This research summary explains a practical, large-scale way to mitigate climate change by changing agriculture. The core idea is simple: plants already cycle enormous amounts of carbon, but most of it returns to the atmosphere when organic matter decomposes. If we divert a small fraction of that flow and embed it into soils as stable carbon, we can draw down roughly 10 billion tonnes of carbon each year. The approach also improves food security, water efficiency, and farm incomes.
21 April 2011
The Core Claim
Climate change could be resolved by modifying the global agricultural system to absorb around 10 billion tonnes of atmospheric carbon annually. The technology required to do this has been under development for some thirty-five years.
The logic is not based on a small, marginal improvement. It is based on working with the largest carbon flows on the planet and redirecting a small portion of them into a stable form inside agricultural soils.
Why Agriculture Matters
Plants are already absorbing roughly thirty times man-made emissions. However, they also return a similar amount back to the atmosphere through the decomposition of organic waste. In fact, decomposing vegetation is described as the single largest source of atmospheric carbon in this cycle.
This means the opportunity is not about persuading plants to absorb more carbon (they already absorb vast amounts). The opportunity is about changing what happens after plant material dies, so that a portion of that carbon is not rapidly released back to the air.
A Small Diversion With a Large Effect
The proposal argues it only requires about 3% of the carbon flow from decomposing vegetation to be diverted and embedded into agricultural soils to resolve climate change at scale.
This is a key point: the climate problem looks overwhelming when framed as “reduce emissions everywhere”, but it becomes more manageable when framed as “redirect a small percentage of a massive natural carbon flow” into stable soil carbon.
The Two-Stage Process
The approach is presented as a two-stage system using two types of land: “harvesting” land to capture organic material, and “embedding” land to convert that organic material into stable soil carbon.
Stage 1: Harvesting Land (Capturing Organic Material)
In this stage, land is dedicated to producing or collecting large volumes of organic material. The summary proposes several practical sources:
- Low-productivity land can be converted to fast-growing trees which are then pruned to generate biomass.
- Forest and urban organic waste can also supply input organic material.
- Some existing farm systems already generate significant organic material, including crops such as
sugar cane, bananas, and fruit trees.
The emphasis is not on creating a new carbon source, but on using organic material that already exists in large quantities and is currently treated as “waste” or is allowed to decompose rapidly.
Stage 2: Embedding Land (Locking Carbon Into Soil)
The captured organic material is then transported to “embedding” land—typically existing cropping land—where the soil microbiology is modified so carbon is embedded into the soil rather than rapidly released back into the atmosphere.
The summary highlights a specific biological shift: replacing a large proportion of bacterial decomposition with decomposition pathways dominated by mycorrhizal fungi. This is achieved by:
- Initial inoculation (introducing the desired fungal biology).
- Maintaining moisture and oxygen levels so the system continues to function.
The intent is not to stop decomposition completely (which is not possible), but to change the balance of processes so a meaningful fraction of carbon becomes stable within soil rather than returning quickly to the air.
How Much Land Would This Require?
The summary estimates that achieving ten billion tonnes of carbon capture would require approximately:
- Two million square kilometres of harvesting land
- One million square kilometres of embedding land
This is a large area, but the argument is that such land is available, particularly in rapidly developing countries where there is both scale and strong incentive to improve food production and land resilience.
Why Developing Countries Are Central
The proposal states that the required land area is available in rapidly developing countries and suggests China could act as the lead country in establishing the process.
The point is practical: the land, the agricultural workforce, the need for reliable food supply, and the ability to roll out large programs can align in countries that are expanding and modernising their agricultural systems.
Secondary Benefits
The summary stresses that this is not only a climate project. If implemented properly, there are strong secondary benefits:
- Food productivity and reliability increase.
- Water and nutrients are used more effectively.
- Farmers gain an additional income stream, which can help reduce conflict between developed and developing nations by creating a direct financial mechanism tied to climate benefit.
In other words, the same actions that improve soil carbon can also strengthen the farm business and the wider food system, making adoption more realistic than approaches that require sacrifice without immediate benefit.
The Critical Next Step: Measurement for Carbon Trading
A major barrier to adoption is not only technology, but measurement. The next critical step is to develop a simple method of quantifying the carbon absorbed so it can be used for carbon trading.
The summary notes that this research can be undertaken by many scientific institutions. It gives one concrete example: the Farmland Irrigated Research Institute in XinXiang, China has agreed to undertake formal scientific work. However, funding is needed.
Without measurement and verification, carbon markets cannot function properly, and farmers cannot be paid reliably for outcomes. The measurement problem is therefore not a side issue—it is central to large-scale implementation.
Why a “Grand Scheme” Is Needed
Despite the years since the Rio and Kyoto summits, atmospheric carbon is increasing at an even faster rate. The summary argues that focusing mainly on small-scale or financial schemes—such as windmills and solar power—will not resolve climate change on its own.
The claim here is direct: we need a plan capable of absorbing large amounts of carbon, and we need advocates willing to take such a plan to international climate negotiations, including the United Nations conference in South Africa that year.
More Information and Contact
If you think you can help, would like to be involved, or could suggest another person who may be interested in this project, please make contact.
colinaustin@bigpond.com
Download ‘How Agriculture Can Capture Carbon and Help Resolve Climate Change’ (full PDF)
