The SO322 expedition is part of MiningImpact, a European consortium that has studied the environmental impacts of potential deep-sea mining since 2015. It is scheduled to run from 17 October to 9 December 2026, beginning and ending in San Diego, and will work in the Pacific’s Clarion-Clipperton Zone. Thirty-nine researchers from 17 institutions in seven European countries are taking part. Their disciplines include biology, microbiology, chemistry, oceanography and geology, allowing them to investigate biological and chemical aspects of the seabed as well as sediment and geological conditions. This is a multidisciplinary observational study of the consequences of an earlier disturbance. It is intended to answer specific questions about faunal change, sediment effects and potential recolonisation, but it cannot provide a complete assessment of the abyssal ecosystem or predict every consequence of future mining.

Polymetallic nodules form at an exceptionally slow rate, growing by about one to two millimetres over a million years. In undisturbed abyssal plains, they also supply a hard surface on which animals can settle. Sea anemones, soft corals and giant stalked sponges may live on the nodules, and the sponges can provide habitat for other organisms. Haeckel said researchers typically find two to three small organisms on each nodule. Where nodules have been removed, those organisms and the habitats associated with them are absent. The expedition’s central question is how the communities around the 2021 trial have changed during the five and a half years since the collector operated.

That earlier test was conducted by the Belgian company Global Sea Mineral Resources, which operated a remotely controlled pre-prototype nodule collector for 74 hours in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. The vehicle travelled about 32 kilometres and harvested polymetallic nodules across 54,000 square metres, an area roughly equivalent to seven soccer fields. Besides removing nodules, the collector removed the biota-rich surface layer of sediment. The experiment therefore created a disturbed track that can now be compared with surrounding seabed. SO322 will examine both the cleared area and its wider sediment-affected zone, offering observations from a real collector trial rather than relying only on short-term responses or predictions.

The trial also produced a plume of sediment suspended in bottom water, with material settling again within several hundred metres of the mining site. Fauna attached to nodules, known as sessile fauna, cannot escape the plume and may be buried by resettling sediment. Haeckel said some organisms can clean themselves while others cannot, and that organisms which filter food from the water are also very likely to be affected. These statements identify mechanisms the researchers will investigate, rather than establishing the extent of impact in every organism. One of SO322’s objectives is to determine how long plume-related effects persist and how far they extend beyond the collector’s route.

To conduct those observations, the research vessel Sonne carries a large suite of equipment. Its remotely operated vehicle, KIEL 6000, is about the size of a small van and, with cables, winches, a control unit and accessories, requires five 20-foot containers. The ship also carries ABYSS, an autonomous underwater vehicle with a launch and recovery system; three benthic landers that can be deployed on the seafloor; and sediment-sampling devices such as multiple and box corers. Scientific equipment aboard the vessel fills 16 containers. Sonne will remain at sea for 54 days, the maximum period for which the ship is designed to stay out without entering a port.

Beyond tracking changes around the collector footprint, the team will test whether artificial hard substrates can promote recolonisation of the seabed. The planned experiment will introduce surfaces where nodules have been extracted, allowing researchers to ask whether animals can begin using a substitute habitat and what kinds of organisms settle on it. The artificial structures will not reproduce the nodules in every respect, and the test will not settle every question about long-term restoration. Nevertheless, placing them in the disturbed landscape can help investigators characterize the arrival of organisms on a new hard surface and compare that process with the condition of the original nodule habitat. The results will inform the project’s broader work on potential environmental consequences.

Major uncertainties surround the biology of the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. Haeckel said about 90 percent of the species sampled so far remain unidentified and have no scientific name, while the total number of species still to be discovered is unknown. The functions of individual species are also poorly understood, leaving researchers without a complete map of their ecological relationships. Species connectivity is another unresolved question. Some species are distributed across the entire Clarion-Clipperton Zone between Mexico and Hawaii, and in some cases across the wider Pacific Ocean. Such a distribution implies that gene exchange must occur, but the intermediate spatial links and temporal scales involved have not been established. These knowledge gaps limit how confidently the lasting effects of disturbance can be characterized.

SO322 is also intended to strengthen the evidence available to the International Seabed Authority and national authorities. MiningImpact translates its scientific findings into recommendations concerning potential deep-sea mining, and the consortium has been assessing environmental consequences since 2015. The five-and-a-half-year interval since the collector trial provides an opportunity to look beyond the immediate period of operation and determine which changes remain detectable in the seabed. Haeckel said the benthic ecosystem is unlikely to recover on human timescales: removal of a specific nodule habitat can be permanent, while alterations to sedimentary processes may persist for thousands of years. He argued that damage on that scale must be prevented because it may become apparent only when it is already too late.

SO322 is therefore a voyage into a habitat defined by very slow formation, uncertain biodiversity and potentially persistent disturbance. The expedition does not initiate commercial extraction and does not, by itself, establish the consequences of mining across the entire Clarion-Clipperton Zone. It instead examines a specific experimental disturbance using remotely operated and autonomous vehicles, seafloor landers and sediment sampling, while a multidisciplinary team studies animals, microbes, water, sediment and geology. Its practical value lies in extending observation beyond the hours of the 2021 collector test: by returning five and a half years later, scientists can assess what remains of the nodule-associated community, how disturbance extends through sediment and whether newly provided surfaces are colonized. Those observations will help clarify the limits of current knowledge and the scale of the ecological challenge posed by mining in the deep sea.

Subject of Research: Ecological effects of experimental polymetallic-nodule mining on the abyssal seafloor

Article Title: A voyage into the slow-motion world of the deep sea

Article References: A voyage into the slow-motion world of the deep sea. Original publication (Bibliographic details unavailable.)

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: deep-sea mining, polymetallic nodules, Clarion-Clipperton Zone, abyssal ecology, sediment plume, benthic fauna, recolonisation, MiningImpact, ocean research, GEOMAR, voyage, slow-motion

Jan Mayen is an unlikely stage for a natural experiment in cascading hazards. The island lies roughly 500 kilometres east of Greenland and 550 kilometres north of Iceland, is politically part of Norway, and is uninhabited apart from the crew of a weather station. Like Iceland, it was forged by volcanic activity along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, the undersea mountain chain where the Eurasian and North American tectonic plates pull apart. It hosts the world’s northernmost active volcano, Beerenberg, which last erupted in the 1980s. From the volcano’s crater rim, glaciers descend approximately 2,000 metres down to the coast, draped over steep volcanic slopes that have been locked in place by permafrost for millennia.

Permafrost, the permanently frozen ground that underlies much of the polar world, is far more than frozen soil. Within fractured rock, ice acts as a kind of geological cement, much as concrete binds aggregate in a building. When that ice thaws, the binding agent disappears and the rock mass becomes weak and unstable. Scientists have long warned that permafrost degradation can destabilize mountain slopes in Alaska, the Alps and the Himalayas. What the Jan Mayen event demonstrates is how this slow, climate-driven weakening can intersect with a sudden geophysical trigger, an earthquake, to produce a hazard cascade that neither process would likely have produced alone.

The earthquake itself was not unusual for the region. Jan Mayen sits in a seismically active zone, and earthquakes are a routine feature of life along the ridge system. What was extraordinary was the slope response. Satellite observations spanning the past 40 years show no evidence of an earthquake-triggered rock avalanche with a comparable debris extension anywhere on the island. The main shock of 10 March 2025 triggered a rock avalanche on the slope above the Kjerulf Glacier within minutes, and the resulting debris formed distinctive conical mounds known as molards, scattered across the ice roughly seven kilometres from the epicentre. Satellite data also documented earthquake-induced calving, the breaking off of ice, at the neighbouring Weyprecht Glacier.

To reconstruct what happened, the international team combined an unusually broad set of data. Local and regional seismic records pinned down the timing and energy of the main shock. Ground-shaking modelling estimated how strongly the slopes near the epicentre would have been shaken. High-resolution satellite imagery mapped the extent of the rock avalanche and the changes to both affected glaciers. Infrasound measurements, which detect low-frequency acoustic waves generated by large mass movements, helped determine the exact timing of the slope failure. Air temperature and long-term climate records completed the picture, allowing the researchers to place the event in its climatic context. This integration of methods enabled the team to reconstruct the sequence of events in remarkable detail for a site so remote that no human witnessed the failure.

The researchers’ central question was deceptively simple: why did this particular earthquake, in a region long accustomed to seismic shaking, produce such pronounced slope instability? Their answer points to an additional factor that has been accumulating for decades. As the climate continues to warm, permafrost degradation weakens the ice that helps bind fractures within the volcanic rock. The frozen water within those fractures, which helped stabilize the steep slopes for thousands of years, is gradually losing its binding effect. In effect, the geological glue holding Beerenberg’s flanks together is melting out from the inside, so that the same shaking that the slopes once shrugged off can now push them past the point of failure.

Lead author Dr Guilherme W. S. de Melo, a postdoctoral researcher in the Marine Geodynamics research unit at GEOMAR, described the 2025 earthquake as a striking example of cascading natural hazards. According to the study, this is the first documented earthquake-triggered rock avalanche on Jan Mayen island, and the volcanic slope may have become increasingly unstable due to permafrost degradation. The phrasing matters: the researchers do not claim the earthquake was caused by climate change, but rather that long-term warming likely made the rock more susceptible to earthquake shaking, amplifying the consequences of a hazard that has always existed in the region.

The implications reach well beyond the Arctic. De Melo drew a direct comparison with the recent disaster on the Nepal-China border, where the immediate trigger was a glacier and ice-rock collapse rather than an earthquake. In both cases, he noted, the broader context is the same: global warming and permafrost degradation can progressively destabilize slopes and glaciers, increasing the potential for cascading hazards. In high mountain Asia, tens of millions of people live in the path of glacial lakes and landslide-prone valleys, so the same weakening process documented on an uninhabited Arctic island could translate into far greater human consequences where steep, ice-cemented terrain sits above populated areas.

The study also highlights how hazard assessment may need to change in a warming world. Traditional seismic hazard maps consider ground shaking, distance to faults and local geology, but they rarely account for the slow climatic preconditioning of slopes. If permafrost degradation progressively lowers the threshold at which rock fails, then earthquakes of a given magnitude may produce landslides, avalanches and glacier destabilization that historical records would suggest were impossible. The Jan Mayen event provides a rare, cleanly documented case study: a seismically active region, four decades of satellite monitoring showing no comparable failures, and a single earthquake that suddenly produced one. That combination makes a strong argument that the baseline for slope stability has shifted.

Beyond GEOMAR, the research involved scientists from the Geological Survey of Norway, the GFZ Helmholtz Centre for Geosciences, the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, the University of Bergen and NORSAR, reflecting the range of expertise needed to disentangle seismic, cryospheric and climatic signals. For glacier and permafrost regions worldwide, from the Andes to the Himalayas to the Arctic archipelagos, the message of the study is that climate change can act as a silent amplifier of natural hazards, weakening the frozen infrastructure of steep terrain long before any trigger arrives. When the shaking finally comes, the slopes may no longer be able to hold.

Subject of Research: Climate-driven permafrost degradation amplifying earthquake-triggered cascading hazards in the Arctic

Article Title: How climate change may amplify earthquake impacts in the Arctic

Article References: How climate change may amplify earthquake impacts in the Arctic. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: permafrost, earthquake, rock avalanche, Jan Mayen, Arctic, climate change, glaciers, cascading hazards, GEOMAR, Beerenberg, slope stability, PNAS

The scientific rationale behind the experiment is rooted in basic ocean chemistry. Since the beginning of industrialisation, atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations have risen sharply, and a substantial fraction of that gas has dissolved into the sea. This influx has shifted seawater chemistry toward progressively lower pH, a process known as ocean acidification, which places particular stress on organisms that build calcareous structures such as mussels, corals and many planktonic species. At the same time, the added carbon dioxide is a principal driver of global warming. Increasing the alkalinity of seawater raises its buffering capacity, which counteracts acidification and allows the ocean to take up additional CO2 and convert it into more stable dissolved forms. In principle, the chemistry is straightforward. What remains uncertain is how marine ecosystems respond to different alkalinity sources, concentrations and modes of delivery, and where the ecological tolerance limits lie.

That uncertainty is precisely what the Taliarte experiment is designed to address. According to Emeritus Professor Ulf Riebesell, a marine biologist at GEOMAR and co-lead of the study, this year’s trial is about comparing a liquid source of alkalinity with ground concrete rubble and assessing how well both substances are tolerated by the marine environment. The work forms part of the international research project OceanAlkAlign, which aims to standardise measurement and assessment methods for Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement and thereby create a robust scientific foundation for future decisions about whether, where and how such techniques might ever be deployed. The choice of location is no accident: the Canary Islands Marine Research Institute PLOCAN, a long-standing research partner of GEOMAR, sits directly beside the Taliarte harbour, from which the mesocosms are deployed, filled and monitored throughout the entire duration of the experiment.

The tools of the trade are the KOSMOS mesocosms, short for Kiel Off-Shore Mesocosms for Future Ocean Simulations, which GEOMAR has been developing and deploying since 2006. These enclosures function like enormous test tubes suspended in the sea, each enclosing a natural slice of the coastal ecosystem, including planktonic food webs, microbial communities and the biogeochemical processes that connect them. Because the water inside each mesocosm is isolated from the surrounding ocean, researchers can manipulate conditions in individual units and compare outcomes against untreated controls with a precision that would be impossible in the open sea. Across 23 experiments to date, the KOSMOS platform has been used to investigate ocean acidification, warming, nutrient dynamics and potential countermeasures including artificial upwelling and various alkalinity enhancement approaches, making it one of the most experienced experimental infrastructures of its kind in the world.

The experimental design in Gran Canaria follows a comparative logic. Natural plankton communities will be observed over several weeks inside the twelve mesocosms. Some of the systems receive increasing quantities of finely ground concrete rubble, while others are treated with liquid sodium hydroxide as a reference representing pure dissolved alkalinity. A further set of enclosures remains untouched as controls. Throughout the seven-week run, the team will track changes in the seawater carbon dioxide system, including pH and total alkalinity, alongside the degree of CO2 uptake achieved. In parallel, an extensive suite of biological measurements will capture the composition and productivity of the phytoplankton, the responses of zooplankton, microbial process rates, and any indications of shifts rippling through the food web. Together, these data streams allow the researchers to evaluate both the effectiveness of each alkalinity source and any potential side effects along the chain from microbes to grazers.

The choice of concrete as a candidate material is driven by a striking waste-management reality. Concrete rubble is one of the largest waste streams on the planet, with an estimated five billion tonnes generated every year, and only a fraction of that material has so far been reused. Because concrete contains cement, which is inherently alkaline, finely ground demolition waste could in principle serve as a cheap and abundant source of alkalinity for the ocean. Model estimates are already exploring whether large quantities of carbon dioxide could be sequestered in this way over the long term, potentially turning a costly disposal problem into a component of climate mitigation. The appeal is obvious: if a material that already exists in staggering quantities can safely enhance the ocean’s carbon uptake, the economics and logistics of carbon dioxide removal could look very different from approaches that require manufacturing alkalinity from scratch.

Yet the researchers are emphatic that apparent availability does not equal environmental safety. A material that seems unproblematic on land can behave very differently at sea. Ground concrete introduces not only alkalinity but also solid particles, which can increase turbidity in the water column and potentially harm microorganisms, with consequences that could propagate through the food web. Associate Professor Kai Schulz of Southern Cross University in Australia, co-leader of the experiment, stresses that a waste product does not automatically become a sustainable solution simply because it is available. In his view, the field needs data showing under what conditions Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement could be ecologically acceptable and where its limits lie. That caution reflects a broader tension in the emerging carbon removal landscape, where the urgency of climate targets creates pressure to scale technologies faster than the ecological evidence base can comfortably support.

The wider context makes the stakes clear. According to many current scenarios, emission reductions alone will not be sufficient to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement, which has pushed methods for active carbon dioxide removal to the forefront of climate policy discussions. Among the portfolio of candidate approaches, Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement is regarded as an option with high potential, provided it can be implemented effectively and in an environmentally responsible manner. The ocean already absorbs a substantial share of humanity’s carbon emissions each year, and even modest enhancements to that capacity, applied across vast areas, could translate into gigatonne-scale removal. But the same vastness that makes the ocean attractive as a carbon sink also makes mistakes difficult to reverse, which is why controlled, ecosystem-level experiments like the one in Taliarte are considered essential prerequisites before any larger deployment could be responsibly considered.

The ultimate objective of the Gran Canaria study is to help define what the researchers describe as a safe operating space for alkalinity enhancement. The results are intended to inform threshold values: which dosages alter the water chemistry in the desired way, and at what point ecological effects become apparent? What differences emerge between solid particulate sources and dissolved alkalinity? And how can findings from laboratory studies, mesocosm experiments and open-ocean field trials be combined into a body of evidence robust enough to guide real-world decisions? Schulz distils the philosophy of the project into a simple maxim: understanding before scaling up. If Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement is ever to be discussed at a meaningful scale, he argues, it must rest solely on transparent data regarding both benefits and risks.

For now, the twelve floating enclosures in Taliarte harbour will continue their seven-week vigil, quietly recording how plankton communities, microbes and water chemistry respond to each dose of ground concrete or sodium hydroxide. Whatever the outcome, the experiment marks a rare moment when two enormous problems, the mounting mountains of construction demolition waste and the urgent need to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, are tested against each other in the same seawater. If the rubble proves both effective and benign, it could open a genuinely circular pathway from demolition site to ocean carbon sink. If it reveals unexpected harms, the results will have done exactly what careful science is meant to do: draw a clear line around what is safe before anyone is tempted to cross it.

Subject of Research: Ocean alkalinity enhancement using ground concrete demolition waste tested in mesocosm experiments

Article Title: Construction waste for climate protection in the ocean?

Article References: Construction waste for climate protection in the ocean?. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: ocean alkalinity enhancement, carbon dioxide removal, concrete rubble, mesocosm experiment, ocean acidification, GEOMAR, KOSMOS, Gran Canaria, PLOCAN, OceanAlkAlign, marine ecosystems, climate mitigation