Revised estimates of the carbon mitigation potential of UK agricultural land
Abstract
Abstract. The soil sequestration components of recent estimates of the carbon mitigation potential of UK agricultural land were calculated on the basis of a percentage change to the soil carbon stock present in the soil. Recent data suggest that the carbon stock of soil in UK arable land has been overestimated, meaning that potential soil carbon sequestration rates were also overestimated. Here, we present a new estimate of the carbon stock in UK arable land, and present revised estimates for the carbon mitigation potential of UK agricultural land. The stock of soil organic carbon in UK arable land (0–30 cm) is estimated to be 562 Tg, about half of the previous estimate. Consequently, the soil carbon sequestration component of each mitigation option is reduced by about half of previously published values. Since above‐ground carbon accumulation and fossil fuel carbon savings remain unchanged by these new soil carbon data, options with a significant non‐soil carbon mitigation component are reduced by less than those resulting from soil carbon sequestration alone. The best single mitigation option (bioenergy crop production on surplus arable land) accounts for 3.5 Tg C yr −1 , (2.2% of the UK's 1990 CO 2 ‐carbon emissions), whilst an optimal combined land‐use mitigation option accounts for 6.1 Tg C yr −1 (3.9% of the UK's 1990 CO 2 ‐carbon emissions). These revised figures suggest that through manipulation of arable land, the UK could, at best, meet 49% of its contribution to the EU's overall Kyoto CO 2 ‐carbon emission reduction target (8% of 1990 emissions), and 31% of the greater target accepted by the UK (12.5%). Even these reduced estimates show a significant carbon mitigation potential for UK arable land.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The measured soil inorganic carbon stock to 100 mm depth increased from 44 to 79 t of C ha-1 in 18 months, approaching values similar to those reported for organic carbon in arable land [84 t of C ha-1].
“The measured soil inorganic carbon stock to 100 mm depth increased from 44 to 79 t of C ha -1 (0.0044-0.0079 t of C m -2 ) in 18 months, approaching values similar to those reported for organic carbon in arable land [84 t of C ha -1 (0.0085 t of C m -2 )].35”
From Rapid Removal of Atmospheric CO2 by Urban Soils (2015) · cites this paper as [35]
Cites
Total carbon and nitrogen in the soils of the world
BATJES, N. H. (1996) · European Journal of Soil Science · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2389.1996.tb01386.x · Cited by 3,213 · see citing works
Total carbon and nitrogen in the soils of the world
Batjes, N. H. (2014) · European Journal of Soil Science · doi:10.1111/ejss.12114_2 · Cited by 2,556 · see citing works
Smith, P., Powlson, D. S., Smith, J., Falloon, P., & Coleman, K. (2000) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.00331.x · Cited by 373 · see citing works
Self-citationTrends `93: A compendium of data on global change
Lab., T. (. S. O. R. N., Boden, T., USDOE, W., Kaiser, D., Sepanski, R. J., Stoss, F. W., & Logsdon, G. (1994) · doi:10.2172/10106351 · Cited by 369 · see citing works
Carbon in the Vegetation and Soils of Great Britain
MILNE, R., & Brown, T. A. (1997) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1006/jema.1995.0118 · Cited by 262 · see citing works
Self-citationBradbury, N. J., Whitmore, A. P., Hart, P. B. S., & Jenkinson, D. S. (1993) · The Journal of Agricultural Science · doi:10.1017/s0021859600085567 · Cited by 244 · see citing works
The carbon content of soil and its geographical distribution in Great Britain
Howard, P. J. A., Loveland, P. J., Bradley, R. I., Dry, F. T., Howard, D. M., & HOWARD, D. C. (1995) · Soil Use and Management · doi:10.1111/j.1475-2743.1995.tb00488.x · Cited by 148 · see citing works
Meeting the UK's climate change commitments: options for carbon mitigation on agricultural land
Smith, P., Powlson, D. S., Smith, J., Falloon, P., & Coleman, K. (2000) · Soil Use and Management · doi:10.1111/j.1475-2743.2000.tb00162.x · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Carbon cycling and sequestration opportunities in temperate grasslands
Soussana, J.-F., Soussana, J.-F., Loiseau, P., Vuichard, N., Ceschia, E., Balesdent, J., Chevallier, T., & Arrouays, D. (2004) · Soil Use and Management · doi:10.1079/sum2003234 · Cited by 563 · see citing works
Crop Management for Soil Carbon Sequestration
Jarecki, M. K., & Lal, R. (2003) · Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences · doi:10.1080/713608318 · Cited by 396 · see citing works
Bioenergy from “surplus” land: environmental and socio-economic implications
Dauber, J., Brown, C., Fernando, A. L., Finnan, J., Krasuska, E., Ponitka, J., Styles, D., Thrän, D., Van Groenigen, K. J., Weih, M., et al. (2012) · BioRisk · doi:10.3897/biorisk.7.3036 · Cited by 206 · see citing works
Clifton‐Brown, J., Hastings, A., Mos, M., McCalmont, J. P., Ashman, C., Awty‐Carroll, D., Cerazy, J., Chiang, Y., Cosentino, S., Cracroft‐Eley, W., et al. (2017) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12357 · Cited by 192 · see citing works
Manning, D. A. C., Renforth, P., Lopez-Capel, E., Robertson, S., & Ghazireh, N. (2013) · International journal of greenhouse gas control · doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.012 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Rapid Removal of Atmospheric CO2 by Urban Soils
Washbourne, C.-L., Lopez-Capel, E., Renforth, P., Ascough, P. L., & Manning, D. A. C. (2015) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es505476d · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Manning, D. A. C. (2008) · Mineralogical Magazine · doi:10.1180/minmag.2008.072.2.639 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Comparison of approaches for estimating carbon sequestration at the regional scale
Falloon, P., Smith, P., Szabó, J., & Pásztor, L. (2002) · Soil Use and Management · doi:10.1111/j.1475-2743.2002.tb00236.x · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Self-citationPotential effects of future land-use change on regional carbon stocks in the UK
Cantarello, E., Newton, A. C., & Hill, R. A. (2011) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2010.10.001 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Bioenergy crop production on reclaimed mine land in the North Appalachian region, USA
Ussiri, D. A. N., Guzman, J. G., Lal, R., & Somireddy, U. (2019) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2019.04.024 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
- Authors
- Smith, P., Milne, R., Powlson, D. S., Smith, J. U., Falloon, P., & Coleman, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Aberdeen (GB)
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Smith, P.
- Venue
- Soil Use and Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-12
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 293-295
- ISSN
- 0266-0032 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-2743
- OpenAlex
- W2010508154
- Cited by
- 115
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 13.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Soil Use and Management (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
- Keywords
- soil organic carbon, carbon sequestration, agricultural land, arable land, carbon mitigation potential, energy crops, land use change, Kyoto Protocol targets
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
