{"id":679174,"date":"2026-09-08T21:01:21","date_gmt":"2026-09-08T21:01:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/679174\/"},"modified":"2026-09-08T21:01:21","modified_gmt":"2026-09-08T21:01:21","slug":"climate-driven-losses-in-seaweed-carbon-sequestration-outpace-habitat-restoration-gains","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/679174\/","title":{"rendered":"Climate-driven losses in seaweed carbon sequestration outpace habitat restoration gains"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

\"Climate-driven<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

image:\u00a0<\/p>\n

Diver measuring kelp forest annual growth off Cape Peninsula, South Africa.<\/p>\n

<\/strong>
\n view more\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n

Credit: Thomas Wernberg (CC-BY 4.0, https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/)<\/p>\n

Climate change is driving rapid declines in seaweed forests globally, outpacing restoration efforts and undermining seaweed restoration as a viable carbon dioxide removal strategy, according to an essay by Karen Filbee-Dexter at the University of Western Australia, and colleagues, publishing September 8th in the open access journal PLOS Biology.<\/p>\n

Natural ecosystems have played an important role in mitigating greenhouse gas emissions over the last century by absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, but this vital ecosystem service is being jeopardized by climate change itself. Planting and restoring seaweed forests is often promoted as a natural climate solution due to their ability to sequester carbon and store it in the deep ocean. However, declines in seaweed forests globally threaten to undermine restoration efforts.<\/p>\n

Researchers analyzed published data on global seaweed forest gains and losses to estimate the net effect on carbon sequestration. They found that declines in kelp forests \u2014 the most widespread and productive seaweed ecosystem \u2014 could result in a reduction in natural carbon sequestration of 1.5 to 30 million tons per year. This loss is between 1,000 and 10,000 times greater than the gain in annual carbon dioxide sequestration from kelp forest restoration projects to date.<\/p>\n

An estimated 25 million hectares of wild kelp forests will be lost by 2050 due to climate change \u2014 more than 6,000 times the area that has been restored since 1958. Large scale kelp restoration projects in Norway and California required huge investments of time, money, and effort. Tens of thousands more projects like these would be needed to compensate for kelp forest losses due to climate change, at a cost of tens or even hundreds of billions of U.S. dollars.<\/p>\n

Carbon sequestration by natural ecosystems has been so reliable that it has been implicitly embedded in climate projections and net-zero planning, but climate change is now compromising those natural services. The authors conclude that the current focus on seaweed forest restoration as a natural climate solution could distract conservationists from protecting threatened seaweed habitats, even though preventing habitat loss is a cheaper and more effective climate change mitigation strategy. Promoting seaweed restoration as a method for carbon dioxide removal may also offer false hope, delaying the phase-out of fossil fuels, the authors warn.<\/p>\n

The authors add, \u201cConserving and restoring seaweed forests is worthwhile, but we need to be realistic about\u00a0what it can achieve in terms of meaningful climate change mitigation through\u00a0carbon dioxide removal. Currently, climate-driven losses of seaweed forests are orders of magnitude greater than gains due to restoration. We contend that restoring seaweed forests\u00a0cannot deliver meaningful climate change mitigation at the scales and speeds required to offset our growing emissions.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

In your coverage, please use this URL to provide access to the freely available paper in PLOS Biology: https:\/\/plos.io\/4wjUoTm<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n

Citation: <\/strong>Filbee-Dexter K, Pessarrodona A, Krumhansl KA, Wernberg T (2026) Seaweed carbon removal cannot keep up with climate-driven loss. PLoS Biol 24(9): e3003949. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pbio.3003949<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

Author countries<\/strong>: Australia, Norway, United States of America, Singapore, Canada<\/p>\n

Funding: <\/strong>The authors were supported by the Norwegian Research Council through the BlueArc Project 334760 (KFD, TW, AP, and KAK) and the Australian Research Council projects: LP220200004 (TW, KFD, AP), FL240100015 (TW), FT230100214 (KFD), and DE250100125 (AP). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.<\/p>\n

Method of Research<\/p>\n

Commentary\/editorial<\/p>\n

Subject of Research<\/p>\n

Not applicable<\/p>\n

COI Statement<\/p>\n

Competing interests: I have read the journal\u2019s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: TW and KFD are advisors to Seaforester, a seaweed restoration company.<\/p>\n

Disclaimer:<\/strong> AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"image:\u00a0 Diver measuring kelp forest annual growth off Cape Peninsula, South Africa. view more\u00a0 Credit: Thomas Wernberg (CC-BY…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":679175,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[77],"tags":[18,19,17,133],"class_list":["post-679174","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-science","tag-eire","tag-ie","tag-ireland","tag-science"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@ie\/117237441508286205","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/679174","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=679174"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/679174\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/679175"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=679174"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=679174"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=679174"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}