Climate change

Iowa Farmer Battles Today's Pests While Eyeing Tomorrow's 'Mean Sixteen' Threats

Fri, 12 Dec 2025 18:55:16 GMT

For Worth County, Iowa, farmer Sarah Tweeten, the list of high-priority agronomic threats isn’t a political abstract — it’s a harsh reality she deals with every season.

Farming with her parents, Brian and Julie, and her uncle Roger, Tweeten has been steering the partnership toward more resilient cropping practices since joining the operation in 2021. This includes shifting from conventional tillage to strip tillage and splitting nitrogen applications.

The changes are part of a broader mindset: Protecting yields today from weeds, disease and insects while aggressively preparing for the next generation of agronomic threats. This forward-thinking approach is what led Tweeten to Washington, D.C., earlier this week as a Farm Journal Foundation farmer ambassador to help introduce a new report: “ The Mean Sixteen: Major Biosecurity Threats Facing U.S. Agriculture and How Policy Solutions Can Help. ”

Today’s Battles and Tomorrow’s Warnings
Researched and developed by Stephanie Mercier, PhD, the report takes an in-depth look at 16 significant pest issues U.S. farmers face now or could realistically in the future.

Tweeten is already battling a couple of the problems that underpin the urgency behind the research. For example, Palmer amaranth (pigweed) is gaining ground in her fields and across Iowa. The pervasive broadleaf weed can drastically reduce yields, with studies showing corn yield reductions between 11% and 91% and soybean yield reductions of 17% to 68%.

“We’ve struggled with pigweed as it continues to establish more resistance to our herbicides in our toolkit,” Tweeten says.

Two additional agronomic issues the report details include:

1. Asian Soybean Rust. First detected in the U.S. in Louisiana in 2004, this fungal disease has spread to southern states like Georgia and Mississippi. Scientists warn that warming winters could enable its migration to the Midwest, adding to existing disease pressures.

2. Corn Ear Rot. It can lead to aflatoxin production, making corn unmarketable and posing risks to humans and livestock. Aflatoxin is an issue Pickens County, Ala., farmer Annie Dee says is an ongoing problem for corn growers in her area.

“If we have aflatoxin, it can be impossible to sell the corn,” says Dee, also a Farm Journal Foundation Farmer ambassador.

A more recent threat she references is the impact of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (bird flu) on local poultry farms.

Since January 2022, HPAI has been confirmed in a commercial or backyard poultry flock in all 50 states.

(USDA)

“An important market for us is poultry feed meal, so that’s a constant worry. The trickle-down effect is if we can’t move our corn then we can’t meet our financial obligations,” Dee adds.

Despite agricultural R&D offering a high ROI — $20 in benefits for every $1 spent — the Farm Journal Foundation report notes public funding for ag research has been declining over the past two decades.

“Farmers urgently need sustained support for aflatoxin research and prevention because these risks threaten our yields, our markets and the trust consumers place in American agriculture,” Dee says.

U.S. public spending on ag research and development has been falling for two decades.

(USDA-ERS)

African Swine Fever Has ‘Devastating Potential’
Looking to the future, Tweeten says she is concerned about African swine fever (ASF) and its potential to impact crop farmers as well as hog producers. The highly contagious swine disease hasn’t been detected in the U.S. mainland, but it isn’t far away. ASF has been confirmed in the Caribbean countries of Haiti and the Dominican Republic, roughly 700 miles from Miami, Fla.

“Being a farmer from Iowa, where we have probably eight times the amount of pigs as we do people, an outbreak of ASF would be just devastating to our state,” Tweeten says.

Hogs are among the biggest customers for the corn and soybeans Tweeten and her family grow. If African swine fever were to shut down hog production or exports, it wouldn’t just be a blow to livestock producers – it would hurt the entire agricultural community, she contends.

Read about 5 livestock diseases that could impact U.S. food security and economic stability.

Food Security Is National Security
When it comes to justifying funding for ag research, Tweeten knows there’s competition for every federal dollar. But she believes agriculture deserves a front-row seat — not only because of its economic weight and impact on farmers, but because of its role in national security.

“There’s that argument that food security is national security,” she says. “If there’s one thing COVID made us aware of, it’s that a disruption to our food chain can be terrifying, quite frankly.”

The pandemic made consumers and policymakers more aware of supply chain vulnerability. In 2020, the shock to the supply chain came from a human disease and logistical bottlenecks.

(Sarah Williams Photography)

Next time, Tweeten says, the disruption could just as easily come from animal or plant disease — whether African swine fever in hogs, Asian soybean rust or some other pathogen in crops. She worries about scenarios where farmers could face a fast-moving disease or crop pest while critical tools are still hung up in regulatory delays.

Her message: Farmers need a full toolbox, not one that’s half-built by the time a threat arrives.

“Ag needs to be in a good position when these sorts of emerging diseases and pests come into the country,” she says, “to have the tools in our toolbox ready for farmers to pull out.”

About the Farm Journal Foundation
The Farm Journal Foundation is a farmer-centered, non-profit, nonpartisan organization established in 2010. It works to advance agricultural innovation, food and nutrition security, conservation, and rural economic development.

Unexpected Impact From Illinois Dust Storm Hits Corn, Soybeans

Wed, 28 May 2025 17:45:12 GMT

It was bad enough Illinois farmers affected by the May 16 dust storm saw priceless topsoil blow off their fields and into the hinterlands. Adding insult to injury, many corn and soybean growers now face not only damaged or destroyed crops but will need to reapply fertilizer and herbicide products in some scenarios, says Ken Ferrie, Farm Journal Field Agronomist.

“If you ever tried to imagine what the Dust Bowl was like in the 1930s all you had to do was be in central Illinois that Friday afternoon,” Ferrie says. “You didn’t need your imagination to experience the Dust Bowl, you got to live it. Now, granted, it was only a few hours long. But it blew soil, it blew residue, it blew trees over, did property damage in some areas, and some of our most precious, McLean County soil was deposited in Lake Michigan.”

On Friday, May 16, 2025, an NOAA satellite captured images of a dust storm that pushed across northern Illinois, northern Indiana and the metropolitan area of Chicago. The dust storm was driven by strong winds, gusting over 60 mph at times.

(NOAA)

Not only McLean County topsoil went north to Chicago and beyond. Ferrie is concerned recent surface-applied herbicides and nitrogen were likely blown away with the soil and residue, too.

“Some of these fields that were sprayed that did not receive a rain to move it into the soil and get it activated are at risk now,” he explains. “We’ll need to keep an eye on these fields for weed escapes and the loss of nitrogen. We can make some estimates on the nitrogen losses with nitrate testing, but herbicide losses will only show up in weed escapes.”

Additional Consequences From The Storm
Ferrie, who is based just south of Bloomington, Ill., reports the dust storm generated a number of farmer requests, calls asking him to come inspect fields for crop damage. He notes that affected cornfields looked like they received a hard frost. With soybeans, some fields had plants sheared off at the ground level.

“In most cases with corn, I saw mainly cosmetic damage, and the corn will bounce back,” Ferrie says. “But in cases where the corn was covered up by dust, the crop will not come back, and it’ll need to be replanted. This occurred mainly where grass strips worked like a snow fence and the dirt piled up on the corn. In some areas buried in residue, we may need to burn that off the field before we can replant.”

Farmers who want to apply fertilizer or herbicides will benefit from holding off making any spray applications until affected crops show signs of a robust recovery, primarily in the form of new growth, he adds.

“Growth out of the whorl tells you that things are getting back on track,” Ferrie says. “We e do want to apply [herbicides] based on weed height, but this would be one time where I would put a pause on it and let this corn recover before we come back in with our post applications.”

Third Consecutive Year Of Spring Dust Storms In Illinois
Rains totaling 1” to 3” in the days following the storm, helped replenish soil moisture levels and start the recovery process in some affected corn and soybean crops.

But Ferrie points out that the dust storm marked the third year in a row such an event has swept through parts of Illinois, and the storms have cast a bad light on production agriculture in the region.

“Guys, we need to step back and take a minute to evaluate what we just witnessed,” Ferrie says. “Our soil went a quarter mile in the air, blew all the way to Chicago, closing roads and causing accidents.”

Such risks and consequences from dust storms are garnering more critical attention from the general public and scientists.

A 10-year study done by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and published by the American Meteorological Society in 2023, found a total of 232 deaths occurred from windblown dust events between 2007 through 2017.

“We found that dust events caused life losses comparable to events like hurricanes and wildfires in some years,” says Daniel Tong, research scientist at NOAA and an associate professor of Atmospheric Oceanic and Earth Sciences at George Mason University, in a news release. “Greater awareness could reduce crashes and possibly save lives.”

Haboobs, another term for intense dust storms, can occur anywhere in the U.S., but are most common in the Southwest , according to the National Weather Service. El Paso, Texas, has seen 10 in 2025 alone, reports Inside Climate News .

El Paso, Texas, has been hit by 10 dust storms so far this year.

(Tom Gill)

Two other recent examples of severe dust storms include:

March 3 – a crash involving 11 vehicles on Interstate 10 occurred near Albuquerque, N.M., left three people dead. Authorities there say heavy dust storms contributed to the crash by severely limiting visibility.

March 14 – Kansas Highway Patrol officials reported eight fatality victims from an Interstate 71-vehicle pileup that occurred during a dust storm.

Fortunately, no fatalities were reported as a result of the Illinois dust storm that occurred May 16.

Calls For Action To Reduce Dust Storm Numbers
A number of individuals and organizations in Illinois are calling for agronomic practices that will prevent or limit such events in the future. One of those is Robert Hirschfeld, Director of Water Policy at Prairie Rivers Network, an independent, state affiliate of the National Wildlife Federation

“These are man-made ecological disasters, driven by a form of agriculture that exploits and depletes the land, leaving millions of acres of soil exposed and eroding for half the year,” Hirschfeld said in a statement distributed three days after the Illinois storm. “We can’t keep farming this way.”

Hirschfeld wants the issue to be addressed formally via legislative action: “If we want real change, we have to move beyond voluntary conservation and start requiring practices that keep soil in place and pollution out of our water.”

Steps Farmers Can Take
While no one can control the weather, farmers can adjust their management practices to reduce the risk of dust storms, according to Illinois Extension. A logical first step is to reduce the number of tillage passes, especially in fields adjacent to busy highways, to begin moving toward conservation tillage.

Additionally, increased soil productivity can be achieved through reduced erosion, enhanced water infiltration, and decreased water evaporation during dry periods, according to the USDA Managing Crop Residues in Corn and Soybeans research report.

Ferrie says many of the farmers he works with are “great stewards of their land and are able to keep their soils in place.”

He advocates using a systems approach in production agriculture that will protect vulnerable soils and other resources (see A System for Every Soil) .

“There are many tools in the toolbox we can use to accomplish this,” he says. “We can work together to implement practices that will eliminate [dust storms] from happening in the future.”

Check out Ferrie’s latest Boots In The Field podcast to hear his specific recommendations and additional insights.

RFK Jr. and Zeldin Comment on How They Would Implement Trump Policy

Fri, 31 Jan 2025 13:41:54 GMT

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s confirmation hearing for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) on Wednesday (Jan. 29) before the Senate Finance Committee lasted over three hours, revealing key points:

Vaccine stance: Kennedy attempted to soften his past anti-vaccine rhetoric, stating support for vaccines but struggling to explain previous controversial statements.
Health policy priorities: He emphasized addressing chronic diseases, promoting safe food, removing conflicts of interest in health agencies, and using “gold-standard science.” Kennedy said that federal dollars spent on SNAP and school lunch programs could be one place to start, “helping kids” avoid obesity and chronic illness by cutting out sugary drinks and “ultra-processed foods.” He would also fund federal research into the link between food additives and chronic illnesses, though he didn’t specify which ingredients sparked the most concern. “I don’t want to take food away from anybody,” Kennedy said.
Kennedy emphasized his support for American farmers, stating:
- “American farms are the bedrock of our culture, of our politics, [and] of our national security.”
- He was a “4-H kid” and spent summers working on ranches.
- He wants to work with farmers and food producers to remove burdensome regulations and unleash American ingenuity.
Agricultural practices and health. Kennedy expressed concerns about current agricultural practices:
- He criticized the use of certain chemicals in farming, stating they destroy soil microbiomes and cause erosion.
- He linked chemical-intensive agriculture to health problems, mentioning clusters of cancers, autoimmune diseases, and obesity in farming communities.
- He called for incentivizing transitions to regenerative agriculture and less chemically intensive practices.Kennedy told Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) that farmers are affected by cancers and autoimmune illnesses that he believes are caused by ingredients like food dyes. “We need to fix our food supply,” Kennedy said, noting that “seeds and chemicals” used by U.S. farmers are “destroying our soil” in the long term. When asked about Kennedy’s “seeds and chemicals” comment, Grassley told Politico: “I’ll have someone from Iowa State University talk to him.”
Collaboration with USDA. Kennedy emphasized his intention to work closely with the Department of Agriculture:
- He stated that MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) “simply cannot succeed without a partnership a full Partnership of American farmers.”
- He committed to working collaboratively with USDA and other federal agencies before implementing policies affecting food supplies.
- Kennedy mentioned that President Trump instructed him to work with Brooke Rollins at USDA to ensure policies support farmers. Rollins told reporters last week that she was supportive of Kennedy’s “Make America Healthy Again” movement. “But what is important and, if confirmed, what my role will be, will be to strike a balance between defending our farmers and our ranchers but also working with Bobby Kennedy, who I adore, to effectuate the president’s vision on all of the above,” Rollins said
Regulatory approach. Kennedy outlined his approach to agricultural regulations:
- He promised to work with farmers to remove burdensome regulations.
- Kennedy acknowledged the “very thin margins” farmers operate on and stated he doesn’t want any farmer to leave their farm for economic or regulatory reasons.
- He agreed that agricultural practice regulations should primarily be left to USDA and EPA.
- “I expect you to leave agricultural practice and regulation to the proper agencies,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told Kennedy. That means, for the most part, leaving policies that impact farmers to USDA and EPA, Grassley clarified.
Future of agriculture. Kennedy shared his vision for the future of American agriculture:
- He called for fixing the food supply as a top priority. Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) told Kennedy that he was happy the nominee addressed the “social media rumors” about agriculture.
- “You made it very very clear you’re not going to tell Americans what to eat, but you do want Americans to know what they’re eating,” Lankford said, calling that a “pretty fair perspective” on food policy.
- Kennedy advocated for supporting the transition to regenerative and sustainable farming practices.
- He mentioned plans to rewrite regulations to give smaller operators “a break.”
- Throughout the hearing, Kennedy attempted to position himself as an ally to farmers while also advocating for changes in agricultural practices to address health and environmental concerns.
Controversial past: Democrats challenged his history of health misinformation and grasp of Medicare and Medicaid.
Republican support: Some GOP senators backed Kennedy, with Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) calling him “awesome,” though the final vote remains uncertain.
Financial concerns: His financial ties to lawsuits against Merck raised conflict-of-interest questions.
Abortion stance: Kennedy sidestepped direct answers but aligned with Trump’s anti-abortion policies, shifting from his previous pro-choice stance.

Bottom line: With strong opposition and divided support, Kennedy’s confirmation vote is expected to be closely contested. Today he attends another confirmation hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. The Senate Finance Committee expects to hold its RFK Jr. vote next week.

Zeldin Confirmed as EPA Administrator

On Wednesday (Jan. 29), the Republican-led Senate confirmed former Congressman Lee Zeldin as the new administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in a 56-42 vote. A staunch Trump ally, Zeldin is expected to steer the agency in alignment with the former president’s environmental policies.

Vote breakdown: All 53 Republicans backed Zeldin, joined by three Democrats — Sens. Ruben Gallego (Ariz.), Mark Kelly (Ariz.), and John Fetterman (Pa.).
Policy direction: Zeldin is expected to roll back environmental regulations, emphasizing economic growth and private-sector collaboration.
Biofuel policy. Zeldin has raised concerns among ethanol and biofuel advocates due to his past opposition to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) and ethanol. However, during his confirmation process, Zeldin made some commitments that suggest a potential shift in his stance. As a congressman, Zeldin had a history of opposing biofuels and the RFS. He signed letters expressing concern about proposed RFS volume increases, citing issues with the “E10 blend wall.” In 2017, Zeldin cosponsored an unsuccessful bill to repeal the RFS. He raised concerns about the validity and practicality of higher ethanol blends like E15 and E85. But during his confirmation process, Zeldin made several statements that indicate a potential change in his approach:
- He committed to giving producers and the industry certainty in the marketplace regarding Renewable Volume Obligations (RVOs).
- Zeldin acknowledged the importance of the RFS issue to President Trump and certain senators.
- He stated that no person or industry has any special influence over his decision-making, addressing concerns about his past connections to the oil industry.
Biofuel industry representatives have expressed cautious optimism:
- The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) looks forward to working with Zeldin on keeping the RFS on track and addressing other priorities like E15 availability.
- The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association (IRFA) encouraged Zeldin to pursue the role biofuels can play in U.S. energy dominance.
- The American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) appreciated Zeldin’s commitments to follow the law regarding RVO rulemakings and supporting year-round E15 nationwide.

Of note: While Zeldin’s past positions raised initial concerns, his recent statements during the confirmation process suggest he may be open to working with the biofuels industry in his new role as EPA Administrator.

Climate stance: Critics warn his leadership could weaken climate initiatives, favoring fossil fuel interests.
Reactions: Republicans praise his “common-sense regulation” approach, while environmental groups call his confirmation a serious setback for public health and environmental justice.

Bottom line. As Zeldin assumes leadership, his tenure is likely to reshape the EPA’s role in U.S. environmental policy for years to come.

Cassidy Casts Doubt on RFK Jr.’s HHS Nomination

Senate HELP Committee Chair Bill Cassidy (R-La.) delivered a blunt message to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during Thursday’s hearing, signaling serious concerns about his nomination for Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary.

“I’ve been struggling with your nomination,” Cassidy stated in his closing remarks, a potential roadblock for Kennedy, given Cassidy’s influential position on the Senate Finance Committee. If Cassidy votes against Kennedy in the panel’s decision, the nomination may not advance.

The Louisiana senator expressed deep skepticism about Kennedy’s stance on vaccines, questioning whether he could be trusted to uphold sound public health policy. Cassidy specifically criticized Kennedy’s history of vaccine skepticism, warning that such views could erode trust in essential immunizations.

“A worthy movement, called MAHA, to improve the health of Americans?” Cassidy asked. “Or will it undermine it, always asking for more evidence and never accepting the evidence that is there?”

He also recounted a recent case of two children dying in a Baton Rouge ICU from vaccine-preventable diseases. “My concern is that if there’s any false note, any undermining of a mama’s trust in vaccines, another person will die from a vaccine-preventable disease,” Cassidy warned.

Beyond his own reservations, Cassidy’s remarks signal broader challenges for Kennedy’s nomination. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a childhood polio survivor, is unlikely to back a nominee with anti-vaccine ties. Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) also remain key votes to watch, with both urging Kennedy to support vaccinations.

Cassidy, up for re-election in 2026, has already drawn a Trump-aligned challenger, State Treasurer John Fleming. Though Cassidy emphasized his desire for Trump’s policies to succeed, he warned that anti-vaccine rhetoric could tarnish Trump’s legacy.

“I want President Trump’s policies to succeed,” Cassidy said. “But if there’s someone that is not vaccinated because of policies, of attitudes we bring to the department, and there’s another 18-year-old who dies of a vaccine-preventable disease… The greatest tragedy will be her death. I can also tell you an associated tragedy will be that it will cast a shadow over President Trump’s legacy, which I want to be the absolute best legacy.”

Bottom line: With Cassidy’s support in doubt and broader Senate skepticism, Kennedy’s path to confirmation remains steep.

How To Elevate Agriculture: Ag Retailer Steps Up On The TEDx Stage

Thu, 31 Oct 2024 21:04:43 GMT

A man who is no stranger to advocacy was on a mission. Mike Twining has been working toward taking a fact-based appeal to the stage of TEDx—the primetime way of sharing big ideas with potentially a big audience for big impact.

This spring, mission accomplished . Twining spoke at a TEDx event hosted by Grand Canyon University and delivered his talk “Saving the Planet With Your Food Choices.”

In his day job, Twining is vice president of sales and marketing at Willard Agri-Service, and for the past 40 years, he’s worked side by side with crop consultants to help farmers make the best decisions agronomically, environmentally and economically. Twining has taken on leadership roles within the Agricultural Retailers Association and stepped up to the call when needed, so much so that ARA awarded him the Excellent in Advocacy Award just last year.

But the calling to take his message to TEDx stage was greater than any doubts that surfaced about being in a room that may not include a single other person familiar with commercial agriculture.

“I hope my ideas spark curiosity and conversation beyond the standard sound bites we all hear about how our food is raised,” Twining says. “It’s easy sometimes to think that we have all the information, but still draw the wrong conclusion. Agriculture is one of the few industries that can scale globally in the next decade to meaningfully reduce climate change.”

He proposes there are three topics around food products we are consistently misled as consumers:

Organics
Genetically modified organisms
Glyphosate

And he proposes how consumers can incentive solutions with food buying purchases to give farmers the right tools and incentives.

The full presentation is available here (and it’s a tight 12 minutes.)

How To Plan For Next Year's Crop With Extreme Weather In Mind

Fri, 16 Aug 2024 19:02:30 GMT

The 2024 planting and growing season hasn’t been one farmers are likely to forget. With each passing week, something new and even more disastrous seemed to be around the corner, ranging from flash flooding and derechos to drought and extreme heat indexes.

In the first half of the year, the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) had tracked 15 separate incidents of extreme weather that totaled over $1 billion in damage. Not too long ago in the 2010s, that was more than the average for the entire year.

Though weather has always been a big challenge for the ag industry, the severity and the damage are growing. Farmers are resilient and constantly prove their ability to adapt, so is there anything they can do to agronomically plan for the unpredictable? Two agronomists weigh in with strategies to decrease risk.

Don’t Put All Your Eggs in One Basket
Eric Wilson, a Wyffels agronomist in southeastern Iowa, says extreme weather is one reason he recommends diversifying your seed selection.

“There’s no such thing as a perfect hybrid,” he says. “The best thing against green snap might not be the best thing in terms of a high-yielding corn hybrid. Oftentimes, you have to give something up to get another thing right.”

Wilson says he would advise choosing at least three to four different hybrids that each play to a different strength.

“We have a product that does really well. It’s high yielding, cranks out bushels, and has a good disease package, but it has a wide green snap window,” he explains. “We need to build a package so that in the event one hybrid has a great year, you’re able to get in on it, but if we get a bunch of wind, it’s not across all of your acres.”

He recommends being aware of your seed’s weaknesses and adapting your management practices accordingly.

“Maybe the one that’s top in yield has an average disease package, but that’s OK because you put it on the field you typically spray anyway,” Wilson says.

At the same time, he says it’s important to not let last year’s weather play too strong of a role in your decision.

“Farmers are notorious for suffering from recency bias,” Wilson says. “If they have a bad windstorm in 2023, that’s all they’re thinking about in 2024 — I’m guilty of it myself. We always try and coach toward selecting a package of products that is going to work well regardless of what environment we get for the year.”

Acknowledge The Frequency, But Reject the Bias
Trey Stephens, Beck’s field agronomist in Nebraska, echoes Wilson’s caution for changing too many decisions based on one year’s conditions.

“You don’t want to let one year alter how you do things normally,” he says. “Just try to stick to what you know as far as your approach to planting, and control what you can.”

At the same time, Stephens says he noticed some weather trends in the area becoming more persistent.

“We’re in Nebraska, so there’s always been hail and wind, but in the past few years there’s been a consistency to it,” he says. “The past few years, we’ve had more severe weather in the later part of June into early July. Then July turns out pretty dry.”

Some of the severe conditions Stephens’ area experienced this growing season include unusually high levels of hail and rain, sometimes totaling 6" to 10" of precipitation overnight. This led to a significant number of fields needing to be replanted, and farmers in the area experimenting with new hybrids.

“Because of flooding, we had a lot of growers planting shorter maturity corn than they ever have — like 102 to 104 days,” he explains. “That was really unique for our area.”

Because of adaptations like this one, farmers will walk away from this year more resilient than before. And as Stephens reflects on what happened over the summer, he emphasizes the importance of planning ahead.

“A lot of people who planted early this year had a more established crop that was more likely to withstand some of the extreme events,” he says. “I advise growers to be prepared when you have the best weather possible and try to plant. Hopefully, you’ll get a crop that’s established enough to survive.”

Meteorologist Talks Emerging Weather Trends And The Ag Supply Chain

Tue, 02 Jul 2024 21:06:42 GMT

Weather is a critical component to the success of any growing season. But Jon Davis, chief meteorologist at Everstream Analytics, says it’s going play an even bigger role from start to finish - eventually changing where specific crops are grown and how they are transported after harvest.

“The climate has absolutely changed things. Agriculturally, there are winners and losers,” Davis says. “For example, the Dakotas have gotten wetter over time. They’re able to support corn and bean development further north up in the prairies. You have a longer growing season and there’s less worry about spring and fall freezes.”

Davis recently joined an episode of the Top Producer podcast to discuss overall weather trends he’s seeing and what the long term impact could be for agriculture.

“There are areas that will be more vulnerable with a higher risk for heat or wetness. Others may actually see an improvement in the overall weather condition for better yields across those areas,” he says.

Beyond the growing season, he shares climate change and the uptick in extreme weather events will have a significant impact on the agriculture supply chain.

“How do extreme weather events affect how we ship and how we move commodities? How does it affect ports, rail lines and trucking overall?” he says. “When moving finished crops with wetter conditions and higher humidity levels, the overall time frame food products can last is shortened up a bit.”

What’s In Front Of Us
As for the 2024 growing season, Davis says he has been tracking a system that could be the key to the overall quality of this year’s crops.

“There’s a ridge of high pressure that has quite a history associated with it. Anywhere it’s gone, it’s produced very hot and extremely dry conditions,” he says. “That ridge is starting to move across the lower 48.”

He’s anticipating unfavorable conditions to strike at the worst possible place and time.

“Places like the prairies will have a lesser impact, but there’s higher risk for corn and soybeans across the Midwest - especially going into July with corn pollinating across those areas.”

Catch up on all episodes of the Top Producer podcast .

What's Causing These Frigid Temperatures Right Now?

Fri, 19 Jan 2024 20:48:23 GMT

Another round of arctic freeze is blasting the U.S. The first round of cold weather brought historic temperatures, with Montana’s temperatures falling to 40 to 50 degree below zero. With another round of frigid temperatures blanketing the U.S. again, what’s behind the cold?

While El Niño can be to blame for the back-to-back winter storms, something else is spurring the cold. Brad Rippey, USDA meteorologist, says moisture pumping up from the Gulf is a hallmark of El Niño.

“As I always say, you can’t blame an individual or a single storm and El Niño, but you start looking at the overall patterns, and there’s absolutely no question that when you start seeing a pattern setting up like this, a storm pipeline from the Pacific coming across the Southwest and into the Midwest or east, that is El Niño,” says Brad Rippey, USDA meteorologist.

The cold, however, is being pushed down from the north. Drew Lerner of World Weather says the arctic air is caused by a warming that occurs in the stratosphere, which is outside of where we live in the troposphere. Sudden stratospheric warming events, like what the U.S. is experiencing now, can be caused by large atmospheric waves in either the stratosphere or the troposphere. Planetary waves have ridges and troughs like ocean waves, but span huge distances in the atmosphere.

“The stratosphere, when it turns warmer, it expands that layer in the atmosphere and it pushes, puts pressure on the troposphere and forces cold air that’s aloft down to the surface. And then it gets spread out from the arctic,” says Lerner. “What happens a lot of times when you get these stratospheric warming events is that you displace the polar vortex and or you split it into two vortices, and that’s what’s happening.”

He says this can lead to a splitting of the polar vortex, so instead of cold air being locked above the polar region, it pushes further south into the mid-latitudes.

The good news? This latest round of frigid air is short-lived. The Climate Prediction Center (CPC) 10-day forecast, which is below, shows a much more mild view, at least compared to what we’re seeing now.

Plenty Of Stormy Weather To Come With Water Issues

Fri, 15 Dec 2023 15:29:07 GMT

When it rains it pours.

At the beginning of this year the relentless drought that plagued California and the American West was considered the worst dry spell in 1,200 years. Measuring historical moisture patterns by looking at thousands of tree rings, scientists concluded that the West was in a “megadrought” from 2001 to 2022. Such perennial dryness has not been seen in the region since the Vikings sailed the North Atlantic and Mayans built temples in Mexico and Central America.

Flip the calendar to 2023 and the majority of those that live in the Golden State have gone from begging for rain to begging for it to stop. In fact, there has been so much precipitation in the first three months of the new year that as of March 16th, the U.S. Drought Monitor determined that over 44 percent of the state was officially relieved of drought conditions altogether and no areas were now in the extreme or exceptional level of severity. Compare that to the end of last year when all of California was in some sort of drought category and almost 43 percent fell into that extreme or exceptional ranking.

The reason for the western deluge is due to a significant change in the overall weather pattern.

One factor is that the waters in the eastern Pacific Ocean are heating up. The cool water La Niña pattern has waned and El Niño is back on the clock. This has ripened weather conditions to set up an atmospheric river, known as the “Pineapple Express”. This river of moisture has reached impressive levels and has delivered a perpetual barrage of systems, dropping both heavy rain and snow that the West has not seen in years.

If 2023 marks the official end of this historical drought, those in agriculture had best not be complacent in thinking the West’s water issues simply quiet down and go away. Weather and the politics surrounding water issues — not just in the West, but worldwide — are about as fickle as Goldilocks trying to figure out which chair to sit in.

The unfortunate reality is that agriculture’s current focus on water issues has been drowned out by all the noise surrounding greenhouse gas mitigation and climate change. While everybody was so focused on the shiny ball of carbon credits and zero emissions, there has been a host of water related issues quickly rising to the surface. Some of these topics, we’ve seen before. Others are new. All will affect agriculture.

The newest development on the water front is that water rights and stewardship has now been adopted as the latest global initiative by the United Nations.

In a report released in March, experts from the Global Commission on the Economics of Water warned that the world is “heading for massive collective failure” in the management of the planet’s water supply and demand that governments treat water as a “global common good.”

The 32-page document, titled Turning the Tide: A Call to Collective Action, may not become a best-seller but its impact could flip control of water rights from local to global. This could dramatically affect everyone from strawberry farmers in California, to corn farmers in Illinois, down to even regional watershed organizations, and even your local NRCS agents.

Of course, in the report is the standard doom and gloom. Because of “policymakers’ failure” nearly 2 billion people lack a safe drinking water supply. Then for real impact, the study floats “the prospect of a 40 percent shortfall in freshwater supply by 2030, with severe shortages in water constrained regions.”

Those who read the report, and are a part of U.S. agriculture, should be shaking in their boots. Such global water policy could weave itself into what crops you can grow, the phasing out of agricultural subsidies (this could include crop insurance), and also adding new “water standards” to future trade agreements. Pardon the pun, but this is the tip of the iceberg that proponents hope will propel water issue to climate change level fervor. Get ready for your global United Nations Kenya Water Accord. No this hasn’t happened yet, but you can bet that the bureaucrats that brought you the Paris Agreement on Climate Change have their private jets fueled and ready to taxi.

Speaking of bureaucrats, on December 30, 2022, the EPA announced their final “Revised Definition of ‘Waters of the United States’” rule.

As you may recall, this is the same issue that got the Obama Administration’s EPA in hot water with production agriculture and rural communities in general. The heat was turned down on WOTUS during the Trump era, but just as Biden did with the Paris Agreement, the WOTUS has been revived.

According to the Water of the United States landing page on the EPA’s website, it notes that the rule went into effect March 20, 2023. In their expanded explanation of the ruling, you get a sense of the level of “irritation” that the powers that be at the EPA have toward those questioning the current ruling:

The agencies’ final rule establishes a clear and reasonable definition of “waters of the United States” and reduces the uncertainty from constantly changing regulatory definitions that has harmed communities and our nation’s waters.

Most agricultural groups don’t share the same sentiments as those at the EPA. One of the harshest responses came from the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture.

“The EPA’s latest rule on defining “waters of the United States” is a statement of federal overreach that ignores states authority to regulate intrastate water quality and the Clean Water Act’s statutory mandate for cooperative federalism,” said NASDA CEO Ted McKinney.

A long line of other ag organizations were quick to pile on including the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, The Fertilizer Institute, and the list goes on. In these organization’s minds the biggest unresolved issue is clarification on what is and is not a navigable water. What defines a waterway in the first place? Is it only a stream on a rainy day? The problem is that the EPA wants to be the judge, jury, and executioner when it comes to answering such questions says critics.

U.S. agriculture and all those tied to it cannot afford to take its eye off the ball when it comes to issues of water. The above examples are just the beginning of more to come. Local, regional and state control needs to remain sacred. When it does that’s when conservation and stewardship works best, because those gifts of nature are then tended to by those that live on that land and in that community. Farming water rights out to those in far away lands and far away places like Washington D.C., or Paris, or Kenya is nothing but a fools errand. For them water is nothing more than the new oil.

USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack Reveals the Final COP28 Declaration Will Not Focus on Agriculture and Food

Mon, 11 Dec 2023 20:28:02 GMT

Despite calls from countries to focus on food and agriculture as a way to meet the world’s climate goals, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack revealed that the final COP28 declaration would not focus on agriculture and food. This decision was influenced by a request from the G77 group of developing countries for additional review and participation related to agriculture and food, leaving no time for negotiations.

While Vilsack highlighted the importance of a special day dedicated to agriculture and food policy and the participation of U.S. farm and food leaders, he considered the Emirates Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Change, signed by 152 nations, and commitments by countries and companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fund related projects as significant achievements. However, some observers were disappointed because this would delay progress until June 2024.

Today, at the first-ever day dedicated to food and agriculture at a COP conference, we’re proud to highlight the steps we’re taking to tackle the climate crisis, invest in food systems innovation, and bring new opportunities to producers #COP28 pic.twitter.com/69uyWVdmcZ
— Secretary Tom Vilsack (@SecVilsack) December 10, 2023

Vilsack mentioned the Agriculture Innovation Mission (AIM) for Climate , a joint initiative between the U.S. and the United Arab Emirates aimed at addressing climate change and global hunger through increased investment in climate-smart agriculture and food systems innovation.

Regarding reducing meat consumption, Vilsack said he had not heard much about that goal but instead emphasized strategies for reducing methane emissions related to livestock. The U.S. is taking a leadership role in methane reduction through research, feed additives, recapturing methane for energy production, and managing manure.

A Focus on Dairy to Start

Leading into the meeting, there was a lot of talk about how agriculture practices and food production may be impacted by the climate goals. And to start the meeting, dairy was on the list.

According to a report from Reuters last week, advocacy groups said that tackling livestock methane should be a major priority at this year’s COP28 summit. In addition, at the summit in Dubai this week, six of the world’s largest dairy companies announced an alliance to cut methane emissions from dairy cows.

Reuters reported members of the Dairy Methane Action Alliance include Danone, Bel Group, General Mills, Lactalis USA, Kraft Heinz and Nestle. The Alliance says it will begin reporting their methane emissions by mid-2024 and will write methane action plans by the end of that year.

While the world’s largest dairy companies are working together, it’s also sparking an argument of how essential dairy is in the diets of people around the globe.

#UN #Roadmap to 1.5 #Livestock plan unveiled at #cop28 listed in this thread.

Livestock plays a crucial economic role contributing to the livelihoods of about 1.7 billion poor people and 70 percent of those employed in the sector are women
— Steven Middendorp (@smiddendorp22) December 10, 2023

Cop28: An Explanation

What is COP28? It’s a meeting of politicians, diplomats, NGOS and representatives of national governments. There are also other stakeholders who attend to try to influence the outcome. The meeting actually dates back to June of 1992 when 154 countries signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). At the time, those countries agreed to combat human impacts on the climate.

COP meetings have been held every year since, with a different country becoming the COP president. Since that country is in charge of organizing the meeting, the host city typically moves year to year. Then, any new agreements struck from that year’s meeting, is typically named after the host city, such as the 2015 Paris Agreement and the 2021 Glasgow Climate Pact.

According to the COP28 website, the goal is to “correct course and accelerate action to tackle the climate crisis.” The website also states, “COP28 is where the world will take stock of progress on the Paris Agreement – the landmark climate treaty concluded in 2015 – and chart a course of action to dramatically reduce emissions and protect lives and livelihoods.”

The Goal

According to COP28 organizers, the science shows “to preserve a livable climate, the production of coal, oil, and gas must rapidly decline, and global renewable power capacity – including wind, solar, hydro and geothermal energy – needs to triple by 2030. At the same time, financing for adaptation and investments in climate resilience need a quantum leap.”

COP28 organizers say the goal is to create “concrete solutions to the defining issue of our time.”

Now's the Time to Transition to a Vertical Farming System

Wed, 18 Oct 2023 14:45:53 GMT

For decades, moldboard plows, disks and field cultivators, all horizontal tillage tools, have been the go-tos for fieldwork. That’s changing as fears about climate change come into focus.

Sooner or later, you’re going to be pushed (or led, depending on your perspective) toward vertical systems by government incentives.

“The world is asking farmers to fight climate change by reducing tillage and planting cover crops,” says Ken Ferrie, Farm Journal field agronomist.

“Governments want you to adopt vertical systems to disturb the ground as little as possible and keep it covered year-round — essentially what existed when our cropland was covered by native prairie. I expect climate-smart initiatives will include financial incentives for reduced tillage and cover crops. That will create opportunities for farmers in vertical systems. However, soil layers left by horizontal, full-width tillage systems could cause those vertical systems to fail.”

No one argues horizontal farming doesn’t have advantages.

Tillage-2.png“Vertical farming tools are like golf clubs,” says Ken Ferrie, Farm Journal field agronomist. “Each has its own purpose. You use some every season and others only when needed. In golf or farming, having the right tools and knowing how to use them is crucial to success. That includes planter setup, weed management and tillage tools. While treating all fields the same makes farming simple, it’s like going golfing with only a driver and a putter — it won’t get you the best score.”

“Horizontal spring tillage lets us plant into warmer soil with more uniform moisture,” Ferrie says.

“That gets plants off to a faster start. Weed control is cheaper, and fewer specialized attachments are required on planters. But unfortunately, horizontal tillage doesn’t match up with the climate incentives I see coming down the pike.”

Vertical farming can be profitable, but it’s harder to manage.

“Among our consulting clients, vertical systems — no-till, strip-till and others — produce the highest return on investment,” Ferrie says. “On the other hand, they also produce the lowest. It depends on whether growers understand and know how to manage their vertical systems.”

This story is the first in a series of articles that will explain how to transition to vertical farming. Let’s set the stage:

What is vertical farming?

“Merely no-tilling or using a vertical harrow or similar vertical tool does not mean you’re in a vertical system,” Ferrie says. “A vertical system exists only after all horizontal layers, usually caused by horizontal tillage, are removed, and the soil is managed so as to not put them back in.

“A vertical system lets roots grow downward without restriction,” he adds. “The soil’s bulk density changes gradually, versus suddenly, so roots can adjust and penetrate, rather than flattening out along the top of a layer. Likewise, without sudden density changes, water will move downward and be stored in pore spaces. It will wick back up as water evaporates from the surface of the soil or through plant leaves.”

Horizontal versus vertical

“Pretend you have a huge vacuum that sucks up all the loose soil following a tillage pass,” Ferrie says. “After horizontal tillage, you would find a flat horizontal plane. Vertical tillage leaves a rougher sawtooth effect.”

Tools for vertical farming

Vertical tools include disk rippers, in-line rippers, chisel plows, field cultivators with spikes instead of sweeps, strip-till bars, row warmers, vertical harrows and no-till planters.

“Most farmers mix and match tools for primary and secondary tillage,” Ferrie says. “In horizontal systems, they might use a vertical tillage tool, such as a disk-ripper, in the fall for primary tillage and follow with a disk or field cultivator when spring rolls around. Or they might make one pass in the spring on soybean stubble with a soil finisher or high-speed disk. But all these secondary tools leave a horizontal tillage layer, a sudden density change that roots might have trouble coping with.”

For vertical farmers, typical programs include:

Chisel plowing in the fall and one or two passes of a vertical harrow in the spring.
Vertical harrowing in the fall, leaving a sterile seedbed for planting in the spring.
Vertical harrowing in the fall, followed by one pass with a vertical harrow in the spring to warm and dry soil for planting.

Conventional vertical tillage is fall primary tillage with a chisel, disk-ripper or in-line ripper (shattering soil across the width of the implement) and leveling in the spring using a vertical tool with no gang angle. “The leveling pass is like screeding concrete — knocking peaks off into the valleys, rather than using a sweep to level soil from below,” Ferrie says.

No-till or strip-till after all the old soil layers have been removed.

Most farmers need to implement multiple practices.

“In some fields, no-till might work great on 70% of the acres, but the other 30%, with drainage or soil-type issues, need to be strip-tilled,” Ferrie says. “So the whole field will work better in a strip-till format. Sometimes a more aggressive fall program is required to manage continuous corn residue, wheel track issues, manure application or new fields that need compaction removed or fertilizer mixed in.”

Golden Rules of Vertical Systems

When consulting clients consider transitioning from a horizontal to a vertical farming system. Farm Journal Field Agronomist Ken Ferrie offers four rules he considers essential:

The shallower a horizontal soil density layer, the more it costs in terms of yield and profit. “A 2"-deep layer causes more problems than an 8" plow sole,” Ferrie says.
The last tillage pass before transitioning to a vertical system must not be horizontal (because it will leave a density layer that will last for years).
Keep the seedbed sacred. “Ear count is always of utmost importance,” Ferrie says. “That requires a perfect seedbed, and creating one takes more management in vertical systems. If you’re not ready to put forth the time and management to achieve a uniform stand in a vertical system, it’s better to remain in a horizontal system.”
Allow three years to transition to a vertical system. “It will take that long to acquire management skills and equipment and prepare your soil for a vertical system,” Ferrie says.

Weather Events Weigh On Ag’s Bottom Line

Wed, 20 Sep 2023 12:00:00 GMT

The world is getting riskier. Just monitoring weather is no longer enough. Agribusinesses and farmers alike need to have a plan designed to navigate weather challenges.
As an example of weather-related costs, ag co-ops’ insurance premiums have risen 40% or more this year.

In 2021, Hurricane Ida’s direct hit on Bayer’s largest glyphosate plant pushed the manufacturing site offline for nearly two months. That one event sent supply shockwaves through the agriculture industry. Bayer saw herbicide sales jump 44% in 2022 after other producers and constrained Chinese suppliers failed to plug the gap.

As extreme weather events affect the profitability of agriculture, here are four areas to bring focus to the ripple effect.

Warmer Oceans Set the stage for storm intensity, weather cycles

“We’ve never had warmer oceans,” says Jon Davis, chief meteorologist with Everstream Analytics. “We care about this because this is the fuel. This is the driver that brings the extreme weather events to the forefront that affect agricultural and energy markets and that affect people on a global basis,” he says.

Using satellites to measure ocean temperatures around the world, meteorologists have recorded the warmest sea surface temperatures in 40 years, Davis explains. Using the technology to explore paleo meteorology, he says it could be extrapolated these are the warmest ocean temperatures in thousands of years.

Ocean temperature fluctuation triggers transitions between El Nino and La Nina events.

“The past three years, we were in a La Nina event with colder than normal water temperatures in the central and eastern Pacific. This is a year of transition. We started out with La Nina conditions, and now we’re seeing moderate El Nino conditions develop,” Davis explains.

The U.S. has experienced more dryness due to the La Nina cycle, but that could change into next year. Davis expects a year of impact from this El Nino.

Hurricane Season

“In the seven global basins in the world, every one has had a Category 5 storm this year. That has never happened,” Davis says.

He says the warmer ocean temperatures provide the fuel to seed this level of storm activity.

“It’s the energy or octane that storms have to rapidly intensify and rapidly develop even in pretty far northern locations,” he says.

Waterway systems

Dryness and drought have brought key waterways to worrying levels for global supply chains and trade. Mississippi River levels are lower this year than they were this time last year. And last year was a historically low water event.

“There’s a couple times a year where it’s game time more than others, and harvest season is one of those periods. You need to have our supply chain operating on all cylinders,” says Soy Transportation Coalition executive director Mike Steenhoek. “It’s a movie sequel none of us wanted to watch, but yet we’re watching it. It’s having an impact on the efficiency of barge transportation.”

This fall, fewer barges are connected to form a single unit. And barges are being loaded to lighter weights.

“This is a major issue from a transportation and logistics standpoint,” Davis says. “There are some alternatives to the Mississippi, but the alternatives are extremely expensive. And there’s certainly no easy answer.”

The supply chain is also being affected by issues on the Panama Canal, which handles 40% of all U.S. container traffic.

“Panama is one of the wettest countries in the world. But they need incredible amounts of fresh water to make the canal work to take ships up 10 stories and then down 10 stories.” Davis says. “It’s all done by fresh water in the lakes in the middle of Panama.”

He notes 80 million gallons of fresh water are required for each of the 15,000 vessels that go through the Panama Canal in a year. Low water levels have slowed traffic since mid-summer. Lake Gatun, the primary lake supporting the canal, is at its lowest seasonal level since 1965.

“We don’t see any improvement in the short term, and we don’t see any in the long term because El Nino tends to suppress rainfall across Panama,” Davis says.

Extreme events bring higher levels of loss

Ken Zuckerberg, lead farm supply and biofuels economist for CoBank, says insurance premiums are on the rise for ag co-ops , and at least one underwriter has exited the space.

“The price of coverage is going up because the markets providing this coverage are worried about these trends — the frequency of events continuing,” he says.
U.S. losses to weather- and climate-related catastrophes totaled $170 billion in 2022, $155 billion in 2021 and $114 billion in 2020. Last year’s total almost tripled the long-term average dating to 1980.

“Higher losses translate to higher rates — i.e., the premium charged per unit of loss exposure—which is logical to adequately compensate the insurance carrier for the increased risk of more frequent and severe losses,” he says.

Zuckerberg reports ag cooperatives paid between 40% to 60% more (risk-adjusted) during the 2023 renewal season. For customers who experienced property losses from 2020 to 2022, insurance rates increased up to 100%.

“Deductibles are increasing — sometimes five times the original level — and there are a lot of exclusions. The devil is in the details,” Zuckerberg describes. “If there was ever a time to dedicate some internal staffing to the risk management function, it’s now.”

Free Webinar: Changing Weather Patterns and the Implications for Farming's Bottom Line

Fri, 01 Sep 2023 17:22:16 GMT

The world is getting riskier, so no longer than we just monitor weather, we have to plan for and navigate the challenges.

As an example, insurance premiums for ag retailers have risen 40% or greater. With El Nino weather patterns, low river levels and the current hurricane season, what should be top of mind of agribusiness managers?

Tune in to this webinar to hear insights from these industry pros:

Jon Davis, Chief Meteorologist, Everstream Analytics
Ken Zuckerberg, Analyst, CoBank
Margy Eckelkamp, Brand Lead and Editor, Top Producer and The Scoop

Sept. 12 1 p.m. central

Free registration

Related article:

Insurance Premiums Up 40% Or Higher For Ag Co-ops

Drought is More than just 'Water Stress' for Corn and Soybeans

Sat, 12 Aug 2023 12:36:24 GMT

This article was written by Jamie Sears Rawlings, manager of Climate-Smart Content at Trust In Food. Learn more at www.trustinfood.com

One of the greatest agronomic challenges facing producers today is the multi-year drought pattern affecting the Corn Belt, says Mike Zwingman, director of agronomy, row crops for Verdesian Life Sciences.

“The impact of drought is more than just water stress,” Zwingman says. “It greatly impacts nutrient uptake and lowers yield potential after drought stress because the plant misses out on some critical nutrient uptake periods.”

As producers in drought-stricken areas monitor how abiotic stress affects their yields, many are looking for solutions to help manage plant health in dry conditions. Nutrient efficiency and management are critical components to creating a more resilient production system.

America’s Conservation Ag Movement sat down with Zwingman to get his perspective on nutrient use, the National Corn Yield Contest and the next generation of products to help producers manage emerging pressures on their operations.

Over your two-decade career in agriculture, how has conservation agriculture evolved?

I don’t think conservation farming principles have changed over the past two decades. No-Till has been a common practice my entire career; cover crops have also existed during that time. What has changed is the focus and intensity of those practices. I understand that none of these practices are new, but how to effectively execute them is the most important lesson I have learned.

Why is nutrient use efficiency important for producers right now? What are some of the factors that are spurring interest?

From the grower’s perspective, economics is the biggest driver of Nutrient Use Efficiency (NUE); managing cost of production and yield optimization are two of the most essential things growers can do when prices are so volatile. That is not to say they aren’t worried about conservation issues; often, those things are tied together.

How does nitrogen stabilization and nutrient efficiency fit into your sponsorship of the National Yield Contest’s new Nitrogen Management Class? Why is this new class important for producers? 

We are excited to be part of this new class of the National Yield Contest because it so profoundly aligns with the DNA of who Verdesian is. I have been saying for years that we have significantly improved Nitrogen Use Efficiency in my lifetime; the problem is that it may be one of the best-kept secrets in our industry. This contest gives us the platform to show consumers, and the rest of the value chain, how good at it we really are.

How do nutrient optimization strategies help producers tell their story with the value chain and consumers who are increasingly interested in production methods?

It focuses on many things growers already have been doing to improve Nutrient Use Efficiency and allows them to invest in and explore new technologies that accelerate that improvement. At Verdesian, we support those efforts by developing some of those new technologies as well and providing clarity on how they best fit into a producer’s operation.

How does growing production transparency affect the future of agriculture?

Our customers are more separated from agriculture than ever before in history but also have more concern about how their food is produced as well. This paradox allows for a vast stream of misinformation to flood the internet and mind-space of the end user. We have both the responsibility and opportunity to change that by being more transparent and inviting people to see what we do.

In a segment that has some residual efficacy concerns from early bad actors, what are some ways Verdesian has been successfully communicating the value of biological products to producers?  

For us, it all starts with explaining exactly how a specific product works either in the soil or in the plant to benefit Nutrient Use Efficiency. That begins with the hard work of the people in our lab to identify modes of action as we go to the field to generate yield data for the grower. We also work extremely hard to get the recommendation on how to use it in the field. We have the right processes in place to allow us to do both those things.

What does the next generation of grower solutions look like, and how is your R&D addressing the challenges growers are facing today and the burgeoning demand for sustainable products? 

I am extremely proud of and excited about the products in our pipeline. Soon we plan on having releases in the micronutrient space, phosphorus enhancers category, and some new technology for the planter box. All of those new technologies address stress management and NUE.

Why is it important for Verdesian Life Sciences to be part of coalitions like America’s Conservation Ag Movement and Agriculture’s Clean Water Alliance? 

There is no better indicator of what is important to a company’s culture than where it invests its talent, money and other resources. At Verdesian, we are committed to developing new technologies that enhance Nutrient Use Efficiency to benefit the environment, grower sustainability and the end user, because that is who we are.

Are Arizona Crops Sizzling as Temperatures Soar? One Farmer Says the Heat is Normal for July

Fri, 28 Jul 2023 22:23:40 GMT

Global temperatures may have set a new record in July, according to some early analyses. As the high U.S. temperatures stole headlines this week, the Biden administration rolled out provisions to protect workers from extreme heat.

The United Nations Secretary-General, António Guterres, says scientists confirmed July is on track to be the world’s hottest month on record. One study suggested global temperatures in July could beat the previous record set in 2019 by 0.2 degree Fahrenheit.

Arizona is seeing a streak of heat. Earlier this month, Phoenix broke a 1974 record for the consecutive number of days the temperature reached more than 110 degrees Fahrenheit, according to the National Weather Service.

Yuma County, Arizona farmer John Boelts says the heat people are experiencing in his area is typical for July.

“The heat always impacts us, but I think the best way to describe it is we’re used to that,” says Boelts, who along with his wife, Alicia, operates Desert Premium Farms in Yuma, Ariz. “That’s normal weather for July and the low desert here in Yuma,” he adds.

The streak of heat in Arizona isn’t the only news generator this week. The state also recorded the all-time record low one day this week, when Phoenix Sky Harbor reached a low of 97 degrees on Wednesday. That made it the highest low temperature ever recorded on July 26 in the city.

“As a teenager starting to work in ag full time myself, I can remember leaving to go to work and passing the bank signs, long before we all had thermometers in our vehicles, and it was not unusual to see 94, 95 or 99 degrees at sunup here in Yuma as you’re driving through town headed out to the field. So that’s kind of what we’re experiencing now,” he says.

His area is known for growing crops like leafy greens, broccoli and cauliflower that are then shipped across the U.S. and Canada, but those crops aren’t grown during the heat of the summer in Arizona.

“This time of year, we know it’s going to be hot. So we’re growing crops like cotton and sudangrass, and we’re preparing our land in a way that’s appropriate for the time of year and the season in this type of weather, because we’ll start planting fall melons and our winter produce crops in August,” Boelts says.

Crops like cotton need heat and a lot of sunshine, making it ideal for Arizona in the summer. Boelts says he and other farmers were more challenged by the second consecutive year of record cool temperatures in May and June.

Blame It (Partially) On El Nino

What’s causing the warm temperatures that parked across the South and Southwest earlier this month, but then crept into the Midwest this week? USDA Meteorologist Brad Rippey says for the South, the problem heat started in mid-June.

“That’s when we started to see some trouble brewing in Texas. More recently, that’s expanded into the western United States, especially the Desert Southwest. That heat that’s coming up from the South is likely more related to El Nino than anything we’ve seen to this point,” says Rippey. “So, you can likely blame some of that high heat in Texas and Arizona, for example, on the developing El Nino.”

Rippey says there’s also some linkage to the high pressure system over Canada and the heat over Texas this week.

“It’s sort of a blend between blocks, if you will, and that is creating some of the extreme heat that we’re seeing in the western Corn Belt and in the Great Plains this week. But again, that’s not completely related to El Nino,” Rippey adds.

NOAA officials declared El Nino arrived in June, but the signs of it have been minimal so far. Earlier this year, some officials predicted the arrival of El Nino would bring ample rainfall to the Corn Belt and other favorable changes. However, Rippey says the current summer weather isn’t too far off course with a typical El Nino.

“The thing about El Nino is its biggest impacts on the northern hemisphere weather typically occur during the cool season as you move into October and beyond, so that October to April timeframe,” Rippey says. “That’s when you see the consistent signal within Nino, usually wet in the southern United States, mild and often dry across the North.”

Signs of Change

He says those El Nino effects are still months away, but for now, El Nino is a contributing factor to the heat in the deep South.

As Boelts manages Arizona heat every year, he says this year he and other residents are hopeful the moisture situation continues to turn more favorable not only for where he lives, but also to support the water level in the Colorado River.

“We know we’re not going to get a lot of rainfall, so we’re very dependent on being able to irrigate our crops with Colorado River water,” he says. “And we’ve been very excited to see that the Colorado River watershed has received a lot of moisture this year, not just in Arizona, where we contribute heavily to the Colorado River watershed, but also in the in the upper parts of the basin in Utah and Colorado. We’re moving in the right direction, refilling those reservoirs. And so we’re hopeful that we’re at the beginning of a trend of improvement.”

Ag Climate Data Collection to be Improved with $300 Million Investment

Wed, 12 Jul 2023 21:24:05 GMT

Ag accounts for 11.2 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, according to a USDA’s 2020 estimates . While these estimates are two years old, USDA intends to improve the future measure, monitoring, reporting and verification of ag climate emissions via a $300 million investment announced on Wednesday.

“We have to improve the scientific backbone of our programs. This new investment by USDA in improving data and measurement of greenhouse gas emissions…is unmatched in its scope and potential to increase accuracy, reduce uncertainty and enhance overall confidence in these estimates,” says Tom Vilsack, USDA secretary. “We’re data driven, and we seek continuous improvement in our climate-smart agriculture and forestry efforts.”

With the funds and stakeholder recommendations in tow, USDA says it will:

• Create a soil carbon monitoring and research network
• Establish a GHG network
• Expand data management, infrastructure and capacity
• Improve models and tools for assessing GHG outcomes at state, regional and national levels
• Improve NRCS conservation standards and use data to reflect GHG capture opportunities
• Revamp coverage of conservation activity data
• Strengthen GHG inventory and assessment programs at the USDA

The investment follows the ethanol industry calling out the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for using obsolete data to measure ethanol’s GHG contributions.

“EPA is using outdated analysis from more than a decade ago to measure the carbon intensity of ethanol and other biofuels, despite the Department of Energy having updated data,” says Chris Bliley, Growth Energy’s senior vice president. “This practice limits ethanol markets.”

Related story: Fuels Parity Act Could Open a New Market Door for Ethanol

New legislation, titled the Fuels Parity Act , was introduced in the U.S. House to address the EPA GHG data and market limitations. While this act could help open market doors, the Food and Ag Climate Alliance (FACA)—an 80+ member ag coalition that includes committee members from groups such as Farm Bureau and NASDA—is confident this USDA funding will help pry open market doors as well.

“FACA supports science-based evaluation mechanisms for GHG quantification that account for the diversity and breadth of ag and forestry production systems. This work is critical to enhancing trust and confidence in the measurement of emissions outcomes that will allow new markets to flourish,” said FACA in a press release .

The $300 million will be tapped from the $20 billion Inflation Reduction Act that was signed into law in August 2022.

Insurance Premiums Up 40% Or Higher For Ag Co-ops

Thu, 15 Jun 2023 18:17:53 GMT

In a report authored by Ken Zuckerberg lead farm supply and biofuels economist for CoBank, insurance premiums are on the rise for agricultural co-ops, and at least one company has exited the space.

The cause of the changes is being attributed to three years of more frequent, more costly floods, tornados, and severe weather events. As quoted in the report, U.S. losses to weather and climate related catastrophes totaled $170 billion in 2022; $155 billion in 2021 and $114 billion in 2020. Last year’s total is almost triple the long-term average dating to 1980.

“Thankfully, the property-casualty insurance industry has been adequately capitalized and able to respond to the needs of customers filing claims, namely domestic agriculture cooperatives. However, therein lies the problem. Higher losses translate to higher rates—i.e., the premium charged per unit of loss exposure—which is logical to adequately compensate the insurance carrier for the increased risk of more frequent and several losses,” wrote Zuckerberg in The Scoop earlier this spring.

Zuckerberg reports ag cooperatives paid 40% to 60% more (risk-adjusted) during the 2023 renewal season (both January and April). And for customers who experienced property losses 2020 to 2022, their insurance rates increased up to 100%. Property and causality companies are seeking to recoup from the rise in losses as well as higher costs for labor, building supplies and financing.

The trend is likely to continue for the next 12 to 18 months, Zuckerberg writes.

There are now only six major players offering property and casualty insurance for ag coops/retailers:

Berkley Agribusiness
Chubb Agribusiness
Continental Western Group
Crum & Forster
Nationwide Agribusiness
Triangle

Austin Mutual, a previous underwriter in this space has exited the market.

Zuckerberg advises there is no “silver bullet” for ag co-ops to use in light of the rising expense of insurance. He offers two takeaways:

improve internal loss control and
purchase property insurance through a hybrid insurance program

Conservation and CRP Rates Discussed in Latest House Panel Hearing

Thu, 25 May 2023 14:49:22 GMT

During a House Agriculture Conservation, Research and Biotechnology Subcommittee hearing , lawmakers discussed concerns about the ability of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Farm Service Agency (FSA) to manage new climate-related funding, staffing challenges, and CRP payment rates.

Leaders of the NRCS and FSA are tasked with addressing staffing shortfalls to deliver conservation and farm programs and implement new climate-related funding included in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). An analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) suggested that the NRCS might only be able to spend around $3.9 billion of the $4.95 billion allocated to it under the IRA for the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP).

Terry Cosby, NRCS Chief, expressed confidence in the agency’s ability to administer these funds, mentioning a recent notice of funding availability that made up to $500 million available for FY 2023. The influx of IRA money has allowed the NRCS to offer more contracts under programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP).

Lawmakers questioned the barriers to hiring new staff, to which Cosby replied that a lack of college graduates in relevant fields was a limitation. The agency is collaborating with land grant universities to address this issue. The agency has received 1,500 applications for 200 openings for soil conservationists around the country, although it is murky how many will meet all the requirements.

Who understands carbon sequestration?

Questions were also raised about the current knowledge gap around carbon sequestration and its impact on current and future programs. Both Cosby and FSA Administrator Zach Ducheneaux emphasized the importance of accurate data for driving enrollment and participation in these programs.

House Ag Chairman G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) Thompson added that he also thinks lawmakers should revisit restrictions placed on the IRA funding that look to target it to climate-related efforts, saying he believes local resource concerns should guide how it is spent.

“We can’t prioritize one natural resource concern over all others and we shouldn’t prioritize one solution above all others,” he said.

On the farm bill front

Thompson raised the possibility of bringing some IRA conservation funding into farm bill baseline. He used the hearing to approach a big issue: The nearly $20 billion in funding for conservation programs contained in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

The funding is not currently included in the baseline for the next farm bill, and Thompson suggested that a portion of the funds should be brought into the baseline. That would make it easier for lawmakers to shift those funds to other efforts in the farm bill.

Included in the funding were $8.45 billion for the cost-sharing Environmental Quality Incentives Programs; $3.25 billion for the Conservation Stewardship Program, directed toward working lands; $4.95 billion for the Regional Conservation Partnership Program, which coordinates stewardship on multiple properties; $1.4 billion for the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program; $1 billion for conservation technology assistance; and $300 million to measure carbon sequestration and greenhouse gas reductions from conservation practices.

Discussion about the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) focused on rental rates for transitioning farmland to conservation and the competition with farmers for prime land. Both Ducheneaux and Cosby highlighted the efforts to provide data and incentives to make the best choices for land use and conservation.

Some lawmakers say the CRP is paying farmers to take land out of production that competes with farmers looking to rent farmland. The rental rates were capped in the 2018 Farm Bill, but USDA has offered incentives and adjustments to CRP rents in a bid to attract more acres.

Subcommittee member Brad Finstad (R-Minn.) said CRP payment rates were higher than they should be and making it hard for farmers to find additional cropland. Increasing program payments as the Biden administration did in 2021 in a bid to boost CRP enrollment “incentivizes farm country to take high-quality land out of production,” Finstad said.

Young farmers especially say high CRP rates have essentially “forced them to compete with the federal government” for land, Finstad said. But Ducheneaux countered that CRP incentives “give the producers a meaningful choice” about what to do with their land. He said FSA was looking at refining its use of an erodibility index to more precisely evaluate land that is being offered for enrollment.

“The choice that they [landowners] make with their resources is not for us to dictate. Our job is to get the opportunity out there in front of them, so that they make the best choice,” Ducheneaux said.

Background

About 23 million acres are currently enrolled in the program at the end of March, including 8.4 million in general sign-up, which is aimed at larger tracts; 8.2 million in continuous sign-up, which is focused on smaller, more environmentally sensitive tracts, and 6.4 million in the grasslands option.

Two million acres enrolled through the general or continuous sign-up options are scheduled to leave the program in October unless they are re-enrolled, including 1.5 million acres enrolled via general signups and 500,000 acres enrolled via continuous CRP efforts.

Contracts currently scheduled to expire in September 2024 fall to only 480,000 and rise to just shy of 1 million acres in September 2025. Through the end of March, just over 44,000 acres were enrolled via the continuous signup in FY 2023 while 888,000 acres were enrolled in FY 2022. Annual CRP enrollment is capped at 27 million acres under the 2018 Farm Bill.

NASA’s Newest Mission is Focused on Helping U.S. Farmers

Thu, 25 May 2023 12:38:23 GMT

When you think of NASA, do missions to the moon or Mars come to mind? If so, you might be surprised to learn that NASA is focused increasingly on missions closer to home – those on planet Earth.

“We have 26 different missions underway, with satellites orbiting Earth, studying the entire planet as a system—the land, the atmosphere, the oceans, all of it,” says Karen St. Germain, director for science at NASA.

The information gleaned by NASA scientists today is disseminated to various organizations for use, including USDA. For instance, data gathered by NASA routinely informs the USDA World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) monthly reports.

NASA’s Role In Agriculture

As the agency looks to the future, St. Germain says NASA expects to work more closely with farmers and other members of the agriculture community through a new program called Acres.

Established in March, Acres is a consortium of partners working across the U.S. agricultural spectrum to develop observatory-based data and tools to help increase food production, while protecting or restoring soil, water and other natural resources, says Alyssa Whitcraft,

founding director and a professor in the department of geographical sciences at the University of Maryland. University staff provide administration and oversight for Acres.

She says initial objectives developed for Acres are based on feedback from Midwest farmers, gathered during individual and group discussions in 2022.

Three of the consortium partners’ broad objectives for Acres include:
1. Supporting a deeper understanding of U.S. agricultural land use, productivity and sustainability
2. Developing on-farm decision support tools for smart agronomy
3. Strengthening environmental and human resilience to climate change and global hazards

“Farmers and ranchers are looking for information to help them make all sorts of decisions, from water use to what crops to plant and when,” says St. Germain, in a press release. “NASA is always looking for new ways to help people find and use science to inform their decisions, so we’re very excited about this new consortium to help America’s farmers use NASA Earth science data.” Read more here: The New Space Jam: Delivering 51 Years of Satellite Data to America’s Producers

‘Down To Earth’ Applications

Some specific applications for the data include: helping to optimize nitrogen applications and irrigation scheduling to support early detection of pests and disease; to provide information tools to support local food production; and to bolster soil health, says Brad Doorn, NASA program manager for water resources and agriculture.

“We want farmers to know that their space agency has an agriculture program that is focused on understanding their needs and finding solutions with them,” Doorn says.

In recent years, NASA has been working to ensure that members of the U.S. agriculture industry are connected directly to the agency’s agriculture work, particularly through its Earth Applied Sciences program.

NASA Acres builds on the success of NASA Harvest, a globally focused consortium also based at the University of Maryland.

More information about Acres and how to get involved is available at nasaacres.org.

Put Your Data To Work: Layers Of Information Pave The Road To Higher Yield

Pop-Up Solar: Can Farmers Make Fertilizer, Fuel and Electricity from the Sun?

Dead Noise: AM Radio Could Soon Be Phased Out of All Vehicles

Ag Will be Granted $11 Million to be Part of the Climate "Solution"

Tue, 16 May 2023 20:10:03 GMT

John Kerry, Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, highlighted the need to address ag sector emissions in the fight against climate change during his keynote address at USDA’s recent AIM for Climate Summit. He noted that ag production accounts for 33% of global greenhouse gas emissions, making it essential to focus on reducing these emissions in the pursuit of a net-zero future.

“We can’t get to net zero, we don’t get this job done, unless ag is front and center as part of the solution,” Kerry said.

Details

Ag generates 10% to 12% of greenhouse gas emissions globally, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The food system as a whole —including packaging, transportation, and waste management — generates a third of global emissions, according to a 2021 study published in the academic journal Nature Food.

As the global population continues to grow, emissions from food systems are projected to cause an additional half a degree of warming by mid-century. Kerry stressed that lives depend on developing the necessary tools to lower ag emissions, urging for innovation within the sector. The global food system, which encompasses land-use change, agricultural production, packaging, and waste management, generates approximately 18 billion tons of carbon dioxide annually, or 34% of total worldwide emissions.

A Farmer’s Reflection on Climate

Fox Business News recently interviewed Nicole Ort Moke of Ort Farms. She said “agriculture is very green and as farmers we are the most invested in keeping the land sustainable, keeping it viable for future generations. And everything we do, environmentally, that’s always at the top of our mind.”

Nicole was asked to comment about making planters and other farm equipment electric vehicles.

“Going electric with the tractors, the concerns that I have are, are they able to be efficient enough with keeping up the battery life and having enough horsepower for us to be able to feed the nation in an economic, affordable way?”

The outlet then talked with Bjørn Lomborg, a Danish author and the president of the think tank Copenhagen Consensus Center. He is the former director of the Danish government’s Environmental Assessment Institute in Copenhagen. He became internationally known for his best-selling and controversial book The Skeptical Environmentalist.

Lomborg was asked if the U.S needs to restrict farming on a vast scale. Lomborg’s response:

“What John Kerry is telling us is that a third of all emissions come from farming, most of that is in developing countries and remember, what is it that is also mostly a core part of the world? It’s a lot of people starving. There’s something fundamentally wrong about that. Look, there’s maybe 750 million people who are starving, but do we need to make it harder to do ag? No. The solution is focused on innovation. First, what matters a lot more is to get cheaper and more food so you can feed your kids. That’s not what John Kerry is pushing for,” he says. “Secondly, if we innovate to have better ag that produces more at lower cost, it also helps the environment because it reduces climate emissions because you don’t need to cut down a lot of forests.”

Upshot

Lomborg says Kerry’s solution to the climate problem is not going to work and should be withdrawn. He says the U.S. and other countries should be spending the money that we’re spending on innovation and technology.

“Look at all the other problems that are also facing the world. All these problems have smart solutions as we just talked about for ag. This is about getting more innovation, especially for the world’s poorest for cassava and sorghum and all these other grains… all these other ag products that don’t get a lot of funding because they’re not growing in rich countries. Those could be better, cheaper, more effectively produced. More production, lower price and lower emissions.”

The pros and cons of focusing on U.S. ag’s climate change:

Pros:

Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions: Agriculture is a significant contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions, particularly methane and nitrous oxide. By focusing on sustainable farming practices, emissions can be reduced.
Carbon sequestration: Certain agricultural practices, such as cover cropping and no-till farming, can help sequester carbon in the soil, reducing atmospheric CO2 levels.
Improved water management: Sustainable agriculture can help manage water resources more efficiently, reducing stress on freshwater sources and mitigating the effects of droughts and floods.
Biodiversity protection: Promoting agricultural practices that protect habitats and ecosystems can contribute to biodiversity conservation and support ecosystem services that are crucial for human well-being.
Food security: Climate-resilient agricultural practices can help ensure a stable food supply in the face of climate change-induced threats like extreme weather events, pests, and diseases.
Economic benefits: Investing in sustainable agriculture can create jobs and stimulate economic growth in rural areas, fostering the development of green technologies and practices.

Cons:

Short-term economic costs: Transitioning to sustainable agricultural practices may require significant investments in new technologies, infrastructure, and training, which could be costly in the short term.
Resistance to change: Farmers and other stakeholders might be resistant to change due to a lack of understanding, financial incentives, or concerns about potential negative impacts on their livelihoods.
Trade-offs and unintended consequences: Focusing on agriculture alone may not be sufficient to address climate change, and some solutions might lead to trade-offs with other environmental, social, or economic objectives.
Political challenges: Policy changes necessary to support sustainable agriculture may face opposition from powerful interest groups, such as the agribusiness sector or the fossil fuel industry, making it difficult to implement effective policies.
Global coordination: While focusing on U.S. agriculture can contribute to mitigating climate change, it’s essential to recognize that climate change is a global problem that requires international cooperation and coordination to address effectively.

While people like Kerry say this focus can yield significant environmental, social, and economic benefits, others note there are challenges to overcome, such as the short-term costs, resistance to change, and the need for global coordination.

The news comes as USDA announces $11 billion for rural clean energy transition. The Biden administration plans to make nearly $11 billion in grants and loan opportunities available to rural electric providers to help them transition to clean energy.

This represents the largest investment in rural electricity since the Rural Electrification Act of 1936. The funds aim to support cleaner energy, create new jobs, reduce energy costs, and combat climate change.

Clean energy grant details

The Empowering Rural America (New ERA) program will make $9.7 billion available to eligible rural electric cooperatives for deploying renewable energy systems, zero-emission systems, and carbon capture systems.

The Powering Affordable Clean Energy (PACE) program will provide $1 billion in partially forgivable loans to renewable-energy developers and electric service providers for financing large-scale solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, hydropower projects, and energy storage systems.

To apply for the New ERA program, eligible entities must submit a Letter of Interest between July 31 and August 31.

For the PACE program, USDA will accept Letters of Interest starting on June 30 until Sept.29. Loans through the PACE program may be forgiven by 40% of the loan amount, and up to 60% for applicants in Puerto Rico, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Republic of Palau, and Tribal communities.

Background on energy grants

Cooperatives are tax-exempt and can’t take advantage of renewable energy tax credits that large power companies can get. The loans and grants are meant to fill that gap and speed rural America’s transition to clean energy, instead of coal and oil-burning power plants.

The funds can be used to deploy renewable energy systems, zero emission systems and carbon capture systems.

Doomsday Addiction: Celebrating 50 years of Failed Climate Predictions

Fri, 05 May 2023 12:58:32 GMT

The apocalypse is tomorrow, and if not, the day after will do. Declarations of the world’s demise are a dime a dozen, the fare of dignitaries, politicians, scientists, and celebs: The end is nigh—and getting nigher.

Coupled to the certainty of doomsday is the fall of farming. Hand in hand, Armageddon and agriculture are bedmates. On March 20, 2023, the United Nations warned of humanity’s ticking “time-bomb,” and released a “report of reports” enumerating a multi-trillion-dollar plan to implement climate policies across the globe. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres proclaimed the report a “survival guide for humanity” and called for the phase-out of fossil fuels: “Dear friends, humanity is on thin ice—and that ice is melting fast.”

Guterres’ remarks were particularly ironic, considering only a month earlier a Global Energy Monitor report revealed China’s expansion of coal capacity to unprecedented levels—six times larger than the rest of the world combined—via the construction of two new coal plants per week.

Despite Guterres’ pronouncement , there is nothing new under the sun—no matter how hot or cold it burns. A quick look at 50 years of cataclysmic predictions is in order.

Goodnight, Irene

In the 1960s, overpopulation and famine forecasts were all the rage. Despite the Green Revolution, which spurred crop yields across the globe, Paul Erlich, a Stanford biologist and end times prophet, preached a starvation gospel: “The Green Revolution...is going to turn brown.”

In 1968, with world population at 3.5 billion (7.9 billion as of 2023), Erlich penned The Population Bomb and lobbed an incendiary grenade in the opening lines of his prologue: The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate…

Lauded by the press, Erlich amplified insistence on a “dying planet” and ramped up his warnings.

August 10, 1969, Erlich in the New York Times: “We must realize that unless we are extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years.”

April 1970, Erlich in Mademoiselle: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”

Erlich was not alone. In the early 1970s, a host of voices supported his beliefs.

Harvard biologist and Nobel Prize winner George Wald , speaking at the University of Rhode Island in November 1970: “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”

Dennis Hayes, key organizer of Earth Day, in The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970: “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation.”

Kenneth Watt, UC Davis ecologist: “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”

Next up, the Ice Age cometh.

Big Cold

In 1970, as greenhouse theorists pushed a rise in average temperature, plenty of prognosticators asserted a big freeze. Kenneth Watt sounded the ice alarm, speaking in Pennsylvania at Swarthmore College: “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

Also in 1970, the Boston Globe ran with a chilling headline, “Scientist Predicts A New Ice Age By 21^st Century.” In the associated article, researcher James Lodge warned, “Air pollution may obliterate the sun and cause a new ice age in the first third of the next century if population continues to grow and earth’s resources are consumed at the present rate…”

The Guardian, Jan. 29, 1974, echoed the Globe: “Spy Satellites Show New Ice Age is Coming Fast.”

Time joined the cooling trend June 22, 1974: “Telltale signs are everywhere, from the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the Midwest. Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7 F.”

Newsweek weighed in on April 28, 1975, warning that global cooling would significantly impact agriculture. “There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production…”

“The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the Earth’s climate seems to be cooling down,” the Newsweek article continued. “Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic.”

Following Newsweek, the New York Times piped in on July 18, 1976, with additional gloom on agriculture’s demise attributed to global cooling. “… the news for the future is not all good. The climate is going to get unreliable. It is going to get cold. Harvest failures and regional famines will be more frequent. Weather will probably make history—again.”

“The relationship of global climate to food supplies is a case in point: climatic researchers are becoming alarmed that in the next 10 to 100 years humanity will be unable to feed itself—not through technological insufficiency or political mischief—but because of climatic changes that it can barely understand or control.”

Even in 1978, global cooling was a “No End” fact, according to another New York Times article: “An international team of specialists has concluded from eight indexes of climate that there is no end in sight to the cooling trend of the last 30 years, at least in the Northern Hemisphere.”

However, just a year after the global cooling article, the New York Times predicted catastrophe via global warming in a February 1979 story : “Climatologists Are Warned North Pole Might Melt,” featuring a jarring opening paragraph: “There is a real possibility that some people now in their infancy will live to a time when the ice at the North Pole will have melted, a change that would cause swift and perhaps catastrophic changes in climate.”

It was the end of the 1970s and big cold failed to arrive. Bring on big heat.

Baking and Burning

Acid rain concerns kicked off the 1980s, but generally were replaced late in the decade with a flood of headlines on heat, greenhouse effect, and sea levels.

In 1982, Mostafa Tolba , executive director of the UN’s Environment Program, pointed to the possibility of widespread devastation in less than 20 years. He cited “an environmental catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust.”

On June 30, 1989, the Associated Press squeezed decimation into a tight, 11-year window, with an ominous article, “Rising Seas Could Obliterate Nations,” containing a jaw-dropping opener: “A senior UN environmental official (Noel Brown) says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.”

In 1990, aware the apocalypse was stalled, Mostafa Tolba, doubled down: “We shall win or lose the climate struggle in the first years of the 1990s. The issue is as urgent as that.”

In February 1993, Thomas Lovejoy, assistant secretary for Environmental and External Affairs at the Smithsonian Institution, stressed the world had one remaining decade of opportunity to avoid calamity. “I am utterly convinced that most of the great environmental struggles will be either won or lost in the 1990s and by the next century it will be too late.”

The 1990s was a steady chain of doomsday assurances, but the heaviest hyperbole was yet to be unleashed.

Cannibals, Toast, and Chaos

In 2006, former vice-president Al Gore projected that unless drastic measures were implemented, the planet would hit an irreversible “point of no return” by 2016. Game over.

Rajendra Pachauri, head of the UN Climate Panel, one-upped Gore in 2007, insisting 2012 was the year of irreversibility. “If there is no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment.”

In April 2008, media mogul Ted Turner provided far more detail than either Gore or Pachauri, emphasizing the consequences of climate inaction. “Not doing it will be catastrophic. We’ll be eight degrees hotter in ten, not 10 but 30 or 40 years and basically none of the crops will grow. Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals. Civilization will have broken down. The few people left will be living in a failed state like Somalia or Sudan, and living conditions will be intolerable. The droughts will be so bad there’ll be no more corn growing.”

The acclaimed godfather of global warming, James Hansen, drew a line in the sand testifying before Congress in June 2008, on the dangers of greenhouse gases: “We’re toast if we don’t get on a very different path. This is the last chance.”

A year later, in July 2009, then-Prince Charles chimed in, asserting the planet had 96 months to avoid decimation: “…irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it.”

Only three months later, UK prime minister Gordon Brown urged nations to pull a historical handbrake ahead of a climate conference: “There are now fewer than 50 days to set the course of the next 50 years and more. If we do not reach a deal at this time, let us be in no doubt: once the damage from unchecked emissions growth is done, no retrospective global agreement, in some future period, can undo that choice. By then, it will be irretrievably too late.”

In 2014, French foreign minister Laurent Fabius upped Brown’s 50 days to 500. “We have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”

Twelve years to 2031. In January 2019, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez put her chips on 2031 as the potential end of days. “Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: ‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it? And, like, this is the war—this is our World War ll.”

Eleven years to 2030. Echoing Ocasio-Cortez in March 2019, but shaving off a year, UN General Assembly President Maria Garces declared an 11-year window to escape catastrophe: “We are the last generation that can prevent irreparable damage to our planet.”

In June 2019, then-presidential candidate Joe Biden threw his support behind Ocasio-Cortez’s dozen-year projection: “Science tells us that how we act or fail to act in the next 12 years will determine the very livability of our planet.”

Full circle back to 2023, and the UN’s latest “ time-bomb ,” released March 20, as described by the Associated Press : “Humanity still has a chance close to the last to prevent the worst of climate change’s future harms…”

In step with near annual UN declarations from the past 50 years, Secretary-General Guterres once again sounded the alarm: “The climate time-bomb is ticking.”

But therein lies the beauty of doomsday predictions: When one fails, make another.

For more from Chris Bennett (cbennett@farmjournal.com 662-592-1106) see:

Priceless Pistol Found After Decades Lost in Farmhouse Attic

Judas Goats: Agriculture’s Bizarre, Drug-Addicted Masters of Deceit Once Ruled the Killing Floor

Cottonmouth Farmer: The Insane Tale of a Buck-Wild Scheme to Corner the Snake Venom Market

Tractorcade: How an Epic Convoy and Legendary Farmer Army Shook Washington, D.C.

Bagging the Tomato King: The Insane Hunt for Agriculture’s Wildest Con Man

Young Farmer uses YouTube and Video Games to Buy $1.8M Land

While America Slept, China Stole the Farm

Bizarre Mystery of Mummified Coon Dog Solved After 40 Years

The Arrowhead whisperer: Stunning Indian Artifact Collection Found on Farmland

Fleecing the Farm: How a Fake Crop Fueled a Bizarre $25 Million Ag Scam

Skeleton In the Walls: Mysterious Arkansas Farmhouse Hides Civil War History

US Farming Loses the King of Combines

Ghost in the House: A Forgotten American Farming Tragedy

Rat Hunting with the Dogs of War, Farming’s Greatest Show on Legs

Evil Grain: The Wild Tale of History’s Biggest Crop Insurance Scam

Latest IPCC report predicts dismal consequences for global agriculture due to climate change

Wed, 03 May 2023 14:10:43 GMT

On March 20, 2023, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), released its 6th Assessment Report (AR6), which looks at the likelihood that current and planned climate change mitigation activity will succeed in keeping the global temperature rise below 1.5 degrees Centigrade (C), and the implications of the likely path of climate change for the global economy. Data on greenhouse gas emissions used in the analysis are from 2019, and do not reflect any changes in economic activity that occurred as a result of COVID-19 pandemic shutdowns that occurred worldwide. The previous report (AR5) was released in 2014, prior to the commitments that 195 countries made to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the Paris Accord, which was negotiated in December 2015.

The IPCC is the arm of the United Nations charged with advancing scientific knowledge about climate change and its likely impact on the world we live in. They recruit scientific experts from multiple relevant disciplines from around the world to produce and assemble peer-reviewed reports on a periodic basis that reflect the most recent credible research about how climate change impacts both the natural environment and man-made infrastructure, and the physical and economic implications of those impacts. The Summary for Policy Makers (SPM) for the sixth round of IPCC assessments can be found here .

Overall, the report finds that, to date, the planet has warmed approximately 1.1 degrees C since the end of the 19th century due to a steady increase in greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, and that countries which are signatories to the Paris Accord have not implemented policies that will put the planet on a path to keep us below that crucial 1.5 degrees C threshold. In fact, at our current rate of GHG emissions, the authors estimate that we will have cumulatively exhausted the global carbon budget that would keep us below 1.5 degrees by about 2030, or less than ten years from now. In order to avoid that likely scenario of overshooting that 1.5 degree C target, governments will need to undertake immediate and deep GHG emission reductions in all sectors during this decade.

Globally, the agricultural sector (including forestry) accounted for about 22 percent of GHG emissions in 2019, when land use changes stemming from agriculture are included. The increasing temperatures and more frequent extreme weather events (such as droughts and floods) that have occurred already due to the current levels of GHG gasses in the atmosphere have exposed millions of additional people in developing countries to both food security and water security problems. Although agricultural productivity has increased in recent years, that rate is slower than it otherwise might have been due to climate change. A 2021 article published in Nature Climate Change found that climate change has hampered growth in agricultural productivity in recent decades, estimating that agricultural productivity growth cumulatively is 21 percent lower than it otherwise would have been since 1961 if climate change were not a factor. Ocean warming and acidification has impacted the health of the fisheries and aquaculture sectors worldwide. Studies that separate out climate change from other factors affecting crop yields have shown that yields of some crops (e.g., maize and wheat) in many lower-latitude regions have been affected negatively by observed climate changes, while in many higher-latitude regions, yields of some crops (e.g., maize, wheat, and sugar beets) have been affected positively over recent decades.

The SPM report identifies a number of steps that can be taken in the food and agriculture sector to help farmers adapt to the effects of climate change. They include:
• cultivar (seed) improvements,
• on-farm water management and storage,
• soil moisture conservation,
• irrigation,
• agroforestry,
• community-based adaptation,
• and farm and landscape level diversification in agriculture.

However, some farmers, especially those with limited resources in developing countries, face financial or institutional constraints in adapting their operations to climate change. To date, there has been very limited funding made available from either public or private sources to help smallholder farmers with adaptation strategies. According to the United Nation’s International Fund on Agricultural Development (IFAD), smallholder farmers receive only 1.7 percent of global climate finance funding, despite cumulatively accounting for roughly one-third of global agricultural production.

The report warns that the effectiveness of adaptation measures will wane with increasing warming over time. The higher the magnitude and the longer the duration of overshoot of the 1.5 degree C target, the more ecosystems and societies are exposed to greater and more widespread changes in climatic impact-drivers, increasing risks for many natural and human systems.

A lengthy separate report entitled Special Report on Climate Change and Land issued in 2022 has a chapter on food security which provides more detailed information than the SPM report. Modeled estimates of corn (maize) production suggest yield declines of 10 to 20 percent in many parts of the world if we overshoot the 1.5 degrees C target by a significant amount, and that modeled results reflect only changing climatic conditions and not the likely impact of increased pest and crop disease pressure, which would further increase losses. On the livestock side, higher temperatures would adversely impact the health and reproductive capability of ruminant animals, decrease the nutrient uptake from forage and grazing, and increase the cost of operating intensive livestock facilities such as confined animal feeding operations (CAFO’s), due both to higher feed costs and higher energy costs to keep the animals cool in summer and warm in the winter. The global aquaculture sector will also be impacted, due to short-term losses due to extreme weather events to both current production and infrastructure damage, while in the longer-term, aquaculture operations could suffer from lack of access to fish seed and fresh water and eutrophication of their water-holding facilities.

USDA’s Cover Crop Program Would be Made Permanent through Biden's Budget

Fri, 10 Mar 2023 22:23:44 GMT

A $6.8 trillion budget proposal was released by the Biden administration on Thursday with the continued “bottom up, middle out” theme, according to USDA.

“The President’s budget provides USDA with the tools needed to serve all Americans by providing effective, innovative science-based public policy leadership at home and around the world,” Tom Vilsack, USDA secretary said in a press release .

The proposed budget includes:

• $19 trillion to be borrowed through FY 2033
• 10.2 trillion in interest on national debt
• $3 trillion in debt deficit reduction
• $6.9 trillion for spending

So, what’s ag’s stake in the $6.8 trillion plan? As is generally the theme in a farm bill, nutrition would take most of the cake.

Nutrition and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)

According to the release, the administration anticipates 6.5 million people will participate in SNAP. To meet these “critical” SNAP needs, the proposal devotes $6.3 billion of a total $7.1 billion in nutrition for SNAP.

“The budget also includes $15 billion over 10 years to allow more states and schools to leverage participation in the community eligibility provision to provide healthy and free school meals to an additional 9 million children,” the release says.

Ensuring SNAP availability is one obstacle. Ensuring food is available for purchase is another issue the budget looks to address.

Supply Chain Resilience

COVID-19 and the Russia–Ukraine war exposed many broken supply chain links. To solder the chain back together, the White House plans to create programs that will:

• Bolster markets through oversight by the Agricultural Marketing Service.
• Safeguard livestock against pests and disease through Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) investments.
• Ensure “safe and healthy” work environments by hiring more inspectors and health officials.

“These programs build on the pandemic and supply chain assistance funding in the American Rescue Plan to address COVID-19 pandemic-related vulnerabilities in the food system,” the plan says.

The supply chain won’t be the only sector to see new or reestablished programs. A similar approach will also be taken up in the climate department.

Climate Resilience

Cover crop pilot programs would be made permanent if this budget were to pass.

With $208 million more in conservation funds from the 2023 enacted funding level, the NRCS would work to “increase the voluntary adoption of conservation practices that sequester carbon and reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with agricultural production.”

Related article: Producers Eliminate Fungicide and Insecticide Use, Cut Fertilizer 50%

To put the investments in motion, NRCS would use draw on federal, state and private conservationists to hire “thousands” of employees that would be available to rural America.

These employees would also work alongside climate researchers, which will also be funded in the budget.

Ag Research

In the past, many legislative officials have speculated American ag is falling behind in research compared with other countries. But research might finally see its needs met if this budget proposal passes.

“The People’s Republic of China has become the largest funder of agricultural research and development in the world, surpassing the U.S. and the EU” the report says. “The budget restores American innovation in agriculture by providing a total of more than $4 billion, a $299 million increase above the 2023 enacted level, for ag research, education and outreach.”

Some, including Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Ca.), feel these research funds are long overdue.

“This administration is taking an important step toward undoing years of underinvestment – as public funding for agriculture research has declined by one-third since 2002,” Carbajal said in a press release.

A letter sent in February to the Office of Management and Budget by Carbajal and other members of Congress stressed the need for increases in ag research.

If these proposed investments are taken-up, Carbajal says American innovation in ag will be “restored.”

Taxes

Arguably the heaviest hitter in the budget bundle is rooted in tax changes that would make American’s pay “their fair share” toward the nation’s debt, according to Janet Yellen, U.S. treasury secretary.

To ensure the “share” is paid, the budget would:

• Raise the corporate tax rate from 21% to 28%. For most farmers this would be almost an 100% tax increase from 2017 when most farmers only paid 15%.

• Include several proposals to eliminate or reduce tax deductions and credits related to oil and natural gas operations.

Many farmers have ground that enjoys oil and gas revenues. This could indirectly reduce those revenues.

• Any farmer with a net worth greater than $100 million would be subject to a minimum tax rate of 25% on all income included unrealized gains not yet tax.

As an example, assume a farmer is worth $125 million and they have $25 million on unrealized gains not yet taxed. They would owe $5 million that can be paid over 9 years in the first year of this proposal or 5 years thereafter.

Plus, if the asset is illiquid, they could make an election to defer the tax until the asset is sold but would owe an “interest charge”. There appears to be no refund if your net worth decreases.

• Increase the Statute of Limitations from 3 years to 6 years for prohibited transactions and material misstatement of assets in a retirement plan.

• Treat all capital gains and dividend income for taxpayers with more than $1 million of taxable income as being taxed at ordinary rates.

As example, assume a farmer had $500,000 of capital gains and $1 million of other net taxable income. All of the capital gains would be taxed at 44.6%.

The administration wants to make farmers and their heirs pay capital gains taxes on any transfers of appreciated property either via gift or at death. They have increased the exemption amount to $5 million per person or $10 million for a married couple and allow portability of any unused amount at the first death.

Related article: Review of President Biden’s Green Book

So, what are the odds of this budget passing? It depends on who you talk to.

Upshot

According to Jim Wiesemeyer , ProFarmer policy analyst, democrats in the House and Senate aren’t sure they’ll produce their own budget documents, saying they’ll review Biden’s proposal and only draft their own resolutions if they need to take a different approach from the president.

Paul Neiffer , farm CPA, believes, with the House in Republican control, there is little chance that much of this will pass in

Crop Insurance, Production Costs, ERP Among Key Topics at Senate Ag Farm Bill Hearing

Fri, 10 Feb 2023 21:00:25 GMT

A Senate Ag Committee hearing Thursday on the new farm bill raised a issue that is now evident: the Title 1 farm bill safety net can no longer deal with the current ag environment of rising production costs and relatively high prices for some commodities. USDA officials also faced criticism about its handling of Phase 2 payments via the Emergency Relief Program (ERP).

Other topics that have previously surfaced included Republican concerns about climate and conservation changes to crop insurance, while Democrats continued to urge expansion of the program to more producers.

Need for change

Senate Ag Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) said the 2018 Farm Bill largely lived up to expectations, but she suggested its successor must deal with several challenges: increasingly damaging natural disasters and accelerated costs of production.

“There are still gaps in the farm safety net as farmers continue to face global market uncertainty and climate-fueled weather disasters,” she said. “While many commodity prices are at historic highs, which is good, we also know that land and fertilizer and input costs are also near record highs.”

Farm safety net gaps

Ranking Member John Boozman (R-Ark.) said a focus on boosting nutrition and climate programs has obscured the fact that farm safety net programs like Price Loss Coverage (PLC) are ill equipped to deal with the current situation.

Related articles: Stepped-Up Basis Leaning in Favor of Rural America on House Ways and Means Panel

“Prices for many of our major commodities would have to drop sharply before the current Title 1 Price Loss Coverage safety net would start to work,” Boozman said, noting corn prices would need to plummet 46% before PLC would provide enrolled farmers any assistance. “By the time corn prices fell that low, the significant damage would have already been done.”

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) asked if USDA had looked at how the two safety net programs respond to inflation, such as adjusting reference prices — which trigger payments under the PLC program.

“I will tell you my legislative staff is always quick to tell me to emphasize that Congress writes the farm bill, and then that’s going to be important here too, obviously those reference prices are in statute,” USDA Undersecretary for Farm Production and Conservation Robert Bonnie told Tuberville. “When we talk to producers, there’s lots of concern about obviously rising input costs,” he added, but then emphasized USDA can only operate farm safety net programs as dictated by Congress.

USDA disaster aid implementation was both praised and criticized

Democrats and Republicans agreed with farmers who have complained about USDA’s methodology for payments under Phase 2 of the ERP, saying they do not adequately compensate farmers for their losses. “I appreciate USDA’s efforts through Phase 1 of ERP, which generally worked well in supporting producers with crop losses and [2020 and 2021],” said Sen John Thune (R-S.D.). “But the Phase 2 methodology… often does not accurately reflect crop losses that Congress meant to cover.”

Thune urged USDA consider reverting to the approach used in Phase 1 of the ERP effort for 2022 losses, a suggestion echoed by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who said farmers in her state “are grateful for the quick and effective approach taken during the implementation of ERP Phase 1,” but “a number of them have been less enthusiastic of the income tax-based approach taken during the rollout of ERP Phase 2.”

Bonnie said USDA’s approach on ERP Phase 2 focused on ensuring more producers had access to aid, but said if there are resources remaining after the effort the department may look at a shallow loss effort to address some of the concerns with Phase 2.

Related articles: The Cost of a Farm Bill: 2023 Row Crop Priorities

Bonnie said ad hoc programs like ERP have helped farmers facing disaster-related losses, but he stressed that federal crop insurance remains a key risk management tool, and that USDA has worked to expand the program to cover more producers.

Crop insurance and climate intersect

Boozman again raised a concern voiced by many Republicans about any move to use crop insurance to incentivize climate or conservation practices — which GOP members contend could undermine the actuarial soundness of the program and move it away from its core focus as a risk management tool.

“Can you commit to making sure that any efforts to expand the crop insurance programs are science based, peer reviewed, and protect the integrity of the program,” he asked Bonnie, saying a “one-size fits all” approach that elevates certain practices like cover cropping could disadvantage farmers in areas where those practices are not practical.

Bonnie responded that “with respect to crop insurance, everything we have to do has to be actuarially sound as we’ve got to maintain the integrity of crop insurance.” He said recent incentives offered to farmers for cover cropping have taken the form of premium rebates — not changes to premiums or the overall premium subsidy paid by the government.

Stabenow praised federal crop insurance, calling it “the number one risk management tool for producers.” However, improvements are needed, she said, promising improvements to the program, “including specialty crop growers, organic producers, beginning and diversified farmers.”

Regarding prevent plant coverage

Sen. Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.) asked if USDA was looking at expanding prevented plant coverage under crop insurance, which pays farmers when they are unable to plant an insured crop due to extreme weathers. He noted eligibility currently hinges on a farmer being able to plant, insure and harvest crops in one of the four preceding crop years — known as the four-in-one rule — and some farmers in the West are at more risk of losing coverage due to prolonged drought conditions.

“One in four is very regionalized in a lot of cases,” acknowledged USDA Administrator Marcia Bunger. “So, for this coming year, we’ve made an exception for several western states to step outside of that one and four,” adding USDA would consult with stakeholders over the next year about a potential long-term solution to the issue.

Related articles: How USDA’s $2.8 Billion Climate-Smart Investment Might Impact Your Operation

USDA climate program efforts were raised by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who noted concern over USDA’s move to tap more than $3 billion from the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) to fund its Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities (PCSC) effort that funds climate-smart ag pilot projects.

“Spending over $3 billion without input from Congress is a serious concern for everybody in the Congress,” Grassley stated.

Grassley then asked Bonnie if USDA had any plans to tap CCC for additional USDA programs. Bonnie reiterated what USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack has said — that PCSC falls within the CCC’s charter as it looks to expand and create new markets for ag commodities.

However, Bonnie ultimately said there were no plans for new CCC-backed programs under the Farm Production and Conservation (FPAC) mission area.

United Airlines Taps Corn to Bring Ethanol-Based Jet Fuel to Market

Wed, 01 Feb 2023 22:47:23 GMT

United Airlines is teaming up with a corn ethanol maker in a bid to ramp up production of green jet fuel to deal with carbon credits and climate change.

United Airlines Holdings Inc., biofuels producer Green Plains Inc. and energy infrastructure firm Tallgrass Energy Partners LP are jointly investing up to $50 million to form Blue Blade Energy. The venture seeks to bring to market technology that would simplify making sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) from ethanol and other alcohol-based ingredients, also known as feedstocks.

Read more: DOE Cuts $118 Million Check to Biofuels Projects

United plans to buy as many as 2.7 billion gallons of the fuel, its biggest SAF agreement by volume, as the airline works to reach net zero emissions by 2050. The venture centers around the idea that ethanol will beat out other commodities, like vegetable oil, as a preferred ingredient for making green jet fuel.

“The trouble with SAF is the lack of feedstock,” United Airlines Ventures President Michael Leskinen said in an interview with Bloomberg. Blue Blade “has the potential to be very consequential in moving the needle in how much SAF is actually produced in the United States.”

Trial Plans

The initial investment is for testing development. If that’s a success, then hundreds of millions in financing would be needed to build an initial production plant, according to Leskinen. The next step would be to build a test plant in 2024, followed by a facility that could start operating by 2028.

Read more: Are Landlocked Soybean Crush Facilities Destined to Survive?

The offtake agreement could provide for enough SAF to fly more than 50,000 flights annually between United’s hub airports in Chicago and Denver.

The Biden administration has challenged refiners and others in the supply chain to boost production of SAF to 3 billion gallons a year as part of an effort to cut aviation emissions 20% by 2030.

The global aviation industry accounts for about 3% of the gases warming the planet today, though the sector’s emissions are rising fast.

What's in it for Ag in the New Spending Bill?

Wed, 28 Dec 2022 03:26:54 GMT

The House on Friday averted a government shutdown by voting 225 to 201 in favor of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023. The $1.7 trillion omnibus bill includes 12 separate bills that cover everything from natural disasters to military pay to foreign aid.

Sanford Bishop Jr., ag, rural development and food and drug administration subcommittee chairman, says the bill is “crucial” to America’s economic success.

“These federal programs make our country a world leader in agriculture, ensure that we have safe, abundant food and medicine to lead healthy lives, support America’s farmers and ranchers, and provide Americans with the materials that clothe us and build our communities,” Bishop says.

Here are highlights of the key ag-sector funding from the omnibus:

Insurance

• Directs USDA to index all administrative and operating expense in the crop insurance program for inflation.

Research

• Agricultural research: Ag research funding will increase by $175 million to $3.45 billion in 2023, including monies for Agricultural Research Service, National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Agriculture and Food Research Initiative, and Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education program.

Conservation

• Includes the SUSTAINS Act, which allows corporations and other private entities to contribute funding for conservation projects and authorize USDA to match the donations.

• Reauthorizes the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act, which imposes fees for maintenance and registration of active ingredients. It boosts registration and maintenance fees 30% and allows EPA to raise fees by 5% in 2024 and 2026.

Infrastructure

• $1.48 billion is included on top of annual appropriations funding for the Army Corps of Engineers to make emergency repairs and navigation improvements needed after extreme weather events, including low water on the Mississippi River.

“One of the best returns on investment is when we pump money into our infrastructure, especially the great waterway system,” Jim Wiesemeyer, ProFarmer policy analyst told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory. “This town [Washington, D.C.] has had a mindset change on pumping more money, not only in the new projects, but restoring some of the water transportation endeavors of the past. It’s good news.”

Relief Aid

• $3.7 billion in farm disaster aid, to cover eligible 2022 crop and livestock losses, with $494.5 million to be used for livestock losses due to drought or wildfires, as part of overall $40.6 billion for disasters.

• Requires USDA to make a one-time payment to each rice producer on a U.S. farm in the 2022 crop year. USDA will determine payment rates based on yield history and acreage.

• Authorizes $100 million for the USDA to make pandemic assistance payments to cotton merchandisers that purchased cotton from a U.S. producer from March 1, 2020, through the measure’s enactment date.

• $25 million for specialty crop equitable relief.

Broadband

• USDA’s ReConnect loan and grant program for rural broadband will get $348 million for fiscal 2023.

Food Assistance

• Make permanent a summer EBT (food stamp) program to provide up to $40 a month per child. It allows grab-and-go or home delivery of meals to kids in rural areas as an alternative to meals in group settings Any summer meals benefits issued to a household in the summer of 2023 couldn’t exceed $120 per child. USDA will be required to establish a program beginning in the summer of 2024 and annually thereafter to issue EBT benefits to eligible households to ensure continued access to food when school isn’t in session in the summer.

• Aid for Food for Peace ($1.8 billion) and McGovern-Dole International Food for Education ($248 million) programs.

Carbon

• Includes the Growing Climate Solutions Act, which authorizes USDA to oversee the registration of farm technical advisers and carbon-credit verification services

Wiesemeyer says the swift passage of the spending package signals the coming farm bill might be easier to pass than some had previously thought, despite the new congress moving in next week.

“Congress put more than a few dollars in this for farm bill-related topics, especially food stamps and some of the climate change funding,” he says. “I think this really increases the odds that both the Senate and the house should get a new farm bill done in 2023.”

The bill will now move to President Biden’s desk, where he is expected to sign it this week.

More on policy :

4 Ways to Advocate for Ag in the New Farm Bill
U.S. Defense Spending Bill Leads to China Taking Aim at Taiwan

How the $1.7 Trillion Omnibus Spending Package Might Impact Your Operation

Tue, 20 Dec 2022 17:19:29 GMT

Text of the $1.7 trillion omnibus spending package was released early Tuesday morning. The Senate will vote first and intends to pass the measure before Thursday, leaving the House no time to demand changes before the Christmas holiday.

Here are the details that might impact your farm:

Disaster Relief

• $250 million in aid to rice producers and $100 million to cotton merchandisers to make up for losses related to the pandemic or supply chain disruptions. USDA previously provided $80 million in aid to textile mills and other cotton users. For rice, USDA would determine payment rates based on yield history and acreage.

• $40.6 billion for drought, hurricanes, flooding, wildfire, natural disasters and other matters — $3.7 billion in disaster aid for farmers to cover 2022 crop and livestock losses.

Food Aid

• Funds two programs that provide foreign food aid. These include the Food for Peace Program (PL 480), which is funded at $1.8 billion, and the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education Program, which is funded at $248 million, for an increase of $11 million over fiscal year 2022.

• Summer Meals Program Modernization: Updates the summer food service program to permanently allow states to provide non-congregate meals and summer electronic benefit (EBT) options nationwide to eligible children in addition to meals provided at congregate feeding sites. Non-congregate meals, such as grab-and-go or home delivery, would be provided in rural areas to eligible children, and summer EBT benefits would be capped at $40 per child per month. This provision is fully offset and based largely on the Hunger-Free Summer for Kids Act, which Boozman authored and introduced earlier this Congress.

• Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) EBT Skimming Regulations and Reimbursement: Requires USDA to coordinate with relevant agencies and stakeholders to investigate reports of stolen SNAP benefits through card skimming, cloning and other similar fraudulent methods. This provision aims to identify the extent of the problem, develop methods to prevent fraud and improve security measures, and provide replacement of benefits stolen through these fraudulent actions.

Conservation

• Cracks down on “conservation easements,” which allow tax breaks when land is dedicated for conservation purposes. The IRS has identified the transactions as a method for avoiding taxes. The conservation easement provision was expected to raise between $6 billion and $7 billion.

• SUSTAINS Act: Enacts a House bill that allows corporations and other private entities to contribute funding for conservation projects and authorizes USDA to match up to 75% in matching the donations.

Inputs

• Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA 5) Reauthorization: Reauthorizes pesticide registration and review process user-fee programs administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and increases registration and maintenance fees to support a more predictable regulatory process, create additional process improvements, and provide resources for safety, training, bilingual labeling, and other services to advance the safe and effective use of pesticides.

• Pesticide Registration Review Deadline Extension: Extends deadline for EPA to complete registration review decisions for all pesticide products registered as of October 1, 2007. EPA is facing a significant backlog of pesticide registrations due to a variety of factors over the past several years, which raises potential implications for continued access to numerous crop protection tools. The agency will be allowed to continue its registration review work through October 1, 2026, as a result of this extension.

Climate

• Growing Climate Solutions Act: Incorporates updated language from the Growing Climate Solutions Act, which directs USDA to establish a program to register entities that provide technical assistance and verification for farmers, ranchers and foresters who participate in voluntary carbon markets with the goal of providing information and confidence to producers.

Farm Business

• $1.92 billion for farm programs, which is $55 million above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. This includes $61 million to resolve ownership and succession of farmland issues, also known as heirs’ property issues. This funding will continue support for various farm, conservation, and emergency loan programs, and help American farmers and ranchers. It will also meet estimates of demand for farm loan programs.

• Funding for specialty crops and remarks on crop insurance/A&O. Some $25 million is being made available for specialty crop equitable relief and report language directing USDA to use its legal authority to index all A&O (crop insurance program) for inflation and provide equitable relief for specialty crops going forward.

Livestock

• Livestock Mandatory Reporting Extension (LMR) Extension: Extends livestock mandatory reporting requirements until September 30, 2023. LMR requires meat packers and importers to report the prices they pay for cattle, hogs, and sheep purchased for slaughter and prices received for meats derived from such species to USDA who then publishes daily, weekly, and monthly public reports detailing these transactions.

Markets

• Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Whistleblower Program Extension: Enables CFTC to continue payment of salaries, customer education initiatives and non-awards expenses related to the whistleblower program to ensure it can continue to function even when awards obligated to whistleblowers exceed the program fund’s balance at the time of distribution.

Some ag sector items that did NOT make the omnibus package:

Nothing for the proposed farmworker labor reforms from Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and others. The bill also left out legislation to reform cattle markets or appoint a special investigator at USDA to investigate possible anti-competitive behavior in the meatpacking sector.

We’ll be updating this article as more details become available.

More on policy :

Water Resources Bill Reauthorized with a Component that Will Impact Producers
European Union Clinches a Deal on a Carbon Border Tax
U.S.'s “Candid” GMO Corn Conversation With Mexico Results In Changes To Looming Trade Dispute
Senate Clears Annual Defense Policy, Pushing $858 Billion to Military

European Union Clinches a Deal on a Carbon Border Tax

Mon, 19 Dec 2022 19:58:12 GMT

Members of the bloc agreed on how to create a tool that will force foreign companies to pay for the cost of their carbon emissions. The tax is a key element of the EU’s climate emissions goals, but trading partners accused Brussels of protectionism.

“From 2027 on, it’s crunch time. Everybody needs to reduce emissions by then or will have to pay a lot,” said the lead negotiator for the European Parliament, Peter Liese.

The EU will phase out free CO2 permits by 2034, deeming them no longer necessary to protect European producers from overseas competition after it also approved a so-called carbon border tax targeting that same competition of producers from jurisdictions with lower emission standards than the bloc.

The EU also will be gradually reducing the number of CO2 permits available for purchase in a further effort to stimulate investment in low-carbon energy. Some 90 million permits will be removed from the system in 2024, followed by another 27 million in 2026.

The carbon deal is provisional and has to be approved by the European Parliament and the Council of Europe.

More on carbon :

Research Demonstrates Cover Crops as Carbon Negative
Research in Ag-Tech Top-Of-Mind in Farm Bill Hearing

Soil Health a Priority in Latest USDA Climate Funding

Wed, 14 Dec 2022 00:07:50 GMT

USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack on Monday announced $325 million of funding for second round of climate-smart ag pilot projects.

The funding includes 71 smaller projects seeking $250,000 to nearly $5 million under the second round of the department’s Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities (PCSC) effort. Vilsack says the latest round is focused on projects targeting underserved producers and partnerships with minority-serving academic institutions.

“Small and underserved producers are facing the impacts of climate change head on, with limited resources, and have the most to gain from leveraging the growing market demand for agricultural goods produced in a sustainable, climate-smart way,” Vilsack said in the press release . “Our goal is to expand markets for climate-smart commodities and ensure that small and underserved producers reap the benefits of these market opportunities.”

The second round follows an initial round of $2.8 billion in funding across 70 larger projects — seeking $5 million to $100 million — that USDA rolled out in September. Total funding awarded under both rounds stands at $3.1 billion, up from an initial $1 billion USDA originally set aside for the effort.

Examples of the newly funded programs include:

Biochar for Climate-Smart Farms in Missouri - $4,935,000 to Missouri Organic Association to provide direct on-farm assistance and support to convert on-farm ag-waste into biochar, a soil amendment, for Missouri farms and measure and market the resulting climate-smart commodities.
Precision Ag Tech to Expand the Participation of Small Grazing Dairy Farms - $4,770,000 to Dairy Grazing Apprenticeship Inc. to make direct payments and provide technical assistance to small-scale dairy farmers to implement climate-smart grazing management.
Beef Cattle Management in Utah’s Semi-arid Rangelands - $4,999,000 to Utah ranchers running small scale operations would receive financial and technical assistance to participate in an innovative grazing pilot project to produce climate-smart beef and establish viable and accessible cattle marketplaces.

Fund Funnel

Funding is being drawn from the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) , a development that has caught Republican lawmakers’ attention.

CCC requires funds be used “for the expansion of markets in US commodities and the promotion of U.S. exports,” and the department has said PCSC is consistent with the requirement as the pilots seek to promote the development and marketing of climate-smart commodities that can fetch a premium in the marketplace.

Pushback from Congress

Some Republican lawmakers have questioned how the move might impact CCC’s other obligations like making farm bill program payments to farmers, along with their concerns about a lack of oversight over the spending.

Incoming House Ag Chair Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-Pa.) has signaled he will increase oversight related to the use of CCC funds for the PCSC program. However, ag interests have been generally supportive of the pilot program, and major farm and commodity groups are among the partners that have been awarded funding under both rounds of the effort.

A complete list of projects is available through the USDA.

More on USDA :

How USDA’s $2.8 Billion Climate-Smart Investment Might Impact Your Operation
Farm Share of the U.S. Food Dollar Hit a Record Low; What Does this Mean for Producers?