IF YOU'RE WORRIED about the hole in the ozone layer, water pollution or world hunger, look down.

The solution to a variety of environmental and world hunger woes lies beneath your feet, says a world-renowned soil scientist with the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center.

"I like to tell my students, ‘In soil we trust,’" said Rattan Lal, director of the Carbon Management and Sequestration Program. "It's time we give proper respect to what we call dirt."

Lal's research shows that the amount of carbon in soils could be increased 10 times in U.S. cropland alone, to 150 million to 200 million tons. Another 150 to 200 million could be held in the U.S. forest biomass, including trees and plants. At a conservative $5 to $10 per ton, that puts the potential value of sequestered carbon at $750 million to $2 billion for cropland.

Putting carbon back into soil and plant life achieves a number of beneficial results. It makes the soil more productive, increasing yields and feeding more people. Soils with carbon-containing residue do a better job of holding on to nutrients and crop chemicals, so water is cleaner. Carbon that is tied up in the soil stays out of the atmosphere, protecting the ozone layer.

Lal has testified to Congress regarding the idea of "carbon credits." Companies could pay landowners to sequester carbon as energy credits while industry searches for other solutions to air pollution.

He participates with a group of researchers at Ohio State looking at everything from policy to economics in regards to carbon sequestration. Among their projects, they are measuring the amount of carbon sequestered in fields of farmers who have implemented conservation tillage.

Bill Richards, a Circleville farmer and former chief of the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, has kept his land in continuous no-till for 25 years, and he hasn't plowed the ground for 40 years.

Increasing the organic matter in soils helps with water quality as well as with crop yields, Richards said. Improved water infiltration rates made the difference during the 2002 drought. "Our corn yields were amazingly good. We had a single four-inch rain in July, and the water soaked right in." Richards' soil absorbs water at the rate of one inch in two minutes, versus more than 20 minutes on nearby conventionally tilled farms.

To Maurice Mausbach, deputy chief for soil survey and resource assessment at USDA, soil health is the most important benefit from carbon sequestration. He believes the Conservation Security Program in the 2002 Farm Bill "offers us a great opportunity to highlight soil carbon management as a priority in the protection and enhancement of our soil and water resources."

Brent Sohngen, an agricultural economist working with Lal on carbon sequestration, believes policy makers must find a way to encourage continuous conservation tillage. Many farmers use conservation tillage on soybeans and not corn. When they rotate into corn, the carbon benefits are lost.

Whether or not the 2002 Farm Bill will address that issue will depend on how the rules are written and how appropriations are made, Sohngen said. Richards believes farmers, who take on additional risks from insects, weeds and diseases when they use conservation tillage, ought to be compensated for something that benefits all of society.

Rattan Lal's research, and that of his colleagues, shows the amount of carbon in soils could be increased 10 times, by 150 to 200 million tons.

Bill Richards, Circleville, Ohio, farmer and former chief of the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, has not plowed his land for 40 years and has had his farm in continuous no-till for 25 years. In this field, he is raising rye as a cover crop following corn silage harvest.

As the amount of carbon in soils increases and moves to deeper levels in the soil profile, the environment benefits in a number of ways. Tying up the carbon into the soil helps protect the ozone layer, offsetting pollution from industry and automobiles. Water infiltration rates increase, preventing erosion and water pollution.