ALBERT

Description: Total soil carbon (TSC) is a composite (total) stock, which is the sum of soil organic carbon (SOC) and soil inorganic carbon (SIC). Total soil carbon, and its individual two components, are all important criteria for assessing ecosytems services (ES) and for achieving United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The objective of this study was to assess the value of TSC stocks, based on the concept of the avoided social cost of carbon dioxide emissions, for the contiguous United States (U.S.) by soil order, soil depth (0–20, 20–100, 100–200 cm), land resource region (LRR), state, and region using information from the State Soil Geographic (STATSGO) database. The total calculated monetary value for TSC storage in the contiguous U.S. was between $8.13T (i.e., $8.13 trillion U.S. dollars, where T = trillion = 1012) and $37.5T, with a midpoint value of $21.1T. Soil orders with the highest TSC storage midpoint values were Mollisols ($7.78T) and Aridisols ($2.49T). Based on area, however, the soil orders with highest midpoint TSC values were Histosols ($21.95 m−2) and Vertisols ($5.84 m−2). Soil depth was important, with the highest values of TSC storage being found in the interval 20–100 cm ($9.87T—total midpoint value, and $1.34 m−2—midpoint area density). The soil depth interval 0–20 cm had the lowest TSC storage ($4.30T) and lowest area-density ($0.58 m−2) value, which exemplifies the prominence of TSC in the deeper subsurface layers of soil. The LRRs with the highest midpoint TSC storage values were: M—Central Feed Grains and Livestock Region ($2.82T) and D—Western Range and Irrigated Region ($2.64T), whereas on an area basis the LRRs with the highest values were I—Southwest Plateaus and Plains Range and Cotton Region ($6.90 m−2) and J—Southwestern Prairies Cotton and Forage Region ($6.38 m−2). Among the U.S. states, the highest midpoint TSC storage values were Texas ($4.03T) and Minnesota ($1.29T), while based on area this order was reversed (i.e., Minnesota: $6.16 m−2; Texas: $6.10 m−2). Comprehensive assessment of regulating ES requires TSC, which is an important measure in achieving the UN SDGs. Despite the known shortcomings of soil databases, such as their static nature and the wide ranges of uncertainty reported for various soil properties, they provide the most comprehensive information available at this time for making systematic assessments of ecosystem services at large spatial scales.

Description: Soil organic carbon (SOC) generates several ecosystem services (ES), including a regulating service by sequestering carbon (C) as SOC. This ES can be valued based on the avoided social cost of carbon (SC-CO2) from the long-term damage resulting from emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2). The objective of this study was to assess the value of SOC stocks, based on the avoided SC-CO2 ($42 per metric ton of CO2 in 2007 U.S. dollars), in the contiguous United States (U.S.) by soil order, soil depth (0–20, 20–100, 100–200 cm), land resource region (LRR), state, and region using information from the State Soil Geographic (STATSGO) database. The total calculated monetary value for SOC storage in the contiguous U.S. was between $4.64T (i.e., $4.64 trillion U.S. dollars, where T = trillion = 1012) and $23.1T, with a midpoint value of $12.7T. Soil orders with the highest midpoint SOC storage values were 1): Mollisols ($4.21T), 2) Histosols ($2.31T), and 3) Alfisols ($1.48T). The midpoint values of SOC normalized by area within soil order boundaries were ranked: 1) Histosols ($21.58 m−2), 2) Vertisols ($2.26 m−2), and 3) Mollisols ($2.08 m−2). The soil depth interval with the highest midpoint values of SOC storage and content was 20–100 cm ($6.18T and $0.84 m−2, respectively), while the depth interval 100–200 cm had the lowest midpoint values of SOC storage ($2.88T) and content ($0.39 m−2). The depth trends exemplify the prominence of SOC in the upper portions of soil. The LRRs with the highest midpoint SOC storage values were: 1) M – Central Feed Grains and Livestock Region ($1.8T), 2) T – Atlantic and Gulf Coast Lowland Forest and Crop Region ($1.26T), and 3) K – Northern Lake States Forest and Forage Region ($1.16T). The midpoint values of SOC normalized by area within LRR boundaries were ranked: 1) U – Florida Subtropical Fruit, Truck Crop, and Range Region ($6.10 m−2), 2) T – Atlantic and Gulf Coast Lowland Forest and Crop Region ($5.44 m−2), and 3) K – Northern Lake States Forest and Forage Region ($3.88 m−2). States with the highest midpoint values of SOC storage were: 1) Texas ($1.08T), 2) Minnesota ($834B) (i.e., $834 billion U.S. dollars, where B = billion = 109), and 3) Florida ($742B). Midpoint values of SOC normalized by area within state boundaries were ranked: 1) Florida ($5.44 m−2), 2) Delaware ($4.10 m−2), and 3) Minnesota ($3.99 m−2). Regions with the highest midpoint values of SOC storage were: 1) Midwest ($3.17T), 2) Southeast ($2.44T), and 3) Northern Plains ($2.35T). Midpoint values of SOC normalized by area within region boundaries were ranked: 1) Midwest ($2.73 m−2), 2) Southeast ($2.31 m−2), and 3) East ($1.82 m−2). The reported values and trends demonstrate the need for policies with regards to SOC management, which requires incentives within administrative boundaries but informed by the geographic distribution of SOC.

Description: Soil databases are very important for assessing ecosystem services at different administrative levels (e.g., state, region etc.). Soil databases provide information about numerous soil properties, including soil inorganic carbon (SIC), which is a naturally occurring liming material that regulates soil pH and performs other key functions related to all four recognized ecosystem services (e.g., provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting services). However, the ecosystem services value, or “true value,” of SIC is not recognized in the current land market. In this case, a negative externality arises because SIC with a positive value has zero market price, resulting in the market failure and the inefficient use of land. One potential method to assess the value of SIC is by determining its replacement cost based on the price of commercial limestone that would be required to amend soil. The objective of this study is to assess SIC replacement cost value in the contiguous United States (U.S.) by depth (0–20, 20–100, 100–200 cm) and considering different spatial aggregation levels (i.e., state, region, land resource region (LRR) using the State Soil Geographic (STATSGO) soil database. A replacement cost value of SIC was determined based on an average price of limestone in 2014 ($10.42 per U.S. ton). Within the contiguous U.S., the total replacement cost value of SIC in the upper two meters of soil is between $2.16T (i.e., 2.16 trillion U.S. dollars, where T = trillion = 1012) and $8.97T. States with the highest midpoint total value of SIC were: (1) Texas ($1.84T), (2) New Mexico ($355B, that is, 355 billion U.S. dollars, where B = billion = 109) and (3) Montana ($325B). When normalized by area, the states with the highest midpoint SIC values were: (1) Texas ($2.78 m−2), (2) Utah ($1.72 m−2) and (3) Minnesota ($1.35 m−2). The highest ranked regions for total SIC value were: (1) South Central ($1.95T), (2) West ($1.23T) and (3) Northern Plains ($1.01T), while the highest ranked regions based on area-normalized SIC value were: (1) South Central ($1.80 m−2), (2) Midwest ($0.82 m−2) and (3) West ($0.63 m−2). For land resource regions (LRR), the rankings were: (1) Western Range and Irrigated Region ($1.10T), (2) Central Great Plains Winter Wheat and Range Region ($926B) and (3) Central Feed Grains and Livestock Region ($635B) based on total SIC value, while the LRR rankings based on area-normalized SIC value were: (1) Southwest Plateaus and Plains Range and Cotton Region ($3.33 m−2), (2) Southwestern Prairies Cotton and Forage Region ($2.83 m−2) and (3) Central Great Plains Winter Wheat and Range Region ($1.59 m−2). Most of the SIC is located within the 100–200 cm depth interval with a midpoint replacement cost value of $2.49T and an area-normalized value of $0.34 m−2. Results from this study provide a link between science-based estimates (e.g., soil order) of SIC replacement costs within the administrative boundaries (e.g., state, region etc.).