. Lida Chatzi, a professor of population and public health sciences and pediatrics at the Keck School of Medicine of USC in Los Angeles.“When liver fat starts accumulating in adolescence, it may set the stage for a lifetime of metabolic and liver health challenges,” Chatzi added in a news release. “If we reduce PFAS exposure early, we may help prevent liver disease later. That’s a powerful public health opportunity.”Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are called “forever chemicals” because they combine carbon and fluorine molecules, one of the strongest chemical bonds possible. This makes PFAS removal and breakdown very difficult.PFAS compounds have been used in consumer products since the 1940s, including fire extinguishing foam, nonstick cookware, food wrappers, stain-resistant furniture and waterproof clothing.More than 99% of Americans have measurable PFAS in their blood, and at least one PFAS chemical is present in roughly half of U.S. drinking water supplies, researchers said.“Adolescents are particularly more vulnerable to the health effects of PFAS as it is a critical period of development and growth,” lead researcher Shiwen “Sherlock” Li, an assistant professor of public health sciences at the University of Hawaii, said in a news release.“In addition to liver disease, PFAS exposure has been associated with a range of adverse health outcomes, including several types of cancer,” Li said.For the new study, researchers examined data on 284 Southern California adolescents and young adults gathered as part of two prior USC studies.All of the participants already had a high risk of metabolic disease because their parents had type 2 diabetes or were overweight, researchers said.Their PFAS levels were measured through blood tests, and liver fat was assessed using MRI scans.Higher blood levels of two common PFAS — perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA) — were linked to an increased risk of fatty liver disease.Results showed a young person’s risk was even higher if they smoked or carried a genetic variant known to influence liver fat.“These findings suggest that PFAS exposures, genetics and lifestyle factors work together to influence who has greater risk of developing MASLD as a function of your life stage,” researcher Max Aung, assistant professor of population and public health sciences at the Keck School of Medicine, said in a news release.“Understanding gene and environment interactions can help advance precision environmental health for MASLD,” he added.The study also showed that fatty liver disease became more common as teens grew older, adding to evidence that younger people might be more vulnerable to PFAS exposure, Chatzi said.“PFAS exposures not only disrupt liver biology but also translate into real liver disease risk in youth,” Chatzi said. “Adolescence seems to be a critical window of susceptibility, suggesting PFAS exposure may matter most when the liver is still developing.”The Environmental Working Group has more on PFAS.SOURCES: Keck School of Medicine of USC, news release, Jan. 6, 2026; Environmental Research, Jan. 1, 2026Copyright © 2026 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

China Announces Another New Trade Measure Against Japan as Tensions Rise

China has escalated its trade tensions with Japan by launching an investigation into imported dichlorosilane, a chemical gas used in making semiconductors

BEIJING (AP) — China escalated its trade tensions with Japan on Wednesday by launching an investigation into imported dichlorosilane, a chemical gas used in making semiconductors, a day after it imposed curbs on the export of so-called dual-use goods that could be used by Japan’s military.The Chinese Commerce Ministry said in a statement that it had launched the investigation following an application from the domestic industry showing the price of dichlorosilane imported from Japan had decreased 31% between 2022 and 2024.“The dumping of imported products from Japan has damaged the production and operation of our domestic industry,” the ministry said.The measure comes a day after Beijing banned exports to Japan of dual-use goods that can have military applications.Beijing has been showing mounting displeasure with Tokyo after new Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi suggested late last year that her nation's military could intervene if China were to take action against Taiwan — an island democracy that Beijing considers its own territory.Tensions were stoked again on Tuesday when Japanese lawmaker Hei Seki, who last year was sanctioned by China for “spreading fallacies” about Taiwan and other disputed territories, visited Taiwan and called it an independent country. Also known as Yo Kitano, he has been banned from entering China. He told reporters that his arrival in Taiwan demonstrated the two are “different countries.”“I came to Taiwan … to prove this point, and to tell the world that Taiwan is an independent country,” Hei Seki said, according to Taiwan’s Central News Agency.“The nasty words of a petty villain like him are not worth commenting on,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning retorted when asked about his comment. Fears of a rare earths curb Masaaki Kanai, head of Asia Oceanian Affairs at Japan's Foreign Ministry, urged China to scrap the trade curbs, saying a measure exclusively targeting Japan that deviates from international practice is unacceptable. Japan, however, has yet to announce any retaliatory measures.As the two countries feuded, speculation rose that China might target rare earths exports to Japan, in a move similar to the rounds of critical minerals export restrictions it has imposed as part of its trade war with the United States.China controls most of the global production of heavy rare earths, used for making powerful, heat-resistance magnets used in industries such as defense and electric vehicles.While the Commerce Ministry did not mention any new rare earths curbs, the official newspaper China Daily, seen as a government mouthpiece, quoted anonymous sources saying Beijing was considering tightening exports of certain rare earths to Japan. That report could not be independently confirmed. Improved South Korean ties contrast with Japan row As Beijing spars with Tokyo, it has made a point of courting a different East Asian power — South Korea.On Wednesday, South Korean President Lee Jae Myung wrapped up a four-day trip to China – his first since taking office in June. Lee and Chinese President Xi Jinping oversaw the signing of cooperation agreements in areas such as technology, trade, transportation and environmental protection.As if to illustrate a contrast with the China-Japan trade frictions, Lee joined two business events at which major South Korean and Chinese companies pledged to collaborate.The two sides signed 24 export contracts worth a combined $44 million, according to South Korea’s Ministry of Trade, Industry and Resources. During Lee’s visit, Chinese media also reported that South Korea overtook Japan as the leading destination for outbound flights from China’s mainland over the New Year’s holiday.China has been discouraging travel to Japan, saying Japanese leaders’ comments on Taiwan have created “significant risks to the personal safety and lives of Chinese citizens in Japan.”Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 2025

Pesticide industry ‘immunity shield’ stripped from US appropriations bill

Democrats and the Make America Healthy Again movement pushed back on the rider in a funding bill led by BayerIn a setback for the pesticide industry, Democrats have succeeded in removing a rider from a congressional appropriations bill that would have helped protect pesticide makers from being sued and could have hindered state efforts to warn about pesticide risks.Chellie Pingree, a Democratic representative from Maine and ranking member of the House appropriations interior, environment, and related agencies subcommittee, said Monday that the controversial measure pushed by the agrochemical giant Bayer and industry allies has been stripped from the 2026 funding bill. Continue reading...

In a setback for the pesticide industry, Democrats have succeeded in removing a rider from a congressional appropriations bill that would have helped protect pesticide makers from being sued and could have hindered state efforts to warn about pesticide risks.Chellie Pingree, a Democratic representative from Maine and ranking member of the House appropriations interior, environment, and related agencies subcommittee, said Monday that the controversial measure pushed by the agrochemical giant Bayer and industry allies has been stripped from the 2026 funding bill.The move is final, as Senate Republican leaders have agreed not to revisit the issue, Pingree said.“I just drew a line in the sand and said this cannot stay in the bill,” Pingree told the Guardian. “There has been intensive lobbying by Bayer. This has been quite a hard fight.”The now-deleted language was part of a larger legislative effort that critics say is aimed at limiting litigation against pesticide industry leader Bayer, which sells the widely used Roundup herbicides.An industry alliance set up by Bayer has been pushing for both state and federal laws that would make it harder for consumers to sue over pesticide risks to human health and has successfully lobbied for the passing of such laws in Georgia and North Dakota so far.The specific proposed language added to the appropriations bill blocked federal funds from being used to “issue or adopt any guidance or any policy, take any regulatory action, or approve any labeling or change to such labeling” inconsistent with the conclusion of an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) human health assessment.Critics said the language would have impeded states and local governments from warning about risks of pesticides even in the face of new scientific findings about health harms if such warnings were not consistent with outdated EPA assessments. The EPA itself would not be able to update warnings without finalizing a new assessment, the critics said.And because of the limits on warnings, critics of the rider said, consumers would have found it difficult, if not impossible, to sue pesticide makers for failing to warn them of health risks if the EPA assessments do not support such warnings.“This provision would have handed pesticide manufacturers exactly what they’ve been lobbying for: federal preemption that stops state and local governments from restricting the use of harmful, cancer-causing chemicals, adding health warnings, or holding companies accountable in court when people are harmed,” Pingree said in a statement. “It would have meant that only the federal government gets a say – even though we know federal reviews can take years, and are often subject to intense industry pressure.”Pingree tried but failed to overturn the language in a July appropriations committee hearing.Bayer, the key backer of the legislative efforts, has been struggling for years to put an end to thousands of lawsuits filed by people who allege they developed cancer from their use of Roundup and other glyphosate-based weed killers sold by Bayer. The company inherited the litigation when it bought Monsanto in 2018 and has paid out billions of dollars in settlements and jury verdicts but still faces several thousand ongoing lawsuits. Bayer maintains its glyphosate-based herbicides do not cause cancer and are safe when used as directed.When asked for comment on Monday, Bayer said that no company should have “blanket immunity” and it disputed that the appropriations bill language would have prevented anyone from suing pesticide manufacturers. The company said it supports state and federal legislation “because the future of American farming depends on reliable science-based regulation of important crop protection products – determined safe for use by the EPA”.The company additionally states on its website that without “legislative certainty”, lawsuits over its glyphosate-based Roundup and other weed killers can impact its research and product development and other “important investments”.Pingree said her efforts were aided by members of the Make America Healthy Again (Maha) movement who have spent the last few months meeting with congressional members and their staffers on this issue. She said her team reached out to Maha leadership in the last few days to pressure Republican lawmakers.“This is the first time that we’ve had a fairly significant advocacy group working on the Republican side,” she said.Last week, Zen Honeycutt, a Maha leader and founder of the group Moms Across America, posted a “call to action”, urging members to demand elected officials “Stop the Pesticide Immunity Shield”.“A lot of people helped make this happen,” Honeycutt said. “Many health advocates have been fervently expressing their requests to keep chemical companies accountable for safety … We are delighted that our elected officials listened to so many Americans who spoke up and are restoring trust in the American political system.”Pingree said the issue is not dead. Bayer has “made this a high priority”, and she expects to see continued efforts to get industry friendly language inserted into legislation, including into the new Farm Bill.“I don’t think this is over,” she said.This story is co-published with the New Lede, a journalism project of the Environmental Working Group

Forever Chemicals' Common in Cosmetics, but FDA Says Safety Data Are Scant

By Deanna Neff HealthDay ReporterSATURDAY, Jan. 3, 2026 (HealthDay News) — Federal regulators have released a mandated report regarding the...

By Deanna Neff HealthDay ReporterSATURDAY, Jan. 3, 2026 (HealthDay News) — Federal regulators have released a mandated report regarding the presence of "forever chemicals" in makeup and skincare products. Forever chemicals — known as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances or PFAS — are manmade chemicals that don't break down and have built up in people’s bodies and the environment. They are sometimes added to beauty products intentionally, and sometimes they are contaminants. While the findings confirm that PFAS are widely used in the beauty industry, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) admitted it lacks enough scientific evidence to determine if they are truly safe for consumers.The new report reveals that 51 forever chemicals — are used in 1,744 cosmetic formulations. These synthetic chemicals are favored by manufacturers because they make products waterproof, increase their durability and improve texture.FDA scientists focused their review on the 25 most frequently used PFAS, which account for roughly 96% of these chemicals found in beauty products. The results were largely unclear. While five were deemed to have low safety concerns, one was flagged for potential health risks, and safety of the rest could not be confirmed.FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary expressed concern over the difficulty in accessing private research. “Our scientists found that toxicological data for most PFAS are incomplete or unavailable, leaving significant uncertainty about consumer safety,” Makary said in a news release, adding that “this lack of reliable data demands further research.”Despite growing concerns about their potential toxicity, no federal laws specifically ban their use in cosmetics.The FDA report focuses on chemicals that are added to products on purpose, rather than those that might show up as accidental contaminants. Moving forward, FDA plans to work closely with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to update and strengthen recommendations on PFAS across the retail and food supply chain, Makary said. The agency has vowed to devote more resources to monitoring these chemicals and will take enforcement action if specific products are proven to be dangerous.The U.S. Food and Drug Administration provides updates and consumer guidance on the use of PFAS in cosmetics.SOURCE: U.S. Food and Drug Administration, news release, Dec. 29, 2025Copyright © 2026 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.