Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T05:17:43.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparative examination of the efficiency of sequestering carbon in US agricultural soils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

John M. Antle ,
Susan M. Capalbo ,
Siân Mooney ,
Edward T. Elliott  and
Keith H. Paustian
John M. Antle
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59715
Susan M. Capalbo
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59715
Siân Mooney*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59715
Edward T. Elliott
Affiliation:
School of Natural Resource Sciences, University of Nebraska, Box 830758, Lincoln NE 68583
Keith H. Paustian
Affiliation:
Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523.
*
S. Mooney ([email protected]).
Get access

Abstract

This paper demonstrates the need to integrate biophysical and economic data to assess the competitiveness of US agriculture to provide soil carbon (C) and participate in a market for C credits. The paper discusses alternative methods of calculating the costs of soil C sequestration and compares the cost of sequestering soil C in Iowa and Montana. Results indicate that the opportunity cost per Mg of sequestered C varies in response to regional resource endowments and net returns. Economic models show that Montana could sequester a relatively small amount of soil C annually at a lower opportunity cost per Mg than Iowa, but Iowa can sequester larger quantities more efficiently. These results are compared with estimates of the cost of C sequestration from other domestic and international studies, and suggest that US agriculture could be competitive in domestic or international markets for C reduction credits.

Keywords

carbon creditscarbon reduction creditscarbon sequestrationeconomics of carbon sequestrationsoil carbon storageUS agriculture
Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , September 2002 , pp. 109 - 115
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Antle, J.M., and Capalbo, S.M.. 2001. Econometric-process models for integrated assessment of agricultural production systems. Amer. J. Agric. Econ. 83(2):389–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Antle, J.M., and Mooney, S.. 2001. Designing efficient policies for agricultural soil carbon sequestration. In Kimble, J. (ed.). Agriculture Practices and Policies for Carbon Sequestration in Soil. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL, in press.Google Scholar
3.Antle, J.M., Capalbo, S.M., Mooney, S., Elliott, E.T., and Paustian, K.H.. 2001a. Economic analysis of agricultural soil carbon sequestration: An integrated assessment approach. Draft working paper. Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics, Montana State University, Bozeman. Web site http://www.climate.montana.edu.Google Scholar
4.Antle, J.M., Capalbo, S.M., Mooney, S., and Paustian, K.H.. 2001b. Spatial heterogeneity, contract design and the efficiency of carbon sequestration policies for agriculture. Draft working paper. Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics, Montana State University, Bozeman.Google Scholar
5.CAST. 1992. Preparing U.S. Agriculture for Global Climate Change. Task Force Report No. 199, Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
6.Franzluebbers, A.J., and Arshad, M.A.. 1996. Soil organic matter pools during early adoption of conservation tillage in northwest Canada. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 60:1422–1427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.IPCC. 1996. Climate change 1995–Impacts, adaptations and mitigation of climate change. In Watson, R.T., Zinyowera, M.C., Moss, R.H., and Dokken, D.J. (eds.). Scientific-Technical Analysis. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
8.IPCC. 2000. Land use, land-use change, and forestry. In Watson, R.T., Noble, I.R., Bolin, B., Ravindranath, N.H., Verardo, D.J., and Dokken, D.J. (eds.). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
9.Lal, R., Kimble, L.M., Follett, R.F., and Cole, C.V.. 1998. The Potential of U.S. Cropland to Sequester C and Mitigate the Greenhouse Effect. Ann Arbor Press, Chelsea, MI.Google Scholar
10.Mann, L.K. 1986. Changes in soil C storage after cultivation. Soil Sci. 142:279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Mitchell, P.D., Lakshminarayan, P.G., Otake, T., and Babcock, B.A.. 1997. The impact of soil conservation policies on carbon sequestration in agricultural soils of the central U.S. In Lal, R., Kimble, J.M., Follett, R.F., and Stewart, B.A. (eds.). Management of Carbon Sequestration in Soil. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. p. 155–142.Google Scholar
12.Parks, P.J., and Hardie, I.W.. 1995. Least-cost forest carbon reserves: Cost-effective subsidies to convert marginal agricultural land to forests. Land Econ. 71:122–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Parton, W.J., Schimel, D.S., Cole, C.V., and Ojima, D.S.. 1987. Analysis of factors controlling soil organic matter levels in Great Plains grasslands. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 51:1173–1179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Paustian, K., Parton, W.J., and Persson, J.. 1992. Modeling soil organic matter in organic amended and nitrogen fertilized long-term plots. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 56:476–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Paustian, K., Elliott, E.T., Peterson, G.A., and Killian, K.. 1996. Modelling climate, CO2 and management impacts on soil carbon in semi-arid agroecosystems. Plant Soil 187:351–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Pautsch, G.R., Kurkalova, L.A., Babcock, B., and Kling, C.L.. 2001. The efficiency of sequestering carbon in agricultural soils. Contemporary Econ. Pol. 19(2): 123–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Rasmussen, P.E., and Parton, W.J.. 1994. Long-term effects of residue management in wheat fallow: I. inputs, yield and soil organic matter. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 58:523–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Sandor, R.L., and Skees, J.R.. 1999. Creating a market for carbon emissions: Opportunities for U.S. farmers. Choices (Third Quarter): 13–17.Google Scholar
19.Stavins, R.N. 1998. A methodological investigation of the costs of carbon sequestration. J. Appl. Econ. 1(2):231–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Stavins, R.N. 1999. The costs of carbon sequestration: A revealed-preference approach. Amer. Econ. Rev. 89(4):994–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Tiessen, H., Stewart, J.W.B., and Betany, J.R.. 1982. Cultivation effects on the amount and concentration of C, N and P in grassland soils. Agron. J. 74:831–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.UNFCCC. 1998. Report of the Conference of the Parties on its Third Session, held at Kyoto. 1–11 December 1997. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Web site http://www.unfccc.de/resource/convkp.html. Viewed October 2000.Google Scholar
23.USDA. 1997. 1997 Census of Agriculture. National Agricultural Statistics Service, U.S. Dept of Agriculture, Washington, DC. Web site http://www.usda.gov/nass. Viewed 9 01 2001.Google Scholar
24.Watson, R.T., Noble, I.R., Bolin, B., Ravindranath, N.H., Verardo, D.J., and Dokken, D.J.. 2000. Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry. A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar