Skip to content
How to read this

Every claim carries a flag and a source.

Disclosure: Guy Hudson, Martlet’s founder, chairs Loam Bio. This example includes Loam material and studies involving Loam. The rights and agreement labels demonstrate the format and do not establish signed contributor permission or an independent assessment of Loam.

Consensus

The field broadly agrees.

Contested

The field is split. Both sides are named.

Outlier

A minority position, never the headline.

A superscript like [S1] links to the source panel and the named work a claim is drawn from.

01 / Where the field agrees

Soil carbon is real, and it is reversible.

  • Soil carbon persistence depends on continuing movement and transformation within soils. Scientific and policy definitions of permanence do not always align.[S1]

    S1 · Dynarski, Bossio & Scow

  • Evidence supports soil carbon saturation, with greater sequestration efficiency in soils further from saturation. Capacity varies with soil and conditions.[S13]

    S13 · Stewart, Paustian, Conant, Plante & Six

  • Particulate and mineral-associated organic matter differ in persistence. The fraction receiving a carbon gain matters when assessing its durability.[S17]

    S17 · Lavallee, Soong & Cotrufo

02 / Where the field genuinely disagrees

Can soil carbon be made durable enough to credit?

This is contested, so we do not resolve it. Both camps are placed side by side, with the strongest version of each.

Camp A · Permanence sceptics

Apparent no-till gains are largely a change in depth distribution, not net sequestration. The mitigation value is widely overstated.[S2]

Because soil carbon is impermanent, it cannot truly offset durable fossil-fuel emissions. Treating that gap as closed is a category error.[S5]

Powlson et al. · Saifuddin et al.

Camp B · Durability is engineerable

A fungal inoculum can shift sequestered carbon toward more stable, mineral-associated fractions.[S14]

In controlled trials the resistant carbon pool rose 20.94% (p<0.001), with fungal necromass producing negative priming. This is mechanism support, held apart from the field results.[S14]

The prototype also records company field results of +5.01 tCO2e/ha (p=0.14) and +7.56 tCO2e/ha (p=0.07). These are directionally positive but not statistically significant. [S14]

Loam Bio (developer) · related mechanism studies [S15][S16]

Flagged outlier · not the central estimate

In Loam’s reviewed field-trial fractionation, about 75% of the carbon built over two years was mineral-associated.[S18] This is a striking figure, from the developer’s own data. It is on the record, and it is not used to carry the conclusion while the wider field’s spread does not support it.

Source panel · what sits behind a citation

Click any citation and this is what you see.

S1Tier 3 · Cited, not cleared

Katherine A. Dynarski, Deborah A. Bossio & Kate M. Scow

Dynamic Stability of Soil Carbon: Reassessing the 'Permanence' of Soil Carbon Sequestration (2020)

Read the published source →
Standing
Synthesis of the persistence/permanence literature
Stance
Dynamic stability and policy definitions
Rights
Cited, not cleared under a Martlet contributor agreement.
Context
Named as a published source. No Martlet contribution or endorsement implied.
S2Tier 3 · Cited, not cleared

David Powlson et al.

Limited potential of no-till agriculture for climate change mitigation (2014)

Read the published source →
Standing
Senior soil scientist. led international review
Stance
Sceptic: mitigation overstated
Rights
Cited, not cleared under a Martlet contributor agreement.
Context
Named as a published source. No Martlet contribution or endorsement implied.
S5Tier 3 · Cited, not cleared

Saifuddin et al.

Soil carbon offset markets are not a just climate solution (2024)

Read the published source →
Standing
Peer-reviewed critique
Stance
Strong sceptic: not a fossil offset
Rights
Cited, not cleared under a Martlet contributor agreement.
Context
Named as a published source. No Martlet contribution or endorsement implied.
S13Tier 3 · Cited, not cleared

Catherine E. Stewart, Keith Paustian, Richard T. Conant, Alain F. Plante & Johan Six

Soil carbon saturation: concept, evidence and evaluation (2007)

Read the published source →
Standing
Foundational saturation-concept research
Stance
Saturation science
Rights
Cited, not cleared under a Martlet contributor agreement.
Context
Named as a published source. No Martlet contribution or endorsement implied.
S14Tier 2 · Illustrative

Loam Bio

CarbonBuilder 2026 Technical Manual (2026)

Company website, not the underlying document →
Standing
Developer applying the stable-fraction thesis commercially. trials with USYD, WSU, UQ
Stance
Developer: durability is engineerable
Rights
Illustrative rights record. Pending Loam sign-off. No executed permission evidenced.
Context
Company material. Guy Hudson chairs Loam Bio. Prototype figures have not been independently verified for this example.
S15Tier 3 · Cited, not cleared

Emiko K. Stuart, Laura Castañeda-Gómez, Wolfram Buss, Jeff R. Powell & Yolima Carrillo

Non-mycorrhizal root-associated fungi increase soil C stocks and stability via diverse mechanisms (2024)

Read the published source →
Standing
Peer-reviewed controlled mechanism study
Stance
Mechanism support in controlled conditions
Rights
Cited, not cleared under a Martlet contributor agreement.
Context
Used isolates screened by Loam Bio. Funded by Western Sydney University and SoilCQuest2031. This is not independent replication of commercial field outcomes.
S16Tier 3 · Cited, not cleared

Yolima Carrillo, Emiko K. Stuart & Jeff R. Powell

Necromass of Diverse Root-Associated Fungi Suppresses Decomposition of Native Soil Carbon via Impacts of Their Traits (2025)

Read the published source →
Standing
Peer-reviewed laboratory mechanism study
Stance
Mechanism support in controlled conditions
Rights
Cited, not cleared under a Martlet contributor agreement.
Context
The publication discloses support from Loam Bio, SoilCQuest and Western Sydney University, and Loam-screened isolates. This is not independent commercial field validation.
S17Tier 3 · Cited, not cleared

Jocelyn M. Lavallee, Jennifer L. Soong & M. Francesca Cotrufo

Conceptualizing soil organic matter into particulate and mineral-associated forms to address global change in the 21st century (2020)

Read the published source →
Standing
Canonical framework for soil-carbon fractions
Stance
Framework: fractions differ in persistence
Rights
Cited, not cleared under a Martlet contributor agreement.
Context
Named as a published source. No Martlet contribution or endorsement implied.
S18Tier 2 · Illustrative

Loam Bio

Durable Carbon Removal at Scale (2026)

Company website, not the underlying document →
Standing
Developer strategy/marketing deck presenting CarbonBuilder field results and crediting approach
Stance
Developer: durable removal at scale
Rights
Illustrative rights record. Pending Loam sign-off. No executed permission evidenced.
Context
Company material. Guy Hudson chairs Loam Bio. Prototype figures have not been independently verified for this example.

Source metadata has been checked where publisher records are available. This remains an illustrative extract, with no claim that named authors have reviewed or endorsed it. Loam documents are represented by source records, not reproduced here.

03 / What would move the answer

The evidence that would change our reading.

  • →Independent, multi-year re-measurement of the mineral-associated fraction on working farms, not company strip trials.
  • →A crediting standard that prices impermanence directly, rather than crediting a 100-year claim against a buffer pool.
  • →Field results at scale that hold up once soils approach saturation.

See how dated claims would be tracked in the illustrative resolution ledger. Want a report like this on your own question? Discuss a pilot.