Science Forums 2

[Michaelangelica]

Show us the money
Carbon-Friendly Farming

* don’t plough
* don’t compact
* don’t burn

But could it make money? While soil carbon sequestration has no formal support from federal or state government legislation or policy, moves are afoot to lay the groundwork. Landcare, and the NSW Farmers Association are pushing for a trading exchange for carbon farming. The NSW Commissioner for Natural Resources John Williams said in February that he strongly supports soil carbon sequestration, saying it “could be a consistent revenue stream [for farmers] … so we can actually address the climate change problem.”
Scientists sample soil Scientists sample soilMethods for sampling soil for measurment of carbon content (above).

There are several groups who are trying it out on a small scale, such as NSW farmer Michael Kiely. Meanwhile, in March this year, a group called Carbon For Life launched a soil carbon accreditation scheme in Western Australia. The scheme will pay certain farmers $90 for every tonne of carbon they sequester in their soils (this amount is based on the going rate on the European Carbon Exchange market).

Farmers from the north and the south coast areas of the state were invited to apply to set up areas on their properties where they could try out different methods of sequestering carbon. Carbon for Life spokesperson Christine Jones says if a farmer was able to increase soil carbon by 0.15 per cent per year, they could earn $21.20 per hectare. If this carbon was sequestered over 80 ha of land (the maximum allowable under the scheme), the farmer could potentially earn $1600/year, potentially for several decades until the soil carbon reached equilibrium.

The first three years of the trial has been funded by mining company Rio Tinto, which, when compulsory federal emissions credit trading is introduced into Australia in 2012, will presumably be looking for opportunities to offset the emissions from its business activities.

Challenges & Obstacles

Even fans of soil carbon sequestration agree the scheme has a number of technical hurdles. One is measuring soil carbon gains in the soil, given that soil carbon levels vary naturally between different soil types and different rainfall areas.


Agricultural practices detrimental to soil carbon levels
Ploughing and burning off - two farming practices which reduce soil carbon levels. Pic: Brian Murphy

Another problem is ensuring that the promised sequestration actually happens – which is why the Australian Soil Carbon Accreditation Scheme recommends farmers only be paid retrospectively for the carbon they sequester.

Another sticking point is how to ensure that the carbon that farmers have already been paid for stays in the ground. In fact there is no guarantee that this won’t happen, but neither can emission reduction be made permanent. These and other issues will no doubt exercise the minds of those attending a major expo on carbon farming to be held in Mudgee, NSW in November.

Meanwhile, industrialised countries continue to struggle with how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 60 per cent by the year 2050, the target recommended by the Kyoto Protocol.

It may well be that soil carbon sequestration could buy us those precious few decades to get the house in order and reduce emissions going into the atmosphere in the first place. And at the same time Australia’s soils — which have taken such a battering over the past several hundred years — may get a new lease of life.

The Carbon Farmers - Features - The Lab - Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Gateway to Science
Good simple, well written, clear, article worth reading.
I have printed out a copy to study it further.