Soil Carbon Industry Group

This is a significant opportunity for enhancing the best public policy instrument for building soil carbon in the world. Will you be making a submission?

Australia just posted its hottest March on record by a large margin. Mean temperatures were 2.41C warmer than the 1961-90 baseline used by the @BoM_au, almost 0.4 degrees warmer than the previous hottest March, in 2019.

Soil Is Dying—And Farmers Are Paying the Price Agriculture is at a breaking point. Soil degradation is costing $400 billion annually in lost productivity worldwide. Yet, regenerating soil health remains one of the most underrated investment opportunities in agriculture. Why Does This Matter? Degraded soils lead to: 1. Lower crop yields 2. Increased fertilizer dependency 3. Poor water retention, increasing drought risks 4. Higher operational costs But investing in soil regeneration isn’t just about sustainability—it’s about profitability and long-term resilience. The Business Impact of Soil Regeneration 1. Higher Yields & Profit Margins → Healthy soils increase crop productivity by up to 40% while reducing input costs. 2. Reduced Fertilizer & Water Costs → Soil with higher organic matter holds 25x more water, cutting irrigation and fertilizer needs. 3.Stronger Market Position → Regenerative products fetch premium prices, aligning with consumer demand for sustainability. 4. Carbon Sequestration Benefits → Healthy soils act as carbon sinks, creating potential revenue streams from carbon credits. 5. Long-Term Land Value Appreciation → Investing in soil health protects and increases land value over time. How to Start Regenerating Soil Profitably? 1. Adopt Cover Cropping → Prevents erosion, enhances microbial life, and reduces fertilizer use. 2.Use Biological Fertilizers → Enhances soil fertility while reducing chemical dependency. 3.Implement No-Till or Reduced-Till Practices → Preserves soil structure and organic matter. 4.Integrate Livestock Grazing → Supports nutrient cycling and improves soil organic matter. 5.Precision Agriculture & Soil Testing → Data-driven soil management reduces waste and maximizes efficiency. The Future of Soil is Profitable Investing in soil regeneration is no longer a cost—it’s a business strategy for higher yields, lower costs, and stronger financial returns. Farmers, agronomists, and investors—what’s your take on soil regeneration? Drop your thoughts in the comments! Dr Suzie Soil Health Expert (SHE) #DrSuzie #SoilHealthExpert #CultivateAgri #Presica #GreenSoilSolution #SustainableFarming #SoilHealth #RegenerativeAgriculture #FarmInnovation #AgTech #PrecisionAg #SoilTesting #WaterConservation #SmartFarming #SoilRegeneration #ClimateSmartAg #EcoFarming

What Soil Tests Reveal About Farm Profitability A few years ago, I visited a farm in Malaysia where the owner was struggling with declining yields despite increasing fertilizer use. When we conducted a soil test, the results were eye-opening: 1. High phosphorus levels—yet more P was being applied every season. 2. Low organic matter, leading to poor nutrient retention. 3.Imbalanced pH, reducing nutrient availability. The solution? Instead of adding more chemical inputs, we focused on soil biology, organic matter, and precision fertilization—and within a season, yields rebounded while costs dropped. This isn’t just a Malaysian problem. Across the world: 1. In the U.S., over-application of nitrogen has led to groundwater contamination and wasted costs. 2. In Europe, stricter fertilizer regulations are forcing farmers to adopt more efficient soil testing practices. 3. In Africa and South Asia, degraded soils mean fertilizer efficiency is as low as 30%, leading to massive financial losses. What Soil Tests Uncover That Spreadsheets Can’t 1.Nutrient excess & waste Many farmers unknowingly apply too much fertilizer, increasing costs without benefits. Soil tests reveal what’s already available—helping to cut unnecessary inputs. 2.Hidden deficiencies A farm may seem well-fertilized, yet micronutrient deficiencies (like zinc, boron, or sulfur) quietly limit yields. Only a soil test can identify these gaps. 3. pH imbalances In Malaysia, acidic soils are a common issue in oil palm and paddy fields, reducing nutrient availability. Correcting pH first makes fertilizers far more effective. 4.Soil organic matter & structure Good soil holds water, cycles nutrients, and supports microbes—none of which chemical fertilizers can fix. Soil tests measure carbon and biological health, key indicators of long-term profitability. 5. The ROI of regenerative practices Soil tests help farmers track improvements from cover cropping, compost use, and microbial inoculants—showing that healthier soils mean lower costs and better yields. The Takeaway? Test Before You Invest. Farming isn’t about adding more inputs—it’s about making smarter decisions. A single soil test can save thousands in wasted fertilizer. When was the last time you tested your soil? What insights did you gain? Let’s discuss. (P.S. If this was helpful, consider resharing so more farmers can benefit. ) #DrSuzie #SoilHealthExpert #CultivateAgri #Presica #GreenSoilSolution #RegenerativeAgriculture #HealthySoil #MalaysiaAgriculture Dr Suzie Soil Health Expert

Building Organic Matter Naturally? Most Farms Are Doing It Wrong. Here’s why “adding compost” is NOT the same as regenerating soil. Let’s clear the air. Most farmers believe that improving organic matter is just a matter of: “Add more mulch. Throw some manure. Wait patiently.” But that mindset is decades behind the science. And it's why most farms—after 5+ years—still struggle to see even a 1% increase in soil organic matter. Here’s What No One’s Telling You: 1. You don’t build organic matter. 2. You engineer the biological system that builds it FOR you. -Mulching isn’t enough. -Composting without biological activation is slow and inefficient. -Cover cropping fails without microbial synergy and root depth. What the Best Farms Are Doing Differently 1. Malaysia: Progressive oil palm farms are stacking fronds, applying targeted microbes, and using humic acids to decompose biomass faster—and deeper. 2. Brazil: Sugarcane growers are combining biochar, legume-rooted covers, and fungal-rich compost to increase OM by 2–3% in just 5 years. 3. Europe: Regenerative pioneers focus on liquid carbon pathways via root exudates, reduced tillage, and diverse perennial plantings. They’re not “adding” OM—they’re growing it from the inside out. The Real Strategy for Building Organic Matter Naturally 1. Root-Driven Carbon Input → Tap-rooted plants + deep-rooting perennials feed carbon below the surface. 2. Biology-First Approach → Feed microbial life with molasses, fish hydrolysate, and compost teas. 3. Structural Layering → Biomass + manure + biochar + fungal inoculants = long-lasting humus. 4. Minimized Disruption → Every tillage pass resets microbial succession. Less is more. 5. Data-Driven Monitoring → Track respiration rates, infiltration, and aggregate stability—not just OM %. The Takeaway: You can’t “add” your way to healthy soil. You must activate it biologically. Organic matter is not a product—it’s a consequence of a living, thriving soil system. Farmers, agronomists, and soil strategists—what’s your best method for building organic matter? Share your techniques, lessons, and field-tested insights. Tag someone who still thinks compost alone is enough. #DrSuzie #SoilDoctorByDrSuzie #SoilHealthExpert #GreenSoilSolution #SmartFarming #SoilRegeneration #BuildOrganicMatter #PrecisionAg #SustainableFarming #AgriTech #MicrobialFarming #CarbonFarming #MalaysiaAgriculture #FarmInnovation Dr Suzie Soil Health Expert (SHE)

Fungi are indeed the secret sauce in conservation… (with a particularly important role in cropping soils)

New research sheds light on the incredible, invisible mycelial networks beneath our feet—where plants and fungi engage in a complex trade of carbon and nutrients. Using cutting-edge robotic imaging, scientists have uncovered how mycorrhizal fungi form efficient, dynamic underground supply chains. This groundbreaking study reveals the fascinating behaviors of these networks and their crucial role in carbon sequestration. Repost 🔁: New Scientist 🎥 Dr. Loreto Oyarte Galvez and Dr. Corentin Bisot/SPUN (SPUN | Society for the Protection of Underground Networks)

💧 Understanding how subsoil conditions affect a crop’s ability to access water is an important step in improving both productivity and water use efficiency, as transpiration is linked to crop yields.   The Soil CRC’s ‘Integrated solutions for accessing soil moisture’ project has helped to quantify crop responses to different soil management practices, on key soils across 4 cropping regions in WA, Vic, NSW and Qld.   The project established 1 medium-term and 3 long-term trial sites to test soil amelioration techniques on sugarcane and broadacre crops such as barley, lupin, faba bean, canola and wheat.   We spoke to Project Leader Dr Murray Hart to learn about our research findings and find out what comes next 👉 https://lnkd.in/gMdyasRC   NSW Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development Agriculture Victoria Murdoch University Charles Sturt University Burdekin Productivity Services #soilresearch #soilscience #soilmoisture

A fascinating new study by Bar-On and colleagues in Science today shows that only a small fraction of the total carbon sequestered by terrestrial ecosystems is stored in living biomass. Instead, most of the carbon ends up in organic non-living reservoirs, both natural reservoirs (dead vegetation, soil organic carbon, sediments in lakes and wetlands) and human-made reservoirs (sediments in dams, landfills, and wood products). One implication of the results is that the carbon stored from the current terrestrial sink (that removes over a quarter of all CO2 emissions from human activities) is more stable than we thought because it is less directly exposed to disturbances such as wildfires, droughts, and extreme heatwaves. This is a positive finding, but also important to remember that the actual sink process, i.e., the way carbon gets pulled out of the atmosphere into the non-living reservoirs, still needs to go through the living biomass (plant photosynthesis) and, therefore, still vulnerable to disturbances and climate change. Some hard thinking is needed to understand the full implications of these findings for the conservation and enhancement of carbon stocks for climate mitigation. I wrote a commentary on the paper here: https://lnkd.in/gxNVWUet

Can you have integrity without additionality? One of the upsides of periodic reviews and suspensions of methods in the Australian carbon market is a closer re-examination of source legislation. In the Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011 (Cth), additionality is a regulatory requirement for carbon credit projects. A carbon project cannot be declared an eligible offsets project unless it meets additionality requirements set out in Section 27. This means that all ACCUs issued in Australia are from projects that have been assessed as additional according to legislation. So what about Offsets Integrity Standards? If you read Section 133 of the Act, you will see that additionality is not an Offsets Integrity Standard. The actual wording references projects under methods that 'should result in carbon abatement that is unlikely to occur in the ordinary course of events (disregarding the effect of this Act)'. Challenging the incorrect language use of 'additionality' as an Offsets Integrity Standard is more than semantics. It corrects a dangerous slippery slope which begins innocently enough with peer reviewed literature critiquing methods but ends with sovereign risk as producers and growers delay participation in carbon projects due to a lack of confidence in the overall reliability of Scheme administration. A far more constructive debate around carbon projects is to discuss the actual Offsets Integrity Standard of ‘carbon abatement that is unlikely to occur in the ordinary course of events (disregarding the effect of this Act)'. Firstly, this framing invites a broad discussion around what is the 'ordinary course of events' – inclusive of technical, economic, social, cultural and environmental factors. It encompasses consideration of barriers to participation in carbon projects and broader co-benefits arising from innovative projects. Secondly, the test for the ‘ordinary course’ standard is at a method level – a portfolio examination – not an individual project level. This avoids 'anti-vaxxer' sentiment where performance is questioned at an individual project level, rather than assessing effectiveness across the broader population. Finally, the ‘ordinary course’ test also points to the underlying intention of the Act, namely to result in methods that incentivise high rates of participation such that the resulting abatement becomes the 'ordinary course of events' – otherwise there would be no need for the qualifier 'disregarding the effect of this Act'. This positions the Australian carbon market as an undeniable world leader – especially in nature-based projects that integrate active agricultural land stewardship with increased profitability. Additionality is dealt with as a legislative requirement for projects to be declared under the ACCU scheme, while portfolio participation becomes the key test for Offsets Integrity. So yes - you can have integrity without additionality, but you can't have integrity without participation.