Evaluation of carbon sequestration potential in experimental units: challenges, methodology, and progress
Abstract
To meet the decarbonation goal, INRAE must be able to assess annual carbon absorption and storage in its soils, as well as the additional storage resulting from the implementation of carbon-storing agricultural practices. However, current methods for evaluating carbon storage remain largely insufficient, as they do not distinguish between different systems and practices. A working group was established to develop a methodology for assessing the carbon sequestration potential of experimental units (UE), leveraging INRAE’s scientific expertise. This article presents the challenges of carbon sequestration at various scales, including INRAE’s own, the carbon-storing practices identified in the literature, the methodology used to evaluate sequestration potential in experimental unit soils, and the current progress of this initiative. Before assessing the impact of carbon-storing practices, the first step is to diagnose current biomass and soil carbon stocks and storage within experimental units. This evaluation is currently underway for INRAE forest plots and experimental units with arable crops. The ongoing work highlights major challenges related to data collection and modeling tools, as models that take into account practices remain at the cutting edge of science but are sometimes difficult to apply at the scale of a single experimental unit.
Related
- On CO2 sequestration in concrete aggregate via carbonation: simulation and experimental verification
- Apoplastic retention over vacuolar sequestration: a potential more efficient strategy limiting root-to-shoot cadmium translocation in leafy vegetable crops
- Optimization of removal of indigo carmine dye by silver–iron oxide bimetallic nanoparticles through response surface methodology modelling: experimental and theoretical mechanistic insights
- Common challenges and potential approaches in urban soil physics research
- A multiple review on identification and fine evaluation of shale pores: Prospects and challenges
BibTeX
@article{bouquet2026evaluation,
title = {{Evaluation of carbon sequestration potential in experimental units: challenges, methodology, and progress}},
author = {Dorine Bouquet and Frédéric Huard},
journal = {NOV'AE - Numéros spéciaux},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.20870/revue-novae.2025.9680},
url = {https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-05854544v1},
note = {CC BY-SA 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Evaluation of carbon sequestration potential in experimental units: challenges, methodology, and progress
AU - Dorine Bouquet
AU - Frédéric Huard
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/06
JO - NOV'AE - Numéros spéciaux
DO - 10.20870/revue-novae.2025.9680
UR - https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-05854544v1
AB - To meet the decarbonation goal, INRAE must be able to assess annual carbon absorption and storage in its soils, as well as the additional storage resulting from the implementation of carbon-storing agricultural practices. However, current methods for evaluating carbon storage remain largely insufficient, as they do not distinguish between different systems and practices. A working group was established to develop a methodology for assessing the carbon sequestration potential of experimental units (UE), leveraging INRAE’s scientific expertise. This article presents the challenges of carbon sequestration at various scales, including INRAE’s own, the carbon-storing practices identified in the literature, the methodology used to evaluate sequestration potential in experimental unit soils, and the current progress of this initiative. Before assessing the impact of carbon-storing practices, the first step is to diagnose current biomass and soil carbon stocks and storage within experimental units. This evaluation is currently underway for INRAE forest plots and experimental units with arable crops. The ongoing work highlights major challenges related to data collection and modeling tools, as models that take into account practices remain at the cutting edge of science but are sometimes difficult to apply at the scale of a single experimental unit.
SN - 2823-2283
SN - 2823-3980
ER -