.png)
Deep-sea mining projects are sized on future demand for nickel, cobalt and manganese. The evidence suggests that demand carries far more uncertainty than the investment case assumes.
For companies seeking to mine the deep seabed, the electric vehicle revolution has been used extensively as a sales pitch. Polymetallic nodules on the ocean floor contain nickel, cobalt, manganese and copper so the promise is straightforward: more electric cars mean more batteries, more batteries mean more metals, and new sources of supply will be needed.
But there is a huge problem with this equation. The battery industry is changing faster than the argument. Carmakers are shifting towards chemistries that use less nickel and cobalt, engineers are working to reduce battery sizes and recycling is beginning to reshape future demand for newly mined materials.
Battery chemistry is moving away
The first challenge to the business case is already visible in the battery market, most notably with the shift towards lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries. Unlike nickel manganese cobalt (NMC) batteries, LFP cathodes contain no nickel, cobalt or manganese.
The International Energy Agency's Global EV Outlook 2026 reports that LFP accounted for more than 55% of electric vehicle batteries deployed globally in 2025, up from nearly half in 2024.
Sodium-ion and solid-state batteries could introduce further changes as their energy density is improving. Studies expect the uptake to fly post 2030, with near-term promise mostly for smaller vehicles.
For prospective seabed miners, this creates a significant forecasting problem. Assuming a fixed relationship between EV sales and metal consumption risks overstating the market available to new projects.
European electric vehicle material demand
European cars have become larger and heavier over the past two decades. Larger vehicles generally need more battery capacity to deliver a given driving range. That means more material per vehicle, even when manufacturers adopt less mineral-intensive chemistries.
However, a study by the Öko-Institut in October 2026 challenges the assumption that electrification must lead to a proportional increase in mineral demand.
- Downsizing vehicles alone could reduce European demand in 2035 by approximately 84,000 tonnes of nickel and 12,000 tonnes of cobalt.
- Improvements in vehicle energy efficiency could reduce demand for lithium, nickel, cobalt and manganese by 14%.
- Shifting journeys from private cars, alongside avoiding unnecessary travel, could reduce demand for key battery materials by 29% to 36% by 2050.
These are scenario-based estimates for European road transport, not predictions of global demand.
However, for a company projecting demand for seabed metals over several decades, these factors deserve a place alongside electric vehicle sales forecasts.
Recycling will change the supply equation
Battery recycling cannot eliminate the need for primary supply while electric vehicle markets continue to expand. Most batteries sold in recent years remain in service, and the availability of end-of-life batteries will increase only gradually.
Over time, however, recycling can make a substantial contribution. The Öko-Institut study estimates that recycling could reduce Europe's primary lithium and nickel requirements by around 50% each by 2040, and its primary cobalt requirement by up to 70%.
The IEA's Global Critical Minerals Outlook 2026 likewise expects recycling to become a more important source of supply. Its projections indicate that the contribution of secondary supply across key energy minerals could nearly double in share by 2040.
Long-term assessments of seabed mining should therefore model both changing demand and the development of secondary supply.
Automakers and financiers are already drawing conclusions
The uncertainty around future metal demand is reflected in decisions by companies that would otherwise be potential customers for seabed minerals.
BMW, Volkswagen, Volvo Cars, Renault and other automotive companies have supported calls for a moratorium on deep-sea mining and pledged not to source minerals from the deep seabed.
The financial sector is sending a similar signal. A report this spring we co-commissioned identified 82 financial institutions representing approximately €24 trillion in assets that have adopted policies restricting or expressing concern about deep-sea mining. They also understand political risks, as currently 46 countries oppose deep-sea mining.
What decision-makers should ask
Electrification will need minerals. The questions are which ones, in what quantities and at what cost relative to alternatives
Before committing capital, investors and companies should ask seabed projects to show that their demand case survives scenarios in which LFP keeps gaining share, vehicles get smaller and recycling scales up, and that they have buyers who have not already ruled out seabed minerals in jurisdictions that allow them.
To me, to mine the deep sea for yesterday’s batteries is a risky bet on tomorrow’s market.
