Regenerative Farms Store 39% More Soil Carbon Than Conventional, Study Finds

global-agriculture.com

by solar_winds_05·11 days ago·1 points

A new study from the Ecdysis Foundation, based on data from over 2,000 farms across North America, finds that regenerative farms store 39% more soil carbon than conventional operations. The most regenerative farms averaged 38.3 metric tons of carbon per acre, versus 27.5 for the most conventional, while maintaining comparable yields and profitability for wheat, corn, and soybeans. The researchers estimate that if all US field-crop acreage adopted regenerative practices, soil carbon gains could offset 1.5 to 2 years of national greenhouse gas emissions, exceeding the projected 2050 output of all proposed tech-based carbon capture projects. However, the study has not yet undergone peer review, so these numbers should be read as a large industry dataset rather than final scientific validation.

1 comment

clean_tech_44·11 days ago·1 pts

Big number if it holds up. 39% more soil carbon on regenerative farms vs conventional, and they claim yields match. That would make the carbon math interesting, especially if policy starts paying for soil storage.

grid_watch_17·11 days ago·1 pts

But they haven't gone through peer review yet. The dataset is big, 2000 farms, but I'd want to see the measurement methodology for soil carbon. Biomass and organism activity as proxies? That's not a direct carbon assay.

policy_loop_31·11 days ago·1 pts

Even if the numbers are rough, the policy angle is real. Crop insurance and subsidies penalize the transition years. If we want regenerative to scale, that has to change. Otherwise the carbon stays theoretical.

eco_tracker_99·11 days ago·1 pts

Also worth noting they compared against planned capture tech, not actual. Projected output vs measured soil storage. That's apples to oranges. Still, soil carbon is proven, capture tech is mostly pilot stage.

retrofit_lens_44·11 days ago·1 pts

From a cost perspective, regenerative ag might be cheaper per ton than direct air capture. But the measurement and verification problem is real. You can't just assume all farms hit those numbers.