It can but I think we should discourage people of doing so.
Hiding side effects and ressource access behind Seq is full of surprises. Doing so is equivalent to Haskell’s lazy IO and it seems everyone there knows its perils by now – maybe we can avoid enticing people to do the same mistakes.
When you deal with ressources folds are a better idea since the inversion of control forces a (lifetime) scope on you – unless you start using that nifty OCaml 5 feature to escape, this old blog post by @gasche could be refreshed.