"USDA Cuts Funding for Renewable Energy on Farmland: A Step Backward for Sustainable Agriculture?"

USDA Halts Funding for Wind and Solar Energy on Farmland, Continuing Shift Toward Fossil Fuels

Lebanon, Tennessee — In a significant policy shift, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced this week that it will cease funding for wind and solar energy projects on American farmland. This decision aligns with the Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to dismantle incentives for renewable energy while increasing support for fossil fuels and biofuels, which are often criticized for their land use and environmental inefficiencies.

During a press conference at the state fairgrounds in Lebanon, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins stated, “We will no longer allow businesses to use your taxpayer dollars to fund solar projects on prime American farmland.” She emphasized that the USDA would also prohibit the use of solar panels manufactured by foreign adversaries in USDA-funded projects.

This announcement is part of a broader initiative to revoke or reduce funding established under the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act, which had aimed to expand renewable energy sources, particularly benefiting farmers and agricultural communities.

Legislative Context

In July, President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which significantly reduced incentives for wind and solar energy while enhancing support for biofuels. This legislation restricts the use of solar components manufactured in China, a point echoed by Rollins during her remarks. The USDA’s formal announcement regarding funding cuts was made on Tuesday, although the agency did not respond to specific inquiries from Inside Climate News.

Supporters of the new policy, including Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-Penn.), chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture, argue that the primary concern is safeguarding the nation’s farmland and food security. “Secretary Rollins understands that food security is national security,” Thompson stated, highlighting the importance of preserving prime farmland for agricultural production.

Agricultural Implications

Currently, over half of the United States’ cropland—approximately 178 million acres out of 328 million total crop acres—is dedicated to growing corn and soybeans, much of which is utilized for biofuels rather than food. Notably, about one-third of the corn planted is used for corn-based ethanol, contributing roughly 4% to the nation’s fuel mix. Furthermore, over 40% of the soybean supply is allocated for biofuels, despite biodiesel accounting for less than 1% of the fuel mix.

The USDA’s decision to disqualify wind and solar projects from its Rural Development Business and Industry Guaranteed Loan Program, as well as from the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP), could have significant economic repercussions for farmers. Many have increasingly relied on income from wind and solar installations, especially as commodity prices have fluctuated and climate-related weather extremes have threatened agricultural production.

Local Perspectives

In Tennessee, where corn and soybeans dominate agricultural land use—covering about 2.5 million acres—a state commission found in 2024 that solar development did not pose a threat to farmland. However, local leaders, such as Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), have voiced strong support for the USDA’s new direction. Blackburn stated, “Tennessee farmland should be used to grow the crops that feed our state and country, not to house solar panels made by foreign countries like Communist China.”

Economic and Environmental Concerns

The USDA reported that the number of solar panels on farmland has surged by nearly 50% since 2021, prompting the agency to take action. A 2024 USDA analysis indicated that approximately 424,000 acres are currently utilized for wind and solar projects, representing only 0.05% of the total 897 million acres of pasture, rangeland, and crop land in the U.S. The agency also noted that agricultural land typically retains its characteristics and can still be used for farming even after solar or wind development.

Richa Patel, a policy specialist at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, expressed concern over the potential negative impact on farmers. “This is such a popular program—it saves them money and provides a potential financial source,” she said, describing the USDA’s decision as a setback for farmers and small businesses striving to make environmentally conscious choices.

Conclusion

The USDA’s recent policy shift marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over the future of renewable energy in the United States, particularly in relation to agricultural land use. As the administration prioritizes fossil fuels and biofuels, the implications for farmers, food security, and environmental sustainability remain to be fully understood. The economic landscape for farmers, who have increasingly turned to renewable energy as a supplemental income source, may face new challenges as these policies take effect.