Efforts to develop kelp-based biofuels face significant structural barriers, primarily the entrenched power of the fossil fuel industry, which one expert describes as "the most technically advanced, subsidized industry on the globe." While researchers at institutions like Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution explore kelp as a sustainable energy source, the existing economic order consistently prioritizes the profits of established capital over the development of alternatives.
Scientists are studying kelp and other seaweed to produce fuel through hydrothermal liquefaction, a process using heat and pressure. Scott Lindell, a marine scientist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, stated the necessity for "other sources of energy that are sustainable," noting that "there’s hardly anything simpler, or anything that grows quite as fast and as sustainably, as seaweed." However, the article notes that ships and aircraft largely rely on liquid fuels derived from oil or gasoline, which emit carbon dioxide when burned.
Capital's Grip on Energy
Government interest in biofuels has been inconsistent, reflecting the fluctuating priorities of capital. A Department of Energy program 10 years ago aimed to develop tools for kelp-based biofuel production. Lindell’s MARINER funding, which supported projects like breeding heat-resistant kelp and studying seaweed genomes, lasted six years and finished 2 years ago. The Department of Energy often backs exploratory, high-risk projects, but federal research funding opportunities have been fewer and delayed since MARINER concluded. A similar feasibility-testing venture that began in the 1970s was swiftly terminated once oil prices stabilized, demonstrating capital's disinterest in alternatives when existing profit streams are secure. Lindell observed, “I don’t think things have changed incredibly since the first oil crisis,” adding, “We’ll come to the realization that things have shifted in the marketplace,” and, “and we can’t squeeze any more oil out of the earth in 30 years’ time.”
Bren Smith, an ocean farmer and co-founder of GreenWave, a nonprofit supporting ocean farmers, highlighted the economic reality: kelp is currently more viable in products like cosmetics or food, rather than fuel, which remains one of its lowest-value uses. Smith remarked, “We’ve made this mistake before, right?” referring to large-scale investments in kelp research focused on fuel production instead of other, more profitable uses. This reveals how capital directs resources towards ventures promising higher returns, leaving lower-value applications underdeveloped.
Labor and the Market's Limits
For small-scale producers, the market for kelp remains underdeveloped. Aquaculture farms today primarily supply kelp to restaurants, cosmetics companies, and fertilizer producers. Oliver Dixon, a shellfish farmer in Point Judith, Rhode Island, grows kelp to supplement his oyster business. This month, he expects to harvest about 10,000 pounds (4,500 kilograms) of kelp, selling most to local restaurants and seafood markets. Dixon described the market as discouraging, stating, “The buyers come in and out, it’s pretty discouraging.” His 9-acre (3.6-hectare) farm is hundreds of times smaller than what would be needed for biofuel production, and without proven demand from the energy sector, he has no plans to expand. The absence of a robust "middle market" for kelp as a fuel source leaves small farmers in a precarious position, unable to scale up production to meet a demand that capital has not yet deemed profitable.
The State's Role in Protecting Wealth
Even with a guaranteed buyer, expanding kelp farming faces significant regulatory hurdles, demonstrating the state's role in protecting existing property and resource distribution. In the United States, coastal waters are largely prioritized for recreation, fishing, and conservation, making it difficult to obtain permits for large aquaculture projects. This contrasts sharply with countries in Asia, where extensive seaweed farms, sometimes covering entire bays, are often prioritized. Dixon, for example, cannot obtain a permit to keep his farm infrastructure in the water year-round, forcing him to remove and reinstall his lines and anchors each year. Moving farms further offshore presents engineering and environmental challenges, including the risk of entangling marine animals and potential competition with other marine life for nutrients, as noted by Hauke Kite-Powell, an engineer and economic analyst at Woods Hole. These regulations, while framed as environmental protection, effectively serve to limit the expansion of new industries that might challenge established economic interests or alter existing uses of collective resources.