These plants are the primary architects of “blue carbon” sinks, coastal ecosystems that can sequester carbon at rates up to three times higher than terrestrial forests.
I don’t think plants of any type should be called carbon sinks. It gives people the false idea that trees are some kind of solution to carbon released by burning fossil fuels. That carbon is just going to go back into the atmosphere when the tree dies and decays.
If it’s not shoving the carbon back underground for hundreds of thousands of years, it’s, at best, a carbon bucket on a wobbly table.
You are right that a big amount gets released back when a tree dies, but it also feeds microorganisms which live in the soil and which enrich the soil itself, increasing the carbon content of the soil. Also, especially in wetlands and coastal areas plant material can sink underwater and get preserved on the sea floor, leading to sequestration, and explaining the higher sequestration rate compared to terrestrial forests.
I don’t think plants of any type should be called carbon sinks. It gives people the false idea that trees are some kind of solution to carbon released by burning fossil fuels. That carbon is just going to go back into the atmosphere when the tree dies and decays.
If it’s not shoving the carbon back underground for hundreds of thousands of years, it’s, at best, a carbon bucket on a wobbly table.
You are right that a big amount gets released back when a tree dies, but it also feeds microorganisms which live in the soil and which enrich the soil itself, increasing the carbon content of the soil. Also, especially in wetlands and coastal areas plant material can sink underwater and get preserved on the sea floor, leading to sequestration, and explaining the higher sequestration rate compared to terrestrial forests.
The only real carbon sink is ocean algae that sinks to the bottom of the ocean when it dies.