[atlasy1]

You are certainly putting in a lot of effort in this discussion and I thank you for that. I would prefer a discussion done in good faith however.

I say that only as it seems you have added paragraphs in all of your previous comments to retroactively protect yourself from points I later raised in my replies and you also seem to have deleted your paragraph that enough seaweed was not being produced and so you believe the problem is not solved.

Seaweed production is in line with current demand. When the market places enough pressure on Farmers to adopt the solution then seaweed production will naturally increase. Seaweed is one of the easiest and fastest growing organisms in the world.

Your most recent arguments regarding Marketing etc being a problem. You are scraping the barrel now looking for problems.

[ygjb]

I haven't added or edited anything but spelling errors. It was another commenter who raised concern about scaling production, my point was that the viability of this as method for methane reduction also needed to determine if the aquaculture needed to produce the seaweed would be a net benefit from a climate change perspective.

[atlasy1]

The aquaculture needed to produce seaweed has to be a net benefit now?

Net zero is not satanic enough?

It is odd that you are so hellbent on finding additional problems and moving the goalposts on this. When billions of people in the world are starving.

Seaweed is one of the the easiest and fastest growing organisms in the world and there have been many threads here pushing for it to even be used as food for humans.