standardization of environmental data and information - International ...

Schriever replied that the device, which had been designed by the
DISCOL team, had cost 30,000 German marks in 1988 (about $15,000 at
the current rate) for four duplicate pieces kept onboard in case something
was lost or went wrong. In mining, however, the nodules would have to be
harvested, not ploughed under, so that a way had to be found to collect
them. Moreover, the device was not environmentally friendly because it
created a big plume that could be observed about 20 m above the seafloor,
even six hours later. He had therefore been glad to hear the Indian
approach in developing collectors that did not have such a big impact. He
welcomed the efforts during the past nine or ten years to instil
environmental consciousness into everyone who would be involved in
mining, not only scientists and environmentalists but also engineers and
politicians.
Another participant cited information from the proceedings of the
1998 Workshop of the International Seabed Authority 45 indicating that the
plough-harrow system was much different from actual mining equipment
because of the size of the area covered – a fact, he added, that had been
recognized by Dr. Thiel.
Schriever agreed that the impact from the plough-harrow was
different from that of a mining system. The DISCOL researchers had
pointed out that they had not simulated mining; rather, they had created an
impact that might be comparable to what a mining system might create. A
mining system would probably not be able to avoid disturbing the sediment
surface because even a 10-ton system like the Indian model described by
Dr. M. Ravindran (chapter 7 above) would penetrate into the sediment and
disturb the upper 10-15 cm. Because the sediment was soft, especially in
its upper centimetres – though this differed from locality to locality in the
CCFZ as well as in the South Pacific -- it would be disturbed and most of the
megafauna within the tracks would probably be killed. Most or at least
some of the macrofauna and meiofauna would survive, especially the
nematodes.
Asked whether his group had ideas about the kind of disturber that
could be designed for a future experiment, Schriever said no activity on this
subject was under way in Germany. He thought it should be tackled after
the results of the various BIEs had been correlated.
INTERNATIONAL SEABED AUTHORITY 359