Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40968129›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Seaweed as a climate fix for meat and dairy production: an LCA perspective.

J-B E Thomas, V W Xu, S J Krizsan, I M Aasen, A Oliveira, H Ramos, P Tyedmers, M Hayes, F Gröndahl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Can seaweed mitigate methane from cows on a global scale?Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

J-B E ThomasDepartment of Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Teknikringen 10B, 100 44, Stockholm, Sweden. jbthomas@kth.se.
V W XuDepartment of Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Teknikringen 10B, 100 44, Stockholm, Sweden.
S J KrizsanDepartment of Agricultural Sciences, Faculty of Applied Ecology, Agricultural Sciences and Biotechnology, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Campus Blæstad, 2322, Hamar, Norway.
I M AasenDepartment of Biotechnology and Nanomedicine, Industrial and Marine Biotechnology, SINTEF Industry, 7465, Trondheim, Norway.
A OliveiraSeaexpert, Ltd., Travessa Do Farrobim 15, 9900-361, Horta, Faial, Azores, Portugal.
H RamosSeaexpert, Ltd., Travessa Do Farrobim 15, 9900-361, Horta, Faial, Azores, Portugal.
P TyedmersSchool for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, 6100 University Ave, PO Box 15000, Halifax, NS, Canada.
M HayesFood BioSciences Department, Teagasc Food Research Centre, Ashtown, Dublin 15, Ireland.
F GröndahlDepartment of Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Teknikringen 10B, 100 44, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Livestock supply chains contribute a substantial share of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, with enteric methane (CH₄) from ruminants being a key driver. Seaweed-derived feed additives have been proposed as a CH₄ mitigation strategy, but their broader environmental trade-offs remain unclear. This study applies life cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate seven seaweed-supplemented scenarios across beef, dairy, and sheep production, assessing climate change, marine and freshwater eutrophication, land use, fossil fuel depletion, and water use. Results indicate that while certain seaweed additives can lower CH₄ emissions in vitro, real-world reductions in total GHG emissions remain modest. Energy-intensive processing and long transport distances can offset CH₄ abatement gains, with only scenarios utilizing low-impact by-products achieving net climate benefits. Sensitivity analyses highlight the importance of Global Warming Potential (GWP) time horizon selection, energy sources, and grazing practices in determining overall environmental performance. Optimizing algae sourcing, processing, and application will be essential to realizing meaningful and scalable mitigation potential in ruminant systems. While seaweed additives can contribute to CH₄ reduction, this study concludes they will not single-handedly deliver transformative climate benefits.

Indexed as

DairyingMeatSeaweedAnimal FeedAnimalsCattleClimate ChangeGlobal WarmingGreenhouse GasesMethaneSheepGreenhouse GasesMethane

Identifiers

PMID40968129
PMCPMC12446431

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.