Challenges in developing effective policy for soil carbon sequestration: perspectives on additionality, leakage, and permanence

Thamo, Tas; Pannell, David J.

doi:10.1080/14693062.2015.1075372

Cited by 54 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of agricultural land to sequester carbon is a much‐discussed climate‐change mitigation option (e.g. Harper et al ; Polglase et al ; Bryan et al ; Thamo and Pannell ). Indeed, under Australia’s Emissions Reduction Fund, landholders could voluntarily undertake management changes to sequester carbon on their land and then claim and sell (at the carbon price) ‘credits’ for the carbon they have stored (ComLaw ).…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 69%

Climate change reduces the mitigation obtainable from sequestration in an Australian farming system

Thamo

Addai

Kragt

et al. 2019

Aus J Agri & Res Econ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural research on climate change generally follows two themes: (i) impact and adaptation or (ii) mitigation and emissions. Despite both being simultaneously relevant to future agricultural systems, the two are usually studied separately. By contrast, this study jointly compares the potential impacts of climate change and the effects of mitigation policy on farming systems in the central region of Western Australia's grainbelt, using the results of several biophysical models integrated into a whole-farm bioeconomic model. In particular, we focus on the potential for interactions between climate impacts and mitigation activities. Results suggest that, in the study area, farm profitability is much more sensitive to changes in climate than to a mitigation policy involving a carbon price on agricultural emissions. Climate change reduces the profitability of agricultural production and, as a result, reduces the opportunity cost of reforesting land for carbon sequestration. Nonetheless, the financial attractiveness of reforestation does not necessarily improve because climate change also reduces tree growth and, therefore, the income from sequestration. Consequently, at least for the study area, climate change has the potential to reduce the amount of abatement obtainable from sequestrationa result potentially relevant to the debate about the desirability of sequestration as a mitigation option. * We thank Jenny Carter for her assistance with the 3PG modelling and Brett Bryan for his feedback on drafts of this manuscript.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 69%

Climate change reduces the mitigation obtainable from sequestration in an Australian farming system

Thamo

Addai

Kragt

et al. 2019

Aus J Agri & Res Econ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Soil is the most abundant terrestrial store of organic carbon (C) (Batjes, 1996). Soil organic C is an indicator of soil quality because it affects nutrient cycling, aggregate stability, structure, water infiltration, and vulnerability to erosion (Tiessen et al, 1994;Lal, 2013). Management of soil organic C is central to maintaining soil health, ensuring food security, and mitigating climate change (Lal, 2004(Lal, , 2016b.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proximal sensing for soil carbon accounting

England

Rossel

2018

SOIL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Maintaining or increasing soil organic carbon (C) is vital for securing food production and for mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, climate change, and land degradation. Some land management practices in cropping, grazing, horticultural, and mixed farming systems can be used to increase organic C in soil, but to assess their effectiveness, we need accurate and cost-efficient methods for measuring and monitoring the change. To determine the stock of organic C in soil, one requires measurements of soil organic C concentration, bulk density, and gravel content, but using conventional laboratory-based analytical methods is expensive. Our aim here is to review the current state of proximal sensing for the development of new soil C accounting methods for emissions reporting and in emissions reduction schemes. We evaluated sensing techniques in terms of their rapidity, cost, accuracy, safety, readiness, and their state of development. The most suitable method for measuring soil organic C concentrations appears to be visible–near-infrared (vis–NIR) spectroscopy and, for bulk density, active gamma-ray attenuation. Sensors for measuring gravel have not been developed, but an interim solution with rapid wet sieving and automated measurement appears useful. Field-deployable, multi-sensor systems are needed for cost-efficient soil C accounting. Proximal sensing can be used for soil organic C accounting, but the methods need to be standardized and procedural guidelines need to be developed to ensure proficient measurement and accurate reporting and verification. These are particularly important if the schemes use financial incentives for landholders to adopt management practices to sequester soil organic C. We list and discuss requirements for developing new soil C accounting methods based on proximal sensing, including requirements for recording, verification, and auditing.

show abstract

“…The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change provide guidelines for the assessment, monitoring, and verification of soil organic C stocks in their GHG inventory methodologies (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ). The Australian Government's Emission Reduction Fund (ERF) has, to date, produced and legislated two methodologies that can be used by farmers and landowners to be financially rewarded for capturing and accumulating additional organic C in soil, subject to a policy framework that ensures additionality, permanence, and no leakage—see Thamo and Pannell (). The first method, 'Sequestering carbon in soils in grazing systems' is based on direct measurement (Department of the Environment, ), whereas the other, 'Estimating sequestration of carbon in soil using default values' (Department of the Environment, ), is based on modelling.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The cost‐efficiency and reliability of two methods for soil organic C accounting

Rossel

Brus

2018

Land Degrad Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sequestering organic carbon (C) in soil can help to combat land degradation, improve food security, and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. But we need reliable, cost‐efficient methods to assess, monitor, and verify the change. Here, we compared two methods for the direct measurement of soil organic C stocks and for monitoring the change. Our aims were to quantify the soil organic C stock in two carbon estimation areas, under cropping and grazing, using composite sampling with two designs and proximal sensing. We compared the two schemes in terms of the (a) accuracy of the estimated C stocks, the total cost, and the cost‐efficiency, calculated as the ratio of the accuracy of the estimate and the total cost, and (b) uncertainty of the estimated standard error of the estimated C stocks. We found that compositing was cheaper but more inaccurate than sensing. Sensing was 1.2 to 2.1 times more cost‐efficient than compositing. We also found that the uncertainty of the estimated standard errors from compositing was large and unreliable, which can hinder the quantification of a minimum detectable difference in organic C stocks. We show that the sensor‐derived spatially explicit data can also be used to map the C stocks, which can help to optimise the sampling design in subsequent monitoring rounds. Our findings have important implications for the development of C measurement and monitoring methodologies. Visible–near infrared and gamma attenuation sensing can accurately, cost‐efficiently, and reliably monitor and verify changes in soil C stocks.

show abstract

Challenges in developing effective policy for soil carbon sequestration: perspectives on additionality, leakage, and permanence

Cited by 54 publications

References 50 publications

Climate change reduces the mitigation obtainable from sequestration in an Australian farming system

Climate change reduces the mitigation obtainable from sequestration in an Australian farming system

Proximal sensing for soil carbon accounting

The cost‐efficiency and reliability of two methods for soil organic C accounting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About