Soil carbon is having a moment – and for good reason. As pressure mounts for credible climate solutions, soil carbon projects sit at the intersection of climate mitigation, agricultural resilience and market innovation. But there’s one topic that consistently rises to the top: uncertainty. How do we measure it? How do we manage it? And how do we build confidence in a system where variability is inherent?
These questions shaped the core of our recent webinar, “The Business of Soil Carbon: Turning Uncertainty into Market Confidence,” the first in Agricarbon’s new series on soil carbon and market integrity. We were joined by host James Alexander and panellists Annie Leeson (Agricarbon), Kevin Silverman (Kateri), Max DuBuisson (Indigo Ag) and Sarah Heard (BeZero Carbon) for a rich, honest conversation on where the market stands today – and what it will take to accelerate progress.
If you missed it, you can watch the full recording here:
👉 https://register.gotowebinar.com/#recording/1018329638347130031
Below is a summary of the discussion and the standout themes that emerged.
Why Uncertainty Matters – and Why It’s Not the Enemy
Uncertainty is an unavoidable feature of soil carbon. As Sarah Heard noted, soil carbon is inherently variable in space and time, and buyers are increasingly aware of the challenges this creates. But uncertainty itself isn’t the problem – it’s opacity.
When uncertainty is measured, disclosed and managed, it becomes a tool rather than a barrier. When it’s ignored or hidden, confidence erodes.
Across the panel, there was consensus that transparency around uncertainty is the foundation of credibility – and that the market is maturing in this direction.
Where Uncertainty Comes From
The panellists unpacked the practical sources of uncertainty across a project’s lifecycle:
- Sampling design: Taking too few samples – or sampling the wrong places – can distort outcomes.
- Field protocols: Inconsistent coring, improper depth control, compaction, poor handling or storage all introduce error.
- Lab processes: Variation in sample prep, instrumentation or analytical methods can compound uncertainty.
- Modelling approaches: Models are powerful but only as good as the data used to calibrate and validate them.
- Environmental and management variability: Soils change over time; management practices differ; climate impacts accumulate.
As Kevin Silverman put it: “Uncertainty deductions aren’t theoretical – they’re the market’s way of quantifying how close your claim is to reality.”
Models vs Measurement? It’s Not a Competition
A recurring misconception in soil carbon is that we must choose between modelling or direct measurement. Models help scale. Measurements anchor models to reality. Together, they form a more reliable system than either alone.
Max DuBuisson highlighted how model confidence skyrockets when underpinned by high-quality calibration datasets – something today’s market still lacks, especially for grasslands.
The Growing Importance of High-Integrity MRV
A strong theme throughout the webinar was the critical role of measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) in building market confidence.
Key points included:
- Measure-and-remeasure approaches are becoming essential for credibility.
- Stratified sampling, robust SOPs and rigorous lab analysis reduce uncertainty and improve trust.
- Buyers increasingly seek projects that can demonstrate clear MRV “proof points,” not just claims.
- Independent ratings, like those from BeZero, are helping buyers differentiate between projects and price risk appropriately.
Interestingly, BeZero shared that no soil carbon project has yet achieved a AA or AAA rating, underscoring the work still to be done – but also the opportunity ahead.
Economics: The Market’s Catch-22
Several panellists highlighted a structural paradox:
- High-integrity projects require more data, better measurement and deeper verification.
- These investments raise costs.
- But carbon prices aren’t yet high enough in many regions to reward that quality.
As Annie Leeson noted, “scale brings cost efficiency,” but today’s market conditions can make it hard for new projects – especially smaller ones – to justify the upfront investment.
Despite this, there is good news:
Quality is beginning to be rewarded. Projects with stronger MRV and clearer accounting are already commanding higher prices and attracting more confident buyers.
What Needs to Happen Next
The conversation closed with forward-looking reflections from each panellist on what would most accelerate market confidence.
1. A shared evidence base
Kevin emphasised the need for open, trusted datasets – especially for grasslands – to help standardise expectations and reduce model uncertainty.
2. More emphasis on real-world measurement
Sarah underscored that buyers increasingly want to see tangible remeasurement over time, not just modelled outcomes.
3. Greater buyer advocacy and transparency
Max highlighted that when companies publicly share why they’ve chosen soil carbon – and what they value about it – it encourages others to follow.
4. Public or philanthropic support for foundational infrastructure
Annie called for more state or non-commercial investment in protocols, data systems and shared infrastructure – the kinds of assets that benefit the whole market but aren’t easy for individual companies to fund alone.
Looking Ahead
If there was one unifying takeaway, it’s this:
Uncertainty is not a reason to avoid soil carbon – it’s a reason to invest in doing it well.
The market is maturing. The science is improving. Confidence is growing. And the opportunity to deliver climate impact and agricultural resilience has never been clearer.
This webinar was just the beginning. We’ll be hosting additional sessions soon, diving deeper into the technical detail behind soil carbon measurement and market integrity. Stay tuned.
Tags
