Choosing the rock
Not every rock is worth spreading. A good feedstock is rich in calcium and magnesium, locked in minerals that dissolve quickly, cheap, safe and close to farmland. Its chemistry sets a ceiling on how much CO₂ it could ever capture; its mineralogy decides how much of that ceiling you actually reach.
- List the five things that make a rock a good feedstock for enhanced weathering
- Compare basalt, dunite, wollastonite, granite and limestone, and say why only some are useful
- Calculate a rock's theoretical CO2 potential from its chemical analysis, from first principles
- Explain why the theoretical potential is a ceiling, not a forecast
- Name the lab measurements used to characterise a feedstock and what each one tells you
In Carbon removal 101 and The chemistry of enhanced weathering you saw the idea: spread crushed silicate rock on soil, let it dissolve, and the released calcium and magnesium end up holding CO2 as dissolved bicarbonate. The rock that goes on the field is called the feedstock. Choosing it is the first decision in any project, and most of the later numbers (how much CO2, how fast, at what cost, with what risks) follow from it.
This module builds directly on Minerals & lithology (mafic versus felsic, and the Goldich series) and Weathering, erosion & soil (what controls weathering rate, and why grain size matters).
Five things a good feedstock needs
Lots of Ca and Mg
Calcium and magnesium are the workhorses: each released Ca²⁺ or Mg²⁺ ion can pair with two bicarbonate ions. Sodium and potassium count too, but most rocks carry less of them, and in less reactive minerals.
In minerals that dissolve fast
The calcium has to come out on a human timescale. Minerals near the top of the Goldich series (olivine, pyroxene, calcium-rich plagioclase) and volcanic glass give it up quickly. Feldspars low in calcium, and quartz, barely do.
Cheap, plentiful, nearby
A meaningful project spreads tens of thousands of tonnes or more. The rock must exist in that volume, ideally already crushed, and close to farmland, because hauling rock is expensive and emits CO2. Quarry fines and other by-products are ideal.
Low in harmful elements and dust
Potentially toxic elements such as nickel and chromium must stay low enough not to build up in soil or crops. Fine powders are a dust hazard for workers, especially if they contain quartz.
Good for the soil
Farmers have to want it. A rock that supplies potassium, phosphorus, silicon and other nutrients, and that neutralises acidic soil (a liming effect), offers something back to the farmer besides carbon.
No rock wins on everything
The rocks with the most magnesium also tend to carry the most nickel and chromium. The safest, most abundant rocks often react more slowly. Choosing a feedstock is a trade-off, which is why the candidates below each have pros and cons.
The candidates
The chemistry is reported as oxides: geochemists express each element as if it were combined with oxygen (CaO, MgO, Na2O, K2O) and give the result in weight per cent (wt%), the share of the rock's mass. "10 wt% CaO" means 100 kg of calcium oxide's worth of calcium in every tonne of rock. The values below are typical and illustrative; real rocks vary from quarry to quarry and even bench to bench.
Basalt
The most abundant volcanic rock on Earth, made of pyroxene, calcium-rich plagioclase, sometimes olivine, and often some glass. Typically ~10 wt% CaO and ~7 wt% MgO.
Pros: huge volumes, widely quarried for aggregate so fines already exist; moderate potential (at the theoretical ceiling, about 0.31 t CO2 per tonne from calcium and magnesium, or about 0.35 t including sodium and potassium; typically ~0.25–0.4 depending on composition); usually modest nickel and chromium; supplies Ca, Mg, K, P and Si. India's Deccan Traps, a pile of lava flows covering roughly half a million square kilometres of western and central India, is one of the largest basalt provinces in the world.
Cons: weathers more slowly than olivine-rich rock, so less removal per tonne per year.
Dunite and other olivine-rich rocks
Ultramafic rocks have less than ~45% silica and are mostly olivine and pyroxene. Dunite is more than 90% olivine, with ~45 wt% MgO.
Pros: the highest potential of any common rock, about 1 t CO2 per tonne at the ceiling; olivine sits at the top of the Goldich series.
Cons: nickel and chromium are typically ten or more times higher than in basalt; if the rock has been altered to serpentine it may contain asbestos-like fibrous minerals; much less abundant at the surface, and it brings little potassium or phosphorus.
Wollastonite
Wollastonite is a simple calcium silicate, CaSiO3, the very mineral in the textbook weathering equation. It forms in skarns, rocks made where hot magma bakes and reacts with limestone. A wollastonite-rich skarn might hold ~40 wt% CaO.
Pros: dissolves fast, calcium-rich, low in nickel and chromium; often used in weathering experiments.
Cons: rare. Deposits are small and the mineral is mined as a speciality industrial product, so it cannot supply climate-scale volumes.
Granite and most sandstones
Granite is mostly quartz, potassium feldspar and sodium-rich plagioclase: ~2 wt% CaO, under 1 wt% MgO, but ~3.5 wt% Na2O and ~4.5 wt% K2O. Most sandstones are mostly quartz.
Why it fails: on paper the sodium and potassium give granite a small potential. In practice quartz barely weathers at all, and feldspars low in calcium dissolve far more slowly than basalt's minerals, so very little reacts within the few years over which a project is usually credited. Quartz-rich dust is also a health hazard.
Limestone and agricultural lime
Limestone is calcium carbonate, CaCO3: ~50–55 wt% CaO. Farmers have spread it as agricultural lime for centuries to fix acidic soils.
Why it isn't carbon removal: its calcium is already bound to carbon. When it dissolves in carbonic acid, at most about half the carbon in the bicarbonate comes from the air; when it dissolves in the strong acids common in fertilised soils, it releases its carbon as CO2. Greenhouse-gas inventories generally count liming as an emission, not a removal.
By-products and wastes
Quarries producing aggregate for roads and concrete generate fines, dust-sized material that is often hard to sell. Some mine tailings and industrial slags are also reactive and calcium- or magnesium-rich.
Pros: the energy-intensive grinding has already been done, and using them can solve a disposal problem.
Cons: the composition is whatever the source rock or process left behind, so metals, contaminants and consistency need careful checking batch by batch.
What sets the speed: minerals and grain size
The vertical axis of the chart above is only qualitative. Chemists put numbers on it by measuring a mineral's dissolution rate: how many moles of it dissolve from each square metre of exposed surface every second. Rates for common minerals span roughly nine powers of ten, so they are drawn on a log scale, where each gridline is ten times faster than the one to its left.
Three things stand out. Calcite dissolves something like ten thousand times faster than olivine, which is why limestone sits at the top of the chart above even though it does not count as removal. Basalt's minerals (glass, pyroxene and calcium-rich plagioclase) dissolve within a factor of ten or so of olivine. And granite's sodium and potassium feldspars are roughly a hundred times slower again, with quartz slower still.
The rate is per square metre, so the other lever is how much surface you expose. Grinding does not change the mineral; it changes the area. Halve a grain's size in every direction and you get eight smaller grains with twice the total surface. A tonne of 10 µm powder has about ten times the surface of a tonne of 100 µm powder. And because a grain dissolves inward from its surface at a steady pace, a grain ten times smaller is also gone about ten times sooner.
Mineral and grain size multiply. A fine powder of a slower mineral can keep pace with a coarse powder of a faster one, which is why labs measure both (see Characterising a feedstock, below). To watch the two combine over months and years, try the dissolution simulator in The chemistry of enhanced weathering.
Counting the ceiling: theoretical potential
How much CO2 could a tonne of rock capture if every bit of its reactive calcium, magnesium, sodium and potassium dissolved? You can work this out from the chemical analysis alone, with nothing more than the bookkeeping of electric charge.
Chemists count atoms in moles: a fixed number of atoms or molecules (about 6 × 1023), chosen so that one mole of a substance weighs its molecular mass in grams. One mole of CaO weighs 56.1 g; one mole of MgO, 40.3 g; one mole of CO2, 44 g. Dividing a mass by the molar mass converts "how heavy" into "how many".
Now follow the charges. Each calcium or magnesium ion carries two positive charges (Ca²⁺, Mg²⁺). In water, those must be balanced by negative ions, and in natural waters that mostly means bicarbonate, HCO3⁻, which carries one negative charge and one carbon atom taken from CO2. So:
MgO behaves like CaO, and K2O like Na2O: every mole of any of these four oxides can, at most, hold two moles of CO2 as dissolved bicarbonate. That is the bicarbonate pathway.
There is a second, less efficient ending. If the water becomes saturated, calcium and magnesium can precipitate as solid carbonate minerals (CaCO3, MgCO3). Each solid carbonate holds only one carbon per calcium or magnesium; the second CO2 is released again as it forms. Sodium and potassium carbonates are far too soluble to form in soils, so on this solid-carbonate pathway only CaO and MgO count, at one mole of CO2 each. In practice it is mostly CaCO3: magnesium carbonates rarely form in soils, so the figure for magnesium is an upper bound.
Put together, the calculation is: for each oxide, divide its mass in a tonne of rock by its molar mass, multiply by the moles of CO2 it can hold (2 on the bicarbonate pathway; 1 for CaO and MgO on the solid-carbonate pathway), and multiply by 44 kg per kilomole of CO2. Add up the oxides. This is a widely used formula in the weathering literature, often named after the researchers who popularised it (you may hear it called the Steinour or Renforth approach), and some versions add correction factors.
Take a basalt with about 10 wt% CaO and 7 wt% MgO, and ignore the smaller sodium and potassium for simplicity. One tonne of it contains 100 kg of CaO and 70 kg of MgO.
Convert to moles. 100 kg ÷ 56.1 kg per kmol = 1.78 kmol of CaO. 70 kg ÷ 40.3 = 1.74 kmol of MgO. Together, 3.52 kmol.
Apply the pathway. Bicarbonate: 3.52 × 2 = 7.04 kmol of CO2, × 44 kg per kmol ≈ 310 kg CO2 per tonne of rock. Solid carbonate: half that, about 155 kg.
Adding the basalt's ~2.5 wt% Na2O and ~0.8 wt% K2O raises the bicarbonate figure to about 350 kg. But treat every one of these numbers as a ceiling. It assumes all of the rock dissolves, that none of the cations are taken up by plants, held on clay or locked into new minerals, that the rock was dissolved by carbonic acid rather than a stronger acid, and that none of the carbon leaks back out downstream (in the ocean, for example, the carbonate chemistry means somewhat less than two CO2 stay stored per Ca²⁺; see The chemistry of enhanced weathering). Real removal over a few years is a fraction of the ceiling.
Pick a rock or set the analysis yourself. The chart shows how much CO2 each oxide could hold at the theoretical ceiling. The panel underneath asks the harder questions: how fast will it react, is the carbon new, and is the rock safe? All presets are typical, illustrative compositions, not measurements of a particular rock.
Carbon already in the rock as carbonate minerals such as calcite, measured as inorganic carbon. Loss on ignition gives an upper limit, because it also counts water.
What the calculator simplifies. The ceiling assumes every grain dissolves, in carbonic acid, with no calcium or magnesium held back by soil or crops. Calcium and magnesium already present as carbonate get no credit at all, a conservative choice: dissolving calcite in carbonic acid takes up at most one CO2 from the air, and strong acids release its carbon instead. The speed and safety ratings are typical categories for each rock type, not measurements. None of these numbers is removal; see Measuring removal (MRV).
Characterising a feedstock
Before a rock goes on a field, a lab has to answer three questions: what is in it, how fast will it react, and is it safe? Each step depends on careful sampling, because an assay (a lab measurement of what a sample contains) is only as good as the sample behind it. Mineral explorers live by the same rule (see Prospecting & the exploration pipeline).
- Sampling & QA/QCRepresentative samples from the stockpile, checked by QA/QC (quality assurance and control): duplicate samples, blanks that should contain nothing, and reference standards of known composition.
- Chemistry & mineralsX-ray fluorescence (XRF) gives the major elements as oxide wt%, the input to the potential calculation. X-ray diffraction (XRD) identifies which minerals hold the Ca and Mg, and how much is amorphous (glass with no crystal structure), which dissolves fast.
- Grain size & surfaceLaser diffraction measures the particle size distribution, summarised as d50 and d80. BET gas adsorption measures specific surface area in m² per gram (1 m²/g = 1,000 m²/kg, the unit in the surface-area chart above), including cracks and pores.
- Trace metals (ICP-MS)Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry measures Ni, Cr, Cd, As, Pb and others at parts-per-million levels.
- Dissolution testsLab experiments, soil columns and pot trials show how fast the real rock dissolves in real soil.
Two details trip people up. First, chemistry alone cannot tell you reactivity. Two rocks with identical oxide totals can dissolve at very different rates if one holds its calcium in glass and pyroxene and the other in feldspar. That is why XRD sits next to XRF. Second, not all the CaO in an analysis is available. If the rock contains some calcite (calcium carbonate, common in altered basalts), that calcium is already paired with carbon, just as in limestone, and must be subtracted. Labs measure this as inorganic carbon, and it also shows up in the loss on ignition, the weight a sample loses when heated strongly as water and CO2 are driven off.
Grain size is summarised from a cumulative curve. The d50 is the size that half the mass of the powder is finer than; the d80, the size that 80% is finer than. A human hair is roughly 50–100 µm (micrometres, thousandths of a millimetre) thick, so in the example below, roughly half the powder by mass is finer than a hair is thick.
Safety thresholds are set by regulators and certification standards, not by the rock. As a rough guide, basalts usually carry nickel and chromium at tens to a few hundred parts per million (ppm), grams per tonne, while ultramafic rocks often carry a few thousand. Regulators look both at total concentrations and at how much is in a form that can dissolve and move. The other hazard is dust: respirable crystalline silica, fine quartz particles small enough to reach deep into the lungs, can cause the lung disease silicosis, so quartz content and dust control matter wherever rock powder is handled.
Basalt is the obvious feedstock for enhanced weathering in India. The Deccan Traps and other basalt provinces give it in enormous volumes, it is already quarried for construction, it is generally far lower in nickel and chromium than ultramafic rock, and it brings nutrients that farmers value. Its theoretical ceiling is lower than dunite's, so the job becomes getting as much of that ceiling as possible to react, and proving it. Every claim about removal starts with a well-sampled, well-characterised feedstock: its chemistry sets the maximum, and its mineralogy and grain size shape the measurements described in Measuring removal (MRV).
Characterising a feedstock and evaluating an ore body are the same task with a different goal: sample the rock well, measure its chemistry and minerals, and judge how far a few samples can stand for the whole. The skills carry straight across to mineral exploration.