Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

The Hard Work of Bringing Kelp to Market

News Feed
Wednesday, July 31, 2024

It was nearly sunset on a breezy May afternoon when Scott Lord and his wife Sheena pulled into Port Clyde, Maine, on the Eva Marie. The hull sat low in the water, weighed down by 2,500 pounds of sugar kelp. The Lords had been out on the water since 5 a.m. “Anything you do on a boat is a long day,” said Scott. Especially if you’re a kelp farmer, trying to make the most of a short, 12-week season. That day, they’d been out to their four-acre farm and back twice, harvesting a total of 6,300 pounds. The wind had whipped the rubbery, golden-brown kelp fronds across Sheena’s face as she hand-cut the seaweed from the lines raised up from the water onto the deck. Scott Lord pictured in Port Clyde, Maine. (Photo credit: Alexandra Talty) She and Scott had worked quickly to stuff the kelp ribbons into giant bags. Now those bags were ready to be offloaded into a waiting truck and driven 100 miles southwest to their processor, Atlantic Sea Farms (ASF), near Portland, where many of the state’s kelp companies are based. Maine is the heart of America’s farmed seaweed industry, supplying half its harvest—well over a million pounds—last season. Largely developed in Asia, seaweed farming is a new venture on American shores. One type in particular, kelp—a large brown algae with many species, including sugar kelp— has been hailed as an ecologically beneficial, nutritious superfood that can be farmed on both U.S. coasts—and could help fight climate change. These remarkable characteristics have helped the seaweed industry attract roughly $380 million in investments since 2018, from government, venture capital, and nonprofits. Kelp’s Tangled LinesRead all the stories in our series: The Promise and Possible Pitfalls of American Kelp Farming An overview of our four-part in-depth series examining the growth of the U.S. seaweed industry. With little regulatory oversight and skyrocketing funding, how will this industry evolve? Can Seaweed Save American Shellfish? Seaweed farms on both coasts are beginning to take hold, tapping into decades of painstaking science—and could help shellfish thrive in waters affected by climate change and pollution. Rescuing Kelp Forests Through Science Breakthrough genetic research at a Massachusetts lab could save the world’s vanishing kelp forests—and support American kelp farming, too. The Hard Work of Bringing Kelp to Market As seaweed farms develop on both coasts and begin to contribute to America’s blue economy, much depends on infrastructure. However, that’s a drop in the bucket compared to the global $9.9 billion market. And, according to farmers and kelp companies, the U.S. investment doesn’t yet address a range of logistical issues that challenge—some might even say threaten—the success of seaweed production. A Highly Perishable Food Scott Lord became a seaweed farmer five years ago to potentially help his other harvests—oysters and lobsters—adapt to rising ocean acidification in Maine; kelp has a remarkable ability to lower the water’s pH. What he calls “kelping” also gives him an additional income stream. But for small farmers like himself, he says, kelp farming “wouldn’t be possible for us if we didn’t have a good business to deal with.” Atlantic Sea Farms, the largest seaweed aquaculture business in the country, has solved several challenges that seaweed farmers face in Maine and other states. Transportation is one. For Lord, trucking kelp to Portland would be cost- and time-prohibitive. Obtaining the reliably productive, inexpensive kelp seed for the farm is another. But as part of the ASF co-op, he is one of 40 farmers that the company provides with kelp seed string—nylon or cotton strings inoculated with kelp spores—at the beginning of the season, in early winter. Farmers grow these out in the water, strung between buoys, until the fronds reach maturity in springtime. Then they sell the harvest to ASF, which picks up the kelp on the dock. The second problem: Compared to other ocean harvests like oysters, lobster or fish, kelp is infinitely more complicated to get onto store shelves. After reaching maturity, it must be harvested within three months, before the water becomes too warm and the seaweed begins to degrade. Harvested kelp is also incredibly perishable. Immediately after leaving the water, it begins to ferment, so must be chilled and processed to extend its shelf life—through freezing, fermenting, pickling, or drying—within a few days. And that requires space and expensive, specialized equipment that can resist the corrosive effects of salt water. Frozen sugar kelp at Atlantic Sea Farms. (Photo credit: Greta Rybus) To date, leading American kelp companies–including ASF and Ocean’s Balance, also in Maine—have poured millions into equipment like industrial freezers and dehydrators. Coastal Enterprises, a nonprofit and lender in Maine, says that most of their loans to the kelp industry are for working capital operations and equipment. Other states with less-developed but emerging kelp businesses—like Alaska, Connecticut, and New York—need processing help even more urgently. According to a recent paper by Connecticut Sea Grant, a national network of university programs dedicated to marine resources, kelp’s “use as a food product in Connecticut and in other parts of the U.S. is limited, because there is a need for post-harvest and marketing infrastructure.” Maine: Building a Vertically Integrated Business Docked at Port Clyde, Sheena Lord stays on the boat, securing the gigantic seaweed bags to a winch while Scott operates a forklift that hauls the 1,000 pound bags off the boat and onto dry land. The bags are then weighed and loaded into ASF’s 18-wheeler. “This is the moment that they become inventory. Every bag has an individual tag that says the Julian date, weight, farm, kelp type and farmer,” says Liz McDonald, seaweed supply director at ASF. Driving her 18-wheeler across New England to reach partner farmers, McDonald lives out of Airbnbs for the majority of harvest season and is a familiar sight at small docks and quaint harbors across the coast. Once the Lords’ bags are all on board, McDonald drives nearly three hours to ASF’s building in Biddeford, Maine tucked off I-95 next to defunct railway track. At the loading dock, workers immediately haul the bags of seaweed from the truck, moving rapidly and efficiently. During kelp harvest season, the scene is a little like the Olympic Village during the Games: Everyone’s been training for this singular stretch of time. The Biddeford facility includes a fermentation room, closed to outsiders, as it contains proprietary machines; storage freezers; a packing room; a cultivation room for breeding kelp; a kitchen for recipe development; and offices upstairs for the marketing and communications teams. Workers unload sugar kelp from Bangs Island Mussels at the Portland Fish Exchange in Maine. (Photo credit: Greta Rybus) “It’s not Instagram beauty like, ‘Look at this beautiful kelp harvest,’” says Briana Warner, CEO of ASF. But she’s visibly proud of the space, beaming as she gives me a tour of the newly built $2 million processing center. At every turn, the air is filled with the briny, spicy smell of the company’s signature Sea-Chi, a seaweed-based kimchi made with fresh kelp. Atlantic Sea Farms CEO Briana Warner. (Photo credit: Greta Rybus) A former diplomat specializing in economic development, Warner knows that her company’s success is built on nitty-gritty details. “The reality is: machines break. Every machine downstairs we had to create from scratch, because it doesn’t even exist in Asia . . . because they’re eating dried kelp,” she explains. “Every safety protocol, we’ve had to come up with.” Early on in Warner’s tenure as CEO, the company almost went under due to processing issues. In February 2020, a deal ASF had reached to supply Maine-grown kelp to Sweetgreen, in a collaboration with celebrity chef David Chang, evaporated as the pandemic shut down the chain’s business. Back then, ASF had limited storage space and needed somewhere to store 240,000 pounds of kelp pouring in from its farms when the deal fell through. Warner tapped into her network of Maine businesses, and Bristol Seafood, a fish wholesaler based out of Portland, came to the rescue. “They froze almost every bag of kelp,” says Warner, getting teary. Bristol gave her a bill for $3,000—far less than the true cost of their services—at the end of the season. The event was clarifying for Warner. She plunged into fundraising for an ASF processing center and worked on consumer marketing. Now, the company has four products in every Whole Foods in the country, foods in national supermarket chains like Sprouts and Albertsons, and 20 ingredient partners like Thorne and Navitas. For the 2023–2024 season, they harvested a record-breaking amount of kelp: 1.3 million pounds. “You can’t have this incredibly positive impact on the environment, on the food chain, on our partner farmers . . . unless you run a really good business,” Warner says. ASF’s dedication to infrastructure also pays off for the consumer. When a shopper buys one of the company’s burgers, they can look up where the kelp grew, who harvested it, and when. This is a markedly different situation than with seafood writ large, where one-third of grocery store labels have been found to be wrong. Traceability is the cornerstone of a larger shift toward the blue economy, a movement among coastal and ocean nations that equally supports workers’ rights, environmental concerns, and sustainability goals. It is a huge selling point for the millions invested in American-grown kelp. For seaweed growers outside Maine, the logistics still have a long way to go. Alaska: Dealing With Distance After Maine, the next biggest kelp-producing state is Alaska. It’s also the most productive state on the West Coast, harvesting 871,000 pounds in the 2022–2023 season. With more than 33,000 miles of shoreline and 41,000 people directly employed in seafood industries in 2022, according to the state’s Department of Labor, as well as access to marine science institutions like the University of Alaska, many here expected seaweed farming to boom when it was first legalized in 2016. Kodiak Island in the summer. Alaska’s thousands of miles of coastline could help the state develop a booming seaweed-farming industry. Federal officials also bet on Alaska’s rapid transition to seaweed farming. In 2022, the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic Development Administration (EDA) announced $49 million to jump-start the state’s seaweed and shellfish industry, with a quarter of those funds earmarked for Alaska Native communities. But for farmers and companies, the kelp boom hasn’t quite happened yet. In 2016, one of the first seaweed companies to open after legalization here went on a hiring spree and immediately started putting buoys into the water. According to former employees, they were expecting to hit 1 million pounds of harvested kelp in a few years. Instead, they’ve significantly reduced operations since then, although they do maintain a farm in Alaska. As for the EDA’s 2022 funding, it is still being allocated, and to an industry that’s just beginning to take shape. Alaska’s mammoth size presents the biggest hurdle: At 663,268 square miles, it’s much larger than any other state and even most countries. Kelp-producing regions can be thousands of miles away from one another. Many of these coastal communities aren’t connected by road, and the only way to haul kelp from farm to processor is by boat. Even after kelp is made into a final product, it still has to be shipped to Seattle, 2,000 miles south. “We’ve looked at chartering an Alaska Airlines plane,” says Lia Heifetz, laughing. Heifetz is the co-founder of Barnacle Foods, a vertically integrated kelp company known for its Bullwhip Kelp Hot Sauce. She isn’t kidding; in its early days, her company explored flying thousands of pounds of fresh kelp from Kodiak to its headquarters and processing facility in Juneau, a distance of 500 miles. Heifetz admits that the plan wasn’t cost effective—and came with quite a carbon footprint—so they dropped the idea. Now in its eighth year of business, Barnacle Foods works only with farms within a 70-mile radius. The company still ships everything by boat, relying on commercial fishing vessels, thanks to relationships with fishers that Heifetz has built over the years. To process their kelp, Barnacle has slowly constructed a 3,000-square-foot production floor and additional warehouse. While Heifetz wouldn’t disclose how much they’ve invested in the facility, she points out that one machine, a “capper” for jars, cost $40,000. Other equipment includes container freezers, container refrigerators, and two forklifts. “Some level of primary processing or stabilization needs to happen at any port [where] there’s a kelp farm,” she says, adding that a single processing company—and there are only a few others in the state—is unlikely to be able to serve thousands of miles of coastline. “Most of the profit is coming from having farms double as grant-funded research.” Farmers and kelp companies say that a cohesive strategy at the state level, particularly around what types of kelp products to initially focus on—food, fertilizer, or bioplastics, for example—could help farmers and kelp companies build infrastructure more efficiently. As the $49 million in federal EDA funds are being dispersed through the Southeast Conference’s Alaska Mariculture Center, up to $10 million will go toward infrastructure-related projects; other funds include the Native Regenerative fund, aimed at providing money for permitting, equipment and lease fees for Native Alaskans; a Kelp Climate fund operated by GreenWave, a kelp nonprofit; and the Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant, which can help address processing issues. An additional challenge for Alaska kelp processing is the cost of energy, which varies widely. Each coastal community is isolated, often operating on its own electrical grid and using a variety of energy sources. Juneau has hydropower, which means Barnacle Foods has relatively low electricity costs, according to Heifitz. In other parts of Alaska, diesel generators can be the only source of electricity, a high-cost option that could deter some types of processing, like freezing. Because of these expensive bottlenecks, farms have to make money in creative ways. “Most of the profit is coming from having farms double as grant-funded research,” says Brianna Murphy. A former commercial fisher, Murphy and her co-founder, Kristin Smith, created Mothers of Millions in 2021 to do just that, funded by a $30,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Their mobile kelp hatchery, built on a repurposed fishing vessel, means they can navigate straight to farms with spore-laden kelp ready for propagating, instead of waiting for the kelp to come by cargo plane and then working frantically to revive it. Murphy and Smith are kind of a one-stop shop for seaweed farmers: They also offer on-water processing capabilities, shredding harvested kelp directly from the water. There’s no shortage of interesting and valuable kelp-farming projects in Alaska, including the Native Conservancy’s kelp program, founded to support Indigenous people in starting their own farms (Native Conservancy founder Dune Lankard was recently featured in the PBS docuseries Hope in the Water for his traditional Eyak kelp cakes). Over the next several years, as the EDA grants begin to bear fruit, Alaska could edge closer to realizing the farming potential of its thousands of miles of coastline. New York: Starting from Scratch For other coastal states trying break into this nascent blue economy, commercial processing often doesn’t exist. Most kelp companies are based in Maine or Alaska, so farmers elsewhere must rely on themselves to harvest, process, and create end products. Sue Wicks lifts a line of sugar kelp. (Photo credit: Alexandra Talty) One determined New York oyster grower came up with her own solution. “This is my bay, a tiny piece of a world that is besieged on every side with climate change and pollution,” says Sue Wicks, the founder of Violet Cove Oysters. Each day, Wicks motors 20 minutes from her house to her 2-acre farm on the Great South Bay, using a Pickerell clamming boat that was designed specifically for this body of water. “With this little spot, I feel an opportunity, a space to do something tangible,” she says, looking out at her acreage, oyster cages bobbing in the distance as she checks the growth on her kelp lines. She plucks off a furl of young sugar kelp and chews it, enjoying its briny sweetness. Sue Wicks’ sugar kelp in its initial drying phase. (Photo courtesy of Sue Wicks) A former Women’s National Basketball Association star, Wicks became an oyster entrepreneur after retiring from professional sports, inspired to work on the waters that her family has fished for more than 10 generations.  Her ancestors could harvest shellfish by hand, but wild stocks have plummeted in Wicks’ lifetime, a consequence of warming waters and nitrogen pollution. After witnessing the decline of her families’ livelihood and pastimes—the traditions of clamming, oystering, fishing and scalloping—she wanted to restore the waters that surrounded her house and hometown. In 2019, she began growing seaweed as part of a research project with Stony Brook University. After receiving the state’s first commercial kelp farming lease for the 2023–2024 season, Wicks began construction on New York’s first processing center, a dehydrator. Supported by Lazy Point Farms, a New York-based nonprofit, the center cost around $50,000 to build, said Wicks, and is part of a public-private partnership with Suffolk County and the nearby town of Brookhaven. She’s already started using it for this season’s haul. Wicks first dries her kelp near the water, on racks in the open air, where it shrinks to 20 percent of its original size. Then she moves the racks to a shipping container equipped with a heater exhaust fan and dehumidifier to finish drying completely. Everything is powered by solar, bringing the whole process as close as possible to net-zero emissions. The shipping container can be converted into a mobile unit, she says, and it’s easily replicated. As for the dried seaweed, Wicks is experimenting with a hot sauce and a seasoning mix, in collaboration with Lazy Point Farms and available through the nonprofit’s website. “We don’t have working waterfronts on Long Island anymore, and that makes it very difficult,” says Wicks. She hopes her processing center encourages other oyster growers to try kelp farming, since it gives them a way to create their own shelf-stable product, right after harvest. “The fisheries are part of our heritage. It is who we are. Our biggest success is getting other farmers in the water.” This series was produced in partnership with the Pulitzer Center’s Ocean Reporting Network. The post The Hard Work of Bringing Kelp to Market appeared first on Civil Eats.

“Anything you do on a boat is a long day,” said Scott. Especially if you’re a kelp farmer, trying to make the most of a short, 12-week season. That day, they’d been out to their four-acre farm and back twice, harvesting a total of 6,300 pounds. The wind had whipped the rubbery, golden-brown kelp fronds across […] The post The Hard Work of Bringing Kelp to Market appeared first on Civil Eats.

It was nearly sunset on a breezy May afternoon when Scott Lord and his wife Sheena pulled into Port Clyde, Maine, on the Eva Marie. The hull sat low in the water, weighed down by 2,500 pounds of sugar kelp. The Lords had been out on the water since 5 a.m.

“Anything you do on a boat is a long day,” said Scott. Especially if you’re a kelp farmer, trying to make the most of a short, 12-week season. That day, they’d been out to their four-acre farm and back twice, harvesting a total of 6,300 pounds. The wind had whipped the rubbery, golden-brown kelp fronds across Sheena’s face as she hand-cut the seaweed from the lines raised up from the water onto the deck.

Scott Lord pictured in Port Clyde, Maine. (Photo credit: Alexandra Talty)

Scott Lord pictured in Port Clyde, Maine. (Photo credit: Alexandra Talty)

She and Scott had worked quickly to stuff the kelp ribbons into giant bags. Now those bags were ready to be offloaded into a waiting truck and driven 100 miles southwest to their processor, Atlantic Sea Farms (ASF), near Portland, where many of the state’s kelp companies are based. Maine is the heart of America’s farmed seaweed industry, supplying half its harvest—well over a million pounds—last season.

Largely developed in Asia, seaweed farming is a new venture on American shores. One type in particular, kelp—a large brown algae with many species, including sugar kelp— has been hailed as an ecologically beneficial, nutritious superfood that can be farmed on both U.S. coasts—and could help fight climate change. These remarkable characteristics have helped the seaweed industry attract roughly $380 million in investments since 2018, from government, venture capital, and nonprofits.

Kelp’s Tangled Lines

Read all the stories in our series:

However, that’s a drop in the bucket compared to the global $9.9 billion market. And, according to farmers and kelp companies, the U.S. investment doesn’t yet address a range of logistical issues that challenge—some might even say threaten—the success of seaweed production.

A Highly Perishable Food

Scott Lord became a seaweed farmer five years ago to potentially help his other harvests—oysters and lobsters—adapt to rising ocean acidification in Maine; kelp has a remarkable ability to lower the water’s pH. What he calls “kelping” also gives him an additional income stream.

But for small farmers like himself, he says, kelp farming “wouldn’t be possible for us if we didn’t have a good business to deal with.” Atlantic Sea Farms, the largest seaweed aquaculture business in the country, has solved several challenges that seaweed farmers face in Maine and other states.

Transportation is one. For Lord, trucking kelp to Portland would be cost- and time-prohibitive. Obtaining the reliably productive, inexpensive kelp seed for the farm is another. But as part of the ASF co-op, he is one of 40 farmers that the company provides with kelp seed string—nylon or cotton strings inoculated with kelp spores—at the beginning of the season, in early winter. Farmers grow these out in the water, strung between buoys, until the fronds reach maturity in springtime. Then they sell the harvest to ASF, which picks up the kelp on the dock.

The second problem: Compared to other ocean harvests like oysters, lobster or fish, kelp is infinitely more complicated to get onto store shelves. After reaching maturity, it must be harvested within three months, before the water becomes too warm and the seaweed begins to degrade. Harvested kelp is also incredibly perishable. Immediately after leaving the water, it begins to ferment, so must be chilled and processed to extend its shelf life—through freezing, fermenting, pickling, or drying—within a few days. And that requires space and expensive, specialized equipment that can resist the corrosive effects of salt water.

Frozen sugar kelp at Atlantic Sea Farms. (Photo credit: Greta Rybus)

To date, leading American kelp companies–including ASF and Ocean’s Balance, also in Maine—have poured millions into equipment like industrial freezers and dehydrators. Coastal Enterprises, a nonprofit and lender in Maine, says that most of their loans to the kelp industry are for working capital operations and equipment. Other states with less-developed but emerging kelp businesses—like Alaska, Connecticut, and New York—need processing help even more urgently.

According to a recent paper by Connecticut Sea Grant, a national network of university programs dedicated to marine resources, kelp’s “use as a food product in Connecticut and in other parts of the U.S. is limited, because there is a need for post-harvest and marketing infrastructure.”

Maine: Building a Vertically Integrated Business

Docked at Port Clyde, Sheena Lord stays on the boat, securing the gigantic seaweed bags to a winch while Scott operates a forklift that hauls the 1,000 pound bags off the boat and onto dry land. The bags are then weighed and loaded into ASF’s 18-wheeler.

“This is the moment that they become inventory. Every bag has an individual tag that says the Julian date, weight, farm, kelp type and farmer,” says Liz McDonald, seaweed supply director at ASF. Driving her 18-wheeler across New England to reach partner farmers, McDonald lives out of Airbnbs for the majority of harvest season and is a familiar sight at small docks and quaint harbors across the coast.

Once the Lords’ bags are all on board, McDonald drives nearly three hours to ASF’s building in Biddeford, Maine tucked off I-95 next to defunct railway track. At the loading dock, workers immediately haul the bags of seaweed from the truck, moving rapidly and efficiently. During kelp harvest season, the scene is a little like the Olympic Village during the Games: Everyone’s been training for this singular stretch of time.

The Biddeford facility includes a fermentation room, closed to outsiders, as it contains proprietary machines; storage freezers; a packing room; a cultivation room for breeding kelp; a kitchen for recipe development; and offices upstairs for the marketing and communications teams.

Sugar kelp is unloaded at the Portland Fish Exchange. (Photo credit: Greta Rybus)

Workers unload sugar kelp from Bangs Island Mussels at the Portland Fish Exchange in Maine. (Photo credit: Greta Rybus)

“It’s not Instagram beauty like, ‘Look at this beautiful kelp harvest,’” says Briana Warner, CEO of ASF. But she’s visibly proud of the space, beaming as she gives me a tour of the newly built $2 million processing center. At every turn, the air is filled with the briny, spicy smell of the company’s signature Sea-Chi, a seaweed-based kimchi made with fresh kelp.

Atlantic Sea Farms CEO Briana Warner.

Atlantic Sea Farms CEO Briana Warner. (Photo credit: Greta Rybus)

A former diplomat specializing in economic development, Warner knows that her company’s success is built on nitty-gritty details. “The reality is: machines break. Every machine downstairs we had to create from scratch, because it doesn’t even exist in Asia . . . because they’re eating dried kelp,” she explains. “Every safety protocol, we’ve had to come up with.”

Early on in Warner’s tenure as CEO, the company almost went under due to processing issues. In February 2020, a deal ASF had reached to supply Maine-grown kelp to Sweetgreen, in a collaboration with celebrity chef David Chang, evaporated as the pandemic shut down the chain’s business. Back then, ASF had limited storage space and needed somewhere to store 240,000 pounds of kelp pouring in from its farms when the deal fell through. Warner tapped into her network of Maine businesses, and Bristol Seafood, a fish wholesaler based out of Portland, came to the rescue.

“They froze almost every bag of kelp,” says Warner, getting teary. Bristol gave her a bill for $3,000—far less than the true cost of their services—at the end of the season.

The event was clarifying for Warner. She plunged into fundraising for an ASF processing center and worked on consumer marketing. Now, the company has four products in every Whole Foods in the country, foods in national supermarket chains like Sprouts and Albertsons, and 20 ingredient partners like Thorne and Navitas.

For the 2023–2024 season, they harvested a record-breaking amount of kelp: 1.3 million pounds. “You can’t have this incredibly positive impact on the environment, on the food chain, on our partner farmers . . . unless you run a really good business,” Warner says.

ASF’s dedication to infrastructure also pays off for the consumer. When a shopper buys one of the company’s burgers, they can look up where the kelp grew, who harvested it, and when. This is a markedly different situation than with seafood writ large, where one-third of grocery store labels have been found to be wrong.

Traceability is the cornerstone of a larger shift toward the blue economy, a movement among coastal and ocean nations that equally supports workers’ rights, environmental concerns, and sustainability goals. It is a huge selling point for the millions invested in American-grown kelp.

For seaweed growers outside Maine, the logistics still have a long way to go.

Alaska: Dealing With Distance

After Maine, the next biggest kelp-producing state is Alaska. It’s also the most productive state on the West Coast, harvesting 871,000 pounds in the 2022–2023 season. With more than 33,000 miles of shoreline and 41,000 people directly employed in seafood industries in 2022, according to the state’s Department of Labor, as well as access to marine science institutions like the University of Alaska, many here expected seaweed farming to boom when it was first legalized in 2016.

An aerial view of Kodiak Island. Alaska's thousands of miles of coastline could help the state develop a booming seaweed-farming industry.

Kodiak Island in the summer. Alaska’s thousands of miles of coastline could help the state develop a booming seaweed-farming industry.

Federal officials also bet on Alaska’s rapid transition to seaweed farming. In 2022, the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic Development Administration (EDA) announced $49 million to jump-start the state’s seaweed and shellfish industry, with a quarter of those funds earmarked for Alaska Native communities.

But for farmers and companies, the kelp boom hasn’t quite happened yet. In 2016, one of the first seaweed companies to open after legalization here went on a hiring spree and immediately started putting buoys into the water. According to former employees, they were expecting to hit 1 million pounds of harvested kelp in a few years. Instead, they’ve significantly reduced operations since then, although they do maintain a farm in Alaska. As for the EDA’s 2022 funding, it is still being allocated, and to an industry that’s just beginning to take shape.

Alaska’s mammoth size presents the biggest hurdle: At 663,268 square miles, it’s much larger than any other state and even most countries. Kelp-producing regions can be thousands of miles away from one another. Many of these coastal communities aren’t connected by road, and the only way to haul kelp from farm to processor is by boat. Even after kelp is made into a final product, it still has to be shipped to Seattle, 2,000 miles south.

“We’ve looked at chartering an Alaska Airlines plane,” says Lia Heifetz, laughing. Heifetz is the co-founder of Barnacle Foods, a vertically integrated kelp company known for its Bullwhip Kelp Hot Sauce. She isn’t kidding; in its early days, her company explored flying thousands of pounds of fresh kelp from Kodiak to its headquarters and processing facility in Juneau, a distance of 500 miles. Heifetz admits that the plan wasn’t cost effective—and came with quite a carbon footprint—so they dropped the idea.

Now in its eighth year of business, Barnacle Foods works only with farms within a 70-mile radius. The company still ships everything by boat, relying on commercial fishing vessels, thanks to relationships with fishers that Heifetz has built over the years. To process their kelp, Barnacle has slowly constructed a 3,000-square-foot production floor and additional warehouse. While Heifetz wouldn’t disclose how much they’ve invested in the facility, she points out that one machine, a “capper” for jars, cost $40,000. Other equipment includes container freezers, container refrigerators, and two forklifts.

“Some level of primary processing or stabilization needs to happen at any port [where] there’s a kelp farm,” she says, adding that a single processing company—and there are only a few others in the state—is unlikely to be able to serve thousands of miles of coastline.

“Most of the profit is coming from having farms double as grant-funded research.”

Farmers and kelp companies say that a cohesive strategy at the state level, particularly around what types of kelp products to initially focus on—food, fertilizer, or bioplastics, for example—could help farmers and kelp companies build infrastructure more efficiently.

As the $49 million in federal EDA funds are being dispersed through the Southeast Conference’s Alaska Mariculture Center, up to $10 million will go toward infrastructure-related projects; other funds include the Native Regenerative fund, aimed at providing money for permitting, equipment and lease fees for Native Alaskans; a Kelp Climate fund operated by GreenWave, a kelp nonprofit; and the Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant, which can help address processing issues.

An additional challenge for Alaska kelp processing is the cost of energy, which varies widely. Each coastal community is isolated, often operating on its own electrical grid and using a variety of energy sources. Juneau has hydropower, which means Barnacle Foods has relatively low electricity costs, according to Heifitz. In other parts of Alaska, diesel generators can be the only source of electricity, a high-cost option that could deter some types of processing, like freezing.

Because of these expensive bottlenecks, farms have to make money in creative ways. “Most of the profit is coming from having farms double as grant-funded research,” says Brianna Murphy. A former commercial fisher, Murphy and her co-founder, Kristin Smith, created Mothers of Millions in 2021 to do just that, funded by a $30,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Their mobile kelp hatchery, built on a repurposed fishing vessel, means they can navigate straight to farms with spore-laden kelp ready for propagating, instead of waiting for the kelp to come by cargo plane and then working frantically to revive it. Murphy and Smith are kind of a one-stop shop for seaweed farmers: They also offer on-water processing capabilities, shredding harvested kelp directly from the water.

There’s no shortage of interesting and valuable kelp-farming projects in Alaska, including the Native Conservancy’s kelp program, founded to support Indigenous people in starting their own farms (Native Conservancy founder Dune Lankard was recently featured in the PBS docuseries Hope in the Water for his traditional Eyak kelp cakes).

Over the next several years, as the EDA grants begin to bear fruit, Alaska could edge closer to realizing the farming potential of its thousands of miles of coastline.

New York: Starting from Scratch

For other coastal states trying break into this nascent blue economy, commercial processing often doesn’t exist. Most kelp companies are based in Maine or Alaska, so farmers elsewhere must rely on themselves to harvest, process, and create end products.

Sue Wicks lifts a line of sugar kelp. (Photo credit: Alexandra Talty)

Sue Wicks lifts a line of sugar kelp. (Photo credit: Alexandra Talty)

One determined New York oyster grower came up with her own solution.

“This is my bay, a tiny piece of a world that is besieged on every side with climate change and pollution,” says Sue Wicks, the founder of Violet Cove Oysters. Each day, Wicks motors 20 minutes from her house to her 2-acre farm on the Great South Bay, using a Pickerell clamming boat that was designed specifically for this body of water.

“With this little spot, I feel an opportunity, a space to do something tangible,” she says, looking out at her acreage, oyster cages bobbing in the distance as she checks the growth on her kelp lines. She plucks off a furl of young sugar kelp and chews it, enjoying its briny sweetness.

Sue Wicks' sugar kelp in its initial drying phase. (Photo courtesy of Sue Wicks)

Sue Wicks’ sugar kelp in its initial drying phase. (Photo courtesy of Sue Wicks)

A former Women’s National Basketball Association star, Wicks became an oyster entrepreneur after retiring from professional sports, inspired to work on the waters that her family has fished for more than 10 generations.  Her ancestors could harvest shellfish by hand, but wild stocks have plummeted in Wicks’ lifetime, a consequence of warming waters and nitrogen pollution. After witnessing the decline of her families’ livelihood and pastimes—the traditions of clamming, oystering, fishing and scalloping—she wanted to restore the waters that surrounded her house and hometown. In 2019, she began growing seaweed as part of a research project with Stony Brook University.

After receiving the state’s first commercial kelp farming lease for the 2023–2024 season, Wicks began construction on New York’s first processing center, a dehydrator. Supported by Lazy Point Farms, a New York-based nonprofit, the center cost around $50,000 to build, said Wicks, and is part of a public-private partnership with Suffolk County and the nearby town of Brookhaven. She’s already started using it for this season’s haul.

Wicks first dries her kelp near the water, on racks in the open air, where it shrinks to 20 percent of its original size. Then she moves the racks to a shipping container equipped with a heater exhaust fan and dehumidifier to finish drying completely. Everything is powered by solar, bringing the whole process as close as possible to net-zero emissions.

The shipping container can be converted into a mobile unit, she says, and it’s easily replicated. As for the dried seaweed, Wicks is experimenting with a hot sauce and a seasoning mix, in collaboration with Lazy Point Farms and available through the nonprofit’s website.

“We don’t have working waterfronts on Long Island anymore, and that makes it very difficult,” says Wicks. She hopes her processing center encourages other oyster growers to try kelp farming, since it gives them a way to create their own shelf-stable product, right after harvest. “The fisheries are part of our heritage. It is who we are. Our biggest success is getting other farmers in the water.”

This series was produced in partnership with the Pulitzer Center’s Ocean Reporting Network.

The post The Hard Work of Bringing Kelp to Market appeared first on Civil Eats.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

These rural Californians want to secede. Newsom’s maps would pair them with Bay Area liberals

California Democrats’ redistricting plan would split the state’s traditional Republican stronghold into a sprawling coastal district with Bay Area liberals. North State conservatives say it would silence rural voices.

In summary California Democrats’ redistricting plan would split the state’s traditional Republican stronghold into a sprawling coastal district with Bay Area liberals. North State conservatives say it would silence rural voices. Over several rivers and through even more woods, flags advocating secession from California flutter above hills dotted with cattle, which outnumber people at least sixfold. This ranching region with a libertarian streak might have more in common with Texas than the San Francisco Bay Area.  But it’s not Texas. Five hours northeast of Sacramento on an easy day, Modoc County and its roughly 8,500 residents are still — begrudgingly — in California.  And California is dominated by Democrats, who are embroiled in a tit-for-tat redistricting war with the Lone Star State that will likely force conservative Modoc County residents to share a representative in Congress with parts of the Bay Area.  Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom is proposing to split up the solidly Republican 1st Congressional District covering 10 rural, inland counties in the North State as part of his plan to create five more Democratic seats to offset a GOP-led effort to gain five red seats in Texas.  That would mean Republican Doug LaMalfa, the Richvale rice farmer who represents the district, would likely lose his seat.  Modoc County and two neighboring red counties would be shifted into a redrawn district that stretches 200 miles west to the Pacific Coast and then south, through redwoods and weed farms, to include some of the state’s wealthiest communities, current Democratic Rep. Jared Huffman’s home in San Rafael and the northern end of the Golden Gate Bridge, all in uber-liberal Marin County.  “It’s like a smack in the face,” said local rancher Amie Martinez. “How could you put Marin County with Modoc County? It’s just a different perspective.” Amie Martinez at the Brass Rail Bar & Grill in Alturas on Sept. 3, 2025. Photo by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters The proposal would even likely force Modoc residents to share a district with the governor, who moved back to Marin County last year and splits his time between there and Sacramento. Modoc County voted 78% in favor of recalling him, and voters asked about redistricting there view it as a publicity stunt for Newsom’s presidential ambitions. The ballot measure known as Proposition 50, on voters’ ballots Nov. 4, has sparked outrage in the North State. Yet for a region known for its rebellious spirit, residents are also resigned: they know they’re collateral damage in a partisan numbers game. The map would dilute conservative voting power in one of the state’s traditional Republican strongholds. It would cut short the career growth of politicians from the state’s minority party and make room for the growing cadre of Democrats rising up from state and county seats, jockeying for bigger platforms. But locals say they’re most concerned it’s a death-knell for rural representation. They worry their agricultural interests and their views on water, wildlife and forest management would be overshadowed in a district that includes Bay Area communities that have long championed environmental protection. “They’ve taken every rural district and made it an urban district,” said Nadine Bailey, a former staffer for a Republican state senator who now advocates for agricultural water users and the rural North State. “It just feels like an assault on rural California.” Though Modoc County supervisors have declared their opposition to Prop. 50, there’s little else locals can do. Registered Republicans are outnumbered by Democrats statewide nearly two-to-one. Rural residents represent an even smaller share of the state’s electorate.  “It’ll be very hard to fight back,” said Tim Babcock, owner of a general store in Lassen County, a similar and neighboring community that’s proposed to be drawn into a different liberal-leaning congressional district. “Unless we split the state. And that’s never going to happen.” An isolated county Far-flung but tight-knit, the high desert of Modoc County has been an agricultural community for generations.  In the west, cattle graze through a series of meadows and valleys into the hills of the Warner Mountains. Hundreds of them are sold weekly at an auction yard Martinez’s family runs on the outskirts of Alturas. The 3,000-person county seat consists of a cluster of government buildings, a high school and empty storefronts. In the east, migratory birds soar over vegetable farms on the drained Tule Lake bed that the U.S. granted to World War II veteran homesteaders by picking names out of a pickle jar. Not far away sit the remains of an internment camp where the government imprisoned nearly 19,000 Japanese Americans.  The sheer remoteness and harsh natural beauty are a point of pride and a source of difficulty. Residents live with the regular threat of wildfires. A fifth of the county’s residents live below the poverty line. There’s no WalMart and no maternity ward, and there are few jobs outside of agriculture. Like other forested counties, local schools are facing a fiscal cliff after Congress failed to renew a source of federal funding reserved for areas with declining timber revenues. Cattle graze on farmland in Modoc County on Sept. 4, 2025. Photo by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters First: Businesses in downtown Alturas, on Sept. 4, 2025. Alturas, in Modoc County, is one of the communities that would be affected by the current redistricting efforts led by state Democrats. Last: Historical structures at the Tule Lake Relocation Center in Newell on Sept. 4, 2025. The Tule Lake Relocation Center was a concentration camp established during World War II by the U.S. government for the incarceration of Japanese Americans. Photos by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters It’s so sparsely populated that local Republican Assemblymember Heather Hadwick, who lives in Modoc County, represents 10 neighboring counties besides her own. She puts in hundreds of miles on the road holding town halls between Sacramento and home, and struggles to imagine a congressmember reaching her county, with winding roads and the Klamath Mountains between Modoc and the coast. “It’s just not good governance,” she said. Modoc County went for Trump by over 70% last fall. Its sheriff, Tex Dowdy, proudly refuses to fly the California flag over his station out of grievance with the state’s liberal governance. In 2013, Modoc made headlines for declaring its intent to secede from California and form the “State of Jefferson” with neighboring counties in the North State and southwest Oregon. County Supervisor Geri Byrne said she knew it was a longshot — but thought, “when’s the last time The New York Times called someone in Modoc County?” Byrne, who is also chair of the Rural County Representatives of California and of the upcoming National Sheepdog Finals, said the secession resolution was about sending a message. “It wasn’t conservative-liberal,” she said. “It was the urban-rural divide, and that’s what this whole Prop. 50 is about.” Even a Democratic resident running a produce pickup center in Alturas observed that her neighbors are “not that Trumpy.” Instead, there’s a pervasive general distrust of politics on any side of the aisle. In particular, residents who live by swaths of national forests bemoan how successive federal administrations of both parties have flip-flopped on how to manage public lands, which they say have worsened the risk of wildfire and prioritized conservation over their livelihoods. Flourishing wolves are a problem At the moment, all anyone can talk about is the wolves.  The apex predator returned to California more than a decade ago, a celebrated conservation success story after they were hunted to near-extinction in the western U.S. Now they’re flourishing in the North State — and feeding on cattle, throwing ranching communities on edge. Federally, they’re still listed as an endangered species under the landmark conservation law signed by President Richard Nixon.  Under California rules, ranchers can only use nonlethal methods to deter the wolves, like electrifying fencing or hiring ranch hands to guard their herds at night.  First: Signs related to wolves hang on a trailer in Lassen County, near Nubieber, on Sept. 3, 2025. The gray wolf population has grown in Northern California, causing tension between local residents and animal protection advocates. Last: Teri Brown, owner of Modoc Farm Supply, at her store in Alturas, on Sept. 4, 2025. Alturas, in Modoc County, is one of the communities that would be affected by the current redistricting efforts led by Democrats. Photos by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters “That whole issue is softened by the organizations that mean well for the animals, but this is our absolute existence here,” said Teri Brown, owner of a local feed store, who said she’s had cows go missing that she suspects were killed by wolves.  It’s one of the rural issues Brown, a registered Republican, said voters closer to the Bay Area wouldn’t understand. She said she doesn’t support gerrymandering anywhere — in Texas or California.  In town to visit his bookkeeper, rancher Ray Anklin scrolled through his phone to show videos of wolves trotting through his property and grisly photos of calf kills. He said last year, wildlife killed 19 of his cattle — a loss of over $3,000 per head. He’s set up a booth at a nearby fair, hoping to get public support for delisting wolves as an endangered species, and wants any representative in Congress to take the issue seriously. As California’s battlegrounds increasingly take shape in exurban and suburban districts, rural North State conservatives at times feel almost as out of touch with their fellow Republicans as they do with Democrats.  Few Republicans in the state and nation understand “public lands districts,” said Modoc County Supervisor Shane Starr, a Republican who used to work in LaMalfa’s office. “Doug’s the closest thing we’ve got.” Modoc County Supervisor Shane Starr at the Hotel Niles in Alturas on Sept. 4, 2025. Photo by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters “This whole thing with DEI and ‘woke culture’ and stuff,” he said, referring to the diversity and inclusion efforts under attack from the right, “it’s like, yeah, we had a kid who goes to the high school who dyed his hair a certain color. Cool, we don’t care. All of these things going on at the national stage are not based in our reality whatsoever.” At a cattlemen’s dinner in Alturas one recent evening, Martinez said she once ran into LaMalfa at a local barbecue fundraiser for firefighters and approached him about a proposal to designate parts of northwestern Nevada as protected federal wilderness. Her 700-person town of Cedarville in east Modoc County is 10 minutes from the state line. Martinez worried about rules that prohibit driving motorized vehicles in wilderness, which she said would discourage the hunters who pass through during deer season and book lodging in town. Even though the proposal was in Nevada, LaMalfa sent staff, including Starr, to meetings to raise objections on behalf of the small town, she said.  “I know we won’t get that kind of representation from Marin County,” she said. Reached by phone, Huffman defended his qualifications to represent the region.  Adding Siskiyou, Shasta and Modoc counties would mean many more hours of travel to meet constituents, but Huffman pointed out his district is already huge, covering 350 miles of the North Coast. And it includes many conservative-leaning, forested areas in Trinity and Del Norte counties. A former attorney for the environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council, he’s the top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, where LaMalfa also sits. Emma Harris holds a belt buckle she was awarded as a prize for winning a branding competition, at the Brass Rail Bar & Grill on Sept. 3, 2025. Photo by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters First: A mural depicts a cowboy riding Red Rock the famous bucking bull in Alturas, on Sept. 4, 2025. Last: Ranchers chat during a cattlemen’s meeting at the Brass Rail Bar & Grill in Alturas on Sept. 3, 2025. Photos by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters Huffman said he would run for re-election in the district if voters approve its redrawing, and “would work my tail off to give them great representation.” As for the wolves, he doesn’t support delisting their endangered status and said he only supports nonlethal methods of managing the population.  “There are plenty of win-win solutions,” he said of conflict between ranchers and environmentalists. “I’m not an absolutist. I’m a problem solver.” For Democrats, ‘I don’t think there’s any option’ On the other side of the aisle, North State Democrats are gearing up to support Prop. 50, even as parts of it make them uneasy.  Nancy Richardson, an office manager at the free weekly paper in Modoc County (coverage of high school sports remains steady, along with a police blotter announcing a woman’s booking for eavesdropping), said she doesn’t like that it will cost the state as much as $280 million to run the statewide election on redistricting.  But she thinks it has to be done.  “I don’t like that Texas is causing this problem,” she said. In Siskiyou County’s liberal enclave of Mt. Shasta, Greg Dinger said he supports the redistricting plan because he wants to fight back against the Trump administration’s targeting of immigrants, erosion of democratic norms and a federal budget that is estimated to cut $28 billion from health care in California over the next 10 years.  The effects are expected to be particularly acute in struggling rural hospitals, which disproportionately rely on Medicare and Medicaid funding. LaMalfa voted for the budget bill. Dinger, who owns a web development company, said normally he would only support bipartisan redistricting. But he was swayed by the fact that Trump had called for Republicans to draw more GOP seats in Texas.  “Under the circumstances, I don’t think there’s any option,” he said. “There’s the phrase that came from Michelle Obama, ‘When they go low, we go high.’ Well, that doesn’t work anymore.” In an interview, LaMalfa said the impacts to rural hospitals were exaggerated. He blamed impending Medicaid cuts instead on California’s health care system being billions of dollars over budget this year, in part because of rising pharmaceutical costs and higher-than-expected enrollment of undocumented immigrants who recently became eligible. (California doesn’t use federal dollars to pay for undocumented immigrants’ coverage.) “Basically what it boils down to is they want illegal immigrants to be getting these benefits,” he said in response to criticism of the spending bill. “Are the other 49 states supposed to pay for that?” LaMalfa has criticized Prop. 50 and said no state should engage in partisan redistricting in the middle of the decade. But he stopped short of endorsing his Republican colleague Rep. Kevin Kiley’s bill in Congress to ban it nationwide, saying states should still retain their rights to run their own elections systems.  The proposed new maps would make Kiley’s Republican-leaning district blue. They would turn LaMalfa’s 1st District into a dramatically more liberal one that stretches into Santa Rosa.  But LaMalfa said he’s leaning toward running for re-election even if the maps pass, though he’s focused for now on campaigning against the proposition.  “I intend to give it my all no matter what the district is,” he said.  He would likely face Audrey Denney, a Chico State professor and two-time prior Democratic challenger who has already said she’d run again if the maps pass. Outgoing state Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire, a Healdsburg Democrat who was instrumental in coming up with the proposed new maps, is also reportedly interested in the seat; McGuire’s office did not respond to a request for comment. In her renovated Queen Anne cottage in downtown Chico, Denney buzzed with excitement describing how the proposition has galvanized rural Democrats.  She emphasized her own family’s roots as ranchers in the Central Coast region, and said she has bipartisan relationships across the North State. Audrey Denney at her home in Chico on Sept. 3, 2025. Denney is considering running as a Democratic candidate for U.S. Congress in Calfornia’s 1st District if voters approve the new congressional maps. Photo by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters “I have credibility in those spaces, growing up in rural America and spending my career advocating for rural America and real, actual, practical solutions for people,” she said.  Denney’s former campaign staffer Rylee Pedotti, a Democrat in Modoc County, shares her optimism — to an extent. A communications professional whose family also owns a ranch, she said she’s not worried Huffman couldn’t represent Modoc.  “More often than not we actually do experience some of the same issues,” Pedotti said: water and irrigation concerns, the loss of home insurance, the rising costs of health care. Yet she’s deeply conflicted about the proposal: on the one hand cheering Democrats for being “finally ready to play hardball as the Republicans have done so well for decades in consolidating power;” on the other fearful of the escalating partisan rancor and the disenfranchisement of her neighbors. She’s considering sitting out the election. “We’ll still be heard,” she said, if the new maps pass. “But I understand the concerns of folks who are on the other side of the aisle. It feels like their voice is being taken away.”

‘A slap in the face’: our expert panel on Australia’s 2035 emissions target

Six experts respond to Labor’s plans for agriculture, resources, the built environment, industry, transport and energy. What did it get right and what more needs to be done?Sign up for climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s free Clear Air newsletter hereThe 62-70% emissions target is a slap in the face to the people growing Australia’s food. It is nothing short of betrayal to farmers around the country and the generations who come after us. The climate chaos described in Australia’s first Climate Risk Assessment is not inevitable, but with a weak target like this it pushes us towards a future no one wants or deserves. Continue reading...

Agriculture and land: farmers are on the frontline of climate changeThe 62-70% emissions target is a slap in the face to the people growing Australia’s food. It is nothing short of betrayal to farmers around the country and the generations who come after us. The climate chaos described in Australia’s first Climate Risk Assessment is not inevitable, but with a weak target like this it pushes us towards a future no one wants or deserves.The climate crisis is already devastating Australian agriculture. Farmers are facing hotter summers, longer droughts, devastating floods and increasingly unpredictable seasons. These shocks are not just hitting the farm gate; they’re flowing through to supermarket shelves, pushing food prices higher for every Australian family.The Climate Risk Assessment lays out the risks in stark detail: heat stress in livestock slashing productivity and animal welfare; horticulture yields dropping as fruit literally burns on the tree; cropping regions in Western Australia and south-east Australia facing declining rainfall; irrigation systems struggling under dwindling water supplies. Biosecurity threats are set to rise, and dangerous heat is already cutting into agricultural jobs and output. Farmers see the realities of climate change playing out in real time.Australian government announces 2035 emissions reduction target – videoFarmers and rural communities are on the frontlines of climate change, and that’s why we need every sector playing its part, especially the heavy polluting energy sector. Every new coalmine and gas project adds pollution that heats our atmosphere, and these emissions make it harder for farmers to keep producing the food we all rely on. A weak emissions target suggests that the government has more interest in protecting profits from coal and gas corporations and exports than in the safety of Australians.A stronger target means more jobs and investment in rural Australia, it means fewer disasters and a more productive food system. Farmers are already leading with renewable energy, soil carbon projects, and regenerative practices. They’re showing what a low-pollution future can look like. To keep Australians safe from worsening climate harm and unlock opportunities in rural communities, the government needs to strengthen its policies and deal with the polluting fossil fuel industry. We need to move quickly, sensibly, and together. Australia can cut pollution, safeguard our farmers, stabilise food prices, and seize the enormous opportunities of a clean economy. That’s a future worth fighting for. Dr Anika Molesworth, a farmer and agricultural environmental scientist, is a founding director of Farmers for Climate ActionResources: if we are to reduce emissions we must measure them effectivelyThe resources sector plan focuses on decarbonising existing emissions through electrification, using low carbon fuels, and reducing fugitive emissions. While it outlines the technical mechanisms to do this, the policies to actually make this happen are limited. They often rely on government outlays and direction rather than the market incentives that would come with pricing carbon.For example, it is cheaper to use diesel in mining site equipment and vehicles, and this diesel does not pay excise because diesel excise is seen as a road user charge and the resources sector use is off-road. Those seeking to use clean rather than diesel fuel are at a competitive disadvantage without a mechanism to charge for the damage to the environment caused by diesel.There are widespread concerns with the current approach to the measurement of fugitive emissions. We often rely on outdated benchmarks rather than actual measurement at site verified by satellite technology. If we are to reduce our emissions we need to measure them effectively.The resources sector currently often relies on land use offsets to meet its emission reduction obligations under the safeguard mechanism. We need to take further steps to ensure their integrity, yet the sector plan does not seem to focus on this. Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s Clear Air column as a free newsletterOf further concern is the heavy reliance on carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies, which are unlikely to occur as this technology is high-cost and unproven in many applications. The examples given of where it is successful are where it is used to extract more gas from an existing reservoir.Finally, the plan doesn’t appear to connect with the other sector plans and the Treasury modelling which show large declines in coal-fired electricity generation beyond 2030, which is an important way we can reduce emissions. Rod Sims is the chair of the Superpower Institute and enterprise professor at the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, faculty of business and economics, University of Melbourne. He is also an expert adviser to the Treasury’s competition taskforce and to the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority on digital issues. From 2011 to 2022 he was chair of the Australian Competition and Consumer CommissionBuilt environment: we must improve energy-intensive homesThursday’s built environment sector plan identifies the need to retrofit our existing homes to electrify them, improve their thermal performance and add more efficient appliances. Such a “renovation wave” would have the double benefit of reducing emissions and saving households thousands of dollars from their energy bills every year.The energy performance of our 11m homes can be measured on the Nationwide House Energy Rating Scheme (NatHERS). This spans from “zero stars” for the worst possible performance to 10 stars for a super “eco-home”. In 2022, the minimum performance required for a new home increased from six stars to seven stars, which should reduce heating and cooling energy needs in a new house by 11-27%. However, while new homes have improved, our existing homes remain leaky, uninsulated and energy-intensive. Over half of all existing Australian homes have a NatHERS rating below two stars, meaning there’s an urgent need for improvement – for our health and the environment.We also need to reduce the emissions from the materials we use to build, and the construction process itself. This is called “embodied carbon” and is responsible for about 10% of all Australian greenhouse gas emissions. Embodied carbon is rarely measured and entirely unregulated in Australia – except recently in New South Wales. What’s more, the emissions from many of the building materials we commonly use, such as cement, steel, glass and plasterboard, don’t come from electricity, but from chemical and heat-related manufacturing processes, making them difficult to decarbonise. The sector plan calls for the use of lower carbon materials – but other strategies such as building smaller homes, and adaptively reusing existing buildings will also be necessary. In 2024 building ministers agreed on a voluntary pathway for commercial buildings to report their embodied carbon. However, if we have any hope of reducing built environment emissions by 70% by 2035, regulating and capping embodied carbon emissions (like France, Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands have already done) will be a much-needed next step. Philip Oldfield is the head of UNSW’s school of the built environment and a researcher in sustainable and low-carbon architectureIndustry: big progress is possible – with smart supportIndustry will need to contribute to the 2035 targets, but “industry” is a complex, diverse category and one size won’t fit all. There are big cross-cutting challenges like process heat and heavy vehicles – both eventually solvable with a mix of electrification and renewable fuels, though neither replacing major capital equipment nor paying higher fuel costs is easy. But a lot of challenges are very specific to industry subsectors: dealing with eroding carbon anodes in aluminium smelting, how to cleanly reduce iron ore for steel, shifting the mix of inputs and storing or using the carbon output in cement-making, and many more. Technical solutions are visible but often not yet tangible.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Clear Air AustraliaAdam Morton brings you incisive analysis about the politics and impact of the climate crisisPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionThe challenge for industry is more than technical, it’s how to make the necessary investments while staying competitive. Policy will have to help in many ways beyond the useful but limited funds announced today. The safeguard mechanism gives a growing carbon value signal, and it will get deeper and likely broader. But business will need a level playing field, so they don’t lose ground just because they face a carbon constraint while their competitors ride free. “Border carbon adjustment” is being rolled out in Europe to ensure equal treatment in critical sectors like cement, and Australia should develop its own approach while respecting our trade commitments.While the safeguard covers most industrial emissions, most individual facilities are too small to be part of it and will never be a good fit. They’ll need different kinds of help to transition: for example, policies more like the “white certificate” schemes to credit energy efficiency and fuel switching that New South Wales and Victoria operate today.Some of industry’s diverse transitions will stretch well beyond 2035. But big progress is possible – with smart support and a focus on building competitiveness. Innes Willox is chief executive of the Australian Industry GroupTransport: we have technological solutions but not the policies to get us thereThe transport sector plan released on Thursday doesn’t have a target for emissions reduction for the sector. That’s a shame – it’s difficult to design policy well without understanding what we’re aiming at.Transport emissions have grown by 14m tonnes or 18% since 2005. The biggest increases have been in aviation (up 68% since 2005) and light commercial vehicles (up 62% since 2005).This happened because we are flying more often, and increasingly buying personal cars that count as “light commercial” – think big 4WD utes.The CSIRO’s work for the Climate Change Authority estimates that transport emissions could be reduced by 20% by 2035, with most of this coming from road transport.Three policies act on transport emissions at the moment: the fringe benefits tax exemption for electric cars, the safeguard mechanism, and the new vehicle efficiency standard.But between these three policies, only 11% of transport emissions are subject to a constraint.The holes in policy are for heavy vehicles – we need incentives for truck owners to switch to cleaner sources, but also more attention on the logistics of providing them with alternative fuel sources. We need charging infrastructure for electric trucks, both at depots and along highways; and we need upgrades to electricity infrastructure to support that. There’s almost no supply chain at the moment for alternative fuels such as biodiesel, and there is no incentive to use alternative fuels. Meanwhile, fuel tax credits provide a disincentive to switch and there’s uncertainty over road user charging. The government announced a $1bn package for low-emissions fuels on Wednesday but we’re yet to see the detailed policy design.Bottom line: the destination is clear, the technological solutions are clear, but it’s a long journey, and we don’t have the right policies yet to get us there. Alison Reeve is the energy and climate change program director at the Grattan InstituteElectricity and energy: there is no excuse for a lack of ambitionDramatically expanding the share of renewables in our electricity system is fundamental to achieving our emission targets. If we can’t decarbonise electricity then we’ll struggle to also reduce emissions from transport and heating of buildings and manufacturing processes, which both hinge on a switch to electric power.Unfortunately, the Albanese government is encountering significant difficulty delivering on its target to grow renewable energy to 82% of power supply by 2030. We’re doing reasonably OK on rooftop solar, extremely well in expanding battery capacity, but falling abysmally short on wind and solar farms due to inadequate transmission links. Yet while we might fall short on targets for 2030, this is no excuse for a lack of ambition on 2035 targets. It is extremely hard to transform the electricity sector within five years because it takes at least five years to plan and build new transmission lines. A 10-year timeframe, however, dramatically expands the scope for change. In addition, rooftop solar drives change by steadily accumulating in small increments, rooftop by rooftop. Over the space of 10 years that can add up to a very large amount of power.But there is also no time to waste. To speed things up the Albanese government must expand its policy suite to options that don’t rely on new transmission lines. This means instituting new policy measures to help households and businesses become more energy efficient and install more rooftop solar. In particular, it has to find a way to push (not just encourage) landlords to upgrade rental properties.We still need to push on with the rollout of wind and solar farms as well. For a small proportion of the population this will mean their rural view will be obscured by transmission lines and wind turbines. That’s unfortunate, but what’s the alternative?

The Insect Apocalypse Hits Fiji: 79% of Native Ants Are Vanishing

Seventy-nine percent of endemic species are showing declines, underscoring how fragile island biodiversity is in the face of ecosystem changes. Insects play essential roles in ecosystems, from pollinating plants to driving decomposition and maintaining nutrient cycles. Their diversity and abundance are crucial for ecological stability, yet recent evidence of widespread declines has raised serious concerns [...]

Museum collection of pinned ants from Fiji. This study involved extensive genome sampling from thousands of Fijian ant specimens, highlighting the vital importance of these museum collections as resources for biodiversity monitoring and conservation.  Credit: Peter GinterSeventy-nine percent of endemic species are showing declines, underscoring how fragile island biodiversity is in the face of ecosystem changes. Insects play essential roles in ecosystems, from pollinating plants to driving decomposition and maintaining nutrient cycles. Their diversity and abundance are crucial for ecological stability, yet recent evidence of widespread declines has raised serious concerns about how insects are adapting to modern environmental pressures. Determining whether these declines reflect long-term trends is key for global conservation strategies and for uncovering the causes of what has been called the “Insect Apocalypse.” In a study published in Science, scientists from the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology (OIST) applied a community genomics approach to investigate ant populations in Fiji as a model for broader insect biodiversity. By sequencing genomes from museum specimens, they reconstructed the ants’ evolutionary history, traced when species first colonized the islands, and examined long-term population dynamics. Conservation monitoring often emphasizes large, charismatic animals and ecosystems that are easier to survey, such as temperate regions. Yet many insects are believed to be undergoing steep declines, and island ecosystems—rich in unique species—are particularly vulnerable. Dr. Evan Economo, Professor at OIST and the University of Maryland and senior author of the study, explained, “It can be difficult to estimate historical changes to insect populations, because with few exceptions, we haven’t been directly monitoring populations over time. We take a novel approach to this problem by analyzing the genomes of many species in parallel from museum specimens collected recently. The genomes hold evidence of whether populations are growing or shrinking, allowing us to reconstruct community-wide changes.” During their fieldwork, the researchers sampled ants in Fiji by using bags to extract them from leaf litter, among other methods. Credit: Evan EconomoThe team’s findings were striking: 79% of Fiji’s endemic ant species—those found nowhere else—show signs of decline, with the timing of these reductions aligning with human arrival on the islands. In contrast, non-native ant species introduced by people are expanding rapidly. Much of the decline appears to have intensified within the last several hundred years, coinciding with European contact, colonization, global trade, and the spread of modern agriculture. A community-wide approach By focusing on the Fijian archipelago, a region of long-term interest to the researchers, they were able to get a broad, comprehensive overview of the population changes and colonization history of almost all the different ant species in the region. “Being closed, isolated ecosystems, islands are expected to feel the effects of human impact faster, so they are kind of a canary in the coal mine,” notes Dr. Cong Liu, first author on this paper. However, studying the populations of tropical islands is not without challenges. Often, fieldwork can be extremely difficult, and it isn’t easy to do continuous surveys. Therefore, instead of relying on real-time field monitoring, here the team used museum collections built across decades of fieldwork, including both the team’s previous collection efforts and those by other entomologists. Museumomics: reconstructing ant colonization One challenge of using museum collections is that DNA degrades over time. Therefore, the researchers had to use special sequencing methods (museumomics) to compare small fragments of DNA. In this study, they sequenced samples of genomes from thousands of ants from over one hundred different confirmed ant species. Using these data, they identified 65 separate instances (colonization events) where new ant species came to the island. These ranged from natural colonization (i.e. arrival of the ants with no human involvement) millions of years ago, to recent human introduction after Fiji became part of global trade networks. A small selection of the species encountered by the team in Fiji. A) Acropyga sp. FJ02 (endemic) carrying mealybug. B) Hypoponera eutrepta (endemic) carrying larva. C) Tetramorium lanuginosum (introduced). D) Colobopsis dentata (endemic). E) Odontomachus simillimus (Pacific native). F) Colobopsis polynesica (endemic). Credit: Eli SarnatBuilding on this history, the researchers were able to use their population genetics models to identify the rise or decline in population of different ant groups throughout the Fijian archipelago, noting the decline of endemic species, as well as dramatic increases in population of non-native species in more recent years. Island endemic species have often evolved traits that make them sensitive to environmental changes, including the arrival of new, damaging species. “Most recorded extinctions have historically been from island systems,” adds Dr. Liu. Going beyond the archipelago The team hopes that this work can act as inspiration for future work to continue building scientific understanding of insect populations, and to inform conservation efforts. “This study also highlights the importance of biodiversity and museum collections,” explains Professor Alexander Mikheyev of the Australian National University, a senior author on this study. “As our scientific toolbox expands, there is more and more information that we are able to capture from biodiversity collections, so it’s essential that we continue investing in and maintaining these vital resources.” The team are looking into this locally as well, to measure the biodiversity of Okinawan insect populations in real-time through acoustic monitoring and trapping as part of the Okinawa Environmental Observation Network (OKEON). “Insects are essential for the environment,” emphasizes Prof. Economo. “As scientists, we need to play our part in their protection, and provide and analyze the relevant data to ensure the long-term integrity of our ecosystems.” Reference: “Genomic signatures indicate biodiversity loss in an endemic island ant fauna” by Cong Liu, Eli Sarnat, Jo Ann Tan, Julia Janicki, John Deyrup, Masako Ogasawara, Miquel L. Grau, Lijun Qiu, Francisco Hita Garcia, Georg Fischer, Akanisi Caginitoba, Nitish Narula, Clive T. Darwell, Yasuhiro Kubota, Naomi E. Pierce, Alexander S. Mikheyev and Evan P. Economo, 11 September 2025, Science.DOI: 10.1126/science.ads3004 Funding: Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.

A Deep Look Into the Wild and Not-So-Wild World of Bumblebees

Over the past several decades the lives of the domesticated and native pollinators have increasingly overlapped

A Deep Look Into the Wild and Not-So-Wild World of Bumblebees Over the past several decades the lives of the domesticated and native pollinators have increasingly overlapped Jude Isabella, bioGraphic September 17, 2025 8:00 a.m. The domestication of some species of bumblebee has had unintended consequences. Grant Callegari / Hakai Institute Bumblebees are lovable, adorable and admirably occupied. They tumble along like toddlers drunk on the sweet smells of pretty flowers, breathing in one, then another and another. If Winnie-the-Pooh were an insect, he would be a bumblebee—a fuzzy, chubby, stinging insect that rarely stings. But I had no idea how much I cared about bumblebees until I had trouble meeting one particular species: the western bumblebee, Bombus occidentalis. Even before that, during the Covid-19 pandemic when my physical world contracted, a different apian wonder lured me into the big world of bumblebees. I had a garden, thankfully, and while working remotely, I had more time to consider its denizens. Cute and rotund, the bumblebees that routinely buzzed my tomato blossoms were small delights at a time when the world felt particularly grim. I snapped a photo of one, uploaded it to a website devoted to bumblebee identification and discovered it was a native species called Bombus vosnesenskii, the yellow-faced bumblebee. A sunny-blond mask covers its face and spreads across what I think of as its shoulders, like a fur wrap. Another strip of yellow near its tail contrasts with its otherwise black body. Enchanted, I dug deeper into online sources about bees, and B. vosnesenskii led me to B. occidentalis—also known as the white-bottomed or white-tailed bumblebee—the species that would have been pollinating my tomatoes in Victoria, British Columbia, some 30 years ago. Since then, B. occidentalis has slipped from being the most common bumblebee species in western North America to noticeably uncommon. In some areas, its populations are down 90 percent from what they were historically. The story of B. vosnesenskii has the opposite trajectory. In 1996, entomologists in British Columbia thought the bumblebee was in need of threatened or endangered status in the province. By 2000—not long after B. occidentalis populations crashed—researchers documented a dramatic B. vosnesenskii range expansion in the province, especially in the Lower Mainland and on Vancouver Island. Bombus vosnesenskii—the yellow-faced bumblebee—has expanded its range in British Columbia in the past couple of decades. Julia Hiebaum / Alamy Stock Photo Sure enough, everywhere I looked in my small pandemic bubble—in the garden, in urban parks, along the seashore—I saw B. vosnesenskii and other natives, but no B. occidentalis. I became fixated with the bee and its plight as an augur for an impoverished world. In a sense, my quest felt like an apology to the bee for my previous inattention. As I ventured deeper into B. occidentalis territory, I realized how dramatically the spheres of wild and lab-born bees have collided over the past few decades. The reality for B. occidentalis and many of its brethren is anything but cute. From a distance, Sarah Johnson’s hair looks like a floral bouquet. Standing still in a sea of beach grass infused with introduced Queen Anne’s lace, the bee biologist’s streaks of chartreuse, mauve, azure and garnet shine bright against the pearly blossoms bumblebees busily devour. We’re on a bumblebee safari in Bella Coola, a small town nestled along an inlet on the British Columbia coast. Johnson traveled here on a road trip with her dad in 2019. At the time, Johnson, who had become an incurable bee stalker while studying biology as an undergrad, was a graduate student at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, British Columbia, researching how wildfire affects bumblebee communities. Beside Bella Coola’s ferry terminal, she spotted B. occidentalis on goldenrod. “Every single flower had a bumblebee,” she recalls, and not just any bee; it was B. occidentalis, which had become rare across much of its range in the province by then. “I was starting to freak out—‘Wow, this is amazing!’—so we drove around, and they were everywhere. There were tons of them. It was a time warp into the past,” Johnson recalls. “This is what their populations would have looked like.” Sarah Johnson, a bee biologist, looks for Bombus occidentalis—the western bumblebee—in an estuary in Bella Coola, British Columbia, where she first chanced upon a population in 2019. Grant Callegari / Hakai Institute I reached out to Johnson after grazing the internet looking for B. occidentalis sightings, and she offered to meet me here, five years after her last visit, hoping the site was still abuzz. On this June day in 2024, the temperature is 61 degrees Fahrenheit—a little chilly, but the fuzz that covers bumblebees acts like a jacket, so they’re often the first pollinators on the scene in spring and the last to exit in fall, when it’s too cold for many other pollen gatherers. The smell on the breeze is botanical, with a hint of licorice and the sweet sap of cottonwood trees lining the shoreline. “There’s an occidentalis!” Johnson says as she points to one clambering over a blossom among the ivory floral canopy. “Two more! And another.” She smiles and sighs. We watch the bumblebees forage. With the combs and brushes on the inside of their legs, they stuff pollen into bristly baskets on their hind legs. A bit of nectar mixed with saliva keeps the pollen moist and sticky so it stays put—all of the million or so golden grains in each basket. This site, a beach, does not fit the established understanding of ideal bumblebee habitat: It’s wet, and the flowers are sparse. But the known world of wild bumblebees is like a 2,000-year-old map: devoid of details and hopelessly myopic. B. occidentalis, it seems, like this location just fine. When Johnson, founding president of the Native Bee Society of British Columbia, stumbled upon this B. occidentalis hot spot, she was well aware that the species was on a downward spiral. She, like other bee biologists, suspected disease was to blame. So soon after she first spotted the bees in 2019, she gathered a handful of B. occidentalis, along with specimens of another native, Bombus vancouverensis—also called the Vancouver bumblebee—that were buzzing around Bella Coola, and she brought them back to her lab. Peering through a microscope, Johnson sliced into their abdomens and peeled back their insides to assess their disease load, something she would do when running a bumblebee recovery program for a nonprofit conservation organization in Ontario in the mid-2010s. Under the light of the microscope, B. occidentalis glowed with spores of Vairimorpha bombi—a fungus implicated in the great bumblebee die-off in the 1990s and originally known as Nosema bombi. A known pathogen of bees in general, the fungus seems particularly problematic for B. occidentalis, and researchers suspect that captive-bred bumblebees helped its spread to the wild. The B. vancouverensis she collected had no fungus. Since Johnson’s dissection was a one-off assessment, the scientific takeaway is fuzzy, though it feeds into the general consensus among some bee biologists that B. occidentalis appears more susceptible to agents of disease than most other bumblebee species. Why B. occidentalis in Bella Coola has managed to thrive despite the heavy fungal load is unclear, says Johnson. But it’s likely that the bees have fewer environmental stressors overall undermining their health here. B. occidentalis forages for pollen on Queen Anne’s lace in the Bella Coola estuary. Grant Callegari / Hakai Institute During our visit, Johnson wades through the waist-high flowers, climbing over driftwood and skirting discarded fishing detritus, her camera ready. “So cute,” she murmurs as a bumblebee skitters across an umbrella-shaped cluster of flowers. I feel like I’m on a bumblebee safari, and like all good safari guides, Johnson is happy to dole out facts about the wildlife, with tons of caveats—there are many species, and many of them are under-investigated. Most bumblebees nest underground, moving into abandoned rodent burrows or finding space at the bottom of fence posts or in the roots of trees, she tells me. Those that dwell aboveground tuck themselves behind house shingles, occupy birdhouses or nestle into other nooks they find. Each spring, hibernating queens emerge from their winter homes and disperse to establish their own nests. Eventually, female workers hatch from the queen’s first batch of eggs. The workers survive only a few weeks, toiling to deliver nectar and pollen back to the nest to benefit the next generation. Males, with shaggier, thinner legs, don’t collect pollen; they solely exist to perpetuate the hive, as if they are the ones in red in The Handmaid’s Tale. They mate with the queen late in the season. When the hive dies off, the queen’s end-of-season offspring, her potential successors, hibernate until it’s time to start their own colonies. Johnson shares these bumblebee basics through public outreach tables at farmer’s markets and other events. She also provides expert identification for the database Bumblebee Watch, where amateur enthusiasts can upload pictures of bees they’ve tracked. Public databases allow researchers to track the movements of and make educated guesses about bumblebee populations. Johnson points out that B. vosnesenskii—the yellow-faced bumblebee in my garden—may be continuing its range expansion, perhaps filling the B. occidentalis niche. Yet the story playing out beyond the sightings is a complicated one. It unspools in laboratories where scientists tinker with domesticated pollinators; in greenhouses where lab-born bees are released en masse; and in increasingly simplified agricultural landscapes that favor efficiency over diversity. Until B. occidentalis caught my imagination, I had no idea that bumblebees are akin to valuable livestock and that some species have already been domesticated on a large scale. The more familiar pollinators are non-native honeybees, probably first carried from Europe to North America in 1622 by English colonists of Virginia. Today, honeybees are integral to the food system in North America, though their services vary. In the United States, for example, they pollinate 100 percent of almonds but only about 25 percent of pumpkins. And they’re poor pollinators for one of the most lucrative crops: tomatoes. The tomato business is enormous. Globally, the market value of tomatoes is over $200 billion annually, compared with apples at around $100 billion. Bumblebees are ideal tomato pollinators because they are plump, they are hairy, and they vibrate. Tomatoes need that buzz: The high-frequency vibration of a bumblebee’s thoracic muscles shakes pollen from the plant’s flowers. “To anthropomorphize,” says Jon Koch, who was until recently a research entomologist at the U.S. Department of Agriculture in Utah, “that’s why we benefit, or the world does—because they’re not very good at wiping their mouths. A lot of pollen ends up on their own bodies.” Bumblebees then transfer the pollen grains between blossoms as they dance from plant to plant. Honeybees, by contrast, don’t vibrate, and they struggle to reach the pollen at the end of tomato blossoms. Being inside a greenhouse also tends to disorient honeybees, so they bang against the glass instead of working. Bombus mixtus is a commonly found bumblebee species native to western North America, in the Rocky Mountains to the coast, from Alaska south to northern California. Grant Callegari / Hakai Institute Before they could buy commercial bumblebees in the 1980s, tomato greenhouse growers hand-pollinated with electric vibrating wands. Compared with this laborious task, bumblebee pollination can lead to plumper fruit and a 30 percent increase in tomato yield. In addition to their effect on greenhouse tomatoes, domesticated bumblebees have increased the yields of bell peppers, cucumbers, eggplants and, in some regions, field crops like blueberries, strawberries and cranberries. Worldwide, 5 species of bumblebees out of about 265 are commercial crop pollinators. B. occidentalis was briefly one of them. Bumblebee domestication started more than a century ago, when farmers began moving four bumblebee species, including a species called Bombus terrestris, the buff-tailed bumblebee, from the United Kingdom to New Zealand—once a bumblebee-free land—to pollinate feed crops such as alfalfa and red clover. The effort to raise bumblebees in captivity progressed in fits and starts for much of the 20th century. But the commercial value of B. terrestris soared soon after a Belgian veterinarian and bumblebee breeder named Roland de Jonghe released a colony into a tomato grower’s greenhouse in the Netherlands in 1985. The grower saw his yield increase, and he noticed that his bumblebee-kissed greenhouse tomatoes were also prettier—with rounded flesh and fewer blemishes—than the hand-pollinated fruit of his competitors. He made a record profit. Within a few years, tomato growers in the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg all began using B. terrestris for pollination, and de Jonghe launched Biobest, which is now one of the world’s largest suppliers of domesticated B. terrestris and other commercial pollinator species. All along, bumblebee breeders understood that their wards were prone to jailbreaking. As Koch points out, “Bumblebees are great escape artists. I’ve learned that they will find the smallest hole anywhere, and they’re persistent.” For that reason, breeders raising bumblebees for the greenhouse industry endeavored to use species local to where they’d be employed. It didn’t always work. In Australia, for example, breeders tried native great carpenter bees, but they were uncooperative in confined settings. In North America, breeders set their sights on domesticating two bumblebees native to Canada and the U.S.: B. impatiens, the most common bumblebee in the east, and B. occidentalis, the most common bumblebee in the west. The quest to create a pollinator from wild B. impatiens worked; B. occidentalis, however, faltered. In the late 1990s, not long into industrial-scale breeding of B. occidentalis, the V. bombi fungus felled commercial populations. Wild B. occidentalis soon fell ill as well, possibly infected by some of the domesticated variety released into greenhouses and farm fields. If hysteria ensued—as it did when colony collapse disorder first struck honeybees in 2006—it seemed to be kept within the sphere of breeders, researchers, trade publications and maybe local farm news. Commercial breeders abandoned B. occidentalis by 1999. “The hothouse tomato industry faced a calamity in terms of productivity,” says Paul van Westendorp, the chief apiarist for the province of British Columbia before his recent retirement. Meanwhile, growers on the other side of the continent, in places like Ontario and New York, were relying on B. impatiens, a proven winner in domestication. Western growers clamored for permission from their governments to import B. impatiens. Promises were made to keep the non-native bees inside, and permission was granted. “We always knew that 100 percent control was perhaps idealistic or unrealistic, but it was considered to be perhaps not a great threat as such,” van Westendorp says. Washington and California also gave permission, with conditions, while Oregon was a holdout. In greenhouses, bumblebee colonies live in a cardboard box about the size of a banker’s box. Inside is a plastic chamber for the hive and where the queen lays her eggs. A round opening, an excluder, to the outside allows smaller workers out, but it should be too small for queens. Did B. impatiens escape greenhouses in western North America? If you ask Gary Jones, program manager for the B.C. Greenhouse Grower’s Association, the evidence is circumstantial. “It’s an assumption,” he says. The assumption is based on surveys by researchers in the spring of 2003 and 2004 of blueberry and strawberry fields in the Lower Mainland, where hundreds of greenhouses dot agricultural fields: They found over 500 B. impatiens, including a queen, at two different sites, roughly one and three miles from greenhouses, typical foraging distances for bumblebees. Commercially produced bumblebees arrive at greenhouses in cardboard boxes that serve as their hives. Carlos Gonzalez / Minneapolis Star Tribune / Alamy Stock Photo Aside from using excluders, growers are also supposed to euthanize hives that have finished their pollinating job, usually by freezing them. Yet there are no rules specifying how long to freeze the hives to kill the bees before disposing of them, says Sheila Colla*, a conservation scientist at York University in Toronto, who led the bee surveys in British Columbia’s blueberry and strawberry fields. And no regulatory agency has anyone methodically inspecting domesticated bumblebees in the province’s commercial greenhouses. Washington and California have no monitoring processes in place either. “I wonder if they’re just being dumped into dumpsters, and that’s how they’re getting out,” says Colla. Katie Buckley with the Washington State Department of Agriculture also knows that some greenhouse growers sold hives to other farmers, who may have placed them outside. That was “not uncommon practice,” she says, referring to the early days of B. impatiens in the West. “There were chains of people that these hives would go through.” No governmental entity checked for escapees. Hunt for bumblebees in farm fields in the Lower Mainland today, and 40 percent will be B. impatiens, as revealed by scientists from the University of British Columbia in 2024, helping fill the void left by B. occidentalis, once the humming majority. While B. impatiens is not responsible for B. occidentalis’ worrisome decline, it may have kept the threatened bee from rebounding in certain areas, through competition or by spreading disease. And even though colonies of native bumblebees—domesticated B. vosnesenskii and another hometown buzz called Bombus huntii—are finally available, it seems unlikely we’ll ever put a lid back on feral B. impatiens. They’ve become a permanent component of the region’s pollinator mix. The question is: What will this now-common species do to wild bee diversity in the long term? By 2017, Washington State firmly jumped on the feral bumblebee worry train when a single image of B. impatiens uploaded to an online insect identification site caught the eye of Chris Looney, who studies insects at the Washington State Department of Agriculture. Looney is famous—at least in some circles—for his work on tracking and eradicating the Asian giant hornet (aka murder hornet, Vespa mandarinia). The photo was taken in Blaine, Washington, roughly half a mile from the Canadian border. “This is only the third location, I would say on Earth, where a bumblebee has been introduced in a place where other bumblebees live,” Looney says over a video chat from his office in Olympia, Washington. Aside from the northwest coast of North America, the other two places are Japan and Chile. In Japan, B. terrestris imported from Europe may be interfering with the mating of native species and competing for nests, but the effects have been subtle so far. In Chile, the effects are profound. Introduced B. terrestris have spread south into Argentina, and now they’re displacing the native ginger-furred Bombus dahlbomii throughout Patagonia, a revelation made in 2013 by Carolina Morales, at Argentina’s National University of Comahue, and her colleagues. B. dahlbomii, the largest bumblebee on Earth—likened to a flying mouse—is the region’s only native bumblebee. Bombus dahlbomii, Patagonia’s only native bumblebee, has struggled since Chile introduced Bombus terrestris into greenhouses in 1997. The largest bumblebee in the world, B. dahlbomii is now considered endangered.  bbr0wn / iNaturalist “In that case, the impacts [in Patagonia] were immediate and obvious,” Looney says. In the Pacific Northwest, the trajectory is less clear. “Will [B. impatiens] just slot in and not really be a competitor? Or will they have disparate impacts on some native bee species but not others? Who knows, right?” Looney and a colleague visited Blaine and immediately found B. impatiens. He then investigated the potential for B. impatiens to spread even further through a modeling study using climate data and habitat needs: The bee has the potential to go big and colonize the coast from British Columbia’s Haida Gwaii archipelago to California’s San Francisco Bay. In 2022, Looney launched a four-year survey. With colleagues, including Koch, who was then at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, he put 46 sites under surveillance for B. impatiens in Washington and in British Columbia’s Lower Mainland. One question the team hopes to answer is whether the bees have a preference for certain landscapes, and if so, which ones. Anecdotally, they’re associated with urban and suburban gardens, parks and agricultural fields, but Looney’s team has also found them on mountains and forested foothills. “Obviously, they found something to eat up there,” he says. He’s also found that the traps he set for the Asian giant hornet, baited with a mimosa-like concoction—rice wine and orange juice—tend to lure B. impatiens. Chris Looney, an entomologist at the Washington State Department of Agriculture, holds a bottle trap used to capture invasive Asian giant hornets. Bombus impatiens are also drawn to the traps.  Paul Christian Gordon / Alamy Stock Photo In October 2022, Looney found 30 of the introduced bumblebees—way more than the usual handful he encounters—inside a hornet trap set in a meadow in Lynden, Washington. Lots of males and queens were flying around, a signal that it was the end of a colony cycle. Another pass at the site in spring 2024 turned up nine B. impatiens nests under the ground. “Big nests,” Looney says—far bigger than those produced by B. occidentalis, which typically contain a few hundred bees. In the fall, he and his team used pickaxes, shovels and a shop vac to collect a colony and bring it back for dissection. Based on the number of larval cells they found—3,600—they estimate that collectively, the nine nests in that meadow habitat could have produced 3,933 gynes, potential queens. About 60 percent survive overwintering, which means that the nests could produce 2,360 would-be queens in spring. The team is far from generating an overall hypothesis about whether the flying infringers are worrisome adversaries or tolerable neighbors for native species. Looney, Koch, Colla and others have noticed that the bee from the east shows up to pollinate later in the season than most natives. The queens are out at the same time as other species’ queens, but the workers take their sweet time heading out to flowering fields—perhaps because they’re reliant on introduced plants, cultivars bred to provide a cascading series of blooms all summer long, or fruits and vegetables ready to harvest at various times over a growing season. From surveys of the Lower Mainland, bee biologists at the University of British Columbia found that B. impatiens binge on the pollen of cultivated dahlias, tomatoes, blueberries and other plants found in suburban gardens. The bee dominates parks in the Vancouver metro area, too. Despite the apparent size of the feral population, the British Columbia government continues to sit on its hands. B. impatiens is no longer welcome in Washington’s greenhouses, though the domesticated eastern worker continues to labor in California. Counties in California inspect greenhouses before issuing permits, yet that state also has a documented feral population. Oregon continues to forbid B. impatiens and so far has no established populations. Bee biologist Lincoln Best at Oregon State University has had teams searching for them since 2018 when he launched the Oregon Bee Atlas. He believes they are dispersing along the coast and into watersheds, finding open areas with decent bumblebee habitat, and that their expansion from either Washington or California into Oregon is probable. “It’s just a matter of time,” he says. On another bumblebee safari, to the Lower Mainland, the apparent gateway of B. impatiens to the West, I meet Sandra Gillespie, a bee biologist with the University of the Fraser Valley in Abbotsford, British Columbia. Gillespie’s focus is on pathogens and bumblebees, but Looney and Koch asked her to join their survey of B. impatiens. Abbotsford is part farm community, part suburbia. To meet Gillespie, I drive down a two-lane road lined with greenhouses and commercial blueberry crops and crowded with trucks, cars, and the odd tractor. “Oh, here’s an impatiens—she’s moving fast,” Gillespie says as we stand at a blackberry patch in a public park. I blink, and the bee is gone. We’re about a mile from the nearest greenhouse, which means the B. impatiens is either feral or a recent escapee. “Once they built that greenhouse, that’s when I started seeing Bombus impatiens at one of my field sites, over there,” she says, pointing north toward the Fraser River. She’s been monitoring the same sites for eight years and rarely sees a B. occidentalis, although she’s spotted them on Vancouver Island. Sandra Gillespie, a bee biologist at the University of the Fraser Valley in British Columbia, studies pathogens in bumblebees. Toby Hall / Hakai Institute A couple of other native bumblebee species whizz by before we stroll to a patch of native fireweed where bumblebees gulp an abundance of nectar from the bubblegum pink petals. Different plants offer different nutritional value, and research has shown that bumblebees thrive on a varied diet. But the intense commercialization of the blueberry crop in Abbotsford has simplified the landscape with thousands of shrubs. “Blueberries are attractive to bumblebees because there are so many of them,” says Gillespie, noting they don’t offer bees much protein. She equates the vast blueberry fields to big box stores, teeming with processed foods. It’s hot, and the bees are fast. Gillespie points to a couple of B. impatiens flying deep into the flower patch. Then she chuckles: A bumblebee in front of us sticks its face deep into a bright pink blossom. It’s a B. vosnesenskii, the yellow-faced bumblebee that first lured me into the world of bees. Earlier in the season, Gillespie collected a handful of B. vosnesenskii queens from the wild and placed them in a box designed for brood rearing, as a means of learning more about the behaviors of her study subjects. Koch and Looney did the same in a couple of different sites in Washington. Gillespie has had little success so far. “I think there’s something wrong with our queens,” she says, clearly frustrated, noting it could also be the lab setup. For publicly funded researchers and commercial breeders alike, figuring out how to rear bees in labs has been notoriously finnicky since the beginning. Gillespie trains students to identify and net bee pollinators in her survey sites. Toby Hall / Hakai Institute Koppert, a commercial breeding operation based in the Netherlands, began raising B. vosnesenskii around 2007, and early results were mixed—the bee was not easy to domesticate. But eventually the company got it right, and commercial sales began in 2020. What did it get right? Who knows. Production methods are proprietary. “As you can imagine, we compete heavily with the likes of Biobest and other smaller local producers all across the world,” says Martin Wohlfarter, Koppert’s global regulatory affairs specialist. Fair enough: The pollination-services industry was worth $2.5 billion in 2024. B. vosnesenskii could prove as lucrative as B. impatiens—it’s one of the two domesticated bumblebees allowed to pollinate crops in Washington and Oregon, both in fields and greenhouses. If British Columbia ever bans B. impatiens, it is likely that B. vosnesenskii and B. huntii will take their place. But will using domesticated native bumblebees ultimately prove better than using non-native equivalents? Well, domesticated B. vosnesenskii can potentially overwhelm habitat and outcompete other species, but more than one researcher points out that they’ll mostly stick with the “big box” floral department they’re released into. More worrisome is the spread of disease to wild bumblebees if an outbreak of a fungus, virus, parasite or bacteria hits a lab or two. What is known is that since the start of the commercial bumblebee breeding industry, infections caused by V. bombi, the fungus that sliced into B. occidentalis populations, have risen in wild species in western North America. Maybe bumblebees meet at a flower patch, alight on some of the same blossoms, each make their own little messes while sipping nectar and gathering pollen, and a pathogen hitches a ride back to a wild hive. Felix Wäckers, head of research and development at Biobest, based in Belgium, is an ecologist and former academic. He joined Biobest 16 years ago, and at the time, he says, shipping pollinators around the globe was not acknowledged—at least by the industry—as a risk to native bumblebee species. Since then, he says, disease protocols have become more rigorous. For instance, scientists will breed queens for multiple generations to weed out potential pathogens from the original wild progenitors. Biobest has also bred native Japanese and South American bumblebees and has stopped selling B. terrestris to Japan and Chile. “I think as an industry, we have taken considerable steps over the last one and a half decades to minimize the impact,” Wäckers says. “That doesn’t mean that what happened with Chile is not a problem.” It also doesn’t mean other companies have stopped selling the non-native bees to Chile or Japan. Colla, the conservation scientist, and her colleagues are calling for a “bumblebee clean stock certification program” across North America to reduce disease risk in captive production, which in turn would reduce the risk of infections in wild pollinators and other insects. As Colla points out, pathogen spillover is a regular occurrence between livestock and their wild counterparts—between cattle and bison; between farmed salmon and wild salmon; between poultry and wild birds. My final bumblebee safari never pans out. I’m home, sick with a case of dramatic irony, infected with the Covid-19 virus. Looney, Koch and their team head out without me to Whatcom County in Washington to check their B. vosnesenskii colonies. They’re doing well. Koch’s lab manager Tien Lindsay sends me photos. The mid-September day looks ablaze in foliage as the team checks a hive surrounded by the white and red blossoms of rugosa, a lovely flowering shrub from eastern Asia. Against an emerald backdrop of western red cedar striped with the white bark of an aspen, a scientist peers inside a white box. The yellow-faced livestock are hidden from the camera. Unlike conventional livestock, bumblebees play a role in the agricultural system that is mostly hidden from consumers. It’s not intentional, just business: Bumblebees have become invisible in a system where profit comes first, food second and biodiversity barely registers. A handful of bumblebee species are tools, necessary tools for growers big and small, including the family-run greenhouse a couple miles from my house that sells the most exquisite heirloom tomatoes at the summer farmers market. The corporate point of view isn’t wrong. An economy that hinges on one metric—money—rewards profit-driven behavior. But money is like a god that demands complete allegiance, leaving less space for the gods of small things, for the 260 or so other wild bumblebees that do not fit into today’s economic system but are likely impacted by it. This is not the end of the story. Farmers have always been creative problem solvers. Change the goal, and farmers and researchers—highly skilled people—can transform the agricultural landscape into healthier ecosystems with space for all bee species. In fact, domesticating bumblebees led to a boost in biocontrol research, resulting in new ways to manage pests without relying solely on chemicals to massacre other life forms. Maybe change begins with an idea: to look at the world through the eyes of wild pollinators while acknowledging them as partners in our food systems. If we simultaneously reject the simplification of agricultural landscapes, we can create diverse food-producing ecosystems that encourage a variety of species that interact for the benefit of the whole. B. vosnesenskii, a bumblebee native to western North America, rests on Looney’s hand at one of his survey sites in Washington State. Chris Looney Another picture in the batch that Lindsay sends me has a caption: “A Bombus vosnesenskii worker bee rests on Dr. Chris Looney’s finger. We were expressing our gratitude for her efforts and services.” Maybe change starts with that. Travel and photography support for this story came from the Tula Foundation. * Sheila Colla passed away on July 6, 2025. As a journalist, I only knew Sheila through a video interview and emails. She answered questions with clarity, patience and kindness and was always responsive. When we chatted many months ago, she was outside with her students, giving thoughtful answers to my questions, occasionally engaging with someone in the background, smiling all the while. She seemed unflappable. When I interviewed other biologists for this story, they often referred to Sheila’s work. From our brief encounter, Sheila came across as a matriarch of the bee biology world, a powerful, influential woman and scientist who cared deeply about the natural world. Please read about her remarkable sojourn on this corporeal plane here. This story originally appeared in bioGraphic, an independent magazine about nature and regeneration powered by the California Academy of Sciences. Get the latest Science stories in your inbox.

As Federal Support for On-Farm Solar Declines, Is Community Agrivoltaics the Future?

Byron Kominek, who owns the farm, sees similar benefits from the solar panels he has installed on some of the land. “What’s important is to think about the solar array as a tree canopy,” Kominek said. The solar garden includes 3,276 panels that generate 1.2 megawatts of community solar power, enough to power 300 homes. […] The post As Federal Support for On-Farm Solar Declines, Is Community Agrivoltaics the Future? appeared first on Civil Eats.

Some of the thickest hay in the meadow at Jack’s Solar Garden, in Longmont, Colorado, is on the west side under an elm tree. The tree offers shade, absorbs the brunt of afternoon sun, and keeps more moisture in the ground. Byron Kominek, who owns the farm, sees similar benefits from the solar panels he has installed on some of the land. “What’s important is to think about the solar array as a tree canopy,” Kominek said. The solar garden includes 3,276 panels that generate 1.2 megawatts of community solar power, enough to power 300 homes. Through his agrivoltaic system—the dual use of land for solar generation and agriculture—he’s found success growing blackberries, raspberries, asparagus, and more under the panels. While growing these crops, he’s also been able to generate and sell electricity—another boost to farm revenue. With hotter, drier years ahead, Kominek also thinks having additional shade on farmland will be important for reducing ground temperatures and keeping water in the soil. Both will expand the lifespan of his property. Through his agrovoltaic system—the dual use of land for solar generation and agriculture—Byron Kominek can grow crops while generating and selling electricity, a boost to farm revenue. Like most farmers and farm advocates, Kominek is concerned about the loss of productive farmland across the country. He sees large-scale solar energy development that involves wiping out farms entirely as part of that problem, but he believes his farm and many others can demonstrate a different approach. “It takes a little bit more upfront, but one can consider some of the main points around developing solar arrays that can make it safer, more accessible, and useful for farmers and ranchers for the long run,” Kominek said. The Biden administration invested in solar through landmark climate legislation, which included additional funds for on-farm solar projects. State policies have also helped spur agrivoltaic growth. But the Trump administration has taken steps to move federal support away from solar energy. Most recently, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) said it would no longer support solar projects that take away viable farmland. That will make it harder for rural businesses and farmers to access grants and loan guarantees that largely go to small-scale solar arrays. In years past, farmers have gravitated toward these awards because of the energy cost benefits that can help sustain their businesses. Increasingly, though, as federal policies become less stable for solar, states and farm groups are looking to community solar projects to fill the gaps. Trump’s Far-Reaching Changes to Rural Energy In August, the USDA shared a press release explaining how the agency would move away from solar through changes to the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP). First created under a different name in the 2002 Farm Bill, REAP has grown to become the primary program in the farm legislation. While other technologies once dominated, energy efficiency and solar projects are now some of the most popular. The program currently supports solar projects that range in scale, funded through grants and loan guarantees for agricultural producers or small rural businesses. Solar arrays can range from small-scale, like task-oriented solar for an irrigation pump, to multi-acre utility-scale projects where electricity generated can go to the grid. It’s also a low-risk, established technology that farmers and small rural businesses have gravitated toward to stabilize energy prices. Company climate pledges and consumer demand are also pushing low-carbon products, which has similarly pushed farmers to solar. “The benefit of solar to agriculture producers is that it provides stable energy cost, predictable energy cost, and helps them to reduce their carbon footprint, as markets increasingly demand,” said Andy Olsen, senior policy advocate at the Environmental Law and Policy Center. “The benefit of solar to agriculture producers is that it provides stable energy cost, predictable energy cost, and helps them to reduce their carbon footprint, as markets increasingly demand.” A recent USDA memo sent to state Rural Development directors and obtained by Civil Eats provides more insights into how the agency plans to move REAP away from solar. Ground-mounted solar projects larger than 50 kilowatts and installed on “certified cropland” are now ineligible for REAP loan guarantees, it says. Any solar projects that have any component made in a foreign adversary country, like China, would also be ineligible. Solar projects that fall under these size, location, and component restrictions will also be “disincentivized” for REAP grants. From 2015 to 2025, 72 percent of REAP projects included solar, according to an analysis by the Environmental Law and Policy Center shared directly with Civil Eats. An estimated 65 percent of these solar projects were larger than 50 kW and could therefore be ineligible for loans, or “docked,” under the new parameters. While available data does not directly include the size of projects, the center’s analysts came to this conclusion by estimating kilowatts by the cost of the project. A separate analysis by the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, also shared with Civil Eats, found that relatively few—only about 150—of these projects are larger than 50 kW, mounted on the ground, and classified as an agriculture project. Many existing REAP projects involve solar arrays mounted on land adjacent to buildings or on the edge of property. But experts point out that nearly every solar array, no matter the size or location, is likely made using components from China. “This is farmers who are saying, ‘I want to go solar to help my farm,’ or, ‘I’m a rural small business and I want to go solar to help my business,’” said Liz Veazey, state policy campaigns director at Solar United Neighbors. “These people are not going to put a bunch of solar in the middle of their farm and impact their farm. They should be able to do whatever they want with their land.” Rural businesses and farms look to REAP and solar as a way to stay in business by lowering or controlling their energy costs, Veazey said. These projects can also create jobs that support the broader local, rural economy. REAP loan guarantees specifically can help support utility-scale solar projects that farmers can use to sell electricity. REAP applications are scored and get “priority points” based on criteria like energy savings, location, committed matching funds and more. These scores are factored into USDA’s selection process. As the internal USDA memo notes, the new restrictions on solar projects will be factored into this point system. But it’s unclear how severely projects involving more than 50 kW, ground-mounted solar, projects on farmland, and systems made with components produced in China will be docked in this new system. Depending on how much projects are docked because of the new solar parameters, it could lead to hundreds fewer systems receiving grants, Veazey said. The USDA is expected to reopen REAP applications on October 1, and she expects more information about the point system to be released then. “Making it harder to get these grants is probably going to reduce applications for solar, [and] potentially push applications to other, maybe less practical technologies,” Veazey said. The new REAP parameters add to a wave of “uncertainty and chaos” in the program, Veazey said. Earlier this year, USDA briefly froze REAP funding and delayed opening the latest cycle of applications. Veazey said she’s also concerned that cuts to agency staff could make it harder to process all the applications. “Making it harder to get these grants is probably going to reduce applications for solar, [and] potentially push applications to other, maybe less practical technologies.” Meanwhile, the federal government has implemented other policies that signal a shift away from solar energy. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) boosted the amount REAP grants could cover to 50 percent. Developers could also stack these grants with other IRA tax credits to further lower the cost of the project. However, under the Republican-backed One Big Beautiful Bill Act, several IRA credits for clean energy were rolled back. Specifically, the residential solar credit will go away at the end of 2025, and the solar credit for businesses that many farmers or rural businesses could have used becomes more complicated with the introduction of “foreign entity of concern” rules that clean energy developers are still seeking formal guidance on. Already, getting a REAP grant entails a competitive but complicated application process, particularly for farmers and rural businesses that may not have technical expertise or support. Adding additional parameters, particularly around foreign components, could add red tape to the application process. The new parameters set by the USDA are “largely killing the REAP program,” said Olsen of the Environmental Law and Policy Center. States Consider Community Solar As the federal policy on solar shifts, some states are increasingly exploring community solar programs that can include farms and rural businesses. Community solar arrays are often funded by private investments and subscriber payments. These are generally smaller, requiring about 50 acres, and usually capped at 5 MW of electrical capacity. So far, 19 states have community solar programs and are exploring agrivoltaics as a way of bringing on low-cost power quickly. This system allows residents and small businesses to get a credit on their electricity bill that could help offset costs. Farmers who implement these projects can also directly see benefits from lower-cost power or selling electricity. So far, 19 states have community solar programs and are exploring ways to enhance agrivoltaics, said Liz Perera, senior director of national programs and policy at Coalition for Community Solar Access (CCSA). These states are trying to bring on low-cost power quickly, and community solar is an economical way of doing this, she continued. “As the cost of power goes up and electricity on these farms goes up, there’s going to be a lot more interest in solar on these farms,” Perera said. “That’s their way of actually dealing with that increased cost.” With community solar projects, farmers can lease land to solar developers, earning dollars from lease payments while still harvesting crops on nearby fields, Perera said. These also bring economic benefits for the entire community. CCSA estimates that 750 mW of community solar nationwide could deliver $2.1 billion in economic impact and create over 14,000 local jobs, based on state-level studies. In Colorado, for example, the community solar program has brought $1.4 billion in private investment while creating jobs largely in rural communities, according to a CCSA report. Creating Opportunities for Agrivoltaic Meanwhile, the types of crops that can be grown in an agrivoltaic system are also expanding with further investment and research. Leafy greens, berries, root vegetables, legumes and more can all be grown under the arrays, Perera said. In September, American Farmland Trust (AFT) announced the Farmers Powering Communities partnership with Reactivate and Edelen Renewables Community Solar. The initiative aims to bring more community-scale solar projects to farmers and rural communities, which AFT believes will protect farmers and farmland while delivering energy savings to rural communities. These projects can also be a mix of agrivoltaics, rooftop solar, and arrays on the edge of farmland. The coalition aims to connect with partners across the country, but is currently focused on New York, Massachusetts, and New Jersey, states that have already have community solar and agrivoltaic programs. Ethan Winter, director of the Smart Solar program at AFT, said these states are more land constrained. “You’re trying to create some opportunity for the next generation of producers, you’re trying to not accelerate farmland loss, and you’ve got some really ambitious energy targets that are going to continue despite the federal policy headwinds,” Winter said. For farmers, one of the key barriers to entering the community solar space is a lack of information about the process, said Joel Tatum, senior solar specialist at AFT. This partnership aims to give farmers the background and research to site projects responsibly. “You’re trying to create some opportunity for the next generation of producers, you’re trying to not accelerate farmland loss, and you’ve got some really ambitious energy targets that are going to continue despite the federal policy headwinds.” Still, agrivoltaics and incorporating community solar into farms is an emerging concept. Even as innovations, farmer interest, and public awareness of solar on farmland grow, consistent support from the federal or state level are necessary. Despite the lagging support at the federal level, many groups remain optimistic that community solar and agrivoltaics will persist. On September 16, community solar developer Lightstar Renewables officially launched its Plains Road Agrivoltaics project in Montgomery, New York. The solar project was tailored to fit within the existing operations at the DiMartino Farm, so hay planting and harvesting can continue around or under the panels. The project is expected to generate enough energy to power 466 homes annually. Previously, county bylaws had banned solar development on prime farmland. But developers and partners on the project were able to amend these bylaws with specific height restrictions and lot coverage, allowing for agrivoltaics, said Lucy Bullock-Sieger, chief strategy officer at Lightstar. This shift is happening in other parts of the country as well, as more examples of agrivoltaics show their benefit to farms and communities, she said. “Agrivoltaics is going to be even more important because the conversation over prime farmland is not going away,” she said. “We have this opportunity to make sure that people understand that agrivoltaics is a viable, commercial, and scalable option for farmers.” The post As Federal Support for On-Farm Solar Declines, Is Community Agrivoltaics the Future? appeared first on Civil Eats.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.