New seafloor map only 25% done, with 6 years to go

Project scope and map quality

• Seabed 2030 aims to map all seafloor features ≥100 m by 2030.
• Commenters using the online viewer note stark differences between old low‑res Maxar/GIS data and new higher‑res bathymetry, especially in the Gulf of Thailand, Caribbean, Azores, and Mid‑Atlantic Ridge.
• Some are surprised by how many “almost islands” and sharp near‑surface ridges appear once higher‑resolution data is used.

Military and security implications

• Several note that detailed bathymetry and gravity maps are core to “battlespace preparation” and precision missile guidance.
• Discussion explains that gravity varies by location (equator vs poles, altitude, local mass), and that sub‑percent gravity errors are trivial for coffee scales but significant for long‑range missiles.
• Some speculate intelligence/military agencies already have much better classified seabed maps in key strategic and submarine areas.
• Chinese GPS coordinate obfuscation (GCJ‑02) is cited as an example of deliberate mapping offsets for security.

Resolution vs operational use

• Stated project resolution (100 m features) is viewed as useful for ships and strategic planning but insufficient for safe submarine maneuvering, since much smaller obstacles can be catastrophic.
• Others argue maps are always a planning aid, not a substitute for direct sensing.

Deep‑sea mining, ownership, and “colonialism”

• A large sub‑thread links global mapping to future resource extraction: mapping as a precursor to seabed mining, boundary claims, and “demarcation ahead of development.”
• Critics warn of destroying deep‑sea ecosystems, food‑chain contamination, and see parallels with historical colonial resource grabs.
• Supporters argue ocean minerals could massively benefit humanity (e.g., energy transition materials) and that careful regulation is preferable to bans.
• Debate continues over whether humanity has “done well” with land resources vs approaching planetary limits and risking civilizational collapse.
• US efforts to extend “continental shelf” claims in the Arctic based on bathymetry are cited as a concrete example of mapping enabling resource jurisdiction.

Scientific, safety, and search uses

• Some emphasize benign uses: navigation safety (including past submarine collisions with uncharted seamounts), kelp farming, conservation planning, and pure scientific curiosity.
• There is a call to prioritize mapping regions relevant to the MH370 search; project documents show at least some alignment but with differing proposed search zones.
• One commenter imagines integrating high‑res seabed maps with VR/AR (e.g., headsets) for submarine piloting.

Data formats and coverage

• IHO S‑57/S‑100 electronic chart standards are discussed: they are curated products derived from surveys, with S‑100 more of a new container that may support gridded bathymetry, but largely separate from Seabed 2030’s raw mapping effort.
• It’s noted that militaries and oil/gas companies have extensive but narrowly focused high‑resolution data (shipping lanes, cables, drill sites), whereas remote deep ocean remains poorly charted.

Funding and institutions

• The Nippon Foundation’s role as a main funder is highlighted, including its origins in Japanese motorboat gambling and controversial historical leadership (alleged war‑crimes ties and involvement in forced sterilization programs).
• Other ocean nonprofits and private efforts (research vessels, deep‑sea systems) are mentioned as part of a broader ecosystem supporting seafloor exploration.