←Home
Old vs newtechnology

Collecting nodules while disturbing as little of the seafloor as possible.

The pilot systems of the 1970s scraped, pumped and returned muddy water to the sea. Newer designs try to touch less of the bottom, pick rather than sweep, keep sediment out of the water column, and measure what they are doing while they do it.

An important caveat: every technology on this page is still being tested and evaluated. None has operated at commercial scale, and most of the claims about lower impact come from the developers themselves and have not yet been verified independently.

§ AThen and now

Old tech vs new tech

What the earlier generation of collectors did, and what the newer designs are trying to change.

−

Old technology

1970s – 2010s pilot systems

STRIPPED TRACK · TOP LAYER REMOVEDOPEN RISER · SLURRY + SEDIMENT TO SHIP ↑HYDRAULIC / MECHANICAL PICK-UPscrapes sediment with the nodulesTRACKED DREDGE COLLECTOR · 1970s PILOT DESIGN
  • Towed or self-propelled tracked collectors with hydraulic / mechanical pick-up that scrape the top layer of sediment
  • Large, heavy equipment resting on and driving across the seafloor
  • Open vertical riser pumping slurry — nodules, sediment and water — all the way to the ship
  • Dewatering plume returned mid-water from the ship
  • Limited real-time monitoring; results known after the fact
  • Whole-area sweeps: every lane in a block is collected
+

New technology

Being developed · none at commercial scale

HOVERING ROBOT · PICKS ONE AT A TIME● nodules with life left in placeSEALED SKIP · NO SLURRY RISERLIVE SENSORSNEWER DESIGNS · BEING DEVELOPED AND TESTED
  • AI-assisted autonomous vehicles — Map the field, pick a route, and avoid what should be left alone
  • Coanda-effect collector heads — Lift nodules with a controlled flow of water instead of scraping
  • Closed skip-lift systems — Sealed containers instead of an open slurry riser — no dewatering plume
  • Real-time environmental monitoring — Turbidity, noise and water-quality sensors that can pause an operation
  • Precision (selective) collection — High-density patches only, with set-aside refuges left untouched
§ BIn depth

Five technologies, explained

For each one: how it works, what it is meant to solve, and what is still unproven.

01

AI-assisted autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs)

Prototype tested · full-scale concept

leaveleaveBATTERYBATTERYhovers —never landsUNTETHERED · BUOYANCY-CONTROLLED · BATTERY SWAP AT SURFACEcamera + AI classify each nodule before it is touched

Autonomous vehicles already do most deep-sea mapping. The new idea is to let them do the collecting too: survey a nodule field first, build a map of where the nodules are dense and where the sponges, corals and other animals live, then plan a route that takes the nodules and avoids the habitat. The vehicle then follows that route without a person driving.

The most-discussed example is Impossible Metals' Eureka series. Eureka II is a test vehicle; Eureka III is the full-scale concept. Both are untethered — no cable to the ship — and hover a short distance above the seabed on controlled buoyancy rather than driving on it. Robotic arms pick individual nodules one at a time. A camera and on-board computer vision look at each nodule first and, if there is visible life on it, the vehicle is meant to leave that one where it is. When the batteries run low, the robot surfaces, swaps packs on the vessel, and goes back down.

Tethered vehicles (the usual ROV) are powered and controlled through a cable, which is reliable but limits how many can work and how far they can roam. Untethered vehicles trade that cable for batteries and autonomy: freer to move, but limited by energy and by how well the software copes with the unexpected.

What it’s meant to solve

  • Removes the tracked vehicle and the scraping head — no driving on the sediment
  • Selective pickup can leave nodules that carry life, and skip mapped habitat entirely
  • Route planning from survey data shrinks the footprint to where nodules are dense

What’s still unproven

  • Picking one nodule at a time is slow; commercial rates would need fleets of robots, which has not been demonstrated
  • Vision-based 'leave it' decisions have not been independently verified at 4,000–5,000 m in real sediment and lighting
  • Battery swaps and untethered navigation at scale, and the noise of many vehicles, are untested
02

Coanda-effect collector heads

Tank and shallow-water tests · used on some pilot collectors

DUCT ↑WATER JETLOW PRESSURElifts nodule · leaves mudhood clears the bedTHE COANDA EFFECT · A JET FOLLOWS A CURVED SURFACEno scraper, no teeth — the moving water does the lifting

The Coanda effect is the tendency of a moving fluid to follow a nearby curved surface — it is why a stream of water from a tap bends around the back of a spoon. A Coanda collector head uses a jet of water directed along a curved hood. The flow hugs the hood, the pressure beneath it drops, and that pressure difference lifts the nodules off the sediment and into a duct.

Compared with the rakes, teeth and scrapers of earlier designs, the head does not have to dig. It rides just above the bed, and in principle takes nodules while leaving much of the mud behind. The jet strength and hood height can be tuned to the size of nodule and the softness of the sediment.

What it’s meant to solve

  • No mechanical scraping — less of the top sediment layer is disturbed
  • A smaller, more controllable plume than a hydraulic dredge
  • Adjustable flow means the head can be tuned rather than redesigned

What’s still unproven

  • Any jet pointed at very soft abyssal mud still resuspends fine sediment; how much, at full working speed, is not settled
  • The heads are still attached to a vehicle that has to move across the seabed
  • Long-run reliability at depth, and the noise of the pumps that drive the jet, are not well characterised
03

Closed skip-lift systems vs the vertical riser

Riser: pilot scale · Skip-lift: concept

VERTICAL RISER SYSTEMpump + dewatering on deckPUMPslurry up ↑return water down ↓(closed loop — no mid-water release)BUFFER UNITCOLLECTORStill pumps sediment-laden water; return depth is the design choice.SKIP-LIFT SYSTEMwinch + sealed containersWINCHSEALEDskip rises sealed ↑empty skip returns ↓(no slurry · no dewatering plume)FILLING STATIONCollector plume remains; the lift itself adds none. Concept stage.

Every nodule has to get 4–5 km up to a ship. The conventional answer is a vertical riser: a long pipe with pumps, up which a slurry of nodules, sediment and water is lifted. On deck the nodules are separated and the leftover water — carrying fine sediment — is discharged back to sea. That discharge is the dewatering plume. Closed-loop riser designs pipe that return water back down instead of releasing it mid-water, which moves the plume rather than removing it.

A skip-lift system does away with the slurry altogether. The collector delivers nodules to a filling station on the seafloor, where they are loaded into sealed containers (skips). A winch on the vessel lifts each skip, empties it, and sends it back down. Because no sediment-laden water is pumped up, there is no dewatering plume to manage; the collector plume on the seafloor remains.

What it’s meant to solve

  • Enclosed transport avoids pumping sediment-laden water to the surface
  • No dewatering plume in the water column where tuna and migrating animals live
  • Fewer high-power pumps running continuously

What’s still unproven

  • Skip-lift has not been built or tested at depth; cycle times and weather limits are theoretical
  • Closed-loop risers still need return water to go somewhere near the seabed
  • Handling thousands of tonnes a day through winched containers is a very different engineering problem from a pump
04

Real-time environmental monitoring

Used in 2022 pilot tests · thresholds still being defined

LIVE DASHBOARD · TURBIDITYthresholdslow / stop if crossedseabed lander · turbidity, currentson the collector · turbidity, noisemid-water mooring · water qualitydowncurrent lander · plume edgehydrophone · noiseSensors report continuously; thresholds are set in the plan and enforced by the regulator.

Older operations learned what they had done after the fact, from surveys weeks or months later. Newer plans put sensors on the collector, in the water column on moorings, and on landers downcurrent of the work. They measure turbidity (how cloudy the water is), noise, currents and water chemistry continuously and send the readings to a dashboard on the vessel and, potentially, to the regulator.

The point is not just to watch. Each sensor has a threshold written into the operating plan; if a plume drifts further than modelled or turbidity spikes, the system is supposed to slow or stop the collector until conditions are back within limits. Monitoring like this is a lease requirement under the federal rules for preliminary activities, not an optional extra.

What it’s meant to solve

  • Turns a promise into a measurement — plume, noise and water-quality limits can be checked live
  • Gives regulators the data to enforce conditions, and the public a record
  • Catches unexpected behaviour (a plume moving the wrong way) before it spreads

What’s still unproven

  • Who sets the thresholds, and at what level, is still being worked out
  • Sensor coverage over an area of tens of kilometres is sparse; plumes can pass between instruments
  • Whether operations actually stop when a threshold is crossed depends on enforcement, not the sensors
05

Precision (selective) collection

Planning approach · depends on survey quality

HIGH-DENSITY PATCH · HARVEST LANESHIGH-DENSITY PATCHSET-ASIDE REFUGEuntouched · seeds recoverySENSITIVEHABITAT · AVOIDPLAN VIEW · SURVEY DATA → COLLECTION PLANSmaller footprint for the same recovery — if the survey data are good enough to trust.

Nodules are not spread evenly. Detailed survey data — from the same AUVs described above — can show which patches are dense enough to be worth collecting and which are not. Precision approaches plan 'harvest lanes' only through the dense patches, leave set-aside refuge areas untouched so animals can recolonise, and route around any mapped sensitive habitat such as sponge fields or seamount slopes.

The result, if it works, is a smaller total footprint for the same amount of material, and a landscape that still has untouched ground scattered through it rather than one continuous strip. It is as much a planning discipline as a machine.

What it’s meant to solve

  • Less area disturbed overall; refuges left as sources for recovery
  • Uses the baseline survey data the process already requires
  • Can be written into a plan as an enforceable map, not just an intention

What’s still unproven

  • Depends on survey resolution — a habitat that is not mapped cannot be avoided
  • How large refuges must be, and how close, for recovery to actually happen is an open scientific question
  • Commercial pressure to widen the lanes once operations start is a governance risk, not a technical one

Other designs being tested

  • Moby (compact tracked crawler)

    A smaller tracked seabed crawler fitted with lights, cameras and sensors — the tracked idea reworked at a lighter scale, aiming for lower ground pressure and better visibility of what it is driving over.

  • Mithril Minerals — 'scan and collect'

    A frame lands on the seabed, scans the ground beneath it, and extends robot arms to pick nodules from a fixed position before lifting off and moving to the next spot. Contact is limited to the feet of the frame.

  • Hovering head with rotating brush

    A collector head that hovers above the bed and uses a slowly rotating brush to sweep nodules into a duct with minimal contact — a middle path between a suction hood and mechanical pick-up.

Company names are given for reference only. Inclusion here is not an endorsement, and none of these designs has been assessed by BOEM.

§ CSide by side

Older systems vs newer designs

Where the newer designs improve on the old — and how far each has actually been proven.

FactorOlder systemsNewer designsStatus
Seafloor contactTracked vehicle drives on the sediment; pick-up scrapes the top 5–15 cmHovering or lightly landed vehicles; heads designed to clear the bedTracked collectors tested at pilot scale in the CCZ (2022); hovering pickers at prototype scale
Sediment plume at seafloorLarge; whole track width stirred and resuspendedSmaller by design (Coanda hoods, single-nodule pickup) — magnitude not yet independently measured at scalePilot data exist for older heads; newer heads measured only in tank and shallow trials
Mid-water plumeYes — dewatering water returned from the ship, often at 1,000–1,500 mReduced (near-seafloor return) or eliminated (sealed skip-lift)Deeper return tested at pilot scale; skip-lift is a concept
SelectivityNone — collects everything in the lane, nodules and the animals on themComputer vision aims to leave nodules with visible life and skip patchesDemonstrated in prototype trials; accuracy at depth and speed unproven
NoiseContinuous: pumps, tracked drive, thrusters, surface vessel DPQuieter vehicles and no slurry pumps in skip-lift concepts; surface vessel noise remainsLittle public measurement for either at operational scale
MonitoringLimited; post-activity surveysReal-time turbidity, noise and water-quality sensors with stop thresholdsReal-time monitoring used in 2022 pilot tests; thresholds still being defined by regulators
Scale provenPilot scale only (1970s trials; NORI collector test, 2022)Tank tests, shallow-water and short deep-water prototype trialsNo system of either kind has operated at commercial scale anywhere
§ DBefore any of this operates here

What would need to be true first

New equipment does not shortcut the process. Every step below sits between today's surveys and any test of a collector in American Samoa's waters.

  1. 1

    A testing plan, submitted and approved

    Under 30 CFR part 581 a lessee cannot test equipment on the seafloor without an approved testing plan. Preliminary activities — mapping, coring, surveys — do not include running a collector.

  2. 2

    An environmental assessment or impact statement

    Any test at scale would need its own NEPA review (an EA or EIS) with public comment, based on the baseline data gathered first.

  3. 3

    Pilot testing under monitoring

    A pilot would run with the real-time monitoring described above, with thresholds set in advance and reports submitted to BOEM.

  4. 4

    BOEM's authority to stop

    If a test shows unacceptable effects, BOEM can suspend, restrict, modify or cancel. Approval of a test is not approval of extraction.

§ ESources

Where this comes from

  • American Samoa DOSI presentation — 'New technologies being developed to reduce environmental impacts'The Steering Committee briefing this page is built from.
  • Impossible Metals — Eureka II / Eureka III public materialsCompany descriptions of the hovering, selective-pickup vehicle; not independently verified.
  • ISA / NORI pilot collector test reports (2022)The Clarion-Clipperton Zone collector trial and its environmental monitoring results.
  • Engineering literature on Coanda-effect nodule collectorsHydraulic collector head studies from the 1990s onward describing lift mechanics and sediment pickup.