Transforming US agriculture for carbon removal with enhanced weathering

Enhanced weathering (EW) with agriculture uses crushed silicate rocks to drive carbon dioxide removal (CDR)<sup>1,2</sup>. If widely adopted on farmlands, it could help achieve net-zero emissions by 2050<sup>2-4</sup>. Here we show, with a detailed US state-specific carbon cycle analysis constrained by resource provision, that EW deployed on agricultural land could sequester 0.16-0.30 GtCO<sub>2</sub> yr<sup>-1</sup> by 2050, rising to 0.25-0.49 GtCO<sub>2</sub> yr<sup>-1</sup> by 2070. Geochemical assessment of rivers and oceans suggests effective transport of dissolved products from EW from soils, offering CDR on intergenerational timescales. Our analysis further indicates that EW may temporarily help lower ground-level ozone and concentrations of secondary aerosols in agricultural regions. Geospatially mapped CDR costs show heterogeneity across the USA, reflecting a combination of cropland distance from basalt source regions, timing of EW deployment and evolving CDR rates. CDR costs are highest in the first two decades before declining to about US$100-150 tCO<sub>2</sub><sup>-1</sup> by 2050, including for states that contribute most to total national CDR. Although EW cannot be a substitute for emission reductions, our assessment strengthens the case for EW as an overlooked practical innovation for helping the USA meet net-zero 2050 goals<sup>5,6</sup>. Public awareness of EW and equity impacts of EW deployment across the USA require further exploration<sup>7,8</sup> and we note that mobilizing an EW industry at the necessary scale could take decades.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Nature
Published
2025-02-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08429-2
Citations
42
Primary Topic
CO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
33.56
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Transforming US agriculture for carbon removal with enhanced weathering

Philip B. Holden, Lyla L. Taylor, Phil Renforth, Rafael M. Eufrasio et al.
42 citations
Nature
CO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
33.56
article

Transforming US agriculture for carbon removal with enhanced weathering

Philip B. Holden, Lyla L. Taylor, Phil Renforth, Rafael M. Eufrasio, Yoshiki Kanzaki, Steven A. Banwart, Noah J. Planavsky, Neil R. Edwards, Hector Pollitt, Maria Val Martin, Euripides P. Kantzas, Nick Pidgeon, Dimitar Z. Epihov, Christopher T. Reinhard, James E. Hansen, David J. Beerling, Lenny Koh, Jean-François Mercure, Adam Wolf, Shuang Zhang, Mark R. Lomas
article en
42 citations

Abstract

Enhanced weathering (EW) with agriculture uses crushed silicate rocks to drive carbon dioxide removal (CDR)<sup>1,2</sup>. If widely adopted on farmlands, it could help achieve net-zero emissions by 2050<sup>2-4</sup>. Here we show, with a detailed US state-specific carbon cycle analysis constrained by resource provision, that EW deployed on agricultural land could sequester 0.16-0.30 GtCO<sub>2</sub> yr<sup>-1</sup> by 2050, rising to 0.25-0.49 GtCO<sub>2</sub> yr<sup>-1</sup> by 2070. Geochemical assessment of rivers and oceans suggests effective transport of dissolved products from EW from soils, offering CDR on intergenerational timescales. Our analysis further indicates that EW may temporarily help lower ground-level ozone and concentrations of secondary aerosols in agricultural regions. Geospatially mapped CDR costs show heterogeneity across the USA, reflecting a combination of cropland distance from basalt source regions, timing of EW deployment and evolving CDR rates. CDR costs are highest in the first two decades before declining to about US$100-150 tCO<sub>2</sub><sup>-1</sup> by 2050, including for states that contribute most to total national CDR. Although EW cannot be a substitute for emission reductions, our assessment strengthens the case for EW as an overlooked practical innovation for helping the USA meet net-zero 2050 goals<sup>5,6</sup>. Public awareness of EW and equity impacts of EW deployment across the USA require further exploration<sup>7,8</sup> and we note that mobilizing an EW industry at the necessary scale could take decades.

NatureVol. 638(8050)
Planetary Science Institute (US), Georgia Institute of Technology (US), University of Leeds (GB), World Bank (US), Princeton University (US), The Open University (GB), University of Exeter (GB), University of Cambridge (GB), Earth Island Institute (US), Heriot-Watt University (GB), Yale University (US), Columbia University (US), Cardiff University (GB), Texas A&M University (US), University of Sheffield (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
CO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
33.56
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.