Did you know?

Subsea cables in Busan and Geoje connecting the world

Introduction

Subsea cables are the backbone of global communication, carrying over 95% of international data traffic. At ER-MARINE , we recognise the crucial role these cables play in due diligence assessments, particularly in the context of offshore wind projects. Subsea cables transfer data communication or are used for power supply, either HVAC or HVDC, depending of the transmission distance. This article explores a few vulnerabilities faced by subsea cables and highlights their importance in the broader context of offshore wind and energy infrastructure. Both Geoje and Busan in South Korea are very important subsea cable landing stations. Did you know this?

Key Vulnerabilities in Geoje; which cables are connected in Geoje?

FLAG Europe-Asia (FEA) Cable

Operational since 1997, the FLAG Europe-Asia (FEA) cable stretches 28,000 kilometers, connecting various countries including the UK, Spain, Italy, and South Korea. Geoje, close to active seismic zones, makes the FEA cable susceptible to earthquakes and underwater landslides, potentially causing significant disruptions. Frequent typhoons in the region can cause underwater turbulence and strong currents, leading to physical damage. Additionally, heavy maritime traffic and fishing activities around Geoje pose a risk of accidental damage from anchors and fishing nets. The cables passes through "marine choke points", this is described separately at the section Maritime Bottlenecks.

SeaMeWe-3 Cable

Launched in 1999, the SeaMeWe-3 cable, one of the oldest, spans 39,000 kilometers and links countries from Germany to Australia. Its aging infrastructure makes it more prone to wear and tear, increasing the likelihood of failures due to physical degradation. Furthermore, reliance on older technology makes SeaMeWe-3 more vulnerable to cyber-attacks aimed at data interception and disruption. Same point as above, passing through marine chokepoints.

Trans-Pacific Express (TPE) Cable System

Operational since 2008 and covering 17,968 kilometers, the Trans-Pacific Express (TPE) cable connects East Asia to North America. Its strategic importance makes it a potential target in geopolitical conflicts, including those involving North Korea and China. The depth and complexity of the TPE system pose significant challenges for maintenance and repair, potentially prolonging recovery times in case of disruptions.

Which cables are connected in Busan; what key vulnerabilities exist?

APCN-2 Cable

The APCN-2 cable, operational since 2001 and spanning 19,000 kilometers, connects several Asian countries. Busan, vulnerable to seismic activities and typhoons, risks significant damage to this cable. Busan's status as a major port also increases the likelihood of accidental damage from heavy maritime activities.

Asia Pacific Gateway (APG) Cable

Launched in 2016 and stretching 10,400 kilometers, the APG is a critical communication link for several Asian countries. This makes it a high-value target for cyber-attacks aimed at disrupting communications or intercepting data. The APG's strategic importance also renders it vulnerable to geopolitical tensions and potential sabotage.

EAC-C2C Cable

With parts operational since 2001 and 2002 respectively, the EAC-C2C cable system covers 36,500 kilometers and connects multiple countries. It faces risks from extensive fishing and shipping activities in the Busan area. Additionally, parts of this system are aging, making them more susceptible to failures due to physical wear and tear.

FLAG North Asia Loop / REACH North Asia Loop

Operational since 1997 (FLAG) and 2002 (REACH), this cable system spans 9,504 kilometers and connects countries such as China, Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea. Similar to the TPE, this system is strategically important and thus vulnerable to geopolitical tensions in the region. The depth and complexity of these cables make maintenance and repairs challenging, potentially leading to extended downtimes.

Korea-Japan Cable Network (KJCN)

In operation since 2002 and extending 500 kilometers, the KJCN connects South Korea and Japan. Ongoing territorial disputes between these countries can impact the security and maintenance of this cable. The KJCN is also vulnerable to natural disasters such as earthquakes and tsunamis, which are prevalent in the region.

New Cross Pacific (NCP) Cable System

Launched in 2018 and spanning 13,618 kilometers, the NCP cable connects Asia to North America. As a newer and technologically advanced cable, it is a potential target for sophisticated cyber-attacks. The NCP’s strategic role makes it a high-value target in geopolitical conflicts.

Southeast Asia-Japan Cable 2 (SJC2)

Scheduled to become operational in 2025, the SJC2 will cover 10,500 kilometers and connect countries such as Japan, China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Singapore. During its construction, it might face risks including environmental impacts and geopolitical tensions. Once operational, it will need robust security measures to protect against both physical and cyber threats.

Areas of Competing Claims

Even though UNCLOS offers clear rules for jurisdiction and the formation of maritime zones, there are areas of competing claims. The largest part of the submarine cables is located within the high seas, where there is almost no legal protection provided – besides Art. 113-115 of UNCLOS. However, states can exert more regulative privileges concerning submarine cables within their territorial waters and exclusive economic zones. If the jurisdiction over submarine cables is unclear, competitive regulative measures or military actions may threaten their security.

Maritime Bottlenecks

Globally, a few maritime chokepoints stand out due to their high density of cables and maritime traffic. For South Korea, critical chokepoints include the Korea Strait, connecting the East China Sea and the Sea of Japan, with heavy maritime traffic that increases the risk of accidental damage. The East China Sea, with its dense maritime traffic and territorial disputes, is another vulnerable area. The Tsushima Strait, between Japan and South Korea, also poses significant risks due to geopolitical tensions and heavy maritime traffic.

For the EU, the most important maritime chokepoints are the Strait of Gibraltar and the Suez Canal. The Strait of Gibraltar connects the Mediterranean and the Atlantic, serving as a passage for seven intercontinental cables. The Suez Canal is vital for connectivity between the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean, with 16 intercontinental cables running through adjacent routes on the Egyptian mainland to avoid damage. Relations with Egypt are crucial to ensure digital connectivity.

ER-Marine's Recommendations

Here a few recommendations in the context of expanding the amount of subsea cables for the domestic expansion of offshore wind. The cable landing stations in Geoje and Busan have been used as examples to showcase potential vulnerabilities.

• Enhancing monitoring and surveillance involves deploying advanced technologies such as Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) to detect anomalies and potential threats in real-time. Regular inspections using remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) and autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) are essential to assess cable conditions and address vulnerabilities proactively.
• Strengthening legal and policy frameworks requires enforcing strict maritime regulations to control fishing and shipping activities near cable routes, establishing International cooperation with neighboring countries is crucial to ensure the security of subsea cables, particularly in disputed waters.
• Building redundancy and resilience can be achieved by investing in additional cable routes to provide redundancy, ensuring that data traffic or electric power, can be rerouted in case of a cable failure. Developing comprehensive emergency response plans that include rapid repair capabilities and coordination with local and international stakeholders is also essential.
• Upgrading infrastructure involves replacing aging cables with newer, more resilient technologies that offer better protective layers and higher data capacities. Ensuring that landing stations have robust and redundant power supply systems is necessary to mitigate the risk of power outages affecting cable operations.

Conclusion

Subsea cables are critical to South Korea's digital connectivity and economic stability, especially with the planned expansion of data centers due to AI developments. Addressing the unique vulnerabilities requires a multifaceted approach involving enhanced monitoring, robust legal frameworks, strategic redundancy, and infrastructure upgrades. By implementing these measures, the resilience of subsea cable networks can be enhanced and uninterrupted global communication ensured.

At ER-Marine, we ensure that subsea cables are an integral part of our due diligence assessments, recognising their significance in the offshore wind and broader energy infrastructure sectors.

Reach out to learn more: https://www.er-marine.com/de-risking

#SouthKorea #SubseaCables #EnergySecurity #CyberSecurity #OffshoreWind #ERMarine