Search Climate Insights Directory

The research evaluates the feasibility and economic benefits of transitioning from food-crop biofuels to residue-based SAFs and e-fuels in the Midwestern United States. It finds that producing three billion gallons of SAF annually from corn stover could contribute between $9 billion and $32 billion to regional GDP and support up to 214,000 jobs, provided there is sufficient policy support.

The report argues that reintegrating livestock into diversified cropping systems can improve farmer profits and reduce environmental degradation. Using economic and environmental modeling, it demonstrates that transitioning from corn-soy monocultures to perennial pastures and complex rotations can sequester soil carbon, reduce synthetic fertilizer and fuel use, and lower water footprints. However, the author notes that these systems typically produce less beef per acre, suggesting that the greatest benefits occur when improved management is paired with a reduction in overall beef consumption. The report concludes with policy recommendations for the USDA and Congress to incentivize regenerative practices through conservation programs, crop insurance reform, and increased agroecological research.

The document examines how US farm subsidies, specifically the Federal Crop Insurance Program, encourage wasteful farming practices that lead to widespread nitrogen pollution. It details the resulting costs to public health, water utilities, and coastal industries, while proposing a transition to integrated prairie strips to reduce runoff and save taxpayers and farmers billions of dollars.

The report examines the environmental, logistic, and infrastructural barriers to commercializing cellulosic ethanol from corn stover in the US, concluding that the country will likely fall short of RFS2 mandates.

The report examines the economic framework of the emerging pharmaceutical crop industry, arguing that while proponents claim significant rural benefits, these are largely unsubstantiated projections. It finds that the primary economic gains are likely to accrue to pharmaceutical companies rather than farmers, who will face limited bargaining power and high risks associated with food supply contamination. The document highlights that the industry's success depends on achieving virtually zero risk of commingling pharma crops with food and feed supplies, a requirement that may significantly increase production costs and offset projected savings.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and a panel of experts conclude that current U.S. corn and soybean production, storage, and transport systems cannot prevent the contamination of the food and feed supply by pharma crops. The report advocates for a "virtually zero contamination" standard and recommends that the USDA halt outdoor production of these crops until a separate, dedicated system is established. Proposed alternatives include using non-food crops like tobacco, guayule, or jojoba, indoor cultivation, and the implementation of rigorous confinement management systems.

The document outlines the environmental and economic benefits of cover crops, such as reducing nitrate leaching by 40 to 70 percent and increasing soil fertility. It identifies significant barriers to adoption, including direct costs (ranging from $62 to $107 per acre for certain varieties in Kansas) and risks related to crop insurance and land tenure. The Union of Concerned Scientists recommends expanding USDA cost-share incentives through the CSP and EQIP programs, reforming crop insurance, and increasing technical assistance and research.