By Carey L. Biron for Context.
Broadcast version by Brett Peveto for Maryland News Connection reporting for the Context/Solutions Journalism Network/Public News Service Collaboration

The owner of Deep Roots Farm in rural Maryland and her workers finished the fall harvest last month, but some of their most vital plantings are still in the ground - and growing fast.

Four species of cover crops - plants such as winter rye and hairy vetch, later removed in the spring - are key to soil resuscitation efforts underway at Deep Roots, 53 acres of rolling hills that used to be part of a tobacco farm.

After purchasing the property two years ago, owner Gale Livingstone set about rebuilding the soil's health, by nurturing the microbiome beneath, planting cover crops, and doing no tilling at all.

The changes mean "you're going to have an abundance of harvest," the 49-year-old said.

Deep Roots is one of a rising number of so-called "regenerative" farms that are improving soil quality not only for its environmental and human health benefits but to trap more planet-heating emissions and curb climate change.

Changing farm practices could capture and store up to 250 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually in the United States - or 4% of the nation's emissions - the National Academy of Sciences found in 2019.

Scientists, advocacy groups and newly-formed companies are working to quantify the amount of carbon farmers store in their soil, fueling offset markets where the resulting credits are sold.

Several commodities and agriculture companies have set up carbon farming programs in recent years, drawing growing interest from companies that have made net-zero pledges and are seeking to reduce their carbon footprints, in part through purchasing offsets.

The government has also lent its support. In September, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced a first-ever round of grants focused on "climate-smart" commodity production, part of a $3 billion program aiming to boost crops' ability to store carbon.

"Suddenly everyone is hearing about soil carbon storage," said Lauren Miller, an executive vice president with Grassroots Carbon, a firm that connects businesses interested in buying soil carbon credits with regenerative farming operations.

Farmers "should be aware of this as another revenue stream - if they adopt regenerative practices, it will improve the soil health ... but they can also get paid for it," she added.

Yet many farmers - including Livingstone of Deep Roots - and climate campaigners are skeptical about the effectiveness of soil carbon markets.

Some are concerned they could help climate polluters who purchase offsets avoid cutting their own firms' emissions, or that the carbon stored in soils may not remain there permanently.

These markets "face a number of really big challenges," said Freya Chay, a program associate with Carbon Plan, a nonprofit that analyzes climate solutions.

Soil carbon levels vary widely and are very hard to measure, and standards set up to facilitate such markets have shown a "huge variation in verification rigor", she said.

And while prices for soil carbon are rising, they remain too low to widely change farmer behavior, Chay added.

University of Maryland regenerative agriculture fellow Matthew Houser likened soil carbon markets to "the Wild West".

"It's like a gold rush. People are trying to figure it out, but there's not a lot of clear structure and knowledge," he said.

Today there are around 100,000 regenerative farms in North America, according to Jonathan Lundgren, director of the Ecdysis Foundation, which is assessing hundreds of operations a year.

In doing the assessments, "we're trying to answer a few simple questions," he said.

That includes whether regenerative agriculture works no matter what you grow and where you grow it, and whether it genuinely cuts pollution, provides lasting carbon sequestration and helps battle climate change.

For example, he said, early findings from almond orchards in California suggest that farms that use regenerative practices have around 30% more soil carbon than conventional ones.

Another initiative, called the Soil Inventory Project, is seeking to develop a national map of soil health.

The efforts aim, in part, at "putting carbon on the farm balance sheet", said Kristofer Covey, its co-founder and president.

At last month's COP27 U.N. climate summit in Egypt, a group of 12 agribusiness firms, from PepsiCo and Mars to McDonald's, committed to boosting regenerative practices and raising farm includes with strategies including carbon removals.

PepsiCo last year announced it would seek to spread regenerative practices among its supply chain's farmers across at least 7 million acres globally by 2030.

"Climate change poses significant risks to farmers in our supply chain," said Rob Meyers, the company's vice president of agriculture.

Many farmers don't talk about climate change, but say things are "not normal anymore", he said, noting it was "one consistent thing we hear from them".

Giving farmers cash for storing carbon can help pay for a switch to regenerative agriculture - and help commodity companies meet their own goals, said Grassroots Carbon's Miller.

"Companies aren't just trying to reduce their carbon footprint anymore," she added.

"They're looking at going carbon-neutral, carbon-negative and working toward regenerative (agriculture)."

Still, the effect of such shifts on climate change remains unclear, said Chay of Carbon Plan.

With many contracts for storing soil carbon lasting just 20 years, for example, carbon sequestered on farmland today could be released in the future, she warned.

"If you're allowing low-quality offset credits and that's influencing (corporate) planning in the short, medium and long term, we have a real problem regarding being honest about what we're achieving," she said.

For now, many farmers across the United States are believed to be taking a wait-and-see attitude on soil carbon markets - especially smaller-scale producers.

An October report from the Farm Journal - a trade magazine - found that of 500 farmers surveyed, 97% said they would not get involved under current conditions, although nearly a third expressed interest and said they were monitoring developments.

One obstacle is the low current value of soil carbon, often around $15 to $20 per ton, said Ben Hushon, an agronomist and partner at the Mill chain of agricultural products stores, one company that has worked with farmers to experiment with soil carbon markets.

That price translates to income of around $15 to $30 per acre, according to an estimate from Duke University.

By comparison, an acre of corn was worth more than $900 last year, while soybeans were $650 per acre, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

There is already rising tension over who should receive soil carbon storage payments - landowners or farmers - given that many farmers are only renting the land they work, Hushon said.

But the most frustrating aspect for many farmers, he said, is that those already growing using sustainable practices often are not rewarded, with corporations purchasing soil carbon credits mainly interested in trying to change farm practices.

"That's resulted in disappointment, frustration and anger," Hushon added.

Still, the incentives are working for Loy Sneary and his son, who raise cattle on 7,000 acres near Bay City, Texas.

They recently shifted their operations to move their herds frequently and let used pastures sit for months before the animals return.

The pair have already seen the regrowth of native grasses with deeper carbon-holding roots, Sneary said - and they have halted the use of herbicides on the land.

"The more we move the cattle, the faster the soil will heal and the more carbon we'll sequester," he added.

While the new approach took upfront investment, Sneary said carbon storage payments he is receiving will let him pay off his costs by the second year.

Neighbors initially thought he was "crazy", he admitted.

But "now we have a lot of folks saying, 'Maybe we should take a second look at this' - especially now that we're getting a payment for it," he said.

The federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration regulates carbon dioxide pipelines, and is holding a two-day conference in Des Moines to take public input and discuss issues surrounding the pipelines.

Opponents believe they threaten air and water quality as well as the people who live near them. Ethanol producers say removing carbon dioxide via pipelines and burying it deep in the ground through a process known as carbon capture and sequestration is an effective way to address safety and environmental concerns.

Ava Auen-Ryan, director of farming and environment for the group Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, said environmentalists want a federal moratorium on the pipelines until they can be studied more thoroughly, and will make it clear to federal regulators at the conference.

"I think we hope to build pressure on the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to do their job well," Auen-Ryan explained. "Also to build pressure on state and federal entities to enact a moratorium on CO2 pipelines."

The agenda showed the committee will discuss public awareness, emergency response and effective communication with emergency first responders and with the public during the conference, which takes place today and tomorrow.

Beyond the potential long-term environmental impacts and health implications, Auen-Ryan also cautioned about the immediate human threats posed in the event a pipeline should rupture, and pointed to a break in Mississippi three years ago, sickening 45 people.

Ryan emphasized the very nature of carbon dioxide, which displaces oxygen in the environment, makes it extremely dangerous in an emergency.

"Gas-combustion vehicles; they can't work," Auen-Ryan pointed out. "They need oxygen to work, so that means that emergency response folks cannot get into those communities and people cannot leave the communities via car. And we also know that rural communities in Iowa are not equipped to respond to something like that. "

The agency will also discuss safety expectations for pipeline operators as well as the general state of pipeline infrastructure. There are currently three companies planning to build carbon dioxide pipelines in Iowa.

New research shows ancient chili peppers were likely growing in Southwestern states like New Mexico millions of years earlier than previously thought.

Scientists believe birds - which, unlike people, lack heat receptors and don't wince, or worse - when eating the spicy "berry-like" fruits, and spread their seeds across vast areas.

Now, researchers at the University of Colorado say a previously collected fossil shows they were growing in the Americas as much as 50 million years ago - much earlier than the 15 million years ago previously thought.

Study senior author, Stacey Smith - an associate professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology - said finding a fossil that upends settled facts is unexpected.

"All of these sort of distinctive members of the family made of eggplants, chile peppers, tobacco," said Smith, "all of these were around long, long before humans ever encountered them. So they were sort of hanging out waiting for us."

As of March 2023, "roasting green chile" is now the official scent of New Mexico. Lawmakers approved and the governor signed a bill making it the first state in the country with an official aroma.

It's estimated the Land of Enchantment produced a whopping 53,000 tons of the peppers in 2022.

Researchers say the chile-pepper fossils originally were collected from the Green River Formation in northwestern Colorado. The findings challenge the previous scientific understanding that nightshades originated from South America.

Smith said she's a bit awed and happy she's able to relate how the fossil discovery has transformed her understanding of plant diversification.

"'Oh that's a fossil of that kind of lizard' or 'That's a fossil of this kind of plant,'" said Smith. "So, it just so happens that we are the people who study those kind of plants and we look at that fossil and say, 'Hey, that's a chile pepper' - and we're 100% certain that it's nothing else."

The findings were recently published in New Phytologist, noting the entire nightshade family - including peppers, tomatoes, potatoes and more - is much older and was more widespread than previously documented.




get more stories like this via email

A U.S. Supreme Court case that began in Idaho has weakened protections across the nation under the Clean Water Act.

The justices on Thursday handed down a 5-4 decision that will undo federal safeguards for wetlands. The case stems from a couple's attempt to build a house in Priest Lake, Idaho. The Environmental Protection Agency informed the couple that backfilling on the property violated the Clean Water Act because it was affecting sensitive wetland habitat. The couple sued the agency.

Alex Funk, director of water resources and senior counsel for the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, said the decision is a blow in many respects, including to people who enjoy the outdoors.

"For the hunting, fishing and sporting, and even kind of the broader outdoor rec community," he said, "these wetlands provide so many public values that are now at significant risk from development and other impacts."

In its decision, the majority wrote that Clean Water Act protections extend only to wetlands "indistinguishable" from larger bodies of water. It could affect up to 90 million acres of wetlands across the country.

Funk said wetlands are vital ecosystems providing benefits that tend to go unrecognized.

"If anything," he said, "this is going to put major setbacks on things like our ability to adapt to climate change, respond to extreme weather events, drought."

He noted that these habitats are essential for clean water, flood mitigation and storing carbon. Wetlands cover 386,000 acres in Idaho, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.