Life, a recent BBC nature documentary series, is a showcase of the diversity of the natural world and the extraordinary behaviour of living things. It seems that nature never fails to amaze the curious investigator; be it far, close or even underfoot.

“We know more about the movement of celestial bodies than about the soil underfoot.” - Leonardo da Vinci.

Yes, underfoot is the soil I want to talk about, which one of my professors fondly refers to as The Book of Nature. He would say, “Open The Book of Nature and read… here and there a chapter might be incomplete or you may not understand, but you can always learn about the past, the present and the future.” Indeed, my limited reading has found a lot of interesting chapters…

What is soil?

Technically defined, soil is a "natural body comprised of solids (minerals and organic matter), liquid, and gases that occurs on the land surface. It is characterized by distinguishable horizons and or the ability to support rooted plants in a natural environment".

In a much more ecological way, it is the basic structure that supports life’s primary producers, i.e. plants. It does this as a result of its unique capability to act as a reservoir of nutrients/water and then to supply those intermittently to the plants - very much like a prudent bank.

This is not the soil’s only role; it also acts as a foundation for infrastructure and as a cornerstone in the health of ecosystems, for example, by locking pollutants and harbouring ultimate decomposers. As such, it is considered as one of the three most vital natural resources, alongside air and water.

Why care for soils?

Knowledge of the soil's physical, chemical and biological make-up is important for various disciplines. For example, nutrient levels are important for crop production, soil shear strength is crucial for engineering construction, and its structure could also be a deciding factor for football pitches! It also has more exotic uses, such as a beauty accessory (see the intricate hair-styling of the Hamer of Ethiopia, for instance).

In addition to their functional roles, soils have been part of our life and culture in many ways. A recent book, Soil and Culture by Edward R. Landa and Christian Feller, pays tribute to their impact from visual arts to religion and from archaeology to disease and warfare, and as a further example, many states in the U.S. have a specific soil that is legislatively established as a ‘state soil’, just like a state bird or flower.

What is the status of soils today?

Like most of earth’s resources, soils in all parts of the world are under threat. From the physical problem of compaction to erosion, and from salinity to pollution, are increasingly degrading our soils, with negative effects on ecosystems, economy and human health. In addition, global warming threatens to release carbon trapped in soil's organic matter, exacerbating climate change and having grave consequences for life on earth.

What's being done?

As the concern on soils has come to the forefront of public awareness, national and international bodies are moving towards legislation and action. For example, the UK government’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) recently published a revised strategy on soils.

Hilary Benn, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, explains the importance of caring for soils.

Take it further

Educate yourself and others with the Soil Science Educational Resource.

Join surveys, for example, the OPAL national soil and earthworm survey.

Support those who are working to improve soils situation, such as the Soil Association.

Open University courses

Neighbourhood nature

Environment: journeys through a changing world

Other links

BBC Life

British Society for Soil Science

International Union of Soil Sciences

European Union Soil Thematic Strategy

About the author

Dr Yoseph Araya is a plant ecologist and associate lecturer at the Open University. He works on the biology and conservation of South African fynbos vegetation. Environmental education and the role of the public in research is one of his key interests.

Subscribe to Yoseph Araya's posts

 

The Institute of Mechanical Engineers (IMECHE) has published a report suggesting the geo-engineering could help provide a 'breathing space' while the world decarbonises the global economy. James Warren offers a first response.

The geo-engineering report gives readers of IMECHE's ideas some food for thought. The report selects three possible ideas which might help us lower CO₂ emissions, but all three are proven at large scale stages, and all three won't necessarily help us change our behaviour.

In fact, this is probably the one big worry here - even if geo-engineering, or what I would call a "pure techno-fix" could reduce our historical emissions to nil, we may find ourselves polluting even more.

The report does make some allusions to the rebound effect but probably not enough for my liking. One of the three ideas put forward is that of artificial trees which capture CO₂ which seems very interesting indeed.

Geo-engineering voice the opinion that we ought to get on with something, rather than wait for drawn-out multinational agreements which are sometimes not met anyway... these arguments to some extent are convincing. We might ask ourselves, just like other forms of basic science research, even if emissions capture or reflective materials don't hugely reduce our overall historic CO₂, might we still learn something useful from this exercise? I suspect the answer to this is yes, and to some extent, even if these ideas seemed very far-fetched, and don't significantly reduce CO₂ without other energy penalties, we may still gain something from them which is very important indeed.

We may learn which options to go for in a big way in terms of easy gains for example, and which are much harder to achieve with engineering, whether it be mechanical or social. With respect to reflectivity and countering the urban heat island effect, we also ought to be thinking much more deeply and widely about how we can lower the current overall energy use in heating homes.

Some estimates say that more than 50% of UK building stock needs to be torn down in order to start this new lower consumption process - so how does this square with the urban heat effects.

The one thing which still comes across is the rebound effect; if we reduce a typical UK citizen's 12 or 13 tonnes of CO₂ per year to, say, half that - by whatever means - what will we be doing to keep it at six, or even - if possible - to lower it further and further? The report describes artificial trees as eventually being decommissioned, but who will police emissions to ensure that the growth of artificial forests doesn't take over?

Even the idea of artificial trees, or bio-algae buildings is a good start to get people thinking about their own use of energy - but we need to be careful: too many techno-fixes may result in a strong but unwanted backlash in further emissions.

Find out more

Discover more about The Design Group at The Open University

Explore The Open University course Environment: Journeys Through A Changing World

The University of Melbourne's Jon Morris explains Urban Heat Islands

In-depth guide to the rebound effect

It’s the season for an overstretched seaside metaphor: with around three months to go I’m beginning to sense a gathering swell of interest in the Copenhagen climate talks later this year. We’ll all be hearing plenty more about ‘COP 15’ (the Fifteenth Conference of the Parties in the UN climate policy negotiations) in the weeks to come. Tempting to bring in plenty more storm (teacup?) surf (opportunity?) and shipping analogies but I’ll resist. Enough now just to note down a few thoughts about what I anticipate about the conference and its significance. I’ll be going as a member of an OU team that will be working to make sense of the event and to analyse and communicate day by day.

2008 UNFCCC conference in Poznan.
[Image © copyright Oxfam International, some rights reserved]

COP 15 is going to have some people crying from the rooftops that this meeting decides the fate of all humanity and others sniping about another pointless UN junket. The truth is that this meeting does matter - a great deal - but it needs to be put in perspective. This is a significant moment in the development of an international political process that started in the early 1990s, and is set to go on for many years into the future. The Copenhagen meeting aims to set the next bundle of targets, timetables and mechanisms when those outlined in the Kyoto deal of 1997 run their course in 2012.

Many things are different this time around. International climate politics is more complex but also more mature. It is no longer simply a matter of the rich North admitting 'mea culpa' and obsessing about mitigating their own emissions and funnelling some 'clean tech' cash to the developing world. The booming manufacturers and sprouting middle classes of the developing world giants of India and China have made them major CO2 polluters. Political leaders and publics in the South are also much more aware of the potentially huge consequences of climate change for their societies.

Things have moved on in the North too. Levels of awareness of the science have increased, but along with this an awareness of the awkward questions raised by it (wind farms and more nuclear waste in your backyard? Higher electricity and fuel bills?). These changes and challenges North and South are neatly summarised in the shifting US and Chinese positions. The financial crash is significant too: it has revived a sense that the state has both responsibility for and can have some power over the economy and it has breathed life into phrases like 'green new deal'. Hence these talks are going on in the context of a much more cautious and critical view of unfettered markets.

But with climate change going up the public agenda around the world government ministers are now working in the full glare of media attention. The media want conflict, event and personality, and in looking for these they can distort the (dull but important) work of international policy development. Bluntly, the talks are about who cuts emissions by how much and when. Every move has consequences and it’s no longer enough to talk glibly about 'low hanging fruit' of easy emissions cuts. To meet climate change with the kind of energy and imagination that will be required will need us to rethink and rewire almost every aspect of contemporary life. The 24/7 short attention span world of the media may not allow much political space for this.

Nevertheless we are helped by the fact that plenty of new people have joined the climate change story since the talks that produced the Kyoto Protocol in the 1990s. Lord Stern is one of them. This respected economist was commissioned by Gordon Brown and Tony Blair to lay out the options for a mainstream western government. Stern found that early action to cut emissions and avoid warming ends up much cheaper than delaying action and paying big bills later to cope with the effects of climate change. And cutting emissions later is also tougher.

So the arguments have been piling up in favour of a robust deal this year. But we shouldn't raise expectations too high: as one wise head noted how people always overestimate what they can do in a year and underestimate what they can do in a decade. Also, focusing on the international politics can distract us from the fact that there are many other creative and determined responses to environmental change in play. On that note, my next post will be about a new Open University project - Creative Climate - that will work to capture the human story of environmental change from 2010 to 2020. We’ll be hoping that plenty of people in the OU community – students, associates, staff – will contribute to that work. More on that soon.

About the author

Joe Smith is a lecturer in the environment at the Open University and chair of Interdependence Day. He has written books on climate change and sustainability, the media and global issues, and the green movement.

Subscribe to Joe Smith's posts