Abstract
Algae have developed into a sustainable and adaptable resource that can help with several global issues, such as resource depletion, environmental degradation, food security, climate change, and energy security. It explores the multifaceted potential of algae in addressing key global sustainability challenges—including climate change, resource depletion, environmental pollution, food insecurity, and energy demands—through biotechnological innovations. Chlorella, Nannochloropsis, Botryococcus, and Spirulina demonstrate exceptional efficiency in biomass production, carbon sequestration, nutrient recycling, and bioenergy generation. Objectives of this review include evaluating recent advances in algal-based wastewater remediation, biodiesel production, and circular bioeconomy strategies, with a focus on the integration of industrial waste streams like abattoir wastewater and crude glycerol. Notably, Chlorella sorokiniana has shown high potential for phycoremediation and biodiesel yield when cultivated in abattoir wastewater digestate (AWD), achieving up to 90% BBM replacement with enhanced lipid and carotenoid content. Similarly, the valorization of crude glycerol via microbial and insect-based systems underscores algae’s role in supporting low-carbon bioeconomies. In agriculture, macroalgae such as Asparagopsis taxiformis have significantly reduced enteric methane emissions in livestock, highlighting their utility in climate-smart farming. Despite these advances, the scalability and economic viability of algal technologies remain constrained by high production costs, energy-intensive processing, contamination risks, and regulatory limitations—especially in food and feed sectors. It advocates for targeted research into cost reduction, process optimization, and harmonized policy frameworks to unlock algae’s full potential. By addressing these challenges, algae can become central to sustainable development strategies, enabling effective transitions toward cleaner energy, healthier ecosystems, and resilient food systems.
Introduction
Algae are a diverse group of photosynthetic organisms that inhabit a wide range of aquatic environments, including freshwater, marine, and brackish ecosystems. They contribute significantly to global carbon fixation and oxygen production, serving as a fundamental component of the Earth’s biosphere. Algae are generally classified into microalgae and macroalgae, both of which have garnered increasing interest for their applications in renewable energy production due to their fast growth rates, high lipid or carbohydrate content, and adaptability to various environmental conditions. Their potential for wastewater treatment, carbon sequestration, and bioproduct generation positions them as key players in sustainable development and the circular bioeconomy (; ).
Recent classification of algae has significantly advanced due to the application of molecular phylogenetics and integrative taxonomy, incorporating genomic, morphological, and ecological data. Green algae are now divided into two major lineages: Chlorophyta and Streptophyta. Within Chlorophyta, classes such as Chlorophyceae, Ulvophyceae, and Trebouxiophyceae have been refined using chloroplast genome data, as shown by Liu et al. (2020), who proposed an updated taxonomic scheme for the order Chaetophorales. Streptophyte algae, which include Zygnematophyceae, Charophyceae, and other early diverging green algae, have also undergone revision, with highlighting their evolutionary closeness to land plants. Ochrophyta, a diverse group of heterokont algae including brown algae (Phaeophyceae) and diatoms (Bacillariophyceae), has been split into two major clades: Chrysista and Diatomista.
Recent multigene phylogenetic analyses by Thakur et al. (2019) introduced new classes such as Olisthodiscophyceae and Phaeosacciophyceae. Red algae (Rhodophyta) have also seen taxonomic refinement, with identifying new families like Yamadaellaceae and Liagoropsidaceae within Nemaliales using chloroplast phylogenomics. Cyanobacteria, traditionally known as blue-green algae, have benefited from an integrative taxonomic approach that combines morphology with 16S rRNA and ITS sequence data, as emphasized by Kaštovský (2023). Overall, the use of integrative taxonomy, including DNA barcoding and whole-genome analysis, has been critical in resolving complex algal lineages and delineating cryptic species ().
Advances in molecular biology and genetic sequencing have significantly altered the classification of algae. The use of ribosomal RNA (rRNA) sequencing in phylogenetic research has revealed new details regarding the evolutionary relationships of groupings of algae. Species have often been reclassified as a result of this. For instance, molecular research has shown that certain kinds of green algae are more closely related to terrestrial plants than previously thought, which has altered our understanding of plant evolution (Lewis and McCourt, 2004). Similarly, molecular technology has enabled the discovery of previously unidentified algae species, highlighting the richness and complexity of the algal kingdom.
Pigments in algae
Algae contain a variety of pigments that enable them to perform photosynthesis effectively in different aquatic environments. These pigments vary significantly across algal classes. In Chlorophyceae (green algae), the principal pigments are chlorophyll a and chlorophyll b, along with carotenoids such as β-carotene and lutein. These pigments are similar to those found in higher plants, giving the algae a distinct green coloration (). Phaeophyceae (brown algae) contain chlorophyll a and c, and a dominant xanthophyll called fucoxanthin. Fucoxanthin masks the green of chlorophyll and gives the algae their characteristic brown coloration. It also improves light absorption in the blue-green spectrum, aiding in photosynthesis at deeper water levels ().
In Rhodophyceae (red algae), chlorophyll a is present, but chlorophyll b and c are absent. Instead, these algae contain water-soluble phycobilin pigments such as phycoerythrin and phycocyanin. Phycoerythrin, in particular, gives red algae their color and enables efficient photosynthesis in deeper or shaded waters by absorbing green and blue light. Carotenoids like β-carotene and zeaxanthin are also present (Lee, 2008). Bacillariophyceae (diatoms) are rich in chlorophyll a, c, and fucoxanthin, giving them a golden-brown color. Fucoxanthin enhances their ability to capture light efficiently and is one of the major pigments in this group (). Cyanophyceae (cyanobacteria or blue-green algae) primarily contain chlorophyll a and phycobilins such as phycocyanin and phycoerythrin. These accessory pigments allow cyanobacteria to thrive in a range of light conditions. Unlike most algae, cyanobacteria do not contain chlorophyll b (Whitton and Potts, 2012).
Euglenophyceae (euglenoids) possess chlorophyll a and b, along with β-carotene. Although they share pigment composition with green algae, they differ in storage material and cell structure, storing carbohydrates as paramylon instead of starch (). Finally, Dinophyceae (dinoflagellates) contain chlorophyll a and c and a unique carotenoid called peridinin. This pigment gives them a reddish-brown appearance and contributes to their efficiency in capturing light in marine environments (Riding et al., 2022).
Phaeophyta, or brown algae, are mainly marine due to their large, multicellular nature. Because they contain the pigment fucoxanthin, they have a brownish color. Brown algae are essential to marine ecosystems because they provide a habitat for a diverse range of organisms. The most well-known species include Macrocystis, Fucus, and Saccharina (Huisman et al., 2005). Complex patterns are produced by the unique silica cell walls of unicellular algae called Bacillariophyta (Diatoms). They are present in both fresh and saltwater environments and are among the most important primary producers in aquatic ecosystems. Diatoms play a major role in fixing carbon worldwide. Navicula, Cyclotella, and Pinnularia are notable genera (Wang, Y. et al., 2022). The unicellular chrysophyta (golden algae) contain pigments such as carotenoids and chlorophyll a and c. Although they can be found in marine environments, they are primarily freshwater species. Aquatic food chains depend on species like Ochromonas and Vaucheria, which belong to the chrysophyta (Kapustin, 2024).
The escalating global sustainability challenges—ranging from climate change, food insecurity, environmental pollution, and energy crises—demand innovative, eco-friendly, and resource-efficient solutions. Algae, owing to their rapid growth, diverse metabolic capabilities, and capacity for bioremediation, biofuel production, and carbon sequestration, have emerged as promising candidates in the quest for sustainable alternatives. Recent reviews underscore the potential of microalgae and macroalgae in various domains, including wastewater treatment (Rawat et al., 2011), bioenergy generation (), nutraceutical production (), and carbon capture technologies (). However, while these studies emphasize specific applications, there remains a lack of comprehensive integrative analysis that explores the multifunctional role of algae across multiple sustainability fronts simultaneously. Furthermore, scalability, economic feasibility, and regional adaptability of algal technologies have not been sufficiently addressed in the context of global implementation (Ochoa et al., 2020). Current literature also overlooks the socio-political and ecological dimensions of deploying algal systems at large scale. Hence, there exists a critical research gap in synthesizing multidisciplinary evidence to establish algae as a viable keystone solution in the global sustainability framework, particularly with respect to policy integration, life cycle assessment, and interdisciplinary innovation strategies.
The status of global sustainability of algae its challenges
Algae offer immense potential in biofuels, carbon capture, wastewater treatment, and food systems, yet face significant sustainability challenges. These include high water and energy demands, limited strain optimization, high production costs, and inadequate policy support. Ecological risks from genetically engineered strains and harmful algal blooms also raise public concern. Moreover, a lack of supply chain infrastructure and regulatory consistency hinders scale-up. Despite promising applications, especially in climate resilience and circular bioeconomy, algae’s global impact remains constrained without breakthroughs in cultivation efficiency, policy incentives, and public trust. Bridging these gaps is vital to fully realizing algae’s role in sustainable development. Here are some essential points that further enrich the discussion of the global sustainability challenges of algae, categorized under relevant themes.
Scope of algae cultivation and biodiversity constraints
Algae—including microalgae and macroalgae comprise a highly diverse group of photosynthetic organisms, numbering between 200,000 to millions of species (Occhipinti et al., 2023). This biodiversity presents both opportunities and constraints. While extremophile strains offer cultivation advantages in harsh environments, most algae strains remain under-characterized, and regulatory frameworks permit industrial use of only a few, creating bottlenecks in innovation and scale-up (Occhipinti et al., 2023). This imbalance between biodiversity potential and industrial deployment risks limiting large-scale sustainability impacts.
Environmental and resource pressure
Algal cultivation is resource-intensive, especially in terms of water, nutrients, and energy. Water demands for biofuel-producing strains reach 600–1,900 L per liter of fuel, even when using wastewater or saline water (). Energy inputs for photobioreactors further reduce their environmental benefit, with eutrophication and harmful algal blooms also posing risks if cultivation systems fail (Schischke et al., 2023). These challenges question the net sustainability of algal systems unless resource-efficient, integrated solutions are developed.
Economic barriers and technological hurdles
High costs associated with harvesting, cultivation systems, and growth media limit algae’s commercial viability. Media recycling is promising, but remains exploratory (). Algal biofuel economic feasibility remains two decades away from maturity, necessitating multibillion-dollar investments and breakthroughs in yield and processing efficiency (Schischke et al., 2023). The disparity between research enthusiasm and real-world economic constraints slows adoption in energy, feed, and biochemical markets.
Environmental services: carbon sequestration and wastewater treatment
Microalgae offer powerful ecosystem services: CO2 fixation up to 50 times faster than terrestrial crops, integration into wastewater treatment, and conversion of nutrients into biomass for valuable compounds (Srimongkol et al., 2022; Schipper et al., 2023). Algal consortia have treated industrial wastewater and remediated heavy metals and organics (Walters et al., 2024). However, scaling these solutions from lab to industry remains restricted by cost and infrastructure limitations.
Social perceptions and regulatory challenges
Public acceptance—especially around genetically engineered (GE) algae—is mixed. Concerns center on escapes from open systems, ecological risks such as harmful blooms, and insufficient regulations (). Stakeholders advocate transparent communication regarding GE benefits and risks, deployment of closed-loop systems, and robust environmental risk assessments (). Without increased public and policy confidence, investments may lag even as technical innovations advance.
Land use and competition with agriculture
While algae do not require arable land, large-scale cultivation still demands space. Coastal areas or deserts are often considered, but they may overlap with conservation zones or local livelihoods (). Moreover, the infrastructure (e.g., raceways, photobioreactors) could disrupt fragile ecosystems. Sustainable land-use planning is essential to balance algae production and ecological integrity.
Supply chain and infrastructure limitations
The lack of a robust supply chain—from seed culture to large-scale harvesting, dewatering, and product refinement—remains a bottleneck. Transportation of wet biomass is costly, and decentralized production is often needed, which increases complexity and cost (). Cold chain logistics for high-value products (like omega-3 oils or pigments) further increase emissions unless localized systems are optimized.
Policy and investment gaps
Algae biotechnology lacks consistent regulatory frameworks across regions. Incentives like carbon credits, renewable fuel subsidies, or wastewater treatment offsets are either inadequate or poorly enforced (Moshood et al., 2021). Inconsistent government backing discourages private investment, and algae startups face high capital expenditures without clear long-term policy guarantees.
Genetic engineering and strain optimization
Modern CRISPR-based gene editing tools offer the potential to improve yield, lipid productivity, and stress tolerance in algae. However, regulatory resistance and ecological concerns about releasing genetically modified algae hinder their deployment. Without public trust and international consensus on bioengineered strains, breakthroughs in strain optimization may remain underutilized ().
Life cycle and end-of-life impacts
Sustainability assessments often overlook the complete life cycle of algal products. The disposal or reuse of algal residues (post oil-extraction) can pose environmental risks if not managed properly. Residues may carry heavy metals or pathogens from wastewater-grown algae. Strategies for composting, anaerobic digestion, or bioplastics production from algal waste are under development but not yet widely adopted (Lopez-Tenllado et al., 2021).
Among the major sustainability problems caused by the world’s expanding population, industrialization, and environmental degradation are climate change, resource depletion, and food insecurity. Algae have emerged as a potential biological resource that can assist with various sustainability challenges due to their numerous applications in food security, wastewater treatment, carbon sequestration, and biofuel generation (Razzak et al., 2013). Because of their high photosynthetic efficiency, rapid growth rates, and capacity to adapt to a variety of climatic conditions, algae offer a desirable alternative to conventional resources (Wijffels and Barbosa, 2010). Additionally, algae play a vital role in wastewater treatment by efficiently removing nitrogen, phosphorus, and heavy metals from wastewater and producing biomass for bioenergy or agricultural use (Li et al., 2019).
Looking forward, the future of algae sustainability lies in overcoming these economic and regulatory bottlenecks through technological innovation and policy support. Biorefinery approaches, where multiple high-value products are extracted from algae, can improve economic returns and resource efficiency. Advancements in synthetic biology, low-cost cultivation technologies, and integration with existing industrial systems are likely to enhance the scalability of algae solutions (Wertz and Perez, 2023). Public-private partnerships and government incentives will be vital in supporting research and accelerating market adoption.
Potential application of algae
Algae contribute to climate change mitigation by sequestering carbon, as they absorb significant amounts of atmospheric CO2, thereby reducing greenhouse gas concentrations (Markou and Georgakakis, 2011). Furthermore, items made from algae, such as food supplements high in protein and biodegradable plastics, offer long-term answers to environmental pollution and food security (). Algae have enormous potential to address global sustainability issues because of their versatility. Their broad use in a variety of sectors, including as agriculture, energy, and environmental management, can greatly aid in the accomplishment of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the UN (). The contribution of microalgae to the circular economy and waste-to-energy plan, while discussing possible industrial and commercial biofuel production methods. Future studies should concentrate on creating new species, integrating biomass pretreatment methods, and streamlining the processes involved in producing biofuel (Hoang et al., 2022). However, overcoming technological, financial, and policy-related obstacles is necessary for the widespread commercial adoption of algae-based solutions. Unlocking algae’s full potential applications for the future requires ongoing research and innovation (Figure 1).
FIGURE 1
Applications of different species of algae in biofuel production
Recent studies highlight the promising role of various algal species in sustainable biofuel production. Neochloris oleoabundans, a microalga, has attracted attention for biodiesel production due to its high lipid accumulation under nitrogen-limited conditions (Pruvost et al., 2009). Similarly, Chlamydomonas reinhardtii is being engineered to enhance starch content, making it a suitable feedstock for bioethanol production (Wang K. et al., 2022). Spirulina platensis, beyond its nutritional value, has been investigated for biogas generation through anaerobic digestion, showing improved methane yields when co-digested with agricultural residues (Varol and Ugurlu, 2015). For macroalgae, Cladophora glomerata, a freshwater green alga, has been explored for bioethanol production owing to its cellulose-rich biomass that can be efficiently hydrolyzed (). Additionally, Padina tetrastromatica, a brown macroalga, has demonstrated potential for biodiesel production, with significant lipid content suitable for transesterification (). These studies reflect the growing interest in diverse algal species as renewable biofuel resources, contributing to a circular bioeconomy.
Table 1 highlights the diverse applications of different algal species in biofuel production, emphasizing their types, biofuels produced, and notable features. Chlorella vulgaris ESP-31, a microalga, is used for bioethanol production due to its high carbohydrate content and ability to grow in unsterilized swine wastewater, resulting in high ethanol yield (). Nannochloropsis oculata, another microalga, produces bioethanol from defatted biomass, with mixotrophic cultivation enhancing fermentable carbohydrate levels (). Botryococcus braunii is noted for biodiesel production, with lipid content reaching up to 75% of its dry weight owing to its hydrocarbon-rich composition (Nazloo et al., 2024). Scenedesmus obliquus, categorized as macroalgae in the table, supports dual production of biodiesel and bioethanol due to its high lipid and carbohydrate levels (Kim et al., 2020). Dunaliella salina is a salt-tolerant microalga valuable for biodiesel production, rich in β-carotene and lipids (). Porphyridium cruentum, a red microalga, provides both biohydrogen and biodiesel thanks to its carbohydrate and pigment content (Markou and Nerantzis, 2013). Among macroalgae, Gracilaria edulis is polysaccharide-rich and achieves high bioethanol fermentation efficiency (Ochoa et al., 2020), while Ulva lactuca is a fast-growing green algae used for bioethanol and biogas production (). Lastly, Sargassum spp., invasive brown algae rich in alginate and carbohydrates, are suitable for conversion into both biogas and bioethanol (Orozco-González et al., 2022). Together, these species illustrate the potential of algae as versatile feedstocks for various biofuels.
TABLE 1
| Algal species | Type | Biofuel type | Notable features | Citation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chlorella vulgaris ESP-31 | Microalgae | Bioethanol | High carbohydrate content; cultivated in unsterilized swine wastewater; high ethanol yield | |
| Nannochloropsis oculata | Microalgae | Bioethanol | Defatted biomass; mixotrophic cultivation increased fermentable carbohydrates | |
| Botryococcus braunii | Microalgae | Biodiesel | Produces hydrocarbons (botryococcenes); lipid content up to 75% dry weight | Nazloo et al. (2024) |
| Scenedesmus obliquus | Macroalgae | Biodiesel, Bioethanol | High lipid and carbohydrate content; suitable for dual fuel production | Kim et al. (2020) |
| Dunaliella salina | Microalgae | Biodiesel | Salt-tolerant; contains β-carotene and high lipid content | |
| Porphyridium cruentum | Red microalgae | Biohydrogen, Biodiesel | Rich in carbohydrates and pigments | Markou and Nerantzis (2013) |
| Gracilaria edulis | Macroalgae | Bioethanol | Polysaccharide-rich red macroalga; high fermentation efficiency | Yang et al. (2020) |
| Ulva lactuca | Microalgae | Bioethanol, Biogas | Abundant coastal green algae; fast-growing; rich in carbohydrates | |
| Sargassum spp. | Microalgae | Biogas, Bioethanol | Invasive brown algae; rich in alginate and carbohydrates; suitable for bioconversion | Orozco-González et al. (2022) |
Applications of different species of algae in biofuel production.
The study found that replacing up to 90% of Bold’s basel medium (BBM) with abattoir wastewater digestate (AWD) supports algal growth with minimal impact on biomass yield. This approach achieved the highest nutrient removal efficiency and produced high-quality biodiesel. Although all AWD treatments met irrigation water quality standards, AWD90 required slight post-treatment. Higher AWD ratios boosted lipid and carotenoid content in the algae, enhancing biodiesel potential. The research highlights Chlorella sorokiniana’s promise for AWD phycoremediation and biomass production, supporting sustainable, waste-to-resource biotechnologies. Further research is needed on scalability, industrial challenges, and economic feasibility for large-scale use in abattoirs (). Microorganisms like Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae can convert crude glycerol into ethanol, volatile fatty acids, and hydrogen. Additionally, oleaginous organisms such as yeast, microalgae, and saprophagous insects can transform it into bio-lipids, supporting low-carbon bioeconomy goals. Co-valorization strategies with domestic wastewater or lignocellulosic hydrolysates enhance lipid production. Notably, black soldier fly larvae efficiently convert waste glycerol and protein-rich materials into biodiesel, animal feed, and fertilizers ().
Microalgae such as Chlorella vulgaris, Nannochloropsis oceanica, and Scenedesmus obliquus possess high lipid content and fast growth rates, making them ideal candidates for biodiesel. Recent developments in genetic engineering and metabolic pathway optimization have significantly improved lipid productivity and conversion efficiencies, making algal biofuels a technically viable option (Wang et al., 2024). Nevertheless, the production cost of algal biofuel remains significantly higher than that of fossil fuels, impeding commercial competitiveness ().
Contribution of different species of algae in climate change mitigation through carbon sequestration
Another major advantage of algae is their capacity for carbon dioxide (CO2) sequestration. Algae can absorb CO2 at rates exceeding terrestrial plants, offering a promising solution for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and other industrial sources (Srimongkol et al., 2022).
Climate change, primarily driven by excessive carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from industrial activities and fossil fuel combustion, poses a significant threat to global ecosystems. Algae play a major role in climate change mitigation by capturing and storing atmospheric CO2 through photosynthesis, a process known as biological carbon sequestration (Markou and Georgakakis, 2011). Microalgae, such as Chlorella vulgaris, Nannochloropsis sp., and Scenedesmus obliquus, exhibit high photosynthetic efficiency and can capture CO2 from industrial flue gases, thereby reducing emissions (Wang et al., 2008). Chlorella vulgaris, for example, has been reported to fix up to 1.83 g of CO2 per gram of biomass, making it one of the most efficient species for carbon sequestration (). Additionally, microalgae can be cultivated in photobioreactors or open ponds using wastewater, further enhancing their sustainability by integrating CO2 capture with wastewater treatment (Razzak et al., 2013). Macroalgae, or seaweeds, such as Macrocystis pyrifera (giant kelp), Sargassum sp., and Laminaria japonica, play a vital role in oceanic carbon sequestration. These large marine algae absorb CO2 during photosynthesis and store carbon in their biomass, which can later be transported to the deep ocean when the algae decay or sink (). Research suggests that kelp forests can sequester an estimated 173 Tg (teragrams) of CO2 annually, highlighting their potential in mitigating climate change (Krause-Jensen and Duarte, 2016).
Certain algae species can be used to produce biochar, a carbon-rich material that can be applied to soil for long-term carbon storage. Spirulina platensis and Chlorella pyrenoidosa have been investigated for their potential to produce biochar through pyrolysis, thereby locking carbon in stable forms while also improving soil fertility (Lehmann et al., 2006). Additionally, algae-based biofuels provide a sustainable energy alternative that recycles CO2 during production, creating a closed carbon loop and reducing net emissions (Wijffels and Barbosa, 2010). Algae-based carbon capture and utilization (CCU) systems have been developed to integrate CO2 sequestration with valuable product generation. Species such as Dunaliella salina and Tetraselmis suecica can thrive in high CO2 environments and are utilized in necessary applications like biofertilizers, fodder, and pharmaceutical products. Furthermore, algae can also absorb airborne pollutants like sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), which contribute to acid rain and respiratory diseases (). Contributions of different species of algae in climate change mitigation via carbon sequestration are enumerated (Table 2).
TABLE 2
| Algal species | Type | Carbon sequestration mechanism | Key contribution | Citation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chlorella vulgaris | Microalga | Rapid photosynthetic CO2 fixation in PBRs; effective with flue-gas integration | Widely demonstrated in pilot photobioreactors and hybrid scrubber–algae systems for industrial CO2 capture and biomass valorization | Prasad et al. (2021) |
| Nannochloropsis spp. (e.g., N. oceanica) | Microalga | High photosynthetic/carbon conversion; tolerant to variable CO2 and saline conditions | Used in pilot CO2 capture + biomass (lipid) production; attractive for biorefinery links | |
| Scenedesmus obliquus | Microalga | Flue-gas tolerant biofixation; high areal productivity | Frequently used for industrial CO2 biofixation with reported high removal efficiencies in outdoor ponds/PBRs | Li et al. (2023) |
| Dunaliella salina | Microalga (halotolerant) | CO2 fixation in high-salinity systems | Suited to saline/brine streams and co-valorization (β-carotene) with promising LCA scenarios for negative CO2eq in niche systems | |
| Tetraselmis suecica | Microalga | High carbon uptake; tolerant to high CO2; robust biomass yields | Used in high-rate systems and integrated CCU schemes (fertilizer/feed co-products) | Srimongkol et al. (2022) |
| Botryococcus braunii | Microalga | Accumulates hydrocarbon-like lipids (botryococcenes) from CO2 | High hydrocarbon yields → direct liquid hydrocarbon precursors; potential for CO2→fuel pathways | Nazloo et al. (2024) |
| Ulva spp. (sea lettuce) | Macroalga | High coastal biomass production; biochar/soil application for durable carbon storage | Harvested biomass can be converted to biochar or soil amendments for long-term carbon sequestration and eutrophication control | Pizarro-Loaiza et al. (2021) |
| Saccharina/kelps (e.g., S. latissima) | Macroalga (kelp) | Rapid coastal growth; potential export/burial of biomass (blue carbon) | Kelp farms produce large biomass rapidly, potential CDR pathways include sinking, burial or durable product manufacture (verification needed) | |
| Sargassum spp. | Brown macroalga | High productivity and export of particulate/dissolved carbon | Large floating mats export C to deeper waters or support valorization routes, but permanence and ecological trade-offs are active research areas | Wang et al. (2023) |
Contribution of different algal species in climate change mitigation via carbon sequestration.
Algae play a crucial role in environmental sustainability through wastewater treatment. Microalgae can effectively remove nitrogen, phosphorus, and heavy metals from municipal and industrial wastewater, converting pollutants into valuable biomass. This biomass can be further used for bioenergy or as biofertilizer, thereby closing nutrient loops (Li et al., 2023). However, inconsistent wastewater composition and the need for pretreatment in some cases raise safety and efficiency concerns, particularly when biomass is reused in food or agriculture.
The contribution of algae to climate change mitigation is multifaceted, primarily through their efficient carbon sequestration capabilities. Algae absorb large amounts of CO2 during photosynthesis, which helps reduce atmospheric greenhouse gases. Microalgae, in particular, exhibit rapid growth rates and high carbon fixation efficiency, making them promising candidates for bio-based carbon capture technologies (Severo et al., 2019; Wongsodiharjo and Ismail Masjud, 2024). Additionally, algae-based biofuels provide a renewable alternative to fossil fuels, lowering net carbon emissions when used as energy sources (Wang et al., 2024). Algal bioremediation of wastewater further reduces nutrient runoff that can exacerbate climate-related issues such as eutrophication (Iakovidou et al., 2024). Collectively, these applications position algae as a vital tool in integrated strategies to mitigate climate change.
Contribution of different species of algae in food security
Food security is a critical global challenge, exacerbated by population growth, climate change, and resource depletion. Algae, both microalgae and macroalgae, have emerged as a sustainable and nutrient-rich solution to enhance food security by providing essential proteins, lipids, vitamins, and bioactive compounds (Pulz and Gross, 2004). Microalgae are abundant in remarkable proteins, carrying all essential amino acids required for human nutrition. Species such as Spirulina platensis, Chlorella vulgaris, and Dunaliella salina are widely recognized as alternative protein sources that can complement or replace conventional animal-based proteins (). Spirulina platensis has a protein content of up to 70% of its dry weight and is considered one of the most complete plant-based protein sources (). Additionally, Chlorella vulgaris is packed with essential nutrients, including vitamins (B12), iron, and omega-3 fatty acids, making it a valuable food supplement (Nova et al., 2020).
Macroalgae, or seaweeds, such as Saccharina japonica (kelp), Porphyra spp. (nori), and Ulva lactuca (sea lettuce), have been staples in many Asian diets for centuries. These species are rich in dietary fiber, iodine, calcium, and polysaccharides such as alginate, fucoidan, and carrageenan, which offer significant health benefits (Holdt and Kraan, 2011). Porphyra spp., used in sushi wraps, is particularly valued for its high protein and vitamin B12 content, making it an important food source for vegetarian and vegan diets (Kaur et al., 2023). Algae are increasingly being used as feed ingredients for livestock and aquaculture, enhancing food production sustainability. Nannochloropsis sp., Tetraselmis suecica, and Isochrysis galbana are commonly used in aquafeeds due to their high levels of omega-3 fatty acids, which improve fish health and nutritional quality (). Additionally, incorporating Spirulina and Chlorella into poultry and cattle feed has been shown to enhance animal growth, immune function, and meat quality while reducing reliance on conventional feed sources (). Algae are also increasingly being incorporated into agriculture and animal husbandry. In particular, red macroalgae such as Asparagopsis taxiformis have been shown to drastically reduce enteric methane emissions when added to cattle feed. A pilot project in Hawaii reported a methane reduction of over 77%, marking a significant breakthrough in climate-friendly agriculture ().
The most prevalent macroseaweed species, green seaweed, is a valuable marine biological resource. Numerous amino acids, fatty acids, dietary fibers, polysaccharides, polyphenols, pigments, and other active ingredients are abundant in it. These components are essential for a number of biological functions, including immunoregulation, anti-inflammatory response, and antioxidant activity. The exploration and use of green seaweeds for increased economic value has surged in recent years due to increased awareness of marine resources (Figure 2).
FIGURE 2
Algae are rich in bioactive compounds, including antioxidants, polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), and polysaccharides, which contribute to human health and disease prevention. Dunaliella salina is a major source of beta-carotene, a powerful antioxidant that supports vision and immune health (). Haematococcus pluvialis produces astaxanthin, a potent anti-inflammatory compound used in nutraceuticals and dietary supplements (). Algae-based biofertilizers, derived from species such as Ascophyllum nodosum and Sargassum sp., contribute to sustainable agriculture by enhancing soil fertility, increasing crop yields, and reducing dependency on chemical fertilizers (Khan et al., 2009). These seaweed extracts contain growth-promoting hormones, minerals, and polysaccharides that improve plant resistance to environmental stresses, supporting more resilient food production systems (Table 3).
TABLE 3
| Algal species | Type | Nutritional components | Food security contribution | Citation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microalgae (mixed species for alternative protein) | Microalgae | Protein, essential amino acids, functional lipids | Emerging vertical/industrial systems can produce concentrated alternative proteins with smaller land footprints | |
| Chlorella vulgaris | Microalga | Protein, vitamins, essential fatty acids, pigments | Common food supplement; used in fortified foods and as a micro-ingredient for nutrition density | |
| Nannochloropsis spp. | Microalga | EPA and other marine omega-3s, protein | Source of marine omega-3s for human food and aqua feed, lowering pressure on fish stocks | |
| Haematococcus pluvialis | Microalga | Astaxanthin (high-value carotenoid) | Nutraceutical and feed additive improving food value chains (aquaculture pigmentation, antioxidant benefits) | Mota et al. (2021) |
| Dunaliella salina | Microalga | β-carotene, provitamin A precursors | Used as a natural pro-vitamin A source and colorant-relevant in micronutrient interventions | |
| Ulva spp./Ulva lactuca | Macroalga | Dietary fibre, protein, minerals (iodine, Ca, Mg) | Edible seaweed used directly in foods and as animal feed; supports coastal food systems and local nutrition | |
| Porphyra/Pyropia spp. (nori) | Red macroalga | High protein, B-vitamins (B12/analogues), mineral content | Staple seaweed in many diets-demonstrable roles in local food security and micronutrient supply | |
| Gracilaria spp./Gracilaria edulis | Red macroalga | Polysaccharides (agar), sugars, protein | Edible seaweed and hydrocolloid source, supports local food industry and fermentation for ethanol/food ingredients | Vijay Anand et al. (2018) |
| Sargassum spp. (selected uses) | Brown macroalga | Carbohydrates, alginate, minerals | When harvested (e.g., beach cast), can be up cycled into feed/fertilizer or processed for food additives, useful in coastal food security and waste valorization | Orozco-González et al. (2022) |
Contribution of algal species to food security.
Contribution of different species of algae in environmental pollution mitigation
Environmental pollution, including water, air, and soil contamination, is a major global challenge. Algae, both microalgae and macroalgae, have shown remarkable potential in mitigating pollution through bioremediation, biofiltration, and pollutant sequestration. Different algal species can absorb heavy metals, degrade organic pollutants, and capture excess nutrients, making them valuable tools for environmental cleanup and ecosystem restoration (Rai et al., 2019). Microalgae have been extensively studied for their ability to remove heavy metals such as cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb), arsenic (As), and mercury (Hg) from industrial wastewater. Species like Chlorella vulgaris, Scenedesmus obliquus, and Spirulina platensis exhibit high biosorption capacities, effectively reducing metal toxicity in contaminated water (Mata et al., 2010). The cell walls of these algae contain polysaccharides, proteins, and lipids that bind metal ions, enabling their removal from industrial effluents (Ordóñez et al., 2023). Moreover, Chlorella vulgaris has been used in phycoremediation to treat textile and pharmaceutical wastewater, removing dyes and other organic contaminants (Muñoz and Guieysse, 2006). Similarly, Scenedesmus obliquus has demonstrated significant potential in treating tannery and paper mill effluents by reducing chemical oxygen demand (COD) and biological oxygen demand (BOD) levels (Kumar and Sweety, 2024). Phycoremediation offers cost reductions and renewable bioenergy options and can remove heavy metals and harmful organic substances without secondary contamination. Algal species like Chlamydomonas, Chlorella, and Scenedesmus are widely used for wastewater treatment. Phycoremediation also produces valuable biomass with high protein and lipid contents, promising applications in biofuel, food, and animal feed industries ().
Eutrophication, caused by excessive nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) from agricultural runoff and sewage discharge, leads to algal blooms and oxygen depletion in water bodies. Certain microalgae, such as Chlorella sp., Nannochloropsis sp., and Tetraselmis suecica, efficiently absorb excess nutrients, prohibiting deleterious algal blooms (HABs) (). Additionally, macroalgae such as Ulva lactuca and Gracilaria sp. act as biofilters in aquaculture systems, absorbing nitrates and phosphates, thereby reducing eutrophication risks (Neori et al., 2004). Integrated algae-based wastewater treatment systems have been implemented in several regions, demonstrating the ability of algae to recycle nutrients while producing valuable biomass for biofertilizers and biofuels (Park et al., 2011). Certain algae species play a crucial role in air pollution mitigation by capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) and other air pollutants from industrial emissions. Chlorella vulgaris, Nannochloropsis sp., and Scenedesmus dimorphus have been successfully cultivated in photobioreactors for CO2 capture from flue gases, significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions (Wang et al., 2008). Furthermore, algae can also absorb airborne pollutants such as sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), which contribute to acid rain and respiratory diseases (). Algal biotechnology offers a low-cost, low-energy solution for wastewater bioremediation. However, commercialization is still in its infancy. Challenges include selecting microalgal species, addressing new contaminants, and operational conditions. Algal bioremediation, combined with current treatment technology, could effectively remove new contaminants (Figure 3).
FIGURE 3
Algae-based bioremediation is an emerging strategy for degrading persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and pharmaceutical residues in wastewater. Species such as Chlorella pyrenoidosa, Anabaena sp., and Oscillatoria sp. have shown the ability to break down pesticides, herbicides, and endocrine-disrupting chemicals through enzymatic and photochemical processes (Zahmatkesh et al., 2023). For instance, Chlorella pyrenoidosa has been reported to degrade antibiotics such as tetracycline and sulfamethoxazole, reducing their ecological impact on aquatic ecosystems (Li et al., 2022). Algae have been explored as a potential bioremediation tool for cleaning oil spills in marine environments. Moreover, macroalgae such as Sargassum sp. have been tested for their ability to absorb oil contaminants from seawater, offering a sustainable and eco-friendly alternative to conventional oil spill cleanup techniques (). Contributions of different algal species in environmental pollution mitigation are enumerated below (Table 4).
TABLE 4
| Algal species | Type | Target pollutants | Mitigation mechanism | Key contribution | Citation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chlorella vulgaris | Microalga | N, P, heavy metals, dyes, pharmaceuticals | Bio-sorption, nutrient assimilation, biodegradation (in wastewater PBRs/raceways) | Demonstrated high N/P removal and micro-pollutant attenuation in pilot wastewater and flue-gas integrated systems | Srimongkol et al. (2022) |
| Scenedesmus/Desmodesmus spp. (e.g., S. obliquus) | Microalga | N, P, COD, some organics | High nutrient uptake, good biomass yield for co-product recovery | Frequently employed in wastewater nutrient removal with simultaneous biomass production for bio-energy | Kim et al. (2020), Srimongkol et al. (2022) |
| Nannochloropsis oculata/spp. | Microalga | Nutrients, hydrocarbons in aquaculture wastewater | Assimilation into biomass; remediation + feed ingredient production | Effective for treating aquaculture effluents while producing feed-quality biomass | Sutherland et al. (2014), |
| Chlorella pyrenoidosa/Chlamydomonas spp. | Microalgae | Pharmaceuticals (e.g., antibiotics), endocrine disruptors | Biotransformation/biodegradation and sorption | Shown to degrade or reduce concentrations of certain antibiotics and emerging pollutants under controlled conditions | Li et al. (2022), |
| Porphyridium cruentum | Red microalga | Textile dyes, heavy metals | Extracellular polysaccharide binding and chelation | Employed in dye and metal removal studies; EPS aids pollutant binding | |
| Ulva spp./Ulva lactuca | Macroalga | N, P, some heavy metals | Ion exchange, bioaccumulation (coastal bio-filtration/IMTA) | Used in integrated multi-trophic aquaculture (IMTA) to remove nutrients and reduce eutrophication risk | |
| Gracilaria spp./Gracilaria verrucosa | Macroalga | Heavy metals (Hg, As) | Cell wall polysaccharide biosorption | Demonstrated heavy metal uptake capacity, useful in coastal remediation and biomass valorization | Jeyadharmarajan and Gopalakrishnan (2023) |
| Sargassum spp. (beachcast) | Brown macroalga | Oil residues, hydrocarbons, nutrients | Bio-filtration and adsorption; collection prevents coastal re-mineralization | Beachcast Sargassum can be harvested and processed to prevent local pollution and convert biomass to products | Orozco-González et al. (2022) |
| Cladophora glomerata | Green macroalga | Hydrocarbons, organic pollutants | Biofilm-mediated degradation and sorption | Useful in remediation of oil-polluted water and construction of biofilters |
Contribution of algal species in environmental pollution mitigation.
Conclusion
Algae represent a highly promising and adaptable biological resource capable of addressing some of the most pressing global sustainability challenges. This review has demonstrated their wide-ranging applications in mitigating climate change through carbon sequestration, improving water quality via nutrient and pollutant removal, generating renewable energy in the form of biodiesel and bio-lipids, and enhancing food and feed security through nutrient-dense biomass. The integration of algae with waste-derived inputs—such as abattoir wastewater digestate and crude glycerol—further strengthens their role in promoting circular bioeconomy practices. For example, Chlorella sorokiniana has shown notable success in phycoremediation and high-quality biodiesel production under these conditions, and the use of macroalgae like Asparagopsis taxiformis in livestock feed has demonstrated significant reductions in methane emissions, offering a viable approach to climate-resilient agriculture.
Despite these promising developments, several key challenges continue to hinder the large-scale deployment and sustainability of algae-based technologies. High operational costs, especially those related to cultivation, harvesting, and drying, remain a major obstacle to economic feasibility. Additionally, the scalability of algae systems is constrained by contamination risks and the technical complexity of maintaining monocultures. Regulatory limitations, particularly regarding the approval of algal species for use in food and feed, further restrict commercialization and international market expansion. The lack of harmonized policy frameworks across regions adds another layer of difficulty to widespread adoption.
To fully harness the potential of algae in global sustainability efforts, future research must prioritize several critical areas. These include the development of cost-effective cultivation methods using low-cost or waste-derived media, as well as advances in genetic and metabolic engineering to enhance algal productivity and resilience. Comprehensive life cycle assessments and sustainability evaluations are essential to validate the environmental benefits of algal technologies at scale. Moreover, integrating algal systems into broader industrial symbiosis models—such as those involving agricultural and municipal waste—could increase efficiency and reduce costs. Equally important is the need for regulatory reform and harmonization to support commercialization, along with initiatives to improve public awareness and acceptance of algae-based products in food and agriculture. Addressing these issues will be essential for unlocking algae’s full potential as a cornerstone of sustainable development.
Statements
Author contributions
BD: Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing. AB: Writing – review and editing, Writing – original draft.
Funding
The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1
AlazaizaM. Y. D.HeS.SuD.Abu AmrS. S.TohP. Y.BashirM. J. K. (2023). Sewage water treatment using Chlorella vulgaris microalgae for simultaneous nutrient separation and biomass production. Separations10 (4), 229. 10.3390/separations10040229
2
AndersenR. A. (2005). Algal culturing techniques. Elsevier Academic Press.
3
AroraN.LoE.LegallN.PhilippidisG. P. (2023). A critical review of growth media recycling to enhance the economics and sustainability of algae cultivation. Energies16 (14), 5378. 10.3390/en16145378
4
Associated Press (2023). Scientists use red seaweed to cut cow burps and methane emissions. Available online at: https://apnews.com/article/375e373a4b55e604c474cd2189546180.
5
AyeleA.GetachewD.KamarajM.SureshA. (2021). Phycoremediation of synthetic dyes: an effective and eco-friendly algal technology for the dye abatement. J. Chem.2021, 1–14. 10.1155/2021/9923643
6
BarsantiL.GualtieriP. (2006). Algae: anatomy, biochemistry, and biotechnology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
7
BeckerE. W. (2007). Micro-algae as a source of protein. Biotechnol. Adv.25 (2), 207–210. 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2006.11.002
8
BenemannJ. R. (2013). Microalgae for biofuels and animal feeds. Energies6 (11), 5869–5886. 10.3390/en6115869
9
BierenbroodspotM. J.PröscholdT.Fürst-JansenJ. M. R.de VriesS.IrisarriI.DarienkoT.et al (2024). Phylogeny and evolution of streptophyte algae. Ann. Bot.134 (3), 385–400. 10.1093/aob/mcae091
10
BleakleyS.HayesM. (2017). Algal proteins: extraction, application, and challenges concerning production. Foods6 (5), 33. 10.3390/foods6050033
11
BoonprabK.MatsuiK.KataokaN. (2017). Preliminary study on bioethanol from fresh water algae, Cladophora glomerata (Sarai Kai) by the fungus, Monascus sp. NP1. J. Appl. Phycol.30 (1), 137–141. 10.1007/s10811-017-1224-1
12
BorowitzkaM.MoheimaniN. (2013). “Sustainable biofuels from algae,”Mitig. Adapt. Strategies Glob. Change, 18, 13–25. 10.1007/s11027-010-9271-9
13
BorowitzkaM. A. (2013). High-value products from microalgae—their development and commercialisation. J. Appl. Phycol.25 (3), 743–756. 10.1007/s10811-013-9983-9
14
BrennanL.OwendeP. (2010). Biofuels from microalgae—A review of technologies for production, processing, and extractions of biofuels and co-products. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.14 (2), 557–577. 10.1016/j.rser.2009.10.009
15
BuetowD. E. (1968). The biology of euglena, 1. Academic Press.
16
CaiT.ParkS. Y.LiY. (2013). Nutrient recovery from wastewater streams by microalgae: status and prospects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.19, 360–369. 10.1016/j.rser.2012.11.030
17
CalatravaV.Gonzalez-BallesterD.DubiniA. (2024). Microalgae for bioremediation: advances, challenges, and public perception on genetic engineering. BMC Plant Biol.24, 1261. 10.1186/s12870-024-05995-5
18
CaporgnoM. P.MathysA. (2018). Trends in microalgae incorporation into innovative food products with potential health benefits. Front. Nutr.5, 58. 10.3389/fnut.2018.00058
19
CarinaD.SharmaS.JaiswalA. K.JaiswalS. (2021). Seaweeds polysaccharides in active food packaging: a review of recent progress. Trends Food Sci. Technol.110, 559–572. 10.1016/j.tifs.2021.02.022
20
ChaiW. S.TanW. G.Halimatul MunawarohH. S.GuptaV. K.HoS.-H.ShowP. L. (2021). Multifaceted roles of microalgae in the application of wastewater biotreatment: a review. Environ. Pollut.269, 116236. 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.116236
21
ChistiY. (2007). Biodiesel from microalgae. Biotechnol. Adv.25 (3), 294–306. 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2007.02.001
22
CostaJ. F.LinS.-M.MacayaE. C.Fernández-GarcíaC.VerbruggenH. (2016). Chloroplast genomes as a tool to resolve red algal phylogenies: a case study in the Nemaliales. BMC Evol. Biol.16 (1), 205. 10.1186/s12862-016-0772-3
23
DaliA.AbdelmalekS.BakdiA.BettayebM. (2021). A new robust control scheme: application for MPP tracking of a PMSG-based variable-speed wind turbine. Renew. Energy172, 1021–1034. 10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.083
24
Dayana PriyadharshiniS.Suresh BabuP.ManikandanS.SubbaiyaR.GovarthananM.KarmegamN. (2021). Phycoremediation of wastewater for pollutant removal: a green approach to environmental protection and long-term remediation. Environ. Pollut.290, 117989. 10.1016/j.envpol.2021.117989
25
DhokaneD.ShaikhA.YadavA.GiriN.BandyopadhyayA.DasguptaS.et al (2023). CRISPR-based bioengineering in microalgae for production of industrially important biomolecules. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.11, 1267826. 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1267826
26
DuarteC. M.WuJ.XiaoX.BruhnA.Krause-JensenD. (2017). Can seaweed farming play a role in climate change mitigation and adaptation?Front. Mar. Sci.4. 10.3389/fmars.2017.00100
27
ElsayedM.ErakyM.OsmanA. I.WangJ.FarghaliM.RashwanA. K.et al (2023). Sustainable valorization of waste glycerol into bioethanol and biodiesel through biocircular approaches: a review. Environ. Chem. Lett.22 (2), 609–634. 10.1007/s10311-023-01671-6
28
FetyanN. A. H.El-SayedA. E.-K. B.IbrahimF. M.AttiaY. A.SadikM. W. (2021). Bioethanol production from defatted biomass of Nannochloropsis oculata microalgae grown under mixotrophic conditions. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.29 (2), 2588–2597. 10.1007/s11356-021-15758-6
29
GaberK.RöschC.BiondiN. (2022). Life cycle assessment of total fatty acid (TFA) production from microalgae Nannochloropsis oceanica at different sites and under different sustainability scenarios. BioEnergy Res.15, 1595–1615. 10.1007/s12155-021-10279-z
30
GauravK.NeetiK.SinghR. (2024). Microalgae-based biodiesel production and its challenges and future opportunities: a review. Green Technol. Sustain.2 (1), 100060. 10.1016/j.grets.2023.100060
31
GengiahK.RajendranN.Al-GhanimK. A.GovindarajanM.GurunathanB. (2023). Process and technoeconomic analysis of bioethanol production from residual biomass of marine macroalgae Ulva lactuca. Sci. Total Environ.868, 161661. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.161661
32
GhoshD.SarkarK.DeviP.KimK.-H.KumarP. (2021). Current and future perspectives of carbon and graphene quantum dots: from synthesis to strategy for building optoelectronic and energy devices. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.135, 110391. 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110391
33
GondiR.KavithaS.Yukesh KannahR.Parthiba KarthikeyanO.KumarG.Kumar TyagiV.et al (2022). Algal-based system for removal of emerging pollutants from wastewater: a review. Bioresour. Technol.344, 126245. 10.1016/j.biortech.2021.126245
34
GovindanK.KimD.-G.KoS.-O. (2022). Catalytic oxidation of acetaminophen through pristine and surface-modified nitrogen-doped carbon-nanotube-catalyzed peroxydisulfate activation. J. Environ. Chem. Eng.10 (5), 108257. 10.1016/j.jece.2022.108257
35
GrahamL. E.GrahamJ. M.WilcoxL. W. (2009). Algae. 2nd ed.Benjamin Cummings.
36
GuedesA. C.AmaroH. M.MalcataF. X. (2011). Microalgae as sources of carotenoids. Mar. Drugs9 (4), 625–644. 10.3390/md9040625
37
HabibM. A. B.ParvinM.HuntingtonT. C.HasanM. R. (2008). A review on culture, production and use of Spirulina as food for humans and feeds for domestic animals (FAO fisheries and aquaculture circular No. 1034, 33 p.). Food Agric. Organ. U. N. Available online at: https://www.fao.org/3/i0427e/i0427e.pdf.
38
HeethoffM.LaumannM.WeigmannG.RaspotnigG. (2011). Integrative taxonomy: combining morphological, molecular and chemical data for species delineation in the parthenogenetic Trhypochthonius tectorum complex (Acari, Oribatida, Trhypochthoniidae). Front. Zoology8 (1), 2. 10.1186/1742-9994-8-2
39
HemaiswaryaS.RajaR.Ravi KumarR.GanesanV.AnbazhaganC. (2010). Microalgae: a sustainable feed source for aquaculture. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol.27 (8), 1737–1746. 10.1007/s11274-010-0632-z
40
HenriksonR. (2011). Earth food spirulina: how this remarkable blue-green algae can transform your health and our planet. Hana, Maui,. Hawaii: Ronore Enterprises Inc.
41
HoangA. T.SirohiR.PandeyA.NižetićS.LamS. S.ChenW.-H.et al (2022). Biofuel production from microalgae: challenges and chances. Phytochem. Rev.22 (4), 1089–1126. 10.1007/s11101-022-09819-y
42
HoldtS. L.KraanS. (2011). Bioactive compounds in seaweed: functional food applications and legislation. J. Appl. Phycol.23 (3), 543–597. 10.1007/s10811-010-9632-5
43
HuismanJ.MatthijsH. C. P.VisserP. M. (2005). Harmful Cyanobacteria. Aquat. Ecol. Ser. 10.1007/1-4020-3022-3
44
IakovidouG.ItziouA.TsiotsiasA.LakiotiE.SamarasP.TsanaktsidisC.et al (2024). Application of microalgae to wastewater bioremediation, with CO2 biomitigation, health product and biofuel development, and environmental biomonitoring. Appl. Sci.14 (15), 6727. 10.3390/app14156727
45
JeyadharmarajanJ.GopalakrishnanP. (2023). Biosorption of heavy metals using Gracilaria edulis seaweed: batch adsorption, kinetics, and thermodynamic studies. Glob. NEST J.25 (10), 33–46. 10.30955/gnj.005259
46
KapustinD. (2024). Diversity and taxonomy of chrysophytes from the pasvik state nature reserve (Russia). Water16 (20), 2990. 10.3390/w16202990
47
KaštovskýJ. (2023). Welcome to the jungle!: an overview of modern taxonomy of Cyanobacteria. Hydrobiologia851 (4), 1063–1077. 10.1007/s10750-023-05356-7
48
KaurM.SainiK. C.MallickA.BastF. (2023). Seaweed-associated epiphytic bacteria: diversity, ecological and economic implications. Aquat. Bot.189, 103698. 10.1016/j.aquabot.2023.103698
49
KhanW.RayirathU. P.SubramanianS.JitheshM. N.RayorathP.HodgesD. M.et al (2009). Seaweed extracts as biostimulants of plant growth and development. J. Plant Growth Regul.28 (4), 386–399. 10.1007/s00344-009-9103-x
50
KimE. J.KimS.ChoiH.-G.HanS. J. (2020). Co-production of biodiesel and bioethanol using psychrophilic microalga chlamydomonas sp. KNM0029C isolated from Arctic sea ice. Biotechnol. Biofuels13 (1), 20. 10.1186/s13068-020-1660-z
51
Krause-JensenD.DuarteC. M. (2016). Substantial role of macroalgae in marine carbon sequestration. Nat. Geosci.9 (10), 737–742. 10.1038/ngeo2790
52
KumarA.Sweety (2024). Phycoremediation of wastewater - an approach used microalgae for bioremediation. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci.13 (7), 28–34. 10.20546/ijcmas.2024.1307.004
53
LeeR. E. (2008). Phycology. 4th ed.Cambridge University Press.
54
LehmannJ.GauntJ.RondonM. (2006). Bio-char sequestration in terrestrial ecosystems – a review. Mitig. Adapt. Strategies Glob. Change11 (2), 403–427. 10.1007/s11027-005-9006-5
55
LewisL. A.McCourtR. M. (2004). Green algae and the origin of land plants. Am. J. Bot.91 (10), 1535–1556. 10.3732/ajb.91.10.1535
56
LiG.BaiX.LiH.LuZ.ZhouY.WangY.et al (2019). Nutrients removal and biomass production from anaerobic digested effluent by microalgae: a review. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng.12 (5), 8–13. 10.25165/j.ijabe.20191205.3630
57
LiS.ShowP. L.NgoH. H.HoS.-H. (2022). Algae-mediated antibiotic wastewater treatment: a critical review. Environ. Sci. Ecotechnology9, 100145. 10.1016/j.ese.2022.100145
58
LiL.GaoK.YangM.ZhengQ.ZhangM.DengX. (2023). Challenges and potential solutions of microalgae-based systems for wastewater treatment and resource recovery. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.11, 1210228. 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1210228
59
LiS.ChangH.ZhangS.HoS.-H. (2023). Production of sustainable biofuels from microalgae with CO2 bio-sequestration and life cycle assessment. Environ. Res.227, 115730. 10.1016/j.envres.2023.115730
60
LiuB.HuY.HuZ.LiuG.ZhuH. (2020). Taxonomic scheme of the order Chaetophorales (Chlorophyceae, Chlorophyta) based on chloroplast genomes. BMC Genomics21 (1), 442. 10.1186/s12864-020-06845-y
61
Lopez-TenlladoF. J.MottaI. L.HillJ. M. (2021). Modification of biochar with high-energy ball milling: development of porosity and surface acid functional groups. Bioresour. Technol. Rep.15, 100704. 10.1016/j.biteb.2021.100704
62
MarkouG.GeorgakakisD. (2011). Cultivation of filamentous Cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) in agro-industrial wastes and wastewaters: a review. Appl. Energy88 (10), 3389–3401. 10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.12.042
63
MarkouG.NerantzisE. (2013). Microalgae for high-value compounds and biofuels production: a review with focus on cultivation under stress conditions. Biotechnol. Adv.31 (8), 1532–1542. 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2013.07.011
64
MataT. M.MartinsA. A.CaetanoN. S. (2010). Microalgae for biodiesel production and other applications: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.14 (1), 217–232. 10.1016/j.rser.2009.07.020
65
MoshoodT. D.NawanirG.MahmudF. (2021). Microalgae biofuels production: a systematic review on socioeconomic prospects of microalgae biofuels and policy implications. Environ. Challenges5, 100207. 10.1016/j.envc.2021.100207
66
MotaG. C. P.MoraesL. B. S. deOliveiraC. Y. B.OliveiraD. W. S.AbreuJ. L. deDantasD. M. M.et al (2021). Astaxanthin from Haematococcus pluvialis: processes, applications, and market. Prep. Biochem. Biotechnol.52 (5), 598–609. 10.1080/10826068.2021.1966802
67
MuñozR.GuieysseB. (2006). Algal–bacterial processes for the treatment of hazardous contaminants: a review. Water Res.40 (15), 2799–2815. 10.1016/j.watres.2006.06.011
68
NazlooE. K.DaneshM.SarrafzadehM.-H.MoheimaniN. R.EnnaceriH. (2024). Biomass and hydrocarbon production from Botryococcus braunii: a review focusing on cultivation methods. Sci. Total Environ.926, 171734. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.171734
69
NeoriA.ChopinT.TroellM.BuschmannA. H.KraemerG. P.HallingC.et al (2004). Integrated aquaculture: rationale, evolution and state of the art emphasizing seaweed biofiltration in modern mariculture. Aquaculture231 (1–4), 361–391. 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2003.11.015
70
NovaP.MartinsA. P.TeixeiraC.AbreuH.SilvaJ. G.SilvaA. M.et al (2020). Foods with microalgae and seaweeds fostering consumers health: a review on scientific and market innovations. J. Appl. Phycol.32 (3), 1789–1802. 10.1007/s10811-020-02129-w
71
OcchipintiP. S.RussoN.FotiP.ZingaleI. M.PinoA.RomeoF. V.et al (2023). Current challenges of microalgae applications: exploiting the potential of non‐conventional microalgae species. J. Sci. Food Agric.104 (7), 3823–3833. 10.1002/jsfa.13136
72
OchoaA.BilbaoJ.GayuboA. G.CastañoP. (2020). Coke formation and deactivation during catalytic reforming of biomass and waste pyrolysis products: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.119, 109600. 10.1016/j.rser.2019.109600
73
OrdóñezJ. I.CortésS.MaluendaP.SotoI. (2023). Biosorption of heavy metals with algae: critical review of its application in real effluents. Sustainability15 (6), 5521. 10.3390/su15065521
74
Orozco-GonzálezJ. G.Amador-CastroF.Gordillo-SierraA. R.García-CayuelaT.AlperH. S.Carrillo-NievesD. (2022). Opportunities surrounding the use of sargassum biomass as precursor of biogas, bioethanol, and biodiesel production. Front. Mar. Sci.8, 791054. 10.3389/fmars.2021.791054
75
ParkJ. B. K.CraggsR. J.ShiltonA. N. (2011). Wastewater treatment high rate algal ponds for biofuel production. Bioresour. Technol.102 (1), 35–42. 10.1016/j.biortech.2010.06.158
76
Pizarro-LoaizaC. A.AntónA.TorrellasM.Torres-LozadaP.PalatsiJ.BonmatíA. (2021). Environmental, social and health benefits of alternative renewable energy sources. Case study for household biogas digesters in rural areas. J. Clean. Prod.297, 126722. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126722
77
PrasadR.GuptaS. K.ShabnamN.OliveiraC. Y. B.NemaA. K.AnsariF. A.et al (2021). Role of microalgae in global CO2 sequestration: physiological mechanism, recent development, challenges, and future prospective. Sustainability13 (23), 13061. 10.3390/su132313061
78
PruvostJ.Van VoorenG.CogneG.LegrandJ. (2009). Investigation of biomass and lipids production with neochloris oleoabundans in photobioreactor. Bioresour. Technol.100 (23), 5988–5995. 10.1016/j.biortech.2009.06.004
79
PulzO.GrossW. (2004). Valuable products from biotechnology of microalgae. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.65 (6), 635–648. 10.1007/s00253-004-1647-x
80
RaiP. K.LeeS. S.ZhangM.TsangY. F.KimK.-H. (2019). Heavy metals in food crops: health risks, fate, mechanisms, and management. Environ. Int.125, 365–385. 10.1016/j.envint.2019.01.067
81
RawatI.Ranjith KumarR.MutandaT.BuxF. (2011). Dual role of microalgae: Phycoremediation of domestic wastewater and biomass production for sustainable biofuels production. Appl. Energy88 (10), 3411–3424. 10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.11.025
82
RazzakS. A.HossainM. M.LuckyR. A.BassiA. S.de LasaH. (2013). Integrated CO2 capture, wastewater treatment and biofuel production by microalgae culturing—A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.27, 622–653. 10.1016/j.rser.2013.05.063
83
RidingJ. B.FensomeR. A.Soyer-GobillardM.-O.MedlinL. K. (2022). A review of the dinoflagellates and their evolution from fossils to modern. J. Mar. Sci. Eng.11 (1), 1. 10.3390/jmse11010001
84
SchipperK.Al JabriH. M. S. J.WijffelsR. H.BarbosaM. J. (2023). Realizing algae value chains in arid environments: an Arabian Peninsula perspective. Trends Biotechnol.41 (6), 750–759. 10.1016/j.tibtech.2022.11.004
85
SchischkeA.PapenfußP.BremM.KurzP.RathgeberA. W. (2023). Sustainable energy transition and its demand for scarce resources: insights into the German energiewende through a new risk assessment framework. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.176, 113190. 10.1016/j.rser.2023.113190
86
SeveroI. A.DepráM. C.ZepkaL. Q.Jacob-LopesE. (2019). “Carbon dioxide capture and use by microalgae in photobioreactors,” in Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (Elsevier), 151–171. 10.1016/b978-0-12-816229-3.00008-9
87
SrimongkolP.SangtanooP.SongsermP.WatsuntornW.KarnchanatatA. (2022). Microalgae-based wastewater treatment for developing economic and environmental sustainability: current status and future prospects. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.10, 904046. 10.3389/fbioe.2022.904046
88
SutherlandD. L.TurnbullM. H.CraggsR. J. (2014). Increased pond depth improves algal productivity and nutrient removal in wastewater treatment high rate algal ponds. Water Res.53, 271–281. 10.1016/j.watres.2014.01.025
89
ThakurR.ShiratoriT.IshidaK. (2019). Taxon-rich multigene phylogenetic analyses resolve the phylogenetic relationship among deep-branching stramenopiles. Protist170 (5), 125682. 10.1016/j.protis.2019.125682
90
TolboomS. N.Carrillo-NievesD.de Jesús Rostro-AlanisM.de la Cruz QuirozR.BarcelóD.IqbalH. M. N.et al (2019). Algal-based removal strategies for hazardous contaminants from the environment – a review. Sci. Total Environ.665, 358–366. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.129
91
VarolA.UgurluA. (2015). Biogas production from microalgae (Spirulina platensis) in a two stage anaerobic system. Waste Biomass Valorization7 (1), 193–200. 10.1007/s12649-015-9442-8
92
Vijay AnandK. G.EswaranK.GhoshA. (2018). Life cycle impact assessment of a seaweed product obtained from Gracilaria edulis – a potent plant biostimulant. J. Clean. Prod.170, 1621–1627. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.241
93
WaltersC.SteynM.NdlelaL.NocandaX.MoloiM.OberholsterP. (2024). Phycoremediation of industrial wastewater: review of algae consortia. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.22 (7), 6209–6224. 10.1007/s13762-024-06130-5
94
WangB.LiY.WuN.LanC. Q. (2008). CO2 bio-mitigation using microalgae. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.79 (5), 707–718. 10.1007/s00253-008-1518-y
95
WangK.LuC.ZhangH.GuoS.RuG.WangJ.et al (2022). Enhancement effect of defoamer additives on photo-fermentation biohydrogen production process. Bioresour. Technol.352, 127070. 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.127070
96
WangY.LiuS.WangJ.YaoY.ChenY.XuQ.et al (2022). Diatom biodiversity and speciation revealed by comparative analysis of mitochondrial genomes. Front. Plant Sci.13, 749982. 10.3389/fpls.2022.749982
97
WangW.-L.Fernández-MéndezM.ElmerF.GaoG.ZhaoY.HanY.et al (2023). Ocean afforestation is a potentially effective way to remove carbon dioxide. Nat. Commun.14 (1), 4339. 10.1038/s41467-023-39926-z
98
WertzJ.-L.PerezS. (2023). Algae in the bioeconomy. CRC Press. 10.1201/9781003459309
99
WhittonB. A.PottsM. (2012). “Introduction to the cyanobacteria,” in The ecology of cyanobacteria (Kluwer Academic Publishers), 1–11. 10.1007/0-306-46855-7_1
100
WijffelsR. H.BarbosaM. J. (2010). An outlook on microalgal biofuels. Science329 (5993), 796–799. 10.1126/science.1189003
101
WongsodiharjoD.Ismail MasjudY. (2024). Utlize microalgae in order to lowering green house emission by using carbon capture. Sustain. Urban Dev. Environ. Impact J.1 (1), 1–10. 10.61511/sudeij.v1i1.2024.632
102
YangC.LuH.ShiY.ZhuY.WuK.LiuY.et al (2020). Nano molybdenum carbides supported on porous zeolites for kraft lignin decomposition to aromatic monomers in ethanol. Bioresour. Technol. Rep.11, 100484. 10.1016/j.biteb.2020.100484
103
ZahmatkeshS.KarimianM.PourhanasaR.GhodratiI.Hajiaghaei-KeshteliM.IsmailM. A. (2023). Wastewater treatment with algal-based membrane bioreactor for the future: removing emerging contaminants. Chemosphere335, 139134. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.139134
Summary
Keywords
algae-based applications, biofuels, bioremediation, carbon sequestration, climate change, food security, global sustainability challenges
Citation
Das BD and Bhattarai A (2025) The versatility of algae in addressing the global sustainability challenges. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 13:1621817. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2025.1621817
Received
02 May 2025
Accepted
02 September 2025
Published
01 October 2025
Volume
13 - 2025
Edited by
Figueroa L. Felix, University of Malaga, Spain
Reviewed by
Mahdy Elsayed, Cairo University, Egypt
Svetoslav Alexandrov, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (BAS), Bulgaria
Updates
Copyright
© 2025 Das and Bhattarai.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Ajaya Bhattarai, bkajaya@gmail.com, ajaya.bhattarai@mmamc.tu.edu.np, bkajaya@yahoo.com
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.