Environmental Protection Agency

Trump Admin to Roll Out Major Fertilizer Plan This Week, Accelerate U.S. Production Push

Mon, 27 Apr 2026 16:36:27 GMT

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins says the Trump administration will unveil a sweeping set of fertilizer initiatives this week, warning that surging input costs are putting intense pressure on American farmers. Speaking at a Missouri farm on Friday, Rollins told those in attendance that fertilizer has become an issue of national security, which is why she says this week’s announcement will be broader than just USDA, also including EPA, Department of Energy, Department of Commerce and Department of the Interior.

While at GR Farms in Higginsville, Mo., on Friday to roll out an announcement on the Supplemental Disaster Relief Program (SDRP) top-up payments, Rollins described the Trump administration’s upcoming announcement on fertilizer as a large-scale investment initiative. She says while she hoped to roll out the plan while in Missouri, the administration is still finalizing the size of the funding package.

Rollins says the plan will address both immediate actions to stabilize fertilizer prices and a longer-term roadmap aimed at ensuring affordable, domestically produced supply for U.S. farmers.

Washington analyst Jim Wiesemeyer says the plan will likely need to include a mix of financial and policy tools, such as grants, tax incentives, loan guarantees outside of existing USDA programs and greater consistency in U.S. trade policy, while noting imports will still play a role, particularly for key nutrients like potash sourced from Canada.

Short-Term Fertilizer Price Pain

During her comments Friday, Rollins highlighted how quickly fertilizer prices have increased since the conflict started in Iran, outlining the additional strain it is placing on producers.

“We know that urea prices have gone up 50% over the last month. Ammonia is up 30% or more,” she said, adding that “our farmers are feeling that pinch.”

Rollins also told the crowd fertilizer has been a longer-term challenge, even before the situation in Iran caused the latest price spike.

“To be clear, this has been a problem for years. The actual numbers are lower, believe it or not, than they were even in 2022,” she says. “But nevertheless, that jump in prices overnight, we have to address.”

Framing the issue as more than just an economic challenge and one that is a matter of national security after decades of offshoring fertilizer production, Rollins says the administration views the issue as part of a broader structural problem within the fertilizer industry.

“The loss of competition in the fertilizer industry has obviously led to higher fertilizer costs over time,” she says. “When combined with what’s happening overseas with the current geopolitical issues facing our world, certainly we have come to a crossroads that requires immediate action. This is indeed a matter of national security, and we are working to tackle it head on.”

Focus on Domestic Fertilizer Production

While Rollins didn’t give details, she hinted the centerpiece of this week’s announcement will be a major push to reshore fertilizer production, backed by federal investment to accomplish that. Working with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, she says the administration is preparing to direct significant funding toward building new fertilizer plants across the country, while also supporting existing projects.

“I have asked Howard to do, and his team to do, and what we’re doing in partnership is to identify a significant number ... that we can deploy into building out fertilizer plants in America,” she says.

Rollins emphasizes cutting regulatory delays will be critical to making that plan work. She says projects are already being identified nationwide, but permitting delays remain a major obstacle — with the goal of getting that process down to months versus the current years it takes.

“We’ve already begun to identify all over the country. Some are under production. How do we move them along more quickly? Some are in the permitting bureaucracy, which sometimes takes years to get through permitting,” she says. “Our goal is to, instead of years, to get to permitting in a matter of weeks, or perhaps months, so that even in one year, two years and three years, we will have facilities up and running that we will never have had that opportunity or option before.”

United States’ Energy Advantage for Nitrogen Fertilizer

Rollins also points to domestic energy resources as a key factor in expanding fertilizer output, particularly for nitrogen production.

“We became, in a matter of just a short period of time, a net exporter of LNG versus importer, meaning we were producing our own energy in America, so much so that we no longer had to rely on other countries,” she says. “The reason that is important is, as our farmers are facing these exponential nitrogen fertilizer costs, we now have the resources in America. We just have to build the facilities, the manufacturing facilities, to turn that LNG into nitrogen. So this is going to happen quicker than you would normally expect, I think because of the pieces of the puzzle that have already been put into place.”

In the meantime, Rollins says the administration is continuing short-term efforts to improve supply availability and reduce costs.

While the longer-term strategy ramps up, she says the administration is continuing short-term interventions to ease pressure on farmers. These include:

Extending a waiver of the Jones Act
Opening new import channels
Working and meeting with industry/fertilizer companies

Highlighting cooperation with domestic producers, she pointed to CF Industries as an example.

“They have said, in order to protect our farmers, we are going to stop maintenance. We are going look at holding our prices steady,” she says.

She also points to ongoing coordination with the Department of Justice.

“Last year, we signed a joint agreement, USDA did, with the Department of Justice, ensuring that farmers have access to competitive and affordable inputs,” she says. “Looking into the activities of our fertilizer companies and what has happened over the last few years, but with a new eye on potential price gouging right now.”

Long-Term Goal: Reduce Foreign Dependence

Looking longer term, Rollins says the administration is focused on reversing decades of reliance on foreign suppliers.

“America has offshored for far too long, far too much of our fertilizer production, leaving us dangerously reliant on Russia and China,” she says. “Changing that long-standing industry that is reliant on global markets won’t happen overnight,” she says. “But working with our farmers and across industry and government, we will find ways to make fertilizer that we can do here in America and make sure it is a price that our great farmers can afford.”

At the same time, the administration is increasing scrutiny of fertilizer markets. Rollins noted ongoing coordination with the Department of Justice, saying officials are taking “a new eye on potential price gouging right now.”

Ultimately, she framed this week’s announcement as the beginning of a broader shift away from foreign dependence.

Rollins says additional details, including funding levels and project specifics, will be included in next week’s announcement.

“We’re at a crossroads that requires immediate action,” she says.

Watch Rollins’ full press conference here:

The New Biofuel Boom? Historic RFS Mandates Drive 2 Billion-Gallon Expansion

Thu, 02 Apr 2026 17:22:41 GMT

The EPA’s finalized “Set 2” rule under the Renewable Fuel Standard is doing something rare in U.S. biofuel policy: it is not just stabilizing the market, it could jolt it.

With blending mandates for 2026 and 2027 set at historic highs , including a more than 60% jump over 2025 levels for biomass-based diesel, the rule is already being read across the industry as a catalyst for a new expansion cycle — one that could ripple from fuel producers back to soybean fields, livestock operations and emerging oilseed crops.

A Demand Shock, But By Design

“It sure feels like it,” says Matt Upmeyer, director of feedstock sourcing and strategy at Montana Renewables, when asked whether the policy signals the next biofuel boom. “We received a strong RVO, adding about 2 billion gallons of biomass-based diesel demand, and that’s a huge increase. And certainly feedstock demand is growing as well. That 2 billion of biomass-based diesel represents about 15 billion lb. of feedstock for the biodiesel and renewable diesel producers. And that really translates directly back to farm and agriculture growth as well.”

From Underperformance to Full Throttle

For an industry coming off a sharp downturn, where biodiesel production fell significantly in 2025 and facilities idled or slowed, the scale of the mandate is not just notable — it is corrective.

“I mean, I think it is realistic,” Upmeyer says of the aggressive growth targets. “The industry is poised to meet that demand. We’ve got capacity. The renewable industry, which is both biodiesel and renewable diesel, has a combined capacity of probably around 7 billion gallons. So meeting that mandate, I don’t think is a problem.”

But meeting it will require a fundamental reshuffling of how feedstocks move through the system.

“We will definitely see some changes and shifts in the feedstock flows,” he says. “We talked a little bit about the soybean oil increase and the production of soybean oil through crush. I think also you’re going to see the tallow industry and choice white grease, the hog industry, as well as poultry fat — all of those are going to find their way into the renewable diesel and biodiesel in a greater way. I think we’ll maximize all of the available low-CI feedstocks, including distillers corn oil. And then from there, obviously, the demand will be filled with soy.”

That expansion does not stop at just soybeans. Upmeyer says there are other crops that stand to benefit from this newly released RFS.

“I think that as we expand the amount of biomass-based diesel we produce, we’re going to start looking to other feedstocks as well. So canola, there’s a fair amount of canola grown in the United States, and certainly our neighbors to the north are large canola producers,” Upmeyer says. “I think that will become an integral part of what we do. And then there’s other low-CI feedstocks that are sort of on the cusp, things like camelina and different things like that will get attracted new attention right now to see how they may fit into the future mandates and production.”

If you look at the past year, biodiesel and renewable diesel facilities reportedly shut down or ran well below capacity in 2025, which led to a one-third drop in U.S. biodiesel production compared to 2024.

When asked if these new RVOs from EPA will reverse that trend and give them enough confidence to bring that production back online, Upmeyer says it should.

“The biodiesel industry got hit hard. Their production costs are higher than renewable diesel, and so they certainly felt that when we had a lower RVO under the Set 1 rule. I think we’re getting close to a point where these plants will start back up. Margins have improved dramatically.”

He adds nuance to that recovery, noting cost pressures still linger.

“Biodiesel producers have a slightly different process than renewable diesel,” he says. “They take fats, oils and greases, combine them with methanol and catalysts to make biodiesel. And methanol costs have shot up, right? So I think the marginal producers on biodiesel are still probably not super inclined to start up, but certainly the integrated biodiesel plants will be running hard. And I do believe that even the marginal biodiesel players will get a chance to restart those assets in the near term.”

A Policy Twist: The Half-RIN Question

One of the most debated elements of the rule — the proposed “half-RIN” provision for 2028 — adds another layer of complexity, particularly for feedstock sourcing and trade.

“We just couldn’t get our heads around the administrative burden that might be associated with a half-RIN,” Upmeyer says. “How do you account for feedstocks coming in from some Canadian origin, some domestic, some from foreign sources? So I think there was an administrative burden that was certainly problematic.”

“This is certainly in line with the administration’s desire to maintain energy independence in the U.S. and to have a U.S.-based and U.S.-centric market for our crop inputs and fuels,” he says. “So I think there were a lot of things that went into this. But at the end of the day, it’s still on the table for 2028. I don’t think there’s clear guidance yet, but it certainly left that door open to address this issue in the Set 3 rule.”

A Win for Agriculture

When asked if he would classify this is a “win for U.S. agriculture,” Upmeyer said the immediate impact of the record-high blending mandates for 2026 and 2027 is already clear to those closest to the supply chain.

“I think it’s a great win,” Upmeyer says. “Again, we’re really underpinning the demand for soybeans and crush. We’ve got a strong demand for the rendered products that come from the beef industry and hog industry. So, I think this is a win for agriculture and for the renewable fuels industry. We certainly applaud the administration’s commitment to energy independence, to the renewable space and ultimately to agriculture.”

Trump Signals More DEF Rollbacks, Pushes Manufacturers to Lower Equipment Costs

Fri, 27 Mar 2026 18:48:07 GMT

In front of a gathering of farmers, ranchers and growers at the White House, President Trump and EPA announced new guidance that will remove the DEF sensor requirements, which the Small Business Administration (SBA) estimates will save farmers $4.4 billion a year and translate into $13.79 billion for Americans. Administrator Lee Zeldin says the move impacts farmers, truckers, motor coach operators and other diesel equipment operators.

“I have heard from truck drivers, farmers and many others complaining about DEF and pleading for a fix in all 50 states I visited during my first year as EPA administrator,” Zeldin says. “Americans are justified in being fed up with failing DEF system issues. EPA understands this is a massive issue and has been doing everything in our statutory power to address this. Today, we take another step in furthering our work by removing DEF sensors. Farmers and truckers should not be losing billions of dollars because of repair costs or days lost on the job.”

Every farmer now has the Right to Repair their own equipment thanks to President Trump. It’s crazy that our talented farmers were being prevented from doing this previously. This announcement is about common sense. Farmers will be able to spend more time in the field and less… pic.twitter.com/4hROUN45EU
— Lee Zeldin (@epaleezeldin) March 27, 2026

New Guidelines Focus on DEF Sensors

EPA says that sudden speed losses and shutdowns caused by DEF system failures compromise safety and productivity. It calls the issue unacceptable and problematic. In a release, EPA says it plans to continue to pursue all legal avenues to address Americans’ complaints. On Feb. 3, 2026, EPA demanded critical data on DEF system failures from the manufacturers that account for over 80% of all products used in DEF systems. This information will arm EPA with what it needs to permanently address DEF system failures. Thus far, the agency has received data from 11 of the 14 manufacturers, and in less than a month, EPA has turned around preliminary findings to issue today’s guidance, demonstrating Administrator Zeldin’s commitment to fixing this issue.

“Today, by eliminating DEF mandates, the Trump Administration is taking yet another step to free up hardworking Americans to focus on the vital work of feeding, clothing, building, and fueling our nation,” says SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler. “I applaud Administrator Zeldin for his leadership on this issue, and I look forward to our continued collaboration to cut red tape for small businesses across the U.S. food supply chain.”

Several ag equipment manufacturers were highlighted during the event at the White House, including John Deere. The company weighed in EPA’s latest announcement about DEF.

“John Deere applauds the EPA’s leadership to provide as much flexibility through agency guidance as possible to limit the frequency of false DEF-quality inducements,” says Kyle Gilley, vice president for global government affairs at John Deere. “Today’s announcement builds upon EPA guidance from February 2026, requested by John Deere, to provide farmers additional tools to complete emissions-related repairs. These announcements are a win for farmers and their ability to keep modern equipment operating in the field.”

EPA says the preliminary review of the warranty data suggests that DEF sensor failures are a significant source of warranty claims and DEF-related inducements. The agency’s new guidance makes clear that under existing regulations, manufacturers can stop inaccurate DEF system failures by removing traditional emission sensors, known as Urea Quality Sensors, and switching to nitrous oxide (NOx) sensors.

EPA also affirms that approved NOx sensor-based software updates can be installed on existing engines without being treated as illegal tampering under the Clean Air Act. This is in line with EPA’s February 2026 Right to Repair clarification guidance , which removed a major barrier keeping farmers from fixing their faulty DEF systems in the field. EPA anticipates the switch will greatly curb errors that traditional sensor technologies have been prone to and reduce the issues Americans face with inaccurate DEF failures.

For more information, see EPA’s Diesel Exhaust Fluid .

Trump Calls on Manufacturers to Lower Equipment Prices If DEF Rolled Back

During Friday’s event, Trump also spoke about the rising complexity and cost of modern farm equipment.

“When you buy a tractor today, you spend 50 percent of your time fixing the environmental — I say environmental impact statement garbage that’s on the tractor,” he says.

He adds that equipment often includes computerized systems that can shut down tractors unnecessarily, increasing repair costs.

“I said to the head of John Deere, ‘Is this a good thing or a bad thing?’ He said, sir, you have no idea how bad it is. It’s made our tractors so complicated. … We want to go back to the old ways, sir. And I said, I agree with you 100 percent.”

During remarks at the event at the White House today, President Trump said EPA is working to further roll back DEF-related requirements and pushed manufacturers to cut equipment costs:

“You’re going to lower the cost of a tractor… they’re going to be able to very shortly…
— Tyne Morgan (@Tyne_Ag) March 27, 2026

The president says the administration is looking into further rolling back DEF requirements, but as he does, he is also urging manufacturers to reduce equipment prices for farmers if the added environmental regulation costs are no longer there.

“Lee (Zeldin), I think we can say, I know you’re in the process of cutting out massive amounts of nonsense that are mandated to be put on your tractors, that all of your trucks that cost your fortune…and I know that they’re going to do this. And I asked one thing, you got to promise me one thing. You’re not going to take any profits. You’re going lower the cost of a tractor. I want you to lower the costs. And if they don’t lower the course, you’ll let me know. And I’ll have to do a big number of those companies. Okay? They’re going to be able to, very shortly, produce a bigger, better tractor and substantially less money. It’s going to be better. It’s gonna be a better tractor at substantially less,” Trump says.

He adds that future tractors will be simpler, more reliable and less expensive.

“I want John Deere and Case and all of the great companies … to give it to you in the form of lower tractor and equipment costs. And I think it’s going to have a huge impact,” he says.

President Trump then directed EPA Administrator Zeldin to explore ways to require, or mandate, manufacturers to lower the cost of farm equipment.

EPA’s guidance issued on Friday is part of a broader effort to address complaints from farmers, truckers and other diesel equipment operators about DEF system failures that cause equipment shutdowns, but Trump says more action on DEF is currently underway.

EPA Announces Waivers to Allow Summertime E15 Use

Thu, 26 Mar 2026 02:01:44 GMT

The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday announced emergency waivers to allow summertime sales of E15.

EPA administrator Lee Zeldin making the announcement at this year’s CERA Week, major energy conference in Houston.

Troy Bredenkamp, senior vice president of government and public affairs with the Renewable Fuels Association says since 2022, EPA has used an emergency waiver each year by way of the Clean Air Act to allow gas stations to sell E15 fuel in the summer months starting May 1.

However, at least the waivers are coming early this year.

“We are going to have emergency waivers for E15 this summer. This announcement is coming probably at least a month ahead of where it usually comes and that’s on purpose, you know, with all the turmoil in the Middle East,” he explains.

The early waivers will avoid the problems they saw last summer with fuel blends that caused fuel disruptions.

“Getting this out early is very positive. The refiners want to have it earlier. We want to have it earlier. The marketplace, the retailers want to have it earlier,” he says.

E10 Emergency Waivers
EPA also announced E10 emergency waivers for the seven Midwest states that already had E15 waivers to remove all federal impediments to selling E10 and provide parody for the two ethanol blends.

According to Bredenkamp, “If they give an E15 waiver for the summer driving season in those seven states, you wouldn’t have a waiver necessarily for E10. So, they have to in those seven states grant an emergency waiver for E10 as well in order to keep maximum fuel fungeability within all fuel pumps within the United States.”

E15 Legislation Needed
However, emergency waivers can’t replace a permanent Congressional fix.

So, farm state lawmakers hope for passage of an E15 bill to make this the last year for the emergency waivers including Sen. Joni Ernst - Iowa (R).

“We’ve done this for a number of years and it’s kind of the same old same old and I am grateful for the waiver. I think that is very important to be able to offer uh the product the way we do through those summer months. But we really do need the administration to assist us with this,” she says.

Ernst says the biggest hurdle for passage is still the refiners and she’s talked to leadership in the administration to urge President Trump to signal to small and mid-level refineries that E15 needs to happen.

E15 a Win Win
Bredenkamp says permanent law would provide certainty for the ethanol industry.

“That would resolve the Midwest state opt- out issue. That would resolve year- round E15. Everyone would know what the game plan is every year moving forward. retailers would have the market certainty that they need to offer it. the corn growers would have uh a demand driver moving forward. That’s what everyone needs.”

And Ernst says consumers would also win at the pump.

“Especially as we see sky high levels of fuel prices. We know we can drop that immediately with E15.”

Meanwhile, EPA is also expected to announce enhanced RVOS or biofuels blending standards by the end of March or even as early as this Friday’s White House Celebration of Ag, which will also help out at the gas pump.

Late Labels, Updated Restrictions, New Names: Navigate the 2026 Dicamba Landscape

Wed, 18 Mar 2026 22:03:24 GMT

As waterhemp continues to outsmart traditional chemistry, soybean growers are looking for a win in 2026. For Nate Eitzmann, that win starts with a returning tool in the toolbox: dicamba for over-the-top application.

A Certified Crop Advisor for Asmus Farm Supply, Eitzmann says while waterhemp is farmers’ enemy No. 1 in his geographic area—northern Iowa, southern Minnesota, and eastern South Dakota—he readily acknowledges other problematic weeds take the top spot in other regions. But all farmers are united in needing effective weed control options.

Adding to the farmer’s toolbox for 2026, the EPA has reinstated a label for three products for over-the-top (OTT) application of dicamba in soybeans. The 2024 season was the most recent growing year growers had access to OTT dicamba.

What does this mean for soybean growers?

Check your traits: Ensure your XtendFlex beans are ready for the application.
Review state cutoffs: Remember that federal EPA labels are the baseline, but state-specific dates and temperatures still apply.
Plan for ESA: Be prepared for runoff mitigation and buffer requirements that may be stricter than in 2024.

Eitzmann says dicamba is a great tool for broadleaf weed control, especially waterhemp.

“It’s risk versus reward with dicamba. It’s a tool that is great for us to add to our toolbox for waterhemp control. We just have to do our best to spray it responsibly within the label and keep it where we want it to be so it’s a tool we can continue to utilize in the future,” he says.

Acknowledging the volatility risk with dicamba, the EPA labels put in place measures to minimize the potential for off-target movement. Additionally, many states have instituted cutoff dates for application (based on calendar date and/or growth stage) and temperature maximums. Applicator training is also a requirement, as it has been in years past.

“Over the years of spraying this dicamba on soybeans, and even prior to that, using it in corn, the volatility concerns have been addressed and we’ve gotten better at it,” he says. “In addition, we’ve got the ESA compliance, so there are some runoff mitigation points that are also included in this, and a few different buffer requirements.”

Read more about the labels here.

What’s Different About the Dicamba Herbicides Available?

A trio of products is available for over-the-top dicamba application in soybeans and cotton:

Engenia: Newer salt formulation; binds tighter to acid to reduce volatility.
Stryax: The XtendiMax replacement; uses DGA salt + VaporGrip.
Tavium: DGA salt + VaporGrip + residual partner (pre-mix).

“As far as killing weeds, we haven’t seen any difference, and the label states we have to be at a half-pound of dicamba per application. So, that’s a different rate per acre of Engenia versus Tavium versus Stryax, but the active ingredient you’re getting is equivalent,” Eitzmann says.

How Much Dicamba Will Be Sprayed in 2026?

While the label for 2026 didn’t come as a complete surprise to Eitzmann or the industry in general, its timing was unexpected. The EPA label for dicamba arrived in early February, which was too late to affect trait packages already purchased by many farmers. Per Farm Journal research, most farmers are finished buying seed by February.

For his team at AFS, their dicamba-sprayed acres grew quickly after the initial EPA registrations, but they peaked around 2021/2022 as Enlist E3 acres gained market share.

For 2026, because of the timing of the labels, dicamba volumes aren’t expected to reach the same saturation seen in 2024. However, Eitzmann says some farmers are in a position to make the applications because of their seed planning.

“There are people who purchased XtendFlex soybeans and, going into purchasing season, they intended to have dicamba as an option. They maybe purchased herbicides to fill that gap if the registration didn’t happen, but once it did, they’re looking to make a change and add dicamba to their program for 2026,” he says.

As for having the tool, Eitzmann says his team and their farmer customers recognize it’s worth following the application requirements to maintain access to the herbicide.

“Be responsible with it, use it within the labels, use it where it fits, and don’t push those limits. I think as we go forward, it’s not a crutch that we have to lean on, but it’s an extra tool that we can use when it’s applicable,” he says.

RVO Crossroads: How EPA’s Biofuel Decision Could Reshape Grain Markets This Spring

Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:41:51 GMT

At Commodity Classic this week, the biofuels debate moved from Washington talking points to farm-gate math. With EPA’s proposed Renewable Volume Obligations now sitting at the White House for review, the outcome is poised to ripple through soybean oil crush margins, renewable diesel run rates and, ultimately, how many acres farmers devote to corn and soybeans this spring.

During a live taping of U.S. Farm Report, analysts Arlan Suderman of StoneX, Chip Flory of AgriTalk and Naomi Blohm of Total Farm Marketing by Stewart-Peterson made it clear: this isn’t just about percentages on a policy sheet. It’s about whether renewable diesel plants jump from 60% to near full capacity, whether USDA’s 17-billion-pound soybean oil forecast proves tight, and whether growers need to “buy acres” before planters roll.

In a market perched at technical resistance and staring down seasonal headwinds, timing may matter as much as the final RVO number. A bold, immediate reallocation of small refinery exemptions could ignite demand and shift acreage battles overnight. A slower rollout, or even delayed clarity, could leave spring planting decisions hanging in the balance.

Five Scenarios and a Need for Certainty

“There’s plenty of talk, but we don’t know for sure,” Suderman says of the pending RVO announcement. “But we have some ideas on what it’s going to be.”

After years of small refinery exemptions (SREs) hanging over the market, EPA has now cleared exemptions dating back to 2016. That removes what Suderman described as a lingering weight on the industry. But the key question now is reallocation.

“There’s about five different scenarios that could still come out of this,” he explains. “So there is a lot of variability.”

The most widely discussed outcome would reallocate 50% of exempted volumes back to larger refiners. But Suderman noted that number could reach 75%, and some industry participants still hope for 100%.

“What we expect to happen is 50%, possibly up to 75% of the small refinery exemptions would be put back in for larger refineries,” he says. “Now what we don’t know is over how many years that’ll be. Will it be over one year, two years or four years? So that makes a big difference.”

Another unresolved issue is the RIN credit for imported feedstocks.

“What we don’t know is what will they do with the 50% RIN credit for imported feedstock,” Suderman says. “There’s a lot of pressure to move that back up to 100%. It could be something in between. It could be one year it’s one thing, the other year it’s another.”

Despite the uncertainty, Suderman sees most scenarios as constructive.

“Regardless, we see most all the possible scenarios here as being positive,” he says. “The biggest thing is not what the numbers say, but just having certainty.”

And once that certainty arrives, the production response could follow quickly.

“It’s going to take 45 to 60 days, we feel like, to really get the industry going,” he says. However, with RIN values rallying, “yesterday we got RINs up high enough that we can start profitably making renewable diesel. So we may ramp it up a little bit quicker.”

Suderman expects a finalized decision from EPA by the end of March , which is a timeline even EPA has stated.

Even 50% Is a Win?

Flory has been in direct conversations with biofuel leaders at Commodity Classic, including representatives from the Renewable Fuels Association and Clean Fuels Alliance America.

“The buzz is that it’s going to be half,” Flory says. “Sometimes the buzz isn’t right… Could be up to 75%. I think there’s still hope that it is going to 100%.”

But even at 50%, he sees progress.

“In my mind, with the way the trend was going, even at 50% reallocation, I’m going to call it a win for the industry,” Flory says.

He emphasizes that the RVO ruling outweighs other ethanol policy wins.

“The RVO decision, I think, is so important,” he says. “It’s more important in my mind than E-15 getting it done.”

The reason is immediate demand potential. Biomass-based diesel refiners have been operating at sharply reduced rates.

“They were running at what, Arlan, 60% capacity?” Flory asked during the discussion. “If we all of a sudden have to ramp this back up to 90%, 95%,” Flory continues, “we’re going to use all 17 billion pounds of bean oil in the year ahead that USDA says we’re going to.”

Markets Sitting at Resistance

Blohm believes the market has already begun factoring in future biofuel demand, but she questions how aggressively policymakers will move.

“If we came out with this information and they said it’s going to be full bore, sooner than later, the market still could respond with higher values,” she says

However, she also pointed to inflation sensitivities.

“There’s also the balance of governments wanting to not have food prices go too high too quickly,” Blohm says. “Especially with this administration still trying to bring beef prices down. So I don’t know that they’re going to immediately give us all of this great news that we’re wanting.”

Instead, she expects a more gradual rollout.

“I’m on the slow roll carryout, which would be bringing that demand up, but slowly over time,” she adds.

Technically, she sees the grain complex at a critical tipping point.

“We’re right at a perch for market prices right now,” Blohm says. “Corn, beans, wheat — all near some short-term major resistance levels where we’re waiting for fresh, big new news.”

If that news comes, either from biofuels or South American weather, the move could be sharp.

“If we can get some new bullish news, either bad weather on the safrinha crop, great news regarding the biofuels, we have reasons for this marketplace to explode higher,” she says. “If we do not get good news soon, seasonals could kick in, when prices often soften into late March. The timing of this is critical. Timing is critical.”

Acreage Wild Cards: RVOs and China

The RVO decision intersects directly with planting intentions and potentially with U.S.-China trade talks expected in April. Suderman points to both as pivotal acreage drivers.

“Two big critical factors that will impact planting intentions are the RVO and trade deal with China,” he says.

If both land favorably, soybeans may need to compete for ground.

“If both of those come in favorable, we could see soybeans having to buy acres,” Suderman says.

But timing complicates the picture. USDA surveys for the March Prospective Plantings report close around mid-March.

“Most of the surveys come in front-loaded,” Suderman noted. If policy clarity arrives after surveys are returned, “we’ll be waiting until the June survey to really feel like we have a handle on the number of planted acres.”

Blohm questioned whether corn acreage will ultimately exceed early USDA projections.

“My thought would be that we’re going to plant less corn than last year,” she said. “But is it going to be 94, 95 or 96? That’s the question.”

Even at those levels, balance sheets remain comfortable without stronger demand.

“With 94, 95, 96 million acres, including trendline yield, as good as demand is, you’re going to have carryout for corn near 1.8, 1.9 or 2 billion bushels, unless we can get some of this renewable stuff happening fast,” says Blohm.

How Much Demand Is Enough?

Flory acknowledged that the corn market has already built substantial usage.

“We’re already looking at $16.4 billion in total demand. That’s a huge number,” he says.

To materially shift prices, though, he says additional growth is needed.

“Looking forward, what does it take? We need to see that shift in demand,” Flory says. “Add another 300 million bushel, 400 million bushels of demand. We can do that if we can get some of these biofuel priorities.”

Are Grains the Bargain Buy?

Beyond domestic policy, outside markets could amplify moves.

“If things flare up with Iran, that’s going to be a game changer for crude oil,” Blohm says. “Which would pull corn prices higher.”

She’s also monitoring palm oil production in Malaysia.

“They’re having too much rain right now, and that’s affecting production,” she says. “If they’ve got lower production, then maybe we see a kick up for soybean oil demand here.”

Suderman added a macro lens, noting that grains and oilseeds have shown strong historical correlation with inflation measures.

“When you look at what the funds want to own if we see a return of inflation pressures, the highest correlation over the last 10 years has been the grain and oilseeds to the CPI, followed by energy,” says Suderman.

A Decision Landing at Planting

The EPA’s RVO decision is expected within weeks — right as planters begin to roll.

If policymakers deliver aggressive reallocation and clarity, renewable diesel plants could ramp from 60% toward full capacity. Soybean oil demand would tighten. Soybeans could push to buy acres.

If the announcement disappoints, or even arrives too late, seasonal pressure could dominate the spring trade.

As Suderman put it, the issue isn’t just the final percentage.

“The biggest thing is not what the numbers say,” he says. “It’s having certainty.”

For farmers making planting and marketing decisions in real time, that certainty can’t come soon enough.

Trump, Zeldin Announce 'Largest Deregulatory Action in U.S. History'

Thu, 12 Feb 2026 21:45:12 GMT

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the “single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history” alongside President Trump in the White House today.

EPA is eliminating both the 2009 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Endangerment Finding and all subsequent federal GHG emission standards for all vehicles and engines of model years 2012 to 2027 and beyond. The action also eliminates all off-cycle credits, including for the start-stop feature.

President Trump’s Day 1 Executive Order 14154 “Unleashing American Energy” tasked EPA with submitting recommendations on the legality and continuing applicability of this finding in the first 30 days of this term. On March 12, 2025, Zeldin announced that the agency was kicking off a formal reconsideration of the finding and resulting regulations. Zeldin formally announced the agency’s proposal to reconsider these actions on July 29, 2025.

“EPA’s historic move restores consumer choice, makes more affordable vehicles available for American families, and decreases the cost of living on all products by lowering the cost of trucks,” EPA said in a release .

Former President Barack Obama commented on X that because of the endangerment finding: “we’ll be less safe, less healthy and less able to fight climate change — all so the fossil fuel industry can make even more money.”

Today, the Trump administration repealed the endangerment finding: the ruling that served as the basis for limits on tailpipe emissions and power plant rules. Without it, we’ll be less safe, less healthy and less able to fight climate change — all so the fossil fuel industry can…
— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) February 12, 2026

Saving Taxpayer Dollars
The administration says the final rule will save American taxpayers over $1.3 trillion in regulations, by removing the regulatory requirements to measure, report, certify and comply with federal GHG emission standards for motor vehicles, and repeals associated compliance programs, credit provisions, and reporting obligations that exist solely to support the vehicle GHG regulatory regime.

“Lee is also working on cleaning up the horrible situation with regard to farm equipment,” President Trump said. “You could use John Deere as an example and other companies where tractors are unbelievably expensive and don’t work as well because of all of the environmental nonsense that was put on them. But the people are going to be a beneficiary because the equipment is going to be a lot less expensive and most importantly it’s going to work much better.”

This major deregulatory process included ‘substantial public input and robust analysis’ of the law following the Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and West Virginia v. EPA. The agency held an extended 52-day public comment period, which included four days of virtual public hearings where more than 600 individuals testified. EPA received about 572,000 public comments on the proposed rule and made substantial updates to the final rule in response to comments.

“The Endangerment Finding has been the source of 16 years of consumer choice restrictions and trillions of dollars in hidden costs for Americans,” Zeldin said in a release. “Referred to by some as the ‘Holy Grail’ of the ‘climate change religion,’ the Endangerment Finding is now eliminated. The Trump EPA is strictly following the letter of the law, returning commonsense to policy, delivering consumer choice to Americans and advancing the American Dream.”

Affordable vehicle ownership is essential to the American Dream and a primary driver of economic mobility out of poverty in the U.S., the Agency explained. This action will result in average cost savings of over $2,400 per vehicle.

“As EPA Administrator, I am proud to deliver the single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history on behalf of American taxpayers and consumers,” Zeldin said. “As an added bonus, the off-cycle credit for the almost universally despised start-stop feature on vehicles has been removed.”

What Does This Mean for the Future?
Climate scientists say the overturning of the endangerment finding undermines decades of scientific progress and damages the credibility of U.S. institutions tasked with protecting the environment, the Associated Press reports. Scientists point out that rising global temperatures — the hottest years on record have all occurred since 2009 — cause more extreme weather that endangers people and causes billions of dollars in damage from more frequent and severe heat waves, wildfires, droughts and catastrophic flooding from more-intense storms.

The EPA action repeals all GHG emissions standards for cars and trucks, but experts believe it could trigger a broader undoing of climate regulations for stationary sources such as power plants and oil and gas facilities, AP reports.

David Doniger, a climate expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told AP that this could prevent future administrations from proposing rules to address global warming because they would have to restart the scientific and legal process to establish a new endangerment finding, which could take years and face legal challenges.

EPA Reinstates Dicamba for 2026 Registration in Cotton and Soybeans

Fri, 06 Feb 2026 23:23:34 GMT

EPA is reinstating dicamba use for farmers in 2026, but it comes with a litany of tight controls and restrictions. It will be the first time since the 2024 season that farmers have had the option to use dicamba over-the-top (OTT) for weed control. It’s now offering approval for the next two seasons in 34 states and then will do additional reviews.

“This decision responds directly to the strong advocacy of America’s cotton and soybean farmers, particularly growers across the Cotton Belt, who have been clear and consistent about the critical challenges they face without access to this tool for controlling resistant weeds in their growing crops,” said EPA in a release. “This action reflects this administration’s commitment to ensuring farmers have the tools they need to succeed while protecting the environment with the strongest safeguards ever imposed on OTT dicamba use.”

EPA says it conducted a thorough pesticide evaluation, using data and hundreds of publicly available independent, peer-reviewed studies and real-world field results to do a human health and ecological risk assessment.

“To be clear, these studies involved pesticide applicators with decades of intensive exposure, not typical consumers,” EPA said.

The agency used that information to help build in what it calls extra precautions into the registration with a focus on reducing worker contact with the product. When applied according to the new label instructions, EPA’s analysis found no unreasonable risk to human health or the environment from OTT dicamba use. It also recognized the issues with drift and calls them legitimate concerns.

“The ecological risks associated with dicamba drift and volatility are real,” EPA said. “If not carefully mitigated, off-target movement of dicamba can damage sensitive plants and impact neighboring farms and natural ecosystems. These concerns are exactly why the strongest safeguards ever are essential.”

EPA says it designed new label restrictions to directly address them, including cutting the amount of dicamba that can be used annually in half, doubling required safety agents, requiring conservation practices to protect endangered species and restricting applications during high temperatures when exposure and volatility risks increase.

New Dicamba Restrictions for 2026 Registration

EPA says they will continue to track how the chemistry performs in the real world and make adjustments if needed. That said, it’s now requiring a host of new mitigation measures, focused on reducing drift, minimizing volatility and protecting ecosystems.

Maximum application rate cut in half. A maximum of two applications of 0.5 lbs. of dicamba per acre may be made annually, for a maximum of 1.0 lb. of all dicamba products annually. (The 2020 registration permitted up to four applications of 0.5 lb./acre, only two could be over-the-top, for a total of 2 lb. of dicamba annually.) This directly reduces the total amount of dicamba in the environment and limits potential exposure to sensitive species.
Doubled volatility reduction agents. 40 oz./acre of approved Volatility Reduction Agent (VRA) must be added to every application.** This significantly reduces the likelihood that dicamba will volatilize (turn into vapor) after application and drift off-target hours or days later — one of the primary pathways for environmental damage.
Mandatory conservation practices. Growers must achieve three runoff/erosion mitigation points from EPA’s certified conservation practices menu on each treated field to protect endangered and threatened species. In some geographically-specific pesticide use limitation areas (PULAs) where especially vulnerable species require additional safeguards, six points are required. These practices — such as vegetative buffers, contour farming and cover crops — physically prevent dicamba from moving off-field in runoff or eroded soil, protecting waterways and habitats.
Temperature-based application limits. On the day of or the day after applications occurring with a forecasted temperature between 85 and 95°F, a user may only treat up to 50% of their untreated dicamba-tolerant (DT) cotton and soybean acres in a county. Remaining DT cotton and soybean acres may not be treated until at least two days after the initial application. This reduces risk during elevated volatility and drift conditions. No applications may occur if the temperature is forecasted to be at or above 95°F on the day of or the day after a planned application, eliminating applications during the highest-risk conditions.

Legacy Diacamba Restrictions Retained on the 2026 Registration

Restricted Use Pesticide designation. Only certified applicators may use this product, ensuring applications are made by trained professionals who understand the risks.
Annual mandatory training. Certified applicators must complete annual training specific to OTT dicamba use, keeping users informed of label requirements, best practices and environmental protection guidelines.
Personal protective equipment (PPE). Several products require loaders, mixers, handlers and applicators to wear label-approved PPE, directly reducing worker exposure.
24-hour Restricted Entry Interval (REI). No one may re-enter a treated field within 24 hours of application, protecting workers and the public from exposure.
Mandatory Drift Reduction Agent (DRA). An approved DRA must be added to every tank mix, creating larger, heavier droplets that are less likely to drift off-target.
240-ft. downwind spray drift buffer. A substantial physical buffer must be maintained during applications to protect adjacent areas. This distance may be decreased only if additional label-approved mitigations (hooded sprayers, downwind windbreaks, etc.) are used, ensuring protection is maintained. (The distance of downwind spray drift buffers may be decreased if other label-approved mitigations are used.)
Strict application timing restrictions. Applications may not be made during a temperature inversion (when atmospheric conditions trap pesticides near the ground and increase drift risk), within 48 hours ahead of forecasted rainfall (which can wash dicamba off-target), if soil is saturated with water, or within one hour after sunrise or after two hours before sunset (when inversions are most likely). These timing restrictions target the specific weather conditions that have historically led to drift problems.
Proximity restrictions. Applications are prohibited if dicamba-sensitive crops or plants are in downwind areas, preventing direct harm to vulnerable species and neighboring crops. (A list of dicamba-sensitive plants and crops is provided on the label.)
Wind speed requirements. Applications must take place when wind speed is between 3-10 mph—strong enough to prevent inversions but not so strong as to cause excessive drift.
Droplet size requirements. Applications must use coarse or coarser spray droplets, which are heavier and less prone to drift than fine droplets.
Low spray height. Spray release height must be no higher than 2 feet above the ground or crop canopy, minimizing the distance droplets can drift before reaching their target.
Aerial application prohibition. Aerial application is completely prohibited, eliminating a higher-risk application method.
Tank mixing prohibition. Tank mixing with ammonium sulfate-containing products is prohibited because these products can increase volatility.
Mandatory record keeping. Specific records must be kept of every application to ensure consistency with all label requirements and enable enforcement.

New Dicamba Rules Are Not Optional

In its release, EPA says these restrictions are not optional and adds that they are enforceable legal requirements.

“Applicators who fail to follow label directions are subject to significant penalties under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), including civil fines and, in cases of knowing violations, criminal prosecution,” it said in the release. “EPA will work with state enforcement to actively monitor compliance, and violations will be met with serious consequences.”

EPA says the temporary approval reflects its commitment to make sure farmers have the tools they need to succeed while protecting the environment.

“Cotton farmers across the southern United States have been particularly vocal about why they need OTT dicamba as herbicide-resistant weeds like Palmer amaranth have become nearly impossible to control with other available tools, threatening crop yields and farm viability,” said EPA. “These “super weeds” can grow 3 inches per day and destroy entire fields. Without effective weed management during the growing season, these producers face devastating economic losses.”

Industry Organizations Say Thank You

The Agricultural Retailers Association (ARA) sent a letter to the EPA in fall 2025, urging EPA to adopt clear, workable label requirements for dicamba that help growers manage weeds effectively while supporting strong stewardship across the industry.

“ARA applauds EPA’s recent decision that preserves the safe use of OTT dicamba while maintaining workable, label required mitigation measures for commercial applicators,” said Daren Coppock, ARA president and CEO. “ARA members have a strong record of responsibly managing dicamba applications and advancing the implementation of precision ag technologies that help growers control resistant and hard to manage weeds. OTT dicamba remains an essential tool for protecting yields and supporting soil health and environmental sustainability in cotton and soybean production.”

The National Cotton Council (NCC) says cotton growers need timely access to effective tools to protect yields and deliver a high-quality crop.

“EPA’s decision provides growers much-needed clarity as they prepare for the upcoming growing season,” said Patrick Johnson, chairman of the National Cotton Council. “We support label requirements that are workable in the field and backed by a science-based registration process. NCC will continue engaging with the EPA to advocate for practical provisions that enable responsible use.”

NCC encourages applicators and producers to follow all label requirements when using dicamba as part of an integrated weed management program.

The American Soybean Association (ASA) is eager to review the label and continue engaging with EPA to ensure regulatory decisions support both environmental stewardship and the realities of modern agriculture.

“We appreciate EPA moving forward with a new dicamba label and recognize the importance of maintaining access to this tool for soybean farmers,” said Scott Metzger, ASA president and an Ohio soybean grower. “Farmers need clear, workable rules that accurately reflect how we farm. We look forward to reviewing the final label and hope it incorporates the feedback ASA and its state affiliates provided to ensure dicamba remains a practical option within a responsible, science-based weed management system.”

Bayer Announces New Dicamba Product

On Friday, Bayer said the EPA’s decision enabled the company to launch its new dicamba herbicide: Stryax.

“With a federal registration in hand, we’ll begin the process of seeking state approvals,” said Dr. Ty Witten, Bayer’s vice president of commercial stewardship,crop science. “In the coming weeks, we’ll launch applicator training opportunities, and stewardship education to help ensure that growers and applicators have the best experience possible with Stryax herbicide.”

Stryax will be a restricted use pesticide and require the use of a qualified volatility agent and drift reduction agent. The company says the new product was formulated to be an additional herbicide option for in-crop use with XtendFlex soybeans, Roundup Ready 2 Xtend soybeans and cotton with XtendFlex technology.

More DEF Relief? EPA Takes New Action for Farmers and Truckers

Tue, 03 Feb 2026 16:14:37 GMT

On the heels of clarifying farmers’ right to repair their own equipment, EPA is escalating pressure on diesel engine manufacturers over ongoing Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) system failures the administration claims continue to sideline farm machinery and trucks.

On Tuesday, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the agency is demanding detailed failure data from major diesel engine manufacturers as it considers additional rules aimed at reducing DEF-related shutdowns and derates that have plagued farmers, truckers and equipment operators for years.

The move builds directly on Monday’s EPA right-to-repair guidance announcement that clarified the Clean Air Act does not prohibit farmers from fixing their own non-road diesel equipment, which includes making temporary emissions overrides when necessary to complete repairs.

“As I traveled to all 50 states during my first year as EPA administrator, I heard from truck drivers, farmers and many others rightly complaining about DEF and pleading for a fix,” Zeldin said in a statement on Tuesday. “EPA understands this is a massive issue, which is why we have already established commonsense guidance for manufacturers to update DEF systems.

“Today, we are furthering that work and demanding detailed data to hold manufacturers accountable for the continued system failures,” he added.

While neither announcement fully rolls back DEF requirements on tractors, a step many farmers and truckers continue to push for, both signal movement in that direction.

With today’s news in the mix, here’s what farmers and truckers need to know:

1. Increased Operational Up-Time.

The most immediate benefit is the reduction of “forced downtime.” Under the clarified guidance announced on Feb. 2, farmers can now perform temporary emissions overrides to complete essential work, such as planting or harvesting, even if a DEF failure occurs. The extension of warning periods — specifically the 36-hour window for non-road equipment before a derate kicks in — provides a buffer to finish a job before seeking repairs.

2. Legal Empowerment for Repairs.

EPA has explicitly stated the Clean Air Act cannot be used by manufacturers as a shield to prevent farmers from fixing your own equipment. This clarification removes a major legal hurdle in the right-to-repair movement, potentially lowering repair costs by allowing farmers and independent mechanics to access the tools and software needed to address DEF-related faults.

3. Manufacturer Accountability.

Under Section 208(a) of the Clean Air Act, EPA is demanding warranty and failure data for Model Year 2016, 2019 and 2023 engines from 14 major on-road and non-road diesel manufacturers (covering 80% of the market). That shifts the burden of DEF reliability from the end-user to the manufacturer. EPA says the information will help determine whether persistent DEF problems are tied to specific product generations, system designs or materials, and will inform further regulatory steps in 2026. Manufacturers have 30 days to comply or face potential enforcement actions.

4. Impact on Machinery Values.

Auction data suggests farmers are already voting with their checkbooks. According to Machinery Pete , demand and values remain strongest for pre-DEF used equipment, while interest in DEF-equipped machinery has softened.

If these EPA actions lead to more reliable DEF systems or easier repairs, the high demand (and inflated prices) for older, less efficient equipment might eventually stabilize as newer models become less of a liability in the field.

5. More Changes are Coming.

When asked why EPA has not eliminated DEF requirements entirely,Zeldin said the agency said it is actively building on last summer’s guidance and actively moving toward “common-sense” adjustments that prioritize productivity alongside emissions standards.

EPA’s demand for warranty and failure data follows DEF guidance issued in August 2025 that significantly softened inducement rules. That guidance delayed severe derates, reduced sudden shutdowns and required manufacturers to update software so operators could continue safely working while addressing faults.

For heavy-duty trucks, warning periods were extended to up to 650 miles or 10 hours before derates begin, with weeks of normal operation allowed before speed is limited. Non-road equipment now sees no impact for the first 36 hours after a DEF fault.

EPA has also said that starting with Model Year 2027, new diesel trucks must be engineered to avoid sudden and severe power loss after running out of DEF.

The Major Market Forces That Could Reset or Further Tighten Farm Margins in the New Year

Mon, 05 Jan 2026 16:48:08 GMT

As producers close the books on 2025, there’s little debate about how the year will be remembered. Commodity prices retreated from harvest highs, input costs refused to follow them lower and margins compressed from both sides. But for market analysts at StoneX Group, the real takeaway from 2025 isn’t the pain. It’s what the year reveals about where agriculture is headed next.

Looking ahead to 2026, Arlan Suderman, StoneX chief commodities economist, and Josh Linville, StoneX vice president of fertilizer, both say 2026 will be shaped by structural shifts that go far beyond one growing season. Global competitiveness, domestic demand growth, geopolitical risk and policy decisions are converging at the same time, and it’s how those forces resolve, or fail to do so, could determine whether 2026 brings opportunity, volatility or another year of pressure.

Suderman: “We’re Not the Lost Cost Producer in the World Anymore”

The downturn producers experienced in 2025 fits squarely into a longer-term cycle that began forming well before the year started, Suderman says.

“We’re entering the cycle, and supply becomes greater than demand, and prices go down, and we’re going to have lean times,” he says. “And that certainly happened [in 2025].”

That cycle, he says, exposed a deeper challenge facing U.S. agriculture, and one that won’t disappear just because markets eventually recover.

“We continue to lose market share to Brazil,” Suderman says. “The reality is we’re not the low-cost producer in the world anymore.”

That loss of cost advantage is having consequences that ripple across exports, acreage decisions and profitability.

“Brazil is going to be able to produce bulk commodities cheaper than us,” he says. “And with their cheap currencies, they’re going to be able to sell it cheaper than we.”

Suderman says that reality is forcing a shift in thinking for U.S. producers and policymakers.

“So we have to find other ways to generate revenue from what we do produce,” he says. “We’re great at producing it, but Brazil is going to be able to produce bulk commodities cheaper than us, and so we have to find other ways.”

Domestic Demand Becomes the Battleground

With export competition intensifying, Suderman says the next phase of market support must come from inside U.S. borders. That’s where biofuels, and specifically what EPA does with biomass-based diesel, will become central to the 2026 outlook.

“We have the biofuel program coming in, which we believe will transition to domestic demand to help replace the lost export demand,” he says.

Suderman points out that export demand to China is already structurally weaker, making domestic demand growth even more critical.

“We’re going to lose that export demand with China anyway,” he says. “So that EPA announcement looks to be good, but we’re still waiting. We’re still waiting for the final regulations from the EPA. We’ve been waiting for most of the past year.”

That delay, he says, isn’t just frustrating, Suderman says it has real economic consequences.

“If we get it by the end of the quarter, that means we’ve lost 25% of the production year,” he says. “If we get it very early in the year, then we can really ramp things up.”

Suderman also points out the details of the policy are just as important as the timing of the announcement.

“What will they do with the small refinery exemptions?” he asks. “Will they offset them all? Will they offset 50% of them? What will they do with the 50% credit for imported feedstocks that were originally proposed? Will that go up to 100%? Will it stay at 50%?”

StoneX expects compromise, but one that still boosts demand, which will be a critical market factor in 2026.

“Our bias is that we think they’re going to go closer to 100% on the feedstock but offset that by offsetting the SREs back onto the RVO,” he says.

If that happens, Suderman says soybeans stand to benefit first and most directly.

“We have tremendous crush potential for our soybeans,” he says. “If we drive soybean demand higher domestically, we can tighten up that balance sheet.”

That tightening, he says, changes the entire market dynamic.

“It leaves us vulnerable to a weather market,” Suderman says.

Corn Demand Is Strong, But Supply Still Dominates

Corn enters 2026 with a different set of fundamentals. Demand, Suderman says, is already robust, but production efficiency continues to cap rallies.

“Corn demand has been on fire,” he says. “We’ve become very good at producing it, and so that has been the problem there.”

One unexpected support has come from Brazil itself.

“Brazil has been ramping up corn ethanol production,” Suderman says. “That has made them less of a competitor in the export market than they otherwise would be.”

Even so, he expects the global balance sheet for corn to remain heavy, which could cap some of the excitement in the markets.

“Global corn demand has exceeded production for about the past decade,” he says. “But supplies were so large, we’re finally working them down to an area where it can start to matter.”

Suderman says that dynamic puts corn at a tipping point, but the market isn’t quite there just yet.

“It may be a year or two away,” he says. “But if we would have a weather problem this summer, we would suddenly find ourselves back in the situation where the market would have to respect that.”

Fertilizer: Where Do We Go From Here?

While producers look for demand-side relief, Linville says fertilizer markets remain one of the biggest headwinds going into 2026 with phosphate standing out above all others.

“You talk to any farmer out there who uses phosphate, and they’re going to tell you this thing is outrageously high priced,” Linville says. “If you look at it from a flat price comparison, it’s incredibly high. When you look at it versus grain values, they’re historically in decent shape, but phosphate values have gone so far above and beyond what we would consider normal.”

That disconnect has already altered behavior of the market, including some loss of demand this past fall

“You saw major demand destruction this fall,” Linville says. “There’s still a lot saying we’re going to see the same thing for spring.”

But the global backdrop limits how much leverage farmers actually have on prices, he says.

“As you look ahead to 2026, that output at export does not look like it’s going to improve,” Linville says. “We think it’s actually going to be markedly worse.”

And what’s the country that remains the linchpin in this discussion? He says that’s simple: It’s China.

“China is your typical leading exporter in the world. Eight to 10 million tons per year back in those normal years,” Linville says. “This year, we’ll be lucky if we get five million tons.”

Why Tight Supply Is Structural Not Strategic

Linville pushes back on the idea that global producers are intentionally tightening supply to inflate prices.

“They’re not restricting exports because they’re trying to drive the global price higher,” he says.

Instead, domestic priorities dominate.

“They’re trying to keep more supply in place for their own people,” Linville says. “There’s higher economic demand, growing industrial demand, battery manufacturing.”

The result is uneven pricing across regions.

“We have seen Chinese values be a decent discount versus the rest of the world,” he says. “It’s a little short-sighted from our standpoint, but when you’re the biggest exporter in the world, you get to do that.”

Nitrogen markets show some improvement, but remain vulnerable.

“You look at the Russian-Ukraine war — that’s a worry,” Linville says. “European production is still 75% of normal — that’s a worry.”

The deeper issue, he says, is how thin the global buffer has become.

“We just don’t have the excess production like we used to,” Linville says. “If there’s any impact to supply, the market reacts very quickly.”

Acreage and Logistics: Where Risk Still Builds

Looking to 2026, StoneX expects acreage shifts but not enough to materially ease fertilizer demand.

“I have corn down 3.5 million acres,” Suderman says. “Soybeans up 4 million acres.”

Much of that movement, he says, happens outside the Corn Belt.

“When you look at the South and the Plains, that can be up to 25% variance,” Suderman says. “That’s where you get your real shift.”

Even with fewer corn acres, Linville says fertilizer demand remains massive, which will support fertilizer prices.

“If we are truly going to be seeing something in the mid-90-million-acre corn range,” he says, “that’s a tremendous amount of fertilizer.”

His biggest concern isn’t price, it’s the timing.

“My worry is that when we all say: ‘Yes, we need that product for spring,’ everybody’s going to rush to market at the same time,” Linville says. “Logistics will penalize us severely.”

He says with that possibility in 2026, retailers are already adjusting to it.

“They can only take so much risk,” Linville says. “So they can only buy so much without further information.”

His advice heading into 2026 centers on communication not prediction.

“Keep having those conversations with your supplier, your retailer, your co-op,” Linville says. “I’m not saying go out and buy it, but have these conversations so the market can plan and be ready for spring.”

Is EPA Reversing Course on RFS Proposal? Agency Pushes Back on Rumors as Ag Sector Awaits Final Rule

Fri, 21 Nov 2025 20:07:50 GMT

The EPA says it is “working expeditiously” to finalize Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) volumes after proposing record-high blending requirements for biomass-based diesel earlier this year — levels that could deliver a major boost in domestic soybean demand. But with rumors swirling about potential delays or softened requirements, agriculture stakeholders are asking: Is EPA reversing course?

In an exclusive interview with U.S. Farm Report, EPA deputy administrator David Fotouhi says the agency is committed to getting the RFS rule “exactly right,” and strongly disputes reports suggesting the administration may scale back or delay the proposed increases.

EPA Still Won’t Commit to a Date, But Says Final RFS Rule Is “On Track”

While agriculture groups continue pressing for clarity on when EPA will finalize its Renewable Fuel Standard volumes orignally proposed in June , the agency maintains that the process remains on schedule — though it’s still without a specific public release date.

The deputy administrator emphasizes the RFS rulemaking has been a top priority since the new EPA leadership took office in January.

“We understand how important it is to get this exactly right,” he says. “From day one, administrator Zeldon has been laser focused on ensuring that the RFS strikes the right balance and carries out our statutory obligation to set volumes, considering the factors that are in the Clean Air Act.”

He notes the original proposal, which was unveiled in January, and the June update were shaped under difficult circumstances.

“When we came to the agency here in January, we had an unprecedented backlog of small refinery exemptions that the Biden administration had failed to consider,” he explains. “We also had a Renewable Fuel Standard program that was behind on setting volumes.”

To address that, EPA not only advanced its main proposal but also issued a supplemental notice proposing how to reallocate volumes connected to those outstanding small refinery exemption decisions.

“We’ve invested a lot of time and effort in the proposal that you just described, as well as the supplemental notice on reallocation of those SRE-exempted volumes,” he says. “That comment period just recently closed, and we’re looking at all the comments we received on the initial proposal from the summer, as well as on the supplemental notice that we just issued.”

(EPA)

The comments are now being reviewed collectively as EPA weighs what the final RVOs should look like.

“We’re taking all of that on board and considering that when deciding how to set the final RVOs,” he continues. “And we are working expeditiously to do that because we know farmers across the country and all the other stakeholders implicated by this program need certainty.”

Pressed on whether the final rule could realistically land this winter or slip into spring, he again declined to give a specific timeframe but reiterated the agency’s urgency.

“What I can say is that we’re working expeditiously to provide that level of certainty,” he says. “We know that we need to set these volumes so that stakeholders can adjust and act accordingly and start meeting the standards. We are working as quickly as we can to take final action on that proposal.”

EPA Slams Reuters Report on Imported Biofuel Incentives

EPA’s frustration with outside reporting was on full display when asked about a Reuters article suggesting the administration is considering delaying proposed cuts to incentives for imported biofuels — a key piece of EPA’s June proposal that was intended to prioritize domestic production. Reuters reported refiners had pushed the administration to dial back or postpone the shift, prompting widespread speculation that EPA might be reversing course.

The deputy administrator forcefully rejects that narrative.

“What I can say now is that there are a lot of rumors and speculation about what we might or might not do,” he says. “We can’t prejudge the outcome of where we’re going. We’re still looking at all of the public comments.”

He made it clear the agency views the Reuters report as misleading and potentially harmful to agricultural markets.

“It’s very frustrating, frankly, when a news agency like Reuters comes out and spreads rumors and innuendo about where we may or may not be going,” he says. “They do it in a way that actually moves markets and causes commodity prices to be affected before we’ve even made a decision.”

The deputy administrator stressed the imported biofuel incentive changes laid out in June remain on the table — and nothing has been rolled back behind the scenes.

“As you said, it was an integral part of our proposal,” he notes. “We’ve received a lot of public feedback on it that we are reviewing from stakeholders across the board, and we’ve made no final decisions yet on that issue.”

He went even further, directly questioning the appropriateness of the Reuters reporting.

“It is irresponsible for Reuters to be speculating about that at this time,” he says. “We are taking this seriously, we are reviewing the comments, and we will make a decision based on the law and the record — not based on rumor.”

The agency’s direct pushback underscores the sensitivity surrounding EPA’s final RVO decision. Every signal about imported biofuels, biomass-based diesel volumes or domestic versus foreign supply carries major implications for commodity markets, soybean crush demand and the renewable fuel industry.

EPA’s message to farmers: Ignore the rumors, wait for the rule and understand that:

No decisions have been finalized
Public comments are still being reviewed
Reports of policy shifts are premature
Certainty for farmers is a guiding priority

More Background on the RFS Proposal

As Farm Journal originally reported in June , EPA’s proposed rule is a potential game changer for farmers. The proposal would increase biomass-based diesel requirements, from 3.35 billion gallons in 2025 to 5.61 billion gallons in 2026, supporting American row-crop growers in the process.

The proposal includes at least three key regulatory shifts that would accompany the volume increases:

Heightened quotas for cellulosic biofuel, biomass-based diesel (BBD) and advanced biofuels.
Prioritization of soybean oil and ethanol produced in the U.S. Imported biofuels would earn just 50% of the Renewable Identification Number (RIN) value compared to U.S.-based fuels.
Removal of renewable electricity (eRINs) as a qualifying fuel, reinforcing liquid biofuels as the RFS centerpiece.

EPA Signals a Broader Deregulatory Strategy

Beyond the RFS, the agency is emphasizing cost-cutting and regulatory relief as core priorities — offering a stark contrast to Biden-era policy approaches.

In August, EPA finalized its decision not to impose new wastewater discharge rules on meat and poultry processors, reversing a previous proposal the deputy administrator says would have cost facilities “millions, if not tens of millions of dollars” with limited environmental benefit.

He argues the change is part of a coordinated administration-wide effort to reduce the cost of living, noting that avoiding new regulatory burdens could help keep grocery prices lower.

Earlier this year, EPA also announced what it called the largest deregulatory action in agency history, spanning 31 changes intended to reduce energy and regulatory costs for farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers.

“One of our biggest focuses is reducing the cost of energy,” he says. “We’re working across agencies — USDA, DOE, Interior — to identify ways to lower input costs for producers. That’s a priority for the president.”

Why EPA Says Farmers and Ranchers Won't Need a Lawyer to Understand the Newly Proposed WOTUS Rule

Fri, 21 Nov 2025 16:10:30 GMT

Agricultural groups have been asking for a new WOTUS rule that eliminates red tape and clears up confusion for farmers and ranchers. As EPA unveiled its latest proposed Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule this week , Deputy Administrator David Fotouhi says the agency’s goal was simple: clarity, consistency and fewer regulatory headaches for farmers and ranchers.

Fotouhi joined “U.S. Farm Report” for an exclusive interview to break down what this new rule means and why EPA believes it hits the mark.

A Rule He Says Brings Clarity and Certainty

Fotouhi says the agency’s top priority is eliminating uncertainty farmers have faced under previous interpretations of WOTUS.

“We really emphasize the need for farmers, ranchers and all stakeholders to have clarity in terms of how broad or narrow federal regulation of waters is in this country,” he says. “From Day 1, we start working on a proposed rule to bring that clarity and certainty to landowners across the country. On Monday, we are able to announce a proposal that is consistent with the law, that provides needed clarity on the extent of federal regulation, and that recognizes the primary jurisdiction of states and localities because they know their resources best.”

He adds that the proposal strikes what he calls a good balance.

“We think we really strike a good balance between protecting our nation’s waters and making sure farmers and ranchers can do the work that feeds Americans and produces the fuel this country relies on — without adding unnecessary regulatory burden to their day-to-day life,” he says.

EPA Says Farmers “Won’t Need a Lawyer” to Understand the New Rule

Fotouhi stresses one of EPA’s biggest priorities in rewriting WOTUS was ensuring farmers no longer need legal help just to determine whether they can work their own ground. He says the agency intentionally crafted the language to be plain, practical and rooted in the realities producers face every day.

“We take a fresh look at the Supreme Court’s direction and try to apply that in language that is easily understandable. Producers should not need a lawyer to understand how this rule applies to their property. We write it in a way that lets farmers look at their land and have a clear sense of whether federal permits are required.”

Fotouhi explains past WOTUS rules often included terminology that was vague, overly technical or open to interpretation, something EPA heard repeatedly during outreach with farm groups.

He says the agency makes a conscious effort to eliminate that ambiguity.

“We listen to farmers tell us repeatedly that the rule has to be understandable,” he says. “So instead of broad definitions that leave too much room for interpretation, we focus on concrete, workable language. We take geographic differences into account, we remove subjective criteria and we make exclusions, like the groundwater exemption, explicit so there’s no second-guessing.”

Fotouhi says that level of clarity is a direct response to years of frustration in rural America.

“We know farmers need certainty,” he says. “They need to know what they can and can’t do without waiting months for an answer. That’s why we put so much effort into making this rule clear, transparent and grounded in what the Supreme Court actually tells us to do.”

EPA Pushes Back on Claims the Proposal Overpromises

Some critics argue the agency risks overpromising. Fotouhi strongly rejects that idea.

“We take a fresh look at all the critical issues the Supreme Court lays out in the Sackett decision,” he says. “We think the previous administration does not faithfully implement that decision when they revise the rule, so we come back, reassess everything and come up with a definition that fully implements what the Court tells EPA and the Army Corps to do.”

He notes the agency made readability a priority.

“We try to apply the Court’s direction in language that is easily understandable, that takes geographic differences into account, and that doesn’t impose unnecessary burdens on farmers when they’re trying to decide if they need a permit,” he says.

Groundwater Exclusion: “We Want It Crystal Clear”

One standout change is the explicit exclusion of groundwater — language EPA says is included to eliminate confusion.

“Groundwater has never been part of the Waters of the United States, but we think it is absolutely necessary to make that exemption clear as day so there is no confusion about whether someone would need a permit for a discharge that may impact groundwater,” Fotouhi says.

He says repeated questions from stakeholders and newer case law convinced the agency to spell it out directly.

“Based on the case law that’s come out in the last few years and the general confusion we hear from stakeholders, we think it is incumbent on us to clarify this as clearly as we can,” he adds.

Final Rule Expected in Early 2026

EPA filed the proposal with the Federal Register , which means the rule’s comment period is officially underway.

“We publish the rule today, and it will be out for public comment for 45 days,” he says. “We know there is an absolute need for certainty and clarity and one nationwide standard, so we move quickly. We are hopeful that in the first few months of 2026, we can have a final rule out for the public.”

RFS: EPA Reviewing Comments, Aims for Certainty

Fotouhi also discusses EPA’s proposed Renewable Fuel Standard volumes, including record-setting biomass-based diesel levels.

“We understand how important it is to get this exactly right. From day one, Administrator Zeldin is laser-focused on ensuring the RFS strikes the right balance,” he says. “We know farmers and all stakeholders implicated by this program need certainty. We are working as quickly as we can to take final action.”

EPA’s Deregulatory Push: More Actions to Come

Fotouhi says the agency’s deregulatory actions announced earlier this year will have significant impact on agriculture.

“Reducing the cost of energy is one of our biggest focuses,” he says. “Many of the actions we identify are aimed at reducing energy prices for farmers, ranchers and manufacturers so we can reduce input costs and ultimately reduce the cost of the products they produce.”

This is evident through their efforts on WOTUS.

“The WOTUS proposal is a prime example; it’s designed to reduce unnecessary and illegal regulatory burden, and we are undertaking a score of additional actions across offices, working with USDA, the Department of Energy and the Interior Department, to identify ways to reduce input costs for agriculture,” Fotouhi says. “A thriving agricultural sector is a priority for the president, and lowering consumer prices is something we have to achieve.”

New WOTUS Proposal Could Reduce Red Tape for Farmers and Ranchers

Mon, 17 Nov 2025 18:01:42 GMT

Farmers and ranchers could soon face fewer regulatory hurdles when working near waterways, as EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers released a new proposal on Nov. 17 to redefine “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS). The agencies say the proposed rule is designed to bring long-requested clarity to what features fall under federal jurisdiction potentially reducing permitting uncertainty for agriculture, landowners and rural businesses.

The proposed rule can be found on the Federal Register . The public can submit comments online there or via Regulations.gov on or before Jan. 5, 2026. During the announcement event on Nov. 17, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin urged the public to submit comments.

The definition of WOTUS determines when producers must secure permits for projects that could affect surface water quality, including common activities such as building terraces, installing drainage or expanding livestock operations. EPA officials say the new proposal aims to align fully with the Supreme Court’s Sackett decision and prevent farmers from needing lawyers or consultants simply to determine whether a water feature on their land is federally regulated.

The proposal follows Zeldin’s promise in March to launch the biggest deregulatory action in history and a series of listening sessions in April and May that asked states, tribes, industry and agriculture to weigh in on WOTUS needs.

Clearer Definition After Years of Confusion

Zeldin and Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Adam Telle emphasize the rule is designed to be clear, durable and commonsense.

Key elements include:

Defined terms such as relatively permanent, continuous surface connection, and tributary to outline which waters qualify under the Clean Water Act.
A requirement that jurisdictional tributaries must have predictable, consistent flow to traditional navigable waters.
Wetlands protections are limited to wetlands that physically touch and are indistinguishable from regulated waters for a consistent duration each year.
Reaffirmed exclusions important to agriculture, including prior converted cropland, certain ditches and waste treatment systems.
A new exclusion for groundwater.
Locally-familiar terminology, such as “wet season,” to help determine whether water features meet regulatory thresholds.

EPA says these changes are intended to reduce uncertainty that has stemmed from years of shifting definitions across administrations.

Impact of WOTUS Proposal on Agriculture

For producers, the proposal could simplify compliance by narrowing which water features fall under federal oversight and confirming exclusions that many farm groups have long advocated.

Zeldin says the aim is “protecting the nation’s navigable waters from pollution” while preventing unnecessary burdens on farmers and ranchers. He criticizes past Democratic administrations for broad interpretations that, in his view, extended federal reach to features that did not warrant regulation.

Farm groups have argued for years that unclear or overly broad definitions can lead to significant costs, delays and legal risks when planning conservation work, drainage projects or infrastructure improvements. A more consistent rule could reduce project backlogs and limit case-by-case determinations that often slow progress during planting, construction or livestock expansion.

“We’ve seen WOTUS definitions, guidance and legal arguments change with each administration,” said Garrett Hawkins, president of the Missouri Farm Bureau, during the May 1 EPA listening session for agriculture . He adds: “farmers, land owners and small businesses are the ones who suffer the most when we don’t have clear rules.”

Several of those who gave testimony and public comment during the ag listening session argued that farmers and ranchers, who already struggle with unpredictable markets and tight margins, shouldn’t have to hire experts to identify elements of their own land.

“A practical WOTUS definition will allow the average landowner — not an engineer, not an attorney, not a wetland specialist — to walk out on their property, see a water feature and make, at minimum, a preliminary determination about whether a feature is federally jurisdictional,” says Kim Brackett, vice president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, who also gave testimony in May.

Alignment With the Sackett Decision

After the Supreme Court’s 2023 Sackett v. EPA ruling , which restricted federal authority over many wetlands, the agencies say the previous WOTUS definition no longer aligned with the law. EPA already issued a memo earlier this year clarifying limits on jurisdiction over adjacent wetlands. The newly proposed rule is the next step in that process.

The proposed rule focuses on relatively permanent bodies of water — streams, rivers, lakes and oceans — and wetlands that are physically connected to those waters. Seasonal and regional variations are incorporated, including waters that flow consistently during the wetter months.

The current situation is a regulatory patchwork. Due to litigation that followed the January 2023 WOTUS rule, which was considered in the Sackett decision, different states are following different rules. Currently, 24 states, mostly the coastal and Great Lakes states, are operating on the 2023 rule, while the other 26 states, mostly those in center and in the Southeast, are operating on pre-2015 WOTUS rule.

Oversight Rests With State and Tribes

A major theme of the proposal is cooperative federalism, giving more authority to states and tribes to manage local land and water resources. EPA says the rule preserves necessary federal protections while recognizing states and tribal governments are best positioned to oversee many smaller or isolated water features.

Sections 101b and 510 of the CWA are key structural examples of the concept of cooperative federalism. The sections give states and tribes the right to set standards and issue permits for federal activities that could discharge pollutants into a water of the U.S. within the state or territory. The most common example of this are 404 dredge and fill permits.

This focus on cooperative federalism was the main chorus of the EPA’s listening session for states , held April 29, especially as it concerns wetlands.

“If more wetlands are excluded from WOTUS, then certain federal projects would not require a section 401 water quality certification by the states,” noted Jennifer Congdon, director of federal affairs for New York Department of Environmental Conservation, during the states’ listening session. She argues that such a situation could impair water quality within a state, thus violating states’ rights under the CWA.

What Happens Next

The proposed rule is available online for public comment on the Federal Register and Regulations.gov on or before Jan. 5, 2026. EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers will hold two hybrid public meetings, and details for submitting comments or registering to speak will be available on EPA’s website .

After the comment period, the agencies plan to move quickly toward a final rule.

“Once the rule is finalized, it typically takes effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register pursuant to Congressional Review Act requirements,” the EPA press office told The Packer earlier this summer .

Based on these potential timelines, a new — potentially final — WOTUS rule could take effect as early as early March.

EPA Updates A/C Rules: What Farmers Need to Know

Mon, 29 Sep 2025 20:03:19 GMT

EPA has again revised standards for refrigerant used in vehicles.

R-12 refrigerant (aka “Freon”) was the go-to coolant for more than 50 years. Then it was discovered that chlorine atoms in escaped R-12 molecules accumulated in the atmosphere and damaged the ozone layer.

A new refrigerant, R-134a, came out in 1991 and replaced R-12’s miscreant chlorine atom with a fluorine atom — which breaks down in 10 to 12 years.

To further minimize damage to the environment, another new refrigerant, R-1234yf, was developed and replaced R-134a’s fluorine atom with a propylene atom — which breaks down in one day.

A transition to R-1234yf is underway. Professional mechanics who use refrigerant recovery and recycling (R&R) machines must have special training and EPA Section 609 certification to buy more than 2 lb. of R-1234yf.

Necessary Adjustments
Cans of R-1234yf are at auto parts stores and have Schrader-type valves, which need a matching fitting on R&R machines or sets of pressure gauges.

Older R-134a refrigerant and new R-1234yf refrigerant are not interchangeable. The propylene atoms in R-1234yf make it mildly flammable. For that reason, newer systems are designed with spark-free compressors and other components.

If farmers have on-farm R&R machines, they can be carefully flushed between exposures to R-134a and R-1234yf, but the newer refrigerant is slightly caustic. Long-term exposure to R-1234yf can damage internal components in machines designed for R-134a.

Farmers who own a set of air conditioning gauges have a similar situation.

“You can buy adapters to hook up an R-134a set of gauges to a R-1234yf system,” says Jeff Weidecke, trainer for MasterCool refrigerant handling systems. “If a guy has an R-134a set of gauges and uses adapter fittings, he’s going to start the vehicle up, disconnect from whatever keg or 1 lb. can they’re using and turn on the machine’s air conditioning system so the clutch and compressor engage. Any R-134a refrigerant left in the hoses will be boiled off and pulled into the vehicle’s R-134a system. Then you can run R-1234yf through those gauges to check or fill a system.”

Weidecke notes that because R-1234yf is a more efficient than R-134a, compressors and other air conditioning system components are smaller, and less refrigerant is used.

“The factory-fill for a lot of new cars is only 12 to 14 ounces,” he says.

How EPA's Proposal to Exempt Refineries From Blending Biofuels Impacts Farmers

Mon, 22 Sep 2025 22:30:02 GMT

The EPA’s latest proposal on how they plan to deal with the backlog of Small Refinery Exemptions (SREs) could have a major impact on farmers.

With a big crop this year, they need biofuels demand to help use those extra bushels.

However, even as recent as last week, small refiners continued to file for exemptions from the biofuels volumes they are mandated to blend under the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS).

If EPA allows these waivers and the backlog of SREs from 2023 to 2025, without increasing the volumes in 2026 and 2027, it will mean lower biofuels production.

EPA’s SRE Proposal Includes Something Old
EPA’s latest proposal to deal with the backlog of Smaller Refinery Exemptions contains something old and something new.

The good news is EPA is using current methodology to calculate SREs, according to Paul Winters, director of public affairs, Clean Fuels Alliance America.

“They’re looking to protect the market space and preserve the volumes they set for the RFS standard — and that’s a good thing. That’s something we fought for back in 2020 and we’re glad to see that continuing.”

He says EPA’s proposal recognizes the SREs handed out in August have the potential to flood the RIN markets.

“They’re looking to reallocate those volumes and protect future RIN markets to make sure there isn’t a signal sent to the industry to undercut production in future years,” he adds.

A New Twist
However, to accomplish that, Winters says EPA has also offered a new proposal — with a twist.

He explains: “They are proposing to either reallocate 100% of the exemptions that have been handed out to date or 50%.”

The final decision will be based on the volumes of biofuels that will be produced in the future and ensure the volumes EPA is setting for 2026 and 2027 are actually met.

Winters says 100% reallocation is the best option for the biofuels industry, as EPA’s updated dashboard on SREs shows, since August 22, they’ve received 10 new exemption petitions for 2021 through 2024.

“We expect they’re going to continue filing more and more of these exemption petitions. So, EPA needs to adopt the 100% estimate based on what’s been filed so far. Because at the end of the day, that’s not going to represent 100% of all the exemptions that are eventually granted,” he further explains.

This is especially important for farmers because if the exemptions were granted without increased production, it would cut into biofuels volumes for 2026 and 2027.

45 Day Comment Period Underway
Winters says it’s key for farmers to be engaged in the process. EPA is holding a hearing on the rule within 15 days as part of a short 45-day comment period.

Breaking News: EPA Backs Existing Wastewater Regulations, Prevents Catastrophe for Processors and Producers

Sat, 30 Aug 2025 20:41:21 GMT

The longstanding Meat and Poultry (MPP) Effluent Guidelines and Standards will stand, announced Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin on Aug. 30. He says the proposed changes to the regulation are unnecessary.

EPA determined existing federal wastewater regulations under the Clean Water Act are effective and the burdens proposed changes would inflict on meat and poultry processors are unwarranted.

“The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) applauds the Trump administration and EPA Administrator Zeldin for taking a common sense approach on the Meat & Poultry Processing Rule,” says Duane Stateler, NPPC president and pork producer from McComb, Ohio. “As proposed by the previous administration, this rule—which provides no environmental benefits—would have been devastating to small- and medium-sized meat processors across the country and the livestock farmers who rely on them as markets for their animals.”

EPA’s action will save not only the nearly 100 local meat processors that EPA itself identified would have to close down but also the thousands of family farmers who rely on them to stay in livestock production, Stateler points out.

“It will help ensure affordable, nutritious American-grown pork can continue to be served on dinner tables across the country,” Stateler says.

Moving Forward
The decision closes the book on a nearly two-year comment and consideration process in which NPPC and other stakeholders have worked with EPA to better inform the agency’s decision and preempt unnecessary harm.

“Under the prior proposal, if it were finalized, major pork processors would have faced significant costs to install new waste water management systems,” explains Michael Formica, NPPC chief legal strategist. “During that period of construction, some plants would likely have needed to temporarily shut down. Others might have had to cut back on how many shifts they run.”

EPA’s internal analysis showed that dozens of facilities, likely small and medium-sized, would be forced to shut down because they would be unable to afford the cost of the technology required to comply, Formica says. Overall, the industry would have realized additional costs estimated at greater than $1 billion a year.

“Producers who rely on those processors would have then been without a market for their livestock,” Formica adds.

Unnecessary Expansions
The Meat and Poultry Products Effluent Guidelines and Standards was enacted in 1974 by the EPA and amended in 2004 to cover wastewater directly discharged by processing facilities. NPPC says the proposed amendment would have established more stringent technological requirements for controlling discharges from processors and significantly increased the scope of plants that were covered by the rules.

While the agricultural industry and the meat and poultry processing sectors support clean water efforts, EPA found these expansions were unnecessary.

NPPC says it appreciates EPA taking no action on the proposal, which would have disrupted packing capacity and livestock markets, in turn inflicting additional financial harm on producers and leading to further industry concentration and the loss of independent farmers.

The Meat Institute says the proposed rule would have also harmed the relationship between meat and poultry processing (MPP) facilities and publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs).

“Indirect discharging MPP facilities often make significant financial investments in maintaining and upgrading the POTW or shouldering major surcharges for the POTW’s continued operation and maintenance, which reduce public treatment costs for residential ratepayers and improve the quality of local and downstream waters,” the Meat Institute wrote in a statement.

EPA Decision on Small Refinery Exemptions Good News For Biofuels

Mon, 25 Aug 2025 17:18:47 GMT

The Environmental Protection Agency had a big announcement on Small Refinery Exemptions (SREs) on Friday.

The agency is acting on a backlog of more than 175-petitions from 38-small refineries dating all the way back to 2016.

EPA officials says the goal is to get the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program back on track but biofuels industry officials are unclear about how that will work.

SRE Decision a Mixed Bag

EPA granted full SREs on 63 petitions to the Renewable Fuel Standard, and partial exemptions on 77. The agency also denied 28 petitions and deemed 7 ineligible.

Paul Winters, Director of Public Affairs, Clean Fuels Alliance America says the result was a good news, bad news story for the industry.

“The exemptions apply to more than 7 billion RIN gallons from prior years. However, EPA is indicating that it’s only returning RINs for 2023 and 2024, which is about 1 .4 billion RINs. Those RINs would still be valid to meet the 2024 RFS volume requirements.”

Will the 2023 to 2025 SREs be Reallocated?

The biofuels industry exoects multiple refiners to object to the decision. So the question remains: how or if the SREs from 2023 to 25 will be reallocated.

Winters says, “1.4 billion RINs returned to the market is a substantial number, especially for 2024 and 2025 where the Biden administration set volumes for biomass based diesel way below where they should have.”

EPA Proposes New Formula for Reallocating SREs

In addition, EPA has proposed a new formula to reallocate gallons exempted from 2023 and later years.

This means EPA still has 57 total exemption requests pending that will be used in finalizing blending levels for 2026 and 2027.

“So what EPA has indicated is that they are going to propose a rule, a supplement to the 2026 and 2027 volumes and they will reallocate the these small refinery exemptions to other refiners,” he says.

So, while the administration is trying to support the biofuels industry, it’s still negative according to Winters.

“They exempted far more small refineries than anyone thought would have,” he explains.

Timeline Unclear

Winters says EPA will send a proposal to the White House next week for a 30 day review, followed by a comment period and hearing on the new proposal.

Eventually the plan is to add this proposal to, for the new framework or small refinery exemption decisions and add it to the 2026 and 2027 RFS rule.

Winters says CFAA will work with EPA on the re-allocations but his will delay the final 2027 RFS rule past the November 1 deadline — adding more uncertainty.

Will the Repeal of EPA's Endangerment Finding Pose a Danger to Biofuels?

Thu, 07 Aug 2025 16:51:32 GMT

For years, efforts to regulate greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from fossil fuels has helped support the growth of the biofuels industry. However, EPA has released a proposal to void it’s 2009 endangerment finding that declares GHG emissions, including carbon dioxide, no longer be a threat to the environment.

EPA’s proposal to reverse the Endangerment Finding returns the Clean Air Act to its original purpose, overturning the previous administration’s attempt at climate control via regulation. Under the Trump administration, the move signals EPA is going to de-emphasize carbon in energy and environmental policies.

Is Voiding the Endangerment Finding a Danger to the Biofuels Industry?

Jordan Fife, president of trading, BioUrja says depending on what the final proposal looks like it could be a game changer.

“If you were to classify carbon as a non-greenhouse gas, and therefore, you would not be able to sequester it and monetize it. So it would be a very big deal.”

Fife says it could also negatively impact carbon pipelines and the carbon markets tied to biofuels.

“It’s not just the pipeline — it’s the actual downstream sequestration. You look at One Earth Energy that’s in Gibson City, Ill., or Indicator, Ill., where ADM is the largest sequester of carbon currently in the country. All of that becomes pretty null and void if carbon is no longer classified as a greenhouse gas,” Fife explains.

Monte Shaw, executive director of the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, agrees the ruling could mean farmers will have a harder time getting paid for carbon reducing practices as part of 45Z.

“I don’t think you’re going to see voluntary actions by the EPA, by the USDA that are tied to carbon metrics for farming. I could be surprised, but I don’t personally anticipate that happening with or without this finding,” Shaw says.

In fact, he stresses there was no assurance of a payment for farmers for carbon sequestration under 45Z.

“The 45Z calculation today, under the current guidance, does not include a way for the farm practices to be accounted for,” he says.

What is the Potential Impact on Biofuels Policy?

However, when it comes to biofuels policy itself, Shaw says 45Z and the Renewable Fuels Standard will see little to no impact: “The first thing people need to know is it doesn’t affect those at all. Those are laws passed by Congress. The RFS was passed by Congress. 45Z was recently passed by Congress. Those are not EPA regulations that are dependent upon this finding. To change 45Z or to change the RFS, you would actually have to change the law.”

Shaw says EPA’s proposal does send a chilling signal to the marketplace but it won’t halt the Sustainable Aviation Fuel market.

States such as California with their Low Carbon Fuel Standard will also be exempt from this finding.

“We have states that are requiring certain things, both on the transportation side, vehicles, as well as increasingly on airlines as well,” Shaw says. “We have huge markets for ultra low -carbon ethanol both domestically and internationally that are not tied to EPA regulations.”

Ruling Could Unleash Lawsuits

He thinks this proposal will spark a rash of climate lawsuits but that those legal challenges will fail due to the Chevron ruling.

“Basically what the courts have said recently is if Congress wants an agency to do something that’s big, they need to tell that agency, and I think regulating CO2 qualifications qualifies as big, right? I actually think this will hold up to the judicial challenges,” Shaw says.

EPA Opens Public Comment on Dicamba Registration, Gives The Labels Another Look

Wed, 23 Jul 2025 21:53:55 GMT

Today, the EPA opened its 30-day public comment period for a proposed registration of dicamba in over-the-top applications. The federal agency received applications from Bayer, BASF and Syngenta, which have marketed XtendiMax, Engenia, and Tavium plus VaporGrip.

Those products were not labeled for use in 2025 after have their registration were vacated by a U.S. district court in 2024. The ruling was based on EPA violating public input procedures on the three products.

“We’re pleased to see that the EPA has made significant progress and opened a public comment period for low-volatility dicamba herbicides to be used over the top of dicamba tolerant cotton and soybeans. This technology provides tremendous value to soybean and cotton farmers across the U.S.” Bayer officials said in a statement.

BASF provided this reaction in a statement: “BASF remains committed to a science-based decision-making process and working with regulatory authorities and other stakeholders throughout this process to ensure over-the-top uses of dicamba remain an option for farmers in the future.”

With the public comment period, the agency stated it’s particularly interested in hearing how the proposed mitigation measures would be implemented by farmer stakeholders. Those include: temperature-dependent volatility mitigations, percent of field treated restrictions and any science-backed solutions to manage volatility. EPA is proposing the following nine mitigation measures:

A single use maximum application rate of 0.5 lb. acid equivalent (a.e.) dicamba per acre.
No more than two applications allowed with a maximum annual application of 1 lb. a.e. dicamba per acre from all combined dicamba-containing products.
Prohibition of aerial applications.
Maintaining a 240-ft downwind buffer.
The spray solution must include an approved drift reduction agent and pH buffering volatility reduction agent added to the tank in higher percentages as temperatures increase.
Temperature-dependent application restrictions to manage volatility. Users have flexibility to implement temperature-dependent restrictions by reducing the percent of field treated, including by using precision agriculture techniques, or prohibiting certain tank mixes at higher temperatures.No applications at temperatures above 95 degrees Fahrenheit.
Three points of mitigation required based on the runoff/erosion mitigation menu .
Users must access and follow any applicable endangered species bulletin from “ Bulletins Live! Two” web-based system. Six points of runoff/erosion mitigation will be required in some pesticide use limitation areas where pesticide exposures are likely to impact the continued existence of a listed species, which may include a reduction in survival or recovery of the species.
Applicators are required to wear baseline attire along with personal protective equipment including chemical-resistant gloves when handling these products. A NIOSH-approved dust/mist filtering respirator with any R, P, or HE filter is also required for all handlers of the BAPMA-salt-formulated product. There is a restricted entry interval of 24 hours. Use is restricted to a limited number of approved states by certified applicators only. Applicators are required to complete additional dicamba-specific annual training and maintain records of all applications.

The public comment period is scheduled to close on Aug. 22, 2025. The next step will be EPA’s review of the registration under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Next is a biological evaluation, and then an Endangered Species Act consultation.

“We believe the EPA will benefit from hearing from those closest to the technology. This will help to ensure any decisions regarding the registration of dicamba are fully informed by those who rely on this important tool. Even a simple comment explaining the important role dicamba plays on a particular farm can be impactful and useful for the EPA,” Bayer’s statement continued.

It’s estimated the process could provide a timeline where dicamba could be available for the 2026 application season.

“We know how important this technology is for so many growers, and we will continue working diligently to help ensure these low-volatility dicamba herbicides remain available for over-the-top use in 2026 and beyond,” the Bayer statement said.

Ag Retailers Association CEO and President Daren Coppock said, “This is a win for ag retailers and farmers who rely on safe, effective tools like over-the-top dicamba to protect their crops. The EPA’s risk-based assessment process remains the gold standard for pesticide regulation, and we applaud the agency for reaffirming its commitment to sound science. Ensuring continued access to these products is critical for a productive, sustainable food supply.”

Soybeans Are Searching For a Demand Story, And Something Big is Brewing

Mon, 21 Jul 2025 21:22:29 GMT

Growing soybeans in Ohio this year has been a bit of a roller coaster ride.

“We faced some wet weather early, especially in the month of May where it was cold and wet,” says Steve Reinhard, a north-central Ohio farmer in Bucyrus. “At the end of May, we got in and finished up corn and soybeans. Things really look pretty decent right now. I think conditions are probably a little more varied in Ohio than maybe some other places.”

Wading Through Challenges
While farmers such as Reinhard are focused on big yields, they have been wading through a number of challenges this year.

In addition to $10 soybeans, tariffs are hanging over the export outlook — an important factor considering about half of the soybeans growing across the U.S. will be exported.

“Soybeans are still United States ag’s No. 1 export industry at about $31 billion provided back to the economy. It’s definitely a market we’re looking at while also stressing more domestic use as well,” says Reinhard, a former chair of the United Soybean Board (USB).

The Current Export Picture
In April, the trade war with China seemed to be heating up. A tariff tit-for-tat caused U.S. soybeans to face a tariff rate of nearly 115%. While short-lived, China still hasn’t been back to the table to buy U.S. soybeans. Even in the wake of the high tariffs in April, the reality was China remains the top export destination for U.S. farmers — even if the country isn’t buying as many soybeans as it did in 2018.

According to Pro Farmer reports:

China imported 10.62 MMT of soybeans from Brazil in June, about 86.6% of total imports and up from 9.72 MMT a year ago.
China imported 1.58 MMT from the U.S., about 12.9% of total imports for June and up from 1.31 MMT a year ago.

The good news is soybean export sales for the 2025/2026 marketing year have seen an uptick lately. According to Terrain, the recent sales contributing to the growth have been from a combination of “other Asia,” “unknown” and “Western Hemisphere” regions.

“The ‘other Asia’ is several countries, including Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam mostly. The ‘Western Hemisphere’ category is almost entirely Mexico,” says Marc Rosenbohm, senior grain and oilseed analyst for Terrain.

When it comes to the “unknown” destinations, he doesn’t want to speculate.

Outstanding Soybeans Sales

(Terrain)

Soybean Sales

(Terrain)

"[Sales] are still at fairly low levels, but hopefully we can keep the momentum going as we get closer to the start of the marketing year,” Rosenbohm says.

Drumming Up More Domestic Demand
Not losing sight of growing exports, while finding more domestic demand, is a focus for USB at a critical time.

“I think the big one we can look at is feed use in the United States,” Reinhard says. “As we look at the increased demand for soybean oil — when we crush the soybean, we get oil and meal. So, we need to look at how we can put more meal into the animal agriculture industry.”

The Top Domestic Customer
From poultry to pork, animal agriculture is the largest end user of soybeans — with livestock consuming 97% of soybean meal produced in the U.S. Keeping that in mind, USB is working to find ways to bring more benefits to animals.

“For instance, in the pork diet, we’re providing antiviral and anti-inflammatory benefits to those younger pigs. We’re able to help with respiratory diseases and improve summer health of the animals, especially under the severe heat stress,” Reinhard says.

One area demand growth is gaining traction is in dairies.

“When we came up with the high oleic [soybean], we were looking at the human health aspects of no trans fat, no saturated fat and great for cooking. What we didn’t intend is how that benefits the dairy industry,” he adds. “It provides a really big improvement on milk fat yield. That’s one of the components dairy gets paid on, and we hope to expand that market as well.”

High oleic soybeans have been on the market since 2012, but the latest discovery is proof researchers are continuing to uncover new and useful benefits for the variety of soybeans bred to have a higher percentage of oleic acid in their oil.

“I think we’re starting to scratch the surface on what high oleic soybeans can do,” Reinhard says. “There are some things high oleic can’t do that conventional soy can since it’s a little bit different oil composition.”

Fueling Demand in a Big Way
Finding new domestic uses for American-grown soybeans is something that gives this Ohio farmer hope. But what is he most excited about? It’s the possible boost in biofuels.

EPA set the stage for a big boost to biofuels in June . That’s when the agency released its proposed blending mandates for biomass-based diesel in the renewable fuel standard. The proposal would increase biomass-based diesel requirements from 3.25 billion gallons in 2025 to 5.61 gallons in 2026. If made final, it would be a potential game changer for soybean farmers.

“Everybody’s going to be happy with the fact we’re going to increase the proposed volume requirement by 67% to 5.61 billion gallons,” says Peter Meyer, principal economist and partner, Muddy Boots Ag LLC. “Now the question is, does that mean we’re going to have to use every available pound of soybean oil toward renewable diesel? It certainly will be. There’s no question.”

Meyer says EPA’s proposal and the potential boost in demand for soybean oil could also drive soybean acreage higher in 2026.

A Game Changer for Farmers
Another big component of EPA’s proposed rule is the fact EPA also wants to restrict the amount of imported foreign feedstocks used in renewable fuels production. According to Marc Rosenbohm, senior grain and oilseed analyst for Terrain, that would put U.S. production of renewable fuels made from U.S. feedstocks, such as soybeans, at a significant advantage.

“We expect soybean oil to play a significant role here,” Rosenbohm says. “Part of that uncertainty is exactly what level it might play related to the RVO proposal. So, I think getting that finalized first will be important for knowing exactly what level of soybean oil we need.”

USDA acknowledged that potential growth in the July World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report earlier this month, forecasting a record 53% of soybean oil usage in the U.S. will go to biofuels.

“They brought up biofuel use of soybean oil to 15.5 billion pounds, which now exceeds the food consumption category — which I think is an important psychological piece of it. We are using a lot of soybean oil for biofuel use, as incentivized by those policies. They also did increase crush to a little over 2.5 billion bushels,” Rosenbohm says.

For AgResource’s president and founder Dan Basse, it’s the boost in biofuels that would fuel the demand story in soybeans — especially if exports continue to navigate tariff threats and uncertainty on trade.

“I believe we need to continue to think about the future opportunities in green fuels and build out that sector,” Basse says. “United States agriculture will struggle with trade unless the Trump administration is able to open up some of these markets. So, my mindset is, looking outside the United States, there’s still tremendous growth in green fuels.”

It’s Not Growing Exports or Domestic Demand: It’s Both
For Reinhard, it’s not whether the soybean industry should focus on growing domestic demand or growing exports. It’s an unwavering focus on both that will drive prices and demand.

“You have an administration now that’s working with different countries to provide different trading opportunities. As we go forward, I think we continue to see our yields increase over time,” Reinhard says. “I don’t see our production going down or being stagnant. So, I think we still need to continue to work on all of our markets and use the great production and ingenuity the U.S. farmer brings forward.”

Supreme Court Decision On Glyphosate Case Expected Next Session

Mon, 30 Jun 2025 14:00:25 GMT

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court asked for the views of the Solicitor General in the Durnell case. This comes after a petition for a writ of certiorari was filed by Bayer’s indirect subsidiary Monsanto in April 2025 arguing that Roundup litigation decisions have been split by federal circuit courts and a Supreme Court decision is needed.

This news of the court’s action has Bayer expecting a decision by the Court—first if it accepts the case, then on a ruling—in the 2025-2026 session. The company says it expects the decision by the Court on whether or not to hear the case in the fall 2025. And then if picked up by the court, its decision would be announced by June 2026.

“We see this request as an encouraging step and look forward to hearing the views of the government on FIFRA’s federal preemption provision, which relies on language common to several federal laws that cover a number of industries,” said Bayer CEO Bill Anderson in a news release. “The security and affordability of the food supply depend on companies’ and farmers’ ability to rely on decisions made by responsible federal regulatory authorities. When courts permit companies to be punished under state law for following federal law, it makes companies like ours a prime target of the litigation industry and threatens farmers and innovations that patients and consumers need for their nutrition and health.”

In the meantime, the company says it will continue it’s “multipronged” strategy around glyphosate litigation. [Read more about that strategy here .]

To-date Bayer has paid more than $10 billion to plaintiffs in litigation claiming Roundup as the cause of their cancer. Bill Anderson became CEO in 2023, and one of his commitments was to get the glyphosate litigation “under control” by 2026. In total, there have been about 180,000 lawsuits brought forward, with about 65,000 cases open now. The company says it has received favorable outcomes in 17 of the last 25 trials.

The federal courts with the split decisions resulted from the 3rd, 9th and 11th circuits.

Biofuels Industry Gets Big Boost From EPA's Blending Mandates

Fri, 13 Jun 2025 22:29:53 GMT

The nation’s biofuels industry got a huge shot in the arm Friday.

EPA Sets Record Blending Mandate for Biomass Based Diesel

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed record blending mandates for biomass based diesel in the Renewable Fuels Standard.

The agency raised the levels 67% from 2025 to 5.61 billion gallons for 2026 and upped volumes to 5.86 billion gallons for 2027.

The levels for 2026 exceeded the industry’s recommendation of 5.25 billion gallons, according to Kurt Kovarik, Vice President, Federal Affairs for Clean Fuels Alliance America:

“EPA’s math would indicate that the volume requirement for biomass -based diesel for 2026 is going to be about 5.6 billion gallons, which by any measure, if they’re close or in the ballpark, This is a significant step change from the 3.35 billion gallons that was mandated for biomass -based diesel for 2025, which is exactly what we asked for.”

Biofuels and Feed Stock Imports Discounted

To level the playing field, EPA is also discounting the value of the RIN credit by half for foreign biofuels imports or the use of foreign feed stocks.

“So, only 50% credit for a fuel that’s produced abroad and imported or a fuel that’s produced domestically from a foreign feed stock. And in this case, foreign is any country other than the United States. So even feed stocks from Canada and Mexico,” he explains.

EPA Decision Signals Growth

Both of these actions will send a huge message of growth to farmers and the industry, which is already producing biomass based diesel near these levels.

“This is a real recognition of the investments that have made in in feed stock development the investments made by soybean farmers the enormous expansion of capacity in renewable diesel and biodiesel production,” he adds.

Small Refinery Exemptions Could be Reallocated

While EPA did not deal with the backlog of 169 Small Refinery Exemptions in this proposal, the agency has signaled reallocation, a precedent set under the first Trump administration.

“So by estimating or committing to estimate those gallons and reallocate them. It means that biofuels producers will be held harmless the small refiners will get the Relief that they seek but those that those gallons or those that mandate won’t simply evaporate,” he says.

Meanwhile, the mandate for conventional corn-based ethanol will remain at 15 billion gallons for both years, which is in line with what the industry recommended.

This proposal now goes through a comment period but EPA has indicated they expect to have it finalized by November 1 at the latest.

Biofuels Groups Optimistic About EPA's RFS Proposal: Refute Talk of Lower Volumes

Wed, 28 May 2025 15:20:54 GMT

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin informed lawmakers the proposal for setting the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) volumes for 2026 and beyond is nearing release. The proposed rule is currently under review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

EPA Listening to Biofuels Industry This Time?

Geoff Cooper, president and CEO, Renewable Fuels Association, says the administration has been listening to their recommendations on setting volumes that encourage growth and demand.

“We recommended at least 15 billion gallon for conventional and 5.25 billion for biomass based diesel, and then when you layer on top a little bit of growth for advanced and cellulosic, you can easily see where EPA could be setting the total RFS volume at around 24 or 25 billion RINs.”

EPA Says Rumors on Biomass-Based Diesel Aren’t True

Recent rumors put volumes for biomass based diesel at 4.65 billion gallons, but Paul Winters, director of public affairs, Clean Fuel Alliance America, says EPA has assured them that number is false.

“They certainly have indicated the rumor circulated last week was incorrect — the volumes would not be that low. They do seem to understand and have definitely heard the message from our industry and the unified position on that 5.25 billion gallon volume,” he explains.

Still, Clean Fuels and 48 of its members sent a letter to EPA advocating for the 5.25 billion and reminding the agency that level was agreed upon with the American Petroleum Institute.

Cooper says that agreement is unprecedented: “We have alignment with the oil refiners. That’s not something we’ve ever had before when we go the discussions around renewable volume obligations and the RFS. That makes everyone’s job easier.”

OMB Holding Stakeholder Meetings

Stakeholders also have scheduled meetings with OMB through June 9 to provide comments, but EPA could fast track the process by canceling meetings to finalize the rule more quickly.

“Clean Fuels would be very happy to have the rule out in public and simply forego a formal meeting with OMB,” Winters says.

Either way, after OMB’s review EPA will publish the proposed rule, start a formal comment period and then take that input to craft the final rule.

“Administrator Zeldin has said many times, including on Capitol Hill just this week, he intends to have a final rule in place by the end of October this year, which would help, I think, restore and kind of get things back on the right timeline when it comes to the RFS,” Cooper says.

Zeldin also indicated EPA will be addressing a longstanding backlog of 160 plus small refinery exemption petitions.

Decode MAHA's Potential Effect on the Agriculture Sector

Mon, 19 May 2025 19:36:44 GMT

Three months ago, President Donald Trump signed an executive order establishing the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission. Later this week, the group’s first report is scheduled to be released.

Farmers were directly mentioned in the president’s February order , “agencies shall work with farmers to ensure that United States food is the healthiest, most abundant, and most affordable in the world.”

Members of the commission include Human Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins, and many more.

Among its tasks, the commission is to “assess the threat that potential over-utilization of medication, certain food ingredients, certain chemicals, and certain other exposures pose to children with respect to chronic inflammation or other established mechanisms of disease, using rigorous and transparent data, including international comparisons.”

So what should agriculture be watching for?

In brief, industry analysts are watching two fronts for activity from MAHA initiatives:

Commodity grain and oilseeds
Pesticide use

“Secretary Kennedy so far has been very focused on processed foods, that’s one part of it,” says Richard Gupton, senior vice president of policy at the Agricultural Retailers Association. “Pesticides have really been a focus of Secretary Kennedy for well before he was in this current role. He was actually was part of the first litigations related to glyphosate.”

There have been reports that the MAHA report will specifically call out pesticides including glyphosate and atrazine.

Gupton highlights the statistics showing how from the mid 1900s to now, American agriculture has increased its output three-fold.

Gupton continues, “We represent ag retailers that are working with farmers, making sure they have the all the modern ag tools right to produce a crop, not only in a sustainable way, but an economical way. Products like glyphosate that have been registered and safely used since 1974, have really revolutionized modern production agriculture.”

Crop Life America is hosting a website for grassroots outreach to law makers and the Trump administration, farmervoicesmatter.org.

“People are making decisions about what tools farmers are going to get access to, and farmers need to be heard,” says Alex Dunn, president of CEO of Crop Life America.
“The pesticides are subject to extensive review by the U.S. EPA, under a very strict law that actually is the envy of many other countries,” Dunn says. “I actually served at the EPA in the last Trump administration. I oversaw the pesticide program for two years, and I got to see the scientists in action. And let me tell you, they don’t let anything go if they think there’s any concern. They are required under the law to assess for any environmental risk, to look at risk to the farm workers, to human health and especially to children. There’s a special requirement in the law that the EPA has to look at risk to children and put a 10 times additional factor of safety for childrens’ exposures. So we have a wonderful system.”

Which agencies have regulatory authority over what?

While this first report coming this week will unveil the overall direction and focus for the commission’s work, its policy and regulatory recommendations will be revealed Aug. 12 when the “Make our Children Healthy Again Strategy” will be submitted to the president.

Health and Human Services houses the Food and Drug Administration, which oversees the trace pesticide testing on food products. However those tolerances are set by EPA.

“The commission’s recommendations could be within Health and Human Services, could be what FDA does, could be related to recommendations at EPA and to FIFRA and how products are registered within that agency,” Gupton says. “All of those things could potentially make it more difficult for farmers to have access to these necessary pesticide tools and cause an increase in the cost of food for American families.”

Rollins told Farm Journal’s Chip Flory on May 16, interagency talks were ongoing for the report’s content. She said her focus was to make sure the perspective of U.S. farmers is included. Recently, she helped organized Kennedy’s visit to a Texas farm.

Regarding Zeldin’s and Rollins’ seat on the commission, Gupton says its key for them to voice the jurisdiction of their agency.

“If they do their jobs and speak up and represent their agencies, and EPA stands behind their science, that’s all we’re asking them to do. And for Secretary Rollins that she’s there promoting and supporting America’s farmers,” Gupton says.

He continues, “If they want to talk about the review process and whether that needs to be updated, then that’s another conversation. They shouldn’t attack the products that have been effective and used by modern agriculture for decades to the benefit of the United States, our farmers and the globe.”

Key Updates: How Two Legal Developments Could Impact Glyphosate Cases

Mon, 12 May 2025 19:25:57 GMT

This past week had two developments around Bayer’s campaign to reframe how regulations around pesticides are interpreted and applied by the court system. Earlier this spring, Bayer leadership confirmed it’s engaging in the multifront approach to limit its legal liabilities as the only domestic manufacturer of glyphosate.

To-date Bayer has paid more than $10 billion to plaintiffs in litigation claiming Roundup as the cause of their cancer.

Bill Anderson became CEO in 2023, and one of his commitments was to get the glyphosate litigation “under control” by 2026.

Two “wins” for the company have come in the past several days.

Supreme Court Brief

On May 9, 10 agricultural groups filed a brief encouraging the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a case regarding glyphosate (and other pesticide) labeling.

In the coming weeks, the Supreme Court will decide on whether it’ll hear the case, with the key question being whether manufacturers of pesticides are liable under state law for “failure to warn” of alleged cancer or other health risks when federal regulators have evaluated the product’s safety and determined its uses are safe.

Groups named supporting the submission of the brief: American Farm Bureau Federation, American Soybean Association, American Sugarbeet Growers Association, International Fresh Produce Association, National Association of Wheat Growers, National Corn Growers Association, National Cotton Council, National Sorghum Producers, North American Blueberry Council, and Western Growers.

Second State Signs Law Reinforcing EPA’s Authority

In late April, North Dakota was the first state to have legislation signed into law reasserting federally approved pesticide labels are the law and companies can not be subject to litigation when those laws are followed.

Georgia becomes the second state to sign into law a bill that reinforces the authority of EPA’s science-based rulings that crop protection products are safe when used as directed.

Georgia Governor Brian Kemp has signed SB 144, which is a bill that has gone through the state’s legislature to re-affirm the authority of EPA and its scientific rulings on the safety of crop protection products.

“This is a major victory for Georgia’s top industry: agriculture,” said Will Bentley, president of the Georgia Agribusiness Council. “By reinforcing science-based regulations for crop protection products, this law provides Georgia’s farmers and agribusiness with the certainty they need to remain competitive and contribute to a strong food and fiber supply chain. We appreciate Governor Kemp and the Georgia Legislature for prioritizing policies that benefit Georgia farmers, agribusinesses and consumers alike.”

Starting last year, Bayer has worked at the state level with legislators to introduce legislation to put a focus around pesticide labels and liability. This year, the company expanded its efforts to 10 states.

“The signing of SB 144 by Governor Kemp demonstrates that Georgia stands with its farmers, who work tirelessly to produce safe and affordable food for communities throughout the state. We thank Governor Kemp and the legislators, farmers and ag groups that supported this important piece of legislation,” said Brian Naber, president, Crop Science North America & Australia/New Zealand Region. “At Bayer, we are committed to developing agricultural innovations that help farmers thrive. This is important not only for Georgia’s farmers and American agriculture, but also the everyday American worried about the cost of groceries, which could increase if these vital tools went away. We hope states around the country considering similar legislation will also support farmers and the tools critical to their success.”

Bayer officials have said the courts will continue to interpret the laws, but they are optimistic the state laws will bring greater legal certainty around claims about the warning label.

Could Government Efficiency Efforts Break the Dam in EPA’s Pesticide Approval Backlog?

Mon, 12 May 2025 16:09:43 GMT

Earlier this month, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin announced the next phase of organizational improvements for the agency. For agriculture, the focus went to 130 science positions that were being reallocated.

With EPA’s authority over reviewing the science of pesticides, and a current backlog of 504 new chemicals in review plus 12,000 pesticide reviews that are overdue compared to their expected timelines, the industry has been watching a ballooning backlog.

“We’ve been trying to get more resources to help to reduce the backlog, and we’ve been advocating for Administrator Zeldin to provide additional resources,” says Terry Kippley, president and CEO of the Council of Producers and Distributors of Agrotechnology. “And so we’re still waiting on some details, but they have announced that there’s 130 scientists that could be moving over into the chemicals division and the chemicals division is the division that growers care about and agribusiness cares about because it includes the Office of Pesticide Programs [OPP], and they’re responsible for getting the tools out into the field.”

Two core causes of the backlog:

There have been two key factors adding up to the slowdown and now backlog of pesticide processing, regulations and approval.

1. Underfunding and interagency performance.

Specific to the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Congress has underfunded its activities. Registrants agreed to a fee structure helping pay for the services provided by EPA, known as PRIA 5, which increased industry fees by 30%.

Congress has continually funded the EPA at low levels, and the OPP significantly below the $166 million asked for in appropriation.

“For many reasons every year they’ve only been giving approximately 80% of that number,” Kippley says. “From the farmer perspective, if you have a deal with a local co-op, and you say I’m going to give you 30% more money. But then you find out that you’re only getting about 80% of that agreed upon number. That’s a problem.”

Kippley says right now, for OPP, it adds up to being short about $32 million.

“We’d like to have them allocate that additional $32 million dollars, so that in the end OPP has the resources to consistently deliver and execute these timelines, so that everybody has certainty.”

2. The COVID-19 pandemic brought an unexpected workload

During the COVID-19 pandemic, disruptions added up in addition to EPA being responsible for testing and approving hand sanitizer products.

“I’ve had nearly a 30-year career dealing with regulated products, and I can say we’ve had certainty out of EPA in the past,” Kippley says. “Maybe wasn’t always perfect, but until COVID it was really operating in a way that we could do business, and they have just received so much more work with so many fewer resources. It’s really a difficult situation to manage.”

Will DOGE be the answer to the two issues that have amassed this backlog?

It has yet to be seen. One retiree from EPA is skeptical that even with an influx of 130 scientists transferred into the OPP, any benefits in terms of approvals won’t be seen for 18 months.

“If they allocate all of the transfers to new registrations — and ignore the FIFRA renewals — and if they are creative, by the time the Trump administration is over, things could be caught up,” they say.

One reason is the recent wave of early retirements, which currently employs 550 total scientists and 100 of those taking the early out package, which went into effect on May 5.

What Agronomists And Farmers Need to Know About Endangered Species Act in 2025

Wed, 07 May 2025 11:00:00 GMT

With the final herbicide rule and final insecticide rule announced by EPA, farmers and applicators will be phasing in new considerations with every new product label and FIFRA re-registration.

“Don’t panic,” says independent crop consultant Steve Hoffman with In-Depth Agronomy. “This is going to be a gradual phase in, and I know it’s definitely adding complexity.”

Independent consultants James Todd and Hoffman have been following the development of these rules, working with federal agencies to schedule about what everyone should know and how this year is pivotal to the future of pesticide use.

“Every new pesticide that gets registered through EPA, and every current pesticide that gets re registered has to come into compliance with new language on the label, Todd says. “Each pesticide is going to be unique and unique to also different endangered species. So the requirement in one part of the country might look different in another part of the country.”

The rules are the result of the EPA taking action to enforce its regulatory authority for the Endangered Species Act. Although the law is 50 years old, in recent years federal courts have announced rulings limiting pesticide use relative to ESA.

“Those lawsuits resulted in a judge somewhere saying, ‘Okay, you have not met this requirement, and we’re going to cancel this pesticide,’” Hoffman explains. “That’s where agriculture was at—we could have just lost any pesticide label instantly. So agriculture has the burden on our back to show that we care about endangered species, and we can do something. This is an opportunity. We just need to see this opportunity to make sure it stays a positive.”

Since the final herbicide rule, EPA issued a label for BASF’s Liberty Ultra, which could be looked to as a model for how these regulations will be applied to products. There hasn’t been a label for an insecticide yet issued , but many expect those labels to mirror how the herbicide rule was applied.

“Growers should go out and take a look at the Liberty Ultra label, because that’s the framework,” Todd says. “There are certain mitigations practices that you can do to earn points—erosion and runoff—and spray drift, and there are PULAs (geographic limitations.) Everyboyd has something that they need to do or be aware of that they need to do. Even if you’re not applying Liberty Ultra this year, look at its label and become familiar with what steps are going to be required.”

While the final herbicide rule and the final insecticide rule require evaluating the product and field, consulting the EPA website, and keeping record of your workplan, Hoffman and Todd have been engaging with other consultants, farmers, and federal agencies in the development of the rules to take into current production practices.

Last year, Hoffman hosted a two-day tour in Wisconsin with multiple federal agencies to discuss farmer practices, production considerations related to the upcoming regulations. The National Alliance of Crop Consultants is repeating the idea this coming year in Virginia and North Carolina.

Hear more in The Scoop podcast: