Soil Carbon Sequestration with Holistic Planned Grazing: A Map of Published Rates
Carbon drawdown is a hot topic for many in the regenerative movement. While the Savory Institute is adamant that a holistic perspective assessing all ecosystem
Carbon drawdown is a hot topic for many in the regenerative movement. While the Savory Institute is adamant that a holistic perspective assessing all ecosystem
The aim of this study was to determine the mid-term effect of regenerative grazing in Basque country of Northern Spain on soil ecosystem services and evaluate their synergies and trade-offs. Regenerative rotational grazing achieved 30% higher springtime grass production and 3.6% higher topsoil carbon storage than conventional rotational grazing.
Lifecycle analysis on White Oak Pastures’ beef. Results demonstrated that a pound of protein sequestered 3.5 pounds of CO2, in comparison to conventional beef which emitted 33 pounds of CO2 per pound of protein, or even Impossible Burger or Beyond Meat which emitted 3.5 pounds and 2 pounds of CO2 per pound of protein, respectively.
This study compared the carbon balance reported by national inventories that followed the IPCC, with an alternative estimation derived from the meta-analysis of science-based, peer-reviewed data. Results show that the potential for grasslands to sequester carbon is large and unaccounted for in standard IPCC models.
This 2010 FAO report makes a strong case for grasslands restoration as a climate mitigation strategy and “improved grazing management” as one of the most important practices for enhancing soil carbon stocks.
This paper from 2010 is a compilation of previous studies on grazing lands and carbon drawdown which themselves date from the 1990s. It shows that grazing lands/rangelands are major stores of terrestrial carbon, occupying approximately 3.6 billion hectares and accounting for about one-fourth of potential carbon (C) sequestration in world soils. Drawdown rates via grazing and on restored semi-arid savanna are reported to be as high as 2.75 tons per hectare per year.
This partial life cycle assessment (LCA) compared two grazing management strategies: 1) a non-irrigated, lightly-stocked, high-density system (MOB) and 2) an irrigated, heavily-stocked, low-density system (IRG). Results indicated that when soil carbon sequestration (SCS) potential was included, each grazing strategy could be an overall sink, with the MOB system found to have greater SCS than the IRG system.
This paper does a greenhouse gas life cycle analysis (LCA) comparison of two grazing finishing systems in the Upper Midwest, USA: feedlot finishing and Holistic Planned Grazing, which the authors refer to as adaptive multipaddock (AMP). It finds that AMP finishing improved soil organic carbon by 3.5 tons per hectare per year. This resulted in a net negative footprint of 6.6 kg of carbon dioxide equivalence per kg of carcass-weight.
This short film by Peter Byck follows producers who have taken the leap from conventional to regenerative agriculture.
What do these three things have in common with Holistic Land Management? What exactly is the power of Holistic Management? What does holistically managed land
Savory’s Library features a robust catalog of science articles, case studies, white papers, media, & more. Choose a popular topic to dive in or start a new search.
Savory Institute is a U.S.-registered 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. EIN: 45-4134319
Fonden The Savory Foundation is incorporated in Denmark. CVR-nr: 43597205
Land to Market is a U.S. public-benefit corporation with majority ownership by the Savory Institute. EIN: 88-2589299
We respect your privacy and will never spam or sell your information.
You can unsubscribe at any time.
