The Future of Farming

Intensive farming not only degrades our soils, but it also contributes to climate change. David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


[Below is the original script. But a few changes may have been made during the recording of this audio podcast.]

We may be running out of dirt. The intensive farming of recorded history, accelerated by the last several decades of industrial agriculture, now strips the soil of some 20 tons of dark, rich organic matter per hectare per year.  That's not just a problem for farmers, much of that carbon ends up in the atmosphere, contributing to climate change, which then goes on to exacerbate other food-growing issues such as drought or floods and extreme temperatures. Plus, degraded soils spur farmers to clear yet more land, contributing to the rapid destruction of the world's forests, further exacerbating climate change. So the future of farming is, in large part, a future of fighting climate change—and battling to preserve soils. Fortunately, there are several promising methods. No-till farming, in which soil is left undisturbed by plows, can help restore some 600 to 900 megatonnes of carbon to the earth over several decades. And organic matter can be put back into the soil more directly, via a method known as biochar. Basically, waste plant matter is burned into charcoal and then added to the soil. In addition to keeping carbon out of the atmosphere, such biochar may also improve fertility, though it probably can't be practiced on a global scale. Ultimately, the future of farming will also be decided by the future of eating: the amount of land needed for farming in the first place could be radically reduced if people stopped eating as much meat. 

—David Biello

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe