Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Potential CO2 removal from enhanced weathering by ecosystem responses to powdered rock


Negative emission technologies underpin socioeconomic scenarios consistent with the Paris Agreement. Afforestation and bioenergy coupled with carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage are the main land negative emission technologies proposed, but the range of nature-based solutions is wider. Here we explore soil amendment with powdered basalt in natural ecosystems. Basalt is an abundant rock resource, which reacts with CO2 and removes it from the atmosphere. Besides, basalt improves soil fertility and thereby potentially enhances ecosystem carbon storage, rendering a global CO2 removal of basalt substantially larger than previously suggested. As this is a fully developed technology that can be co-deployed in existing land systems, it is suited for rapid upscaling. Achieving sufficiently high net CO2 removal will require upscaling of basalt mining, deploying systems in remote areas with a low carbon footprint and using energy from low-carbon sources. We argue that basalt soil amendment should be considered a prominent option when assessing land management options for mitigating climate change, but yet unknown side-effects, as well as limited data on field-scale deployment, need to be addressed first.

This is a preview of subscription content

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: CDR over the five decades after a one-time application of BD to global hinterland.
Fig. 2: Spatial pattern of total CDR, and the biotic contribution, of BD application to global hinterland.
Fig. 3: Cost of CDR over the five decades after a one-time application of BD to global hinterland.

Data availability

The simulation data (, are freely available. The dataset on airfield location is available at (accessed 18 January 2020).

Code availability

The source code of the land surface model ORCHIDEE-CNP is freely available ( The corresponding author will make the Python codes developed for this study available upon reasonable request.


  1. 1.

    IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) (WMO, 2018).

  2. 2.

    Griscom, B. W. et al. Natural climate solutions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 11645–11650 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Smith, P. et al. Land-management options for greenhouse gas removal and their impacts on ecosystem services and the sustainable development goals. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 44, 255–286 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Smith, P. et al. Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 42–50 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Beerling, D. J. et al. Farming with crops and rocks to address global climate, food and soil security. Nat. Plants 4, 138–147 (2018).

  6. 6.

    Taylor, L. L. et al. Enhanced weathering strategies for stabilizing climate and averting ocean acidification. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 402–406 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Beerling, D. J. et al. Potential for large-scale CO2 removal via enhanced rock weathering with croplands. Nature 583, 242–248 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Börker, J., Hartmann, J., Amann, T. & Romero-Mujalli, G. Terrestrial sediments of the Earth: development of a global unconsolidated sediments map database (gum). Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 19, 997–1024 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Dessert, C., Dupré, B., Gaillardet, J., François, L. M. & Allègre, C. J. Basalt weathering laws and the impact of basalt weathering on the global carbon cycle. Chem. Geol. 202, 257–273 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Dalmora, A. C. et al. Application of andesite rock as a clean source of fertilizer for eucalyptus crop: evidence of sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 256, 120432 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Seifritz, W. CO2 disposal by means of silicates. Nature 345, 486 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Köhler, P. Anthropogenic CO2 of high emission scenario compensated after 3500 years of ocean alkalinization with an annually constant dissolution of 5 Pg of olivine. Front. Clim. 2, 575744 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Peña-Ramírez, V. M., Vázquez-Selem, L. & Siebe, C. Soil organic carbon stocks and forest productivity in volcanic ash soils of different age (1835-30,500 years B.P.) in Mexico. Geoderma 149, 224–234 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    de Oliveira Garcia, W. et al. Impacts of enhanced weathering on biomass production for negative emission technologies and soil hydrology. Biogeosciences 17, 2107–2133 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Kelland, M. E. et al. Increased yield and CO2 sequestration potential with the C4 cereal Sorghum bicolor cultivated in basaltic rock dust-amended agricultural soil. Glob. Chang. Biol. 26, 3658–3676 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Ramos, C. G. et al. Evaluation of soil re-mineralizer from by-product of volcanic rock mining: experimental proof using black oats and maize crops. Nat. Resour. Res. 29, 1583–1600 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Tchouankoue, J., Tchekambou, A., Angue, M., Ngansop, C. & Theodoro, S. in Geotherapy (eds Goreau, T. J. et al.) 445–458 (CRC Press, 2014).

  18. 18.

    Van Straaten, P. Farming with rocks and minerals: challenges and opportunities. An. Acad. Bras. Cienc. 78, 731–747 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Ramos, C. G. et al. Evaluation of the potential of volcanic rock waste from southern Brazil as a natural soil fertilizer. J. Clean. Prod. 142, 2700–2706 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Fuss, S. et al. Negative emissions - part 2: costs, potentials and side effects. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 2–4 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Strefler, J., Amann, T., Bauer, N., Kriegler, E. & Hartmann, J. Potential and costs of carbon dioxide removal by enhanced weathering of rocks. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 034010 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    de Oliveira Garcia, W., Amann, T. & Hartmann, J. Increasing biomass demand enlarges negative forest nutrient budget areas in wood export regions. Sci. Rep. 8, 5280 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Elser, J. J. et al. Global analysis of nitrogen and phosphorus limitation of primary producers in freshwater, marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Ecol. Lett. 10, 1135–1142 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Wright, S. J. Plant responses to nutrient addition experiments conducted in tropical forests. Ecol. Monogr. 89, e01382 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Hou, E. et al. Global meta-analysis shows pervasive phosphorus limitation of aboveground plant production in natural terrestrial ecosystems. Nat. Commun. 11, 637 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Du, E. et al. Global patterns of terrestrial nitrogen and phosphorus limitation. Nat. Geosci. 13, 221–226 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Terrer, C. et al. Nitrogen and phosphorus constrain the CO2 fertilization of global plant biomass. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 684–689 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Gard, M. et al. Global whole-rock geochemical database compilation. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 11, 1553–1566 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Amann, T. & Hartmann, J. Ideas and perspectives: synergies from co-deployment of negative emission technologies. Biogeosciences 16, 2949–2960 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Cattaneo, A. et al. Global mapping of urban–rural catchment areas reveals unequal access to services. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (2021).

  31. 31.

    Hartmann, J. et al. Enhanced chemical weathering as a geoengineering strategy to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide, supply nutrients, and mitigate ocean acidification. Rev. Geophys. 51, 113–149 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Clair, T. & Hindar, A. Liming for the mitigation of acid rain effects in freshwater: a review of recent results. Environ. Rev. 13, 91–128 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Bošeľa, M. & Šebeň, V. Analysis of the aerial application of fertilizer and dolomitic limestone. J. For. Sci. 56, 47–57 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Grafton, M. C. E. et al. Resolving the agricultural crushed limestone flow problem from fixed wing aircraft. Trans. ASABE 54, 769–775 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Moosdorf, N., Renforth, P. & Hartmann, J. Carbon dioxide efficiency of terrestrial enhanced weathering. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 4809–4816 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011).

  37. 37.

    Cook, R. J., Barron, J. C., Papendick, R. I. & Williams, G. J. Impact on agriculture of the Mount St. Helens eruptions. Science 211, 16–22 (1981).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Doughty, C. E., Wolf, A. & Malhi, Y. The legacy of the Pleistocene megafauna extinctions on nutrient availability in Amazonia. Nat. Geosci. 6, 761–764 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Jonard, M. et al. Tree mineral nutrition is deteriorating in Europe. Glob. Chang. Biol. 21, 418–430 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Peñuelas, J. et al. Human-induced nitrogen–phosphorus imbalances alter natural and managed ecosystems across the globe. Nat. Commun. 4, 2934 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Wardle, D. A., Bardgett, R. D., Walker, L. R., Peltzer, D. A. & Lagerström, A. The response of plant diversity to ecosystem retrogression: evidence from contrasting long-term chronosequences. Oikos 117, 93–103 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Kaspari, M. & Yanoviak, S. P. Biogeography of litter depth in tropical forests: evaluating the phosphorus growth rate hypothesis. Funct. Ecol. 22, 919–923 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Harpole, W. S. et al. Addition of multiple limiting resources reduces grassland diversity. Nature 537, 93–96 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Doughty, C. E., Abraham, A. & Roman, J. The sixth R: revitalizing the natural phosphorus pump. Preprint at EcoEvoRxiv (2020).

  45. 45.

    Status of the World’s Soil Resources (FAO & Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils, 2015).

  46. 46.

    Pai, S., Zerriffi, H., Jewell, J. & Pathak, J. Solar has greater techno-economic resource suitability than wind for replacing coal mining jobs. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 034065 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A. & Seppälä, J. Circular economy: the concept and its limitations. Ecol. Econ. 143, 37–46 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Macía, Y. M., Pedrera, J., Castro, M. T. & Vilalta, G. Analysis of energy sustainability in ore slurry pumping transport systems. Sustainability 11, 3191 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Pidgeon, N. F. & Spence, E. Perceptions of enhanced weathering as a biological negative emissions option. Biol. Lett. 13, 20170024 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Köhler, P. et al. Geoengineering potential of artificially enhanced silicate weathering of olivine. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 20228–20233 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Goll, D. S. et al. A representation of the phosphorus cycle for ORCHIDEE (revision 4520). Geosci. Model Dev. 10, 20228–20233 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Goll, D. S. et al. Low phosphorus availability decreases susceptibility of tropical primary productivity to droughts. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 8231–8240 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Sun, Y. et al. Global evaluation of the nutrient-enabled version of the land surface model ORCHIDEE-CNP v1.2 (r5986). Geosci. Model Dev. 14, 1987–2010 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Friedlingstein, P. et al. Global carbon budget. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 11, 1783–1838 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Ilyina, T. et al. Assessing the potential of calcium-based artificial ocean alkalinization to mitigate rising atmospheric CO2 and ocean acidification. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40, 5909–5914 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Fishkis, O., Ingwersen, J., Lamers, M., Denysenko, D. & Streck, T. Phytolith transport in soil: a field study using fluorescent labelling. Geoderma 157, 27–36 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Artaxo, P. et al. in Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis (eds Solomon, S. et al.) Ch. 2 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

  58. 58.

    Guidelines for Measuring and Managing CO2 Emission from Freight Transport Operations (ECTA, March 2011).

  59. 59.

    Brown, T. J. et al. World Mineral Production 2013–17 (British Geological Survey, 2019).

Download references


D.S.G., P.C., J.P., M.O., I.J. and S.V. acknowledge financial support from the European Research Council Synergy grant ERC‐SyG‐2013‐610028 IMBALANCE‐P. J.P. acknowledges financial support from the Spanish Government grant PID2019-110521GB-I00, the Fundación Areces grant ELEMENTAL-CLIMATE and the Catalan Government grant SGR 2017‐1005. D.S.G. and P.C. benefited from support from the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) grant ANR‐16‐CONV‐0003 (CLAND). T.A. and J.H. benefited from financial support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) priority programme on ‘Climate Engineering–Risks, Challenges and Opportunities?’, specifically the CEMICS2 project, and under Germany’s Excellence Strategy – EXC 2037 ‘Climate, Climatic Change, and Society’ – project number 390683824, contribution to the Center for Earth System Research and Sustainability (CEN) of Universität Hamburg. K.T. benefited from State assistance managed by the National Research Agency in France under the ‘Programme d’Investissements d’Avenir’ under the reference ANR-19-MPGA-0008.

Author information




D.S.G., P.C. and T.A. designed the study. D.S.G. and J.C. undertook model development and coding, with input from W.L. and T.A. T.A. provided data on rock chemistry. D.S.G. undertook the data analysis and synthesis. D.S.G. wrote the manuscript with input on sections and addition of appropriate references specific to their area of expertise from all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel S. Goll.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Nature Geoscience thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editor: Xujia Jiang.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and dissolution of basalt dust (BD) over the course of the experiment.

The accumulated CDR is given for one-time basalt dust additions of 1, 3 and 5 kg m-2 and varying P contents ranging between 0.036 and 0.286 %-weight (shaded areas). Remaining BD mass is shown in red.

Extended Data Fig. 2 The trajectories of carbon dioxide removed (CDR) as a function of the amount of dissolved basalt dust.

Shown is CDR for different amounts of basalt dust addition of 1, 3, and 5 kg m-2 (color) and varying P contents ranging between 0.036 and 0.286 %-weight (shaded areas). Abiotic CDR is shown in black.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the distribution of basalt dust.

Shown are emissions for a selection of existing transport technologies (airplane [red], road [grey], railroad [green], river [blue] & pipeline [yellow]) as a function of transportation distance. The shaded areas represent the variation in GHG emission within a transport type. The dotted line shows the median CDR potential of basalt application to hinterlands.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the production of basalt dust.

Shown are median GHG emissions for selected energy production systems: wind, nuclear, concentrated solar power, coal power coupled to carbon capture and storage (ccs), biomass burning (dedicated), gas (combined cycle), and coal (pulverized). The bars indicate maximum and minimum values.

Extended Data Fig. 5 The fate of basalt derived phosphorus.

Shown are the fractions of phosphorus released from basal dust which remains in terrestrial ecosystems (top) or is lost to aquatic systems (bottom) 50 years after application of 5 kg m-2 basalt dust of intermediate P content (0.161 %-weight).

Extended Data Fig. 6 Increase in phosphorus concentration in surface runoff due to basalt dust application.

Shown is the increase in phosphorus concentration averaged for the 50 years after application of 5 kg m-2 basalt dust of intermediate P content (0.161 %-weight).

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Note, Figs. 1–8 and Tables 1–9.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Goll, D.S., Ciais, P., Amann, T. et al. Potential CO2 removal from enhanced weathering by ecosystem responses to powdered rock. Nat. Geosci. 14, 545–549 (2021).

Download citation


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing