The Impacts and Consequences of Submarine Communication Cables Essay Sample

The internet is carried throughout the world by cables laid across all five oceans and seven seas. Submarine communication cables contaminate the environment and are damaging to marine life. These cables transport 99 percent of the world's international communications, so it confuses me why we have not yet found a method to make them more ecologically sustainable. I'll discuss who's responsible for funding these cables, the extra precautions certain countries are taking, and how it affects marine life.

First your phone's data is transmitted by radio waves that connect to cell towers. Then, signals are transferred to an internet exchange through fibre optic cables. Finally, it connects to landing stations all across the world. This process has been going on for 160 years, with the first cable laid in 1850 between England and France. This year, there are 436 cables in the ocean, summing 1.2 million kilometres, which is long enough to wrap around the world 30 times. My main concern is who is paying for this expensive cabling. Amazon, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft hold more than half of the world's cables, which comes as no surprise. A video outlining the financials was posted on YouTube.com by Consumer News and Business Channel. Tom Chitty is a multimedia journalist who produces and presents videos for CNBC's digital platforms. Chitty explains it clearly: “It is unlikely that the submarine cable race will slow down between the big companies. With billions of dollars at stake, more money will be invested in these subsea projects.”. Instead of investing money on harmful/damaging communication lines, these powerful corporations should spend/donate their money in more ethical ways, such as charity organizations, research, and grants. Theo Wayt, a verified tech reporter for the New York Post says this about Amazon, “Facebook employees say Mark Zuckerberg’s obsession with growth has overridden ethical concerns and allowed hate speech and incitements to violence to spread unchecked,” even Zuckerberg’s employees disagree with the many unethical values Amazon has, one of them being the cables (Wayt). 

To prevent these unethical choices, countries such as Australia and New Zealand have legislation in place to preserve the life surrounding Submarine Communication Cables. Australia is one of a few countries having a specialized policy for the protection of submarine cables. “It is a criminal offence: to damage or sever a submarine cable, engage in negligent conduct that results in damage to a cable, engage in an activity that is prohibited or restricted in a protection zone.” If you commit any of these criminal offences, you face a 10-year prison term or a fine of up to 600 penalty points. (Submarine Cable Declaration 2007 - Northern Sydney Protection Zone). Unlike Australia, the Asia-America Gateway (AAG), one of the largest communication cables that reach the United States and many countries in Asia, has no protective laws. Vietnam has suffered greatly from the Asia-America Gateway being damaged. Since 2017, the AAG has broken down three-five times each year (Quy). According to a post on Developing-Telecoms.com, “The AAG handles more than 60 percent of Vietnam’s international internet traffic.” and that, “The issue affects users of 3G and 4G networks along with international social network users.” (O'Grady). As a result, everyday individuals trying to access the internet are being affected. These events would be less common if Vietnam had protection laws similar to those in Australia. Many of these incidents in Vietnam have been caused by sharks chewing the cables.

There are many reasons why Sharks would be attracted to fibre optic cables, one of them being; sharks have pores in their snouts that can sense electromagnetic waves and mistake it for bioelectric fields that surround schools of fish. The Shark Lab was founded by Dr. Chris Lowe, the self-proclaimed ‘Shark Expert’. “The mission of the Shark Lab is to study the physiological and behavioural ecology of marine animals, emphasizing the effect of human activity on the ocean,” (Shark Lab). Lowe hypothesizes that these sharks are merely interested in the wires. “If you had just a piece of plastic out there shaped like a cable, there’s a good chance they’d bite that too,” (Márquez). Sharks are not the only marine species that come in contact with underwater cables. Audun Rikardsen, a wildlife photographer, discovered a tangled-up Humpback Whale near Troms, Norway, in 2016. The cord was wrapped around the whale's head, fins, and tail. “We were sure it was tangled in fishing gear and struggled for about 4 or 5 hours to free it, but we couldn’t cut through the cord,” Rikardsen says (Coghlan). This wire was supposed to be 560 feet below on the Norwegian seabed, but it was wrapped around a helpless whale instead. Rikardsen's village of Skulsfjord, Norway, was without power for around two weeks, while the cable was being reconstructed (Coghlan). 

Someone needs to fix this. The ethical limits that corporations are breaching, to the innocent Vietnamese people whose lives are impacted every three-five times each year, to the helpless marine wildlife that are being hurt. When is it going to stop? The worst part is that almost no one is aware of the impacts that Submarine Communication Cables have. The world would be a more sustainable place if we create better ways to communicate internationally.