Dig it or plant it? Choosing the right carbon offset path
A closer look at pros and cons of tree planting versus soil carbon projects
When it comes to carbon offsets, the options for rural landowners/users are varied. But not all methods of removing carbon from the atmosphere deliver the same impact. Some come with extra environmental benefits. Others carry risks that make them less reliable over time.
Here, we focus on two common approaches: tree planting and storing carbon in the soil. Both can generate offset credits, but they work in different ways and suit different types of land. It’s important to remember that whatever method is used, it must represent a quantifiable improvement on the existing situation.
Tree planting: the long game with added benefits
There’s a natural appeal to planting trees. It’s visible and tangible, and in the right context, can also do a lot of environmental good beyond removing carbon from the atmosphere.
Pros:
Long-term carbon storage: Mature trees can store large amounts of carbon in wood and roots. If they’re protected from fire or logging, that storage can last for decades or even centuries.
Biodiversity benefits: Planting native species can help restore ecosystems, support wildlife and improve landscape resilience.
Multi-purpose planting: Trees can provide shade and shelter while allowing livestock to graze between them. There are great case studies across NSW showing how this works in practice.
Cons:
Slow carbon capture: Trees take years to grow. In many cases, reforestation projects don’t start delivering real carbon gains until around five to ten years after planting, often hitting their stride about a decade in.
High maintenance: Young trees need protection, especially in tough climates. That means weeding, fencing, pest control, and regular monitoring. Clearing and replanting may also be necessary.
Fire and disease risk: A single bush fire or pest outbreak can wipe out decades of progress. That risk has to be factored into any project.
Tree planting works best on land that won’t be returned to cropping or grazing, so it’s ideal for marginal or degraded areas.
Soil carbon: quicker wins with more ongoing effort
Increasing the amount of carbon stored in the soil is less visible than planting trees, but it can be just as powerful. It involves changing how land is managed, for example, by reducing tillage, using cover crops, or improving grazing practices.
Pros:
Better soil health: More carbon in the soil improves water retention, structure and fertility. That leads to healthier crops and pasture.
Increased productivity: The benefits for farmers include greater drought resilience, less need for fertilisers, irrigation and chemical spraying.
Faster results: Some soil carbon gains can be measured in just a few years, making this one of the quickest ways to make an impact.
Cons:
Needs consistent management: If these practices stop, the carbon gains can be reversed. This means full support is necessary from the start, and a long-term commitment.
Tough to measure: Soil carbon changes slowly and varies across a piece of land. Getting accurate, verified data is difficult and can be costly.
Soil carbon projects suit working farms, especially where there’s an interest in longer-term land improvement. They’re most effective where landholders are actively involved and committed to ongoing change.
Looking ahead: combining methods for greater impact
There’s no one size fits all approach. Tree planting might be best for unused or steep land, while soil carbon projects tend to suit more actively managed areas. What’s really exciting is the potential to combine methods on the same landholding, such as planting trees on less productive areas, while building up soil carbon in grazing and cropping fields.
Current carbon credit rules don’t allow different methods to be stacked on the same piece of land, however that may change. If it does, combining trees and soil carbon could help offset risks and deliver more stable returns.
The carbon market is constantly evolving, increasing the need for better data, smarter verification, and systems that support mixed projects. As the Clean Energy Regulator (CER) refines its processes, including more advanced analytic tools, and updates to project validation, it’s likely we’ll see more flexibility in combining methods.
Done well, this could open the door for more landholders to get involved, build long-term value and make a real impact in the carbon removal space.
Want to know more?
Check out Beyond carbon: The additional benefits of sequestration projects, exploring the future of carbon and biodiversity markets for landowners.
Want to know what potential your land has in the carbon market?
Download your free report: tailored for your property address
Access our carbon insights and tools at no cost
Analytics Dashboard: Get an aggregated view of ACCU projects, proponents and market insights.
Project Explorer: Uncover the geographic distribution of Australian ACCU Carbon projects
