Farmland transitioning into carbon molecules, symbolizing soil carbon sequestration.

Soil Carbon Sequestration: Can It Really Save Us From Climate Change?

Kai Mendoza in Climate & Environment August 2025 • 4 min read.

"Dive into the complexities of soil carbon sequestration and discover why this climate mitigation tool might be more elusive than we think."

The pressing need to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in our atmosphere stands as one of the monumental environmental challenges of our time. To tackle this, humanity can focus on two primary strategies: curbing fossil fuel emissions and developing methods to remove greenhouse gases already released into the atmosphere.

Industry, transportation, and domestic activities release approximately 10 gigatons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually. The concept of capturing atmospheric carbon dioxide and storing it as organic carbon in the biosphere has garnered attention as a potential supplementary strategy to mitigate the pace of climate change.

For nearly two decades, soil scientists have been exploring the possibility of sequestering carbon in soil organic matter. The underlying idea is that millennia of agricultural practices have depleted global soil carbon by about 116 gigatons. By adopting new agricultural techniques, it's proposed that a significant portion of this carbon could be restored, turning cultivated soils into valuable tools for climate change mitigation.

The Barriers to Soil Carbon Sequestration: Why It's Not So Simple

Farmland transitioning into carbon molecules, symbolizing soil carbon sequestration.

Despite the seemingly straightforward concept, significant cultural, economic, and physical obstacles hinder the effectiveness of soil carbon sequestration as a primary climate mitigation strategy. The implementation of soil carbon sequestration on a global scale faces complex challenges. These challenges begin with a researcher's limited understanding of their stakeholders and a lack of appreciation for the complexity of the policy implementation involved.

Consider the "4 per mille" initiative, a French initiative aiming to increase the quantity of carbon contained in soils by 0.4% per year. While this goal is physically achievable in theory, the practical, political, and economic aspects of implementing such a plan are often overlooked. Achieving this initiative's objectives would require immediate and sustained action on all lands across the Earth.

Cultural Differences: Farmers, particularly in the United States, tend to be conservative, valuing personal independence and authority. This can lead to suspicion of environmental initiatives proposed by academics and government entities.
Economic Realities: Many farmers reject the idea that human activities are causing climate change, viewing it as government overreach. A recent survey in California indicated that farmers are more concerned about increased government regulations than the direct impacts of climate change on their operations.
Land Ownership Complexities: In the U.S., a significant portion of farmland is operated by renters who may lack the financial incentive to invest in long-term conservation programs. Absentee landowners may also have little interest in these initiatives.

These factors contribute to the low adoption rates of current U.S. government programs aimed at promoting soil health and carbon sequestration, where only 2% to 5% of croplands receive funding under the largest conservation programs. Philosophical and economic obstacles further complicate the landscape, excluding farms exceeding certain income levels from receiving conservation support.

Focusing on Adaptation: A More Realistic Approach

While soil carbon sequestration presents challenges as a primary climate change solution, improving soil health remains crucial for adapting to a changing climate. Instead of emphasizing carbon sequestration as the primary goal, a more effective approach involves prioritizing improvements in water management, soil erosion prevention, and food security. This involves adapting soils and agricultural practices to withstand a rapidly changing climate, ensuring the continued production of food.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.1073/pnas.1815901115, Alternate LINK

Title: Soil Carbon Sequestration Is An Elusive Climate Mitigation Tool

Subject: Multidisciplinary

Journal: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Publisher: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Authors: Ronald Amundson, Léopold Biardeau

Published: 2018-11-13

Everything You Need To Know

What are the two main strategies that can be used to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere?

The two primary strategies for stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations involve reducing fossil fuel emissions and developing methods to remove greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere. The reduction of emissions aims to decrease the influx of new greenhouse gases, while removal techniques focus on mitigating the impact of existing atmospheric pollutants like carbon dioxide.

What is the core idea behind using soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change, and how does it relate to historical agricultural practices?

The central concept of soil carbon sequestration involves capturing atmospheric carbon dioxide and storing it as organic carbon in the soil. This approach is based on the understanding that millennia of agricultural practices have depleted global soil carbon by an estimated 116 gigatons. The proposition is that by implementing new agricultural techniques, a significant portion of this lost carbon could be restored, transforming cultivated soils into a valuable tool for climate change mitigation.

What are some of the major barriers hindering the widespread adoption of soil carbon sequestration as a primary climate mitigation strategy?

Several significant cultural, economic, and physical barriers impede the effectiveness of soil carbon sequestration. Culturally, the independence and authority valued by farmers, especially in the U.S., can lead to skepticism towards environmental initiatives proposed by academics and government entities. Economically, many farmers do not believe that human activities are causing climate change and view such initiatives as government overreach. Land ownership complexities also play a role, as renters may lack the financial incentive to invest in long-term conservation programs. Absentee landowners may also have little interest in such initiatives.

Can you explain the "4 per mille" initiative and what challenges does it face in practical implementation?

The "4 per mille" initiative is a French effort that aims to increase the quantity of carbon contained in soils by 0.4% per year. While theoretically achievable, the practical, political, and economic aspects of implementing such a plan pose significant challenges. Achieving this goal would require immediate and sustained action on all lands across the Earth, which is difficult to coordinate and enforce due to varying national interests, economic constraints, and agricultural practices. Furthermore, it often overlooks the varying geographical and ecological factors influencing carbon sequestration rates.

Why might focusing on soil health and adaptation be a more realistic approach than solely emphasizing soil carbon sequestration for combating climate change?

While soil carbon sequestration faces challenges as a primary climate change solution, improving soil health remains crucial for adapting to a changing climate. Prioritizing improvements in water management, soil erosion prevention, and food security can lead to more tangible and immediate benefits. This involves adapting soils and agricultural practices to withstand a rapidly changing climate, ensuring the continued production of food. It also involves dealing with tangible issues that are more directly visible and impactful to farmers, such as soil fertility and water availability, which can foster greater cooperation and engagement.