You are here
News Feeds
China’s solar industry is losing money. The country is doubling down anyway.
Cheap, abundant Chinese solar panels have become essential to decarbonizing the global energy system. Without them, the world’s clean energy transition would have arguably been slower and more expensive. But China’s solar manufacturing industry now faces a bizarre problem: oversupply. Chinese solar manufacturers have built far more production capacity than the market can absorb. In fact, China now has enough factories to meet roughly twice the global demand for solar products, according to an analysis by the research firm Rhodium Group. If all newly announced factories get built, the country’s manufacturing capacity could double, further widening the gap between supply and demand.
The market imbalance has put Chinese solar panel makers in a precarious position. Market analysts and company executives say the industry’s central problem — a massive oversupply of panels — has triggered vicious “price wars” between competing companies and sent prices plummeting. In the first quarter of 2026, the country’s solar manufacturers announced $1.5 billion in losses, an extension of roughly three years of continuous unprofitability. Industry behemoths like JinkoSolar and Longi have also been facing slowing installations in China, U.S. trade barriers, and weaker global demand.
“There’s been an enormous amount of price wars internally in China, with companies just slashing prices to very, very low levels,” said Hannah Pitt, director of the energy and climate practice at Rhodium Group.
Chinese officials have spent years trying to curb the cutthroat competition, stem overproduction, and stabilize prices, with little success. For all but the most advanced solar products, prices kept falling, and companies kept building new facilities. Regional governments, which have invested heavily in solar supply chains, have been hesitant to trim local development. Some manufacturers even built illegal factories or produced panels without permits, according to reporting by the South China Morning Post.
“Everyone is wondering how long this can last,” said Martin Schachinger, a solar product wholesaler based in Germany. “Even TaleSun, a manufacturer we expected to go out of the market five years ago, still exists. So, it’s a little bit … spooky.”
China designated solar a strategic industry in 2010, prompting massive public investment. Local governments subsidized manufacturers, while private investors expanded every stage of the supply chain in anticipation of booming global demand. The resulting manufacturing ecosystem allowed Chinese firms to produce extraordinarily cheap solar panels for both domestic and international markets.
But production soon outpaced global demand, triggering a fierce battle as manufacturers slashed prices to win customers. The Chinese government dubbed this self-defeating competition neijuan, meaning “involution,” a term originally coined by Chinese students describing the relentless pressure to succeed with diminishing returns. Involution is a common trend in Chinese industries that receive heavy public support, including other clean energy sectors such as batteries and electric vehicles.
For the United States and the rest of the globe, the oversupply has meant consistent availability of cheap solar panels and components that boosted the adoption of renewable energy. Solar panels provided more electricity in the United States than coal for the first time on record in May, according to analysis of government data by Ember, an energy think tank. Globally, clean power sources, of which solar is the fastest growing, met all new electricity demand around the world in 2025, staving off an increase in fossil fuel generation. It’s helped China, the world’s largest net emitter of greenhouse gases, flatten its emissions growth, too. The country’s emissions appear to have plateaued and could soon peak.
If Chinese officials correct the oversupply problem, it could cool some of that rapid solar deployment. But experts say China is more focused on advancing its solar industry than rightsizing it, meaning the cheap solar panel prices may continue for years.
Read Next It’s official: Data centers are slowing America’s shift away from coal Jake BittleChinese officials have called for “concerted efforts” to rein in solar production as recently as April. But the country’s broader industrial policies and stated goals seem to be leaning away from strict discipline, focusing instead on upgrading solar supply chains to produce more advanced technologies, according to a May report by Rhodium Group. In other words, the oversupply problem isn’t scaring China away from its big bets on solar. In fact, its latest five-year plan signals that China will continue supporting its massive clean energy industries, including solar, “optimizing and upgrading“ those industries rather than clamping down on their oversupply.
“It’s a really interesting moment right now across Chinese industries. Instead of just trying to consolidate, Beijing is pushing industries to go further, to move into more advanced manufacturing,” said Pitt.
The strategy stands in stark contrast to the United States’ steady solar manufacturing growth, which relies on market conditions rather than government support. Over the past year, the Trump administration and Congress have weakened policy incentives for solar, cutting back tax credits expanded in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act and impeding solar development on federal land.
But demand for cheap solar has kept the industry growing. Unlike China’s self-sufficient solar empire, U.S. producers can’t meet all domestic demand for solar panels and are still heavily reliant on foreign components, primarily from China. While the U.S. pursues a slower, market-led approach, China has chosen a long-term state strategy that prioritizes manufacturing dominance over near-term profits.
That manufacturing dominance is especially important now that other countries are pushing back against China’s near-monopoly in the industry. The country’s efforts to upgrade its supply chains and move into higher-value products could help it stay ahead as new technologies reshape the solar market and countries attempt to build their own competing industries.
“If a solar company in Europe doesn’t make a joint venture with Chinese companies and use the huge advantages of the Chinese systems, then it won’t be successful,” said Schachinger. “From time to time, Indian manufacturers try to step into the European market, but against Chinese products, they have no advantages, and the prices are higher.”
That means if unsustainable business models or geopolitical tensions don’t spoil the boom, the world will have at least a few more years of low-cost Chinese solar products to supply its decarbonization goals, experts suspect.
“This isn’t over yet,” Pitt said. “I think the data points to prices remaining low for the foreseeable future.”
toolTips('.classtoolTips3','Carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and other gases that prevent heat from escaping Earth’s atmosphere. Together, they act as a blanket to keep the planet at a liveable temperature in what is known as the “greenhouse effect.” Too many of these gases, however, can cause excessive warming, disrupting fragile climates and ecosystems.'); toolTips('.classtoolTips4','The process of reducing the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that drive climate change, most often by deprioritizing the use of fossil fuels like oil and gas in favor of renewable sources of energy.');This story was originally published by Grist with the headline China’s solar industry is losing money. The country is doubling down anyway. on Jul 29, 2026.
Social media driving wild animal pet trade
Countryside campaigners strongly object to “harm” of Foxholes gas drilling
Gas drilling in a small village in the Yorkshire Wolds would cause “unacceptable harm”, a leading campaign organisation has said.
Entrance to the proposed gas site. Photo: DrillOrDropThe Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) has strongly objected to the plan at Foxholes, about nine miles from Scarborough, in North Yorkshire.
CPRE said a planning application by Egdon Resources should be refused.
A detailed response by the organisation’s North and East Yorkshire branch said:
“The proposal is inappropriate in this rural location, would cause unacceptable harm to countryside character and amenity, raises unresolved environmental and water protection concerns, would generate significant traffic and operational disturbance, and is inconsistent with the direction of travel required by climate change policy and responsible rural planning.”
It added:
“The proposal would introduce an intrusive industrial hydrocarbon exploration operation into a rural landscape, with associated drilling, testing, heavy goods vehicle movements, lighting, noise, emissions, water protection risks and long-term landscape and climate implications.
It said the operation, if approved, would “erode the local character and tranquillity of the area and would be at odds with the public interest in protecting the countryside for its landscape, amenity, ecological and cultural value”.
The organisation also said the application was “contrary to both national and local planning policies, inconsistent with the protection of rural character and amenity, and fails to demonstrate that the development can be made acceptable in this sensitive location.”
The earmarked site is on the edge of the proposed Yorkshire Wolds National Landscape, a designation that would bring the same level of protection given to national parks.
Egdon proposes to drill an exploration well through the chalk drinking water aquifer and next to the Gypsey Race, a rare chalk stream. Both the aquifer and the stream are considered internationally significant.
6CPRE formal response to Foxholes gas drilling planningk application Download Key issuesCPRE said the proposal would generate some short-term construction work, possibly increase exploratory knowledge and may contribute to future gas production.
But the organisation said there were many disadvantages, including:
- climate conflict and lack of need for new gas
- harm to the Yorkshire Wolds and proposed National Landscape sensitivity zone
- unacceptable noise risk in a quiet rural area
- unresolved highway safety, congestion and emergency-routing issues
- risk to the Gypsey Race and chalk aquifer
- disturbance to residents, vulnerable road users, agriculture and tourism
- uncertainty over restoration and future production pressure
CPRE said the site is in the setting of the proposed Yorkshire Wolds National Landscape, a distinctive region of open, rolling farmland, dry valleys, historic villages and relative tranquillity. The site is also within the 3.5km sensitivity zone of what would be a protected area.
The organisation said:
“approving hydrocarbon exploration in this landscape would set an undesirable precedent for further industrialisation of the Wolds and their rural setting”.
It said North Yorkshire Council, which will decide the planning application, should “attach ‘substantial weight’ to landscape protection, rural amenity and the conservation of countryside character”.
CPRE added:
“The council should not ignore the national significance of the landscape evidence or permit development within its immediate sensitivity zone that would prejudice, undermine or conflict with the purposes of designation”.
“Traffic risks on rural roads”CPRE said the scheme should be refused because of the impact on local roads from a “significant number of heavy goods vehicle [HGV] and operational vehicle movements”.
It said:
“Rural roads in and around Foxholes are not designed to accommodate sustained industrial traffic without harm to local amenity, road safety, verges, agricultural access and quiet enjoyment of the countryside.
Increased HGV traffic would add noise, vibration, emissions, perceived danger for residents, walkers, cyclists, horse riders and other road users, the organisation said.
It added:
“the rural road network should [not] be used to support fossil fuel exploration where the claimed public benefit is speculative and limited.”
CPRE also raised concerns that the proposed lorry route to the Foxhole site crossed Staxton Hill, 515ft high with a 1:4 gradient.
It said Egdon Resources had not provided sufficient detail of any alternative or emergency route if Staxton Hill were closed or unavailable.
“Without a fully assessed and consulted-upon emergency routing plan, the council cannot lawfully or rationally conclude that safe and suitable access has been demonstrated for all phases of the development”.
The organisation said the impacts of the scheme on local roads “should therefore be treated as severe, or at the very least inadequately assessed, and permission should be refused until the applicant has demonstrated safe and suitable access for all users and the absence of unacceptable or severe cumulative transport effects”.
“Unresolved risks to water resources”CPRE said the application had not “demonstrated that standard mitigation, monitoring and regulatory controls are sufficient to overcome the planning objection in this sensitive rural and hydrogeological context”.
It said the Yorkshire Wolds chalk aquifer was particularly vulnerable because groundwater can move through fractures and fissures and contaminants may travel unpredictably and rapidly.
It urged the council to apply a precautionary approach and “require clear, independent evidence that serious or irreversible harm can be ruled out”.
CPRE said North Yorkshire Council should not defer “fundamental questions of water protection to later permitting regimes where those matters are also relevant to land use planning.
The organisation added it would be “perverse” for the planning system to support a project to restore the Gypsey Race, “while simultaneously permitting a new fossil fuel drilling operation” nearby “without a compelling need and without eliminating the risk of harm to the chalk aquifer and chalk stream system”.
“Disturbance to residents”CPRE said of the drilling proposal:
“it would introduce noise, lighting, dust, odour and industrial activity harmful to residential and rural amenity”.
It said planning conditions would not “adequately protect residents and the rural environment”.
CPRE said the current night-time noise levels were very low. It specifically opposed Egdon’s suggested night-time noise limits.
It said:
“the Council should require Egdon to show why materially lower night-time limits cannot be achieved and why the operation cannot be designed to avoid night-time drilling noise impacts altogether.”
“Climate change and fossil fuel dependence”CPRE said it objected in principle to new hydrocarbon exploration because this would prolong dependence on fossil fuels when national policy, scientific evidence and public interest required accelerated transition to renewable and low carbon energy.
It said the planning case for the Foxholes proposal was “weak”. The development was not needed to meet a compelling local or national requirement for new gas extraction, the organisation said.
“The claimed economic benefits here are limited and temporary, while the proposal would enable a form of energy development that is inconsistent with the direction of national climate policy and the urgent need to decarbonise. On that basis, the development is not sustainable development and should be refused.”
TomKat Ranch Earns Audubon Bird-Friendly Land Certification
Update: New Little Nature Playgrounds are Coming to Cobbs Creek Park
Three new Little Nature Playgrounds are planned for Cobbs Creek Park. Designed with input from local residents, these welcoming spaces will encourage children and families to explore the park, learn about its history and ecology, and safely access the trail from nearby neighborhoods.
Each playground will feature a combination of nature-inspired elements, colorful asphalt art, and wayfinding maps that help connect visitors to Cobbs Creek Park.
Clean Air Council is partnering with Philadelphia Parks and Recreation, Tiny WPA, Amber Art and Design, and community organizations to bring this vision to life.
How does the Little Nature Playground Project help the surrounding community?- Connect neighbors to park resources and the physical, social, emotional benefits of green space.
- Offer fun, nature-based play and learning opportunities that encourage repeated visits to the park.
- Welcome the community into Cobbs Creek Park through safe, accessible entrances
Community input has shaped every step of this project. Over the past six months, Clean Air Council and community partners have presented the Little Nature Playground Project at almost a dozen in-person meetings and events.These conversations were designed to gather design and location feedback while ensuring the project reflects the community’s vision.
Partnering with the Cobbs Creek Community Environmental Center and area libraries, the Council shared updates through community meetings, educational programs, and events. The Council also held a series of “dinner and design workshops” to gain perspectives from neighbors and distributed flyers to encourage participation.
Workshop attendees offered feedback and insight into the project’s themes. Initial project locations were identified by using existing pedestrian safety infrastructure, including traffic signals, crosswalks, and pedestrian crossing signals. Community members voted on their favorite locations and the top three crossing sites were selected.
Throughout the last six months, online surveys and meetings with community stakeholders have helped refine the three playground locations and their themes. Project consultants are currently designing initial project sketches.
Little Nature Playground Proposed Locations- Woodland Ave. and Cobbs Creek Parkway (north side)
- Market St. and 63rd St. (north side)
- Spruce St. and Cobbs Creek Parkway (south side)
Location: Woodland Ave. and Cobbs Creek Parkway
Theme: Lenape history and connecting to the creek
“Karakung” is the Lenape name for Cobbs Creek and translates to “the place of the wild geese.” One element of the play structure could be different geese that people can climb and sit on. Above is a mock up of what one of the geese could look like.
Location: 63rd St. and Market St.
Theme: Nature of Cobbs Creek Park (native plants, flowers, animals)
Many neighbors talked about wanting a place to rest along the trail during different community feedback sessions. Above is an image of a mock up of a bench in the shape of a creek. Elements that may be highlighted in the play structure design include local animals, native flowers, and the creek.
Location: Spruce St. and 63rd St.
Theme: Celebrating Cobbs Creek communities
Inspired by conversations with community groups and neighbors, this location will celebrate the collective energy put into supporting and caring for the community. The design will recognize that supporting young people is a key part of the neighborhood’s success. The creek bench may also be included in this location.
How can the surrounding community continue to inform this project and lead the vision?Community members are encouraged to sign up to attend one or all of the upcoming Cobbs Creek Neighbors RCO community meetings, where we will be giving project updates and continuing to gain community feedback. These meetings will take place Monday evenings at the Blanche A. Nixon/Cobbs Creek Library, 5800 Cobbs Creek Parkway, Philadelphia, PA 19143. Register for free below to keep updated on any changes!
- September 14, 5:30 – 7 p.m. Register
- November 2, 5:30 – 7 p.m. Register
- December 7, 5:30 – 7 p.m. Register
Follow @CobbsCreekWatershedCoaltion on Instagram and Facebook for updates!
Questions? Email Trails@cleanair.org
Urban Living Labs Are Missing Their Ecology: Why the next generation of urban experimentation must begin with watersheds, ecosystem services, and ecological governance
Fact brief - Do solar plants require backup from fossil fuels?
Skeptical Science is partnering with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. You can submit claims you think need checking via the tipline.
Do solar plants require backup from fossil fuels?Solar plants require backup, but it doesn’t have to be from fossil fuels.
A combination of renewables, energy storage, and long-distance transmission can reliably power the majority of the U.S. without relying on coal, oil, or natural gas, as one 2017 research paper describes. Renewables like wind can generate under cloudy conditions, while surplus solar from brighter weather can be stored in utility-scale batteries for rainy days. Additionally, transmission from neighboring regions can assist solar capacity drops.
The Department of Energy and Princeton have outlined decarbonization scenarios projecting expansion of solar and decrease in fossil fuels while maintaining reliability. Analysis of real-world outcomes has found that renewables growth has actually outperformed projections.
California is an example of improving reliability while transitioning from fossil fuels to solar. From 2015 to 2025, in-state generation saw a jump in solar reliance from 8% to 27%, while natural gas dropped from 60% to 36%.
Go to full rebuttal on Skeptical Science or to the fact brief on Gigafact
This fact brief is responsive to quotes such as this one.
Sources
The Electricity Journal Reliably integrating variable renewables: Moving grid flexibility resources from models to results
The Alliance for Climate Transition Institute Solar energy requires 100% fossil fuel backup
Princeton University Net-Zero America
University of Virginia Decarbonization by 2050: Are We on Track?
California Energy Commission CA Electric Generation 2001-25
California Energy Commission California Energy Leaders Report Progress on Grid Reliability Ahead of Summer 2026
MIT The Future of Energy Storage
Columbia Law School Sabin Center for Climate Change Law Rebutting 33 False Claims About Solar, Wind, and Electric Vehicles
Please use this form to provide feedback about this fact brief. This will help us to better gauge its impact and usability. Thank you!
About fact briefs published on Gigafact
Fact briefs are short, credibly sourced summaries that offer "yes/no" answers in response to claims found online. They rely on publicly available, often primary source data and documents. Fact briefs are created by contributors to Gigafact — a nonprofit project looking to expand participation in fact-checking and protect the democratic process. See all of our published fact briefs here.
Buying cookware? A California law makes it easier to spot PFAS in kitchen products
For years, the “forever chemicals” known as PFAS were used in many products that touch food, including popcorn bags, pizza boxes, pans and other cookware. Concerns about PFAS’ health harms then led many states to either restrict or outright ban the chemicals in specific items.
Eventually, outcry over these toxic substances led to manufacturers phasing out their use in food packaging nationwide. But they’re still allowed in kitchen products.
That doesn’t mean you’re stuck with PFAS when you’re shopping for pots and pans.
Thanks to a California law that banned PFAS in paper-based food packaging, it is now possible for consumers across the country to find out which companies use PFAS in their products. That’s because the law also included language ordering companies to disclose on their websites if they use PFAS in their cookware – information anyone can see, not just Californians.
Which companies use PFAS?Last week, the environmental group Defend Our Health compiled this data and released a public directory detailing PFAS usage claims by over 200 cookware companies. You can check the directory to see if a product you are interested in purchasing is labeled PFAS-free.
Of the 210 companies, about 40%, or 82 companies, disclosed their products contained PFAS. A total of 44 companies clearly disclosed through the California requirements that they don’t use PFAS in their products.
Another 23 companies stated that they do not use PFAS, but these claims could not be verified because the companies either did not provide a disclosure in keeping with the California requirement or may have been exempt from the disclosure requirement under California law.
Widespread contaminationTeflon and other PFAS-coated cookware are the poster child for a contamination crisis that extends across the globe, with the chemicals detected in soil, water and air.
Exposure to PFAS at incredibly low concentrations can lead to health harms that have been documented in nearly every system in the body. The chemicals have been linked to cancer, reproductive and immune system harm and other diseases.
When pans coated with the forever chemical PTFE are heated above roughly 400 to 500 degrees Fahrenheit, they can release hazardous fumes. Overheating has been linked to a documented condition called polymer fume fever, sometimes known as “Teflon flu.”
PFAS in nonstick cookware and other consumer and industrial products remain a concern throughout their lifecycle – from manufacturing and use to disposal – because they can pollute the environment and contribute to human exposure..
EWG for over 20 years has recommended consumers avoid nonstick pans. EWG commissioned tests of nonstick pans in 2003 and published a report, “Canaries in the Kitchen,” showing that pans can overheat and off-gas pollutants within minutes of use.
In 2021, EWG scientists summarized peer-reviewed studies showing that PFAS can migrate from containers and cookware into food. Our recommendation still stands: Seek out cast iron, stainless steel or carbon steel cookware.
States are leading the wayStates are taking steps to tackle PFAS in kitchen products.
In 2025, California Senate Bill 682, authored by state Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), would have banned the sale of cookware containing intentionally added PFAS beginning in 2030. Despite passing the Legislature, the measure was vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, meaning the chemicals can still be used in products sold in the state.
That veto didn’t slow other states from banning PFAS in cookware outright.
Amara’s Law ended the sale of PFAS cookware in Minnesota, the first state to do so. The law took effect in 2025. Maine and Colorado PFAS cookware bans took effect in January 2026. Connecticut, Vermont and Washington have bans on the use of PFAS in cookware set to take effect in the coming years.
States also set the first PFAS drinking water standards, and they continue to lead on tackling other sources of forever chemicals contamination.
According to the SaferStates PFAS tracker, 17 states have legislation pending that would end the use of PFAS in categories ranging from textiles and dental floss to cookware and firefighting foam.
This state-driven action is leading to real change. Online disclosure of PFAS use is an important first step for consumers, but more change is still needed. Some companies already go beyond what is required in California by independently verifying their products are PFAS-free.
Reducing your exposure to PFASPFAS exposure is widespread, because this class of chemicals has found its way into hundreds of products used every day by consumers.
Research indicates the source of exposure comes from food, water and PFAS that have migrated into dust from household products. No single step will completely eliminate exposure, but small changes matter.
Start with the sources you can control, including:
- Choose PFAS-free cookware
- Filter PFAS from your tap water
- Cook fresh food at home as much as possible and limit takeout
- Vacuum frequently with a HEPA-filter vacuum to remove household dust
- Avoid purchasing products marketed as “stain resistant,” “water proof” and “long lasting.”
Nature Journaling Protects Birds and the Places They Need
In Germany, Wind and Solar Overtake Fossil Fuels
In a first, Germany drew more power from wind and solar than from fossil fuels last year.
Links & Information: The Road to Organic
View USDA’s guide on how to become certified organic: Becoming Certified Find certifying agents in your area using USDA’s Organic Certifier Locator FSA’s Organic Certification Cost Share Program provides cost share assistance for farmers who are obtaining or renewing their organic certification. The program covers up to 75% of certification costs. The application deadline for […]
The post Links & Information: The Road to Organic appeared first on RAFI.
Links & Information: Corporate Welfare Queens
Books & Articles Why SNAP Works, by Christopher Bosso (2025) The Queen: The Forgotten Life Behind an American Myth by Josh Levin (2019) “Welfare queen” stereotype (2022) Big Hunger by Andrew Fisher (2017) The Painful Truth about Hunger in America by Mariana Chilton (2024) Videos & Documentaries A Place at the Table (2013) The danger […]
The post Links & Information: Corporate Welfare Queens appeared first on RAFI.
Links & Information – Farming with Disabilities
The National AgrAbility Project currently has state / regional projects in 21 states: AK, CA, UT, NM, CO, TX, SD, NE, MO, WI, IL, IN, MI, OH, PA, ME, VA, TN, SC, GA, & FL. Five additional states also have affiliate projects: ID, WY, KS, IA, & NC. Learn more about service in your state […]
The post Links & Information – Farming with Disabilities appeared first on RAFI.
Inside the ‘America First’ makeover of a global hunger program
Bassirou Sani Boubacar Gaoh has spent the last decade trying to figure out how the plants feeding millions across Niger can better withstand the unpredictability of a warming planet. Extreme heat waves and severe droughts that alternate with heavy rainfall and flash floods are imperiling the many millet, rice, and sorghum farms throughout the Sahel region, where temperatures have risen much faster than the global average.
Yet the biggest threat to those farms is neither heat, droughts, nor floods, but the infestations unleashed with their arrival. The millet head miner is one of the most notorious of these hordes. The destructive moth lays eggs directly onto the flowering heads of the pearl millet crop, which hatch into larvae that feed voraciously from within the plant’s florets. Drought, sandy soils, and certain farming practices, such as sowing fields too early, only worsen infestations.
“In a bad year, it can wipe out a large part of a family harvest,” said Boubacar Gaoh. Domestic agriculture, he noted, is both the West African nation’s economic backbone and the foundation of most families’ access to food. Roughly 2.4 million people throughout Niger face acute food insecurity and 1.6 million children suffer from acute malnutrition. “When you’re talking about a crop that feeds the household, that isn’t just lost income. It’s less food on the table,” he said.
Bassirou Sani Boubacar Gaoh (center) and another researcher talk with a farmer in Konni, Niger, about the pest challenges he faces in his field.Courtesy of Bassirou Sani Boubacar Gaoh
Boubacar Gaoh’s grandparents were millet farmers, so as a plant breeder in Niamey specializing in staple crops, he’s personally invested in developing on-the-ground solutions to help protect growers from pests like the millet head miner. In November 2024, he launched a program that sought to equip local farmers with the tools they need for crop disease surveillance and pest control. In partnership with an agricultural research hub hosted by Pennsylvania State University, the work was funded through the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Feed the Future Innovation Labs program.
From the start, he and his team set out to visit farmers across Niger, offering hands-on training on how to fight pests and disease affecting their harvests, teaching them not only how to use free technologies like PlantVillage, an AI-powered mobile platform for pest and disease forecasting, but how to confront infestations. Solutions for containing infestations vary, but farmers first must spot the bugs behind them — a tricky feat, especially in the case of the millet head miner, which can do some real damage undetected. That’s where monitoring tools, said Boubacar Gaoh, can make all the difference. “Timing is everything. … It only strikes during a short window as the grain forms,” he said. “The real reduction in crop loss comes from acting on that warning at the right moment.”
Last January, they were preparing to roll out the use of natural predators to eradicate the millet head miner, along with a multitude of other agricultural menaces. They’d even just met with officials at Niger’s Ministry of Agriculture to negotiate use of their data to inform the government’s understanding of crop health and national surveillance systems.
Then, without warning, it was all over. On January 24, 2025, days after his inauguration, President Donald Trump issued a stop-work order that suspended nearly all of USAID’s overseas programs, before dismantling the agency entirely. In the months that followed, nearly all of the 17 core Innovation Labs, anchored in American universities with a network of international partners, received funding termination notices.
Boubacar Gaoh stayed on part time, drawing on a small stipend provided by a donor to the Penn State lab, but the rest of his team in Niger was let go. In the year and a half since, he has pivoted to chasing funding sources in an increasingly fraught and competitive philanthropic landscape. He’s had little luck.
“I was surprised when it was stopped — because, why? Everyone knows that with climate change, pests are moving around. The conditions are so that these pests can grow and develop in the region where previously they couldn’t develop and affect food supply,” said Boubacar Gaoh.
Boubacar Gaoh’s team conducted diagnostic visits all over Niger, including at a watermelon plot (left) and a vegetable farm (right). Then, without warning, it was all over. Courtesy of Bassirou Sani Boubacar Gaoh
A statement by the White House on the funding cuts issued last fall, when it formally cancelled the $72 million funding the program, described USAID’s spending as “woke, weaponized, and wasteful.” By then, the administration had gutted all but one lab. The Climate-Resilient Cereals Innovation Lab at Kansas State University was given the go-ahead to continue its research. (The lab has since rebranded itself as the “Innovation Lab for Cereals.”) Because Congress appropriated the funds, questions surfaced on the legality of Trump’s power to withhold the funding, but then the Supreme Court ruled that the president had the discretion to do so.
“Why were all the other labs terminated?” Timothy Dalton, then-interim director of the Kansas lab, asked at the time. “When they’re doing such critically important work as we are doing, in order to combat global food insecurity and to generate scientific advances that can be harnessed by the U.S. agricultural community?” A university spokesperson for the cereals lab declined Grist’s request for an interview.
This March, the State Department issued a new call for proposals for Feed the Future Innovation Labs, inviting any U.S.-based university to submit a statement of interest in an open competition for the resurrected program. The call for applications described the labs as mechanisms “to advance global food security in alignment with U.S. policy through targeted research.” Approximately five to seven awards were anticipated, the listing noted, ranging from $20 million to $40 million. To the scientists watching their labs get dismantled a year earlier, the announcement raised an obvious question: resurrected for whom, and to do what?
Although the labs’ stated goals on hunger and food security haven’t changed much, where the work happens could look very different under the Trump administration’s redesigned version of the program. Former USAID officials and innovation lab directors told Grist that they are concerned that lower-income African regions, which had always been the focus of the program, have now been deprioritized in favor of countries in the Western Hemisphere.
“A 27-page document of criteria, and Africa gets three paragraphs on the last page,” said Jim Gaffney, a former general development officer at USAID’s Bureau for Food Security. “It never says you should not work in African countries. But it’s obvious it’s not terribly important to them.”
According to one American researcher, “We were learning from African colleagues about genetic sources of disease resistance that we could bring over. … It was a two-way street.” Courtesy of Bassirou Sani Boubacar GaohAfrica just surpassed Asia as the continent with the largest number of people facing hunger, according to the annual State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report released last week by a cohort of United Nations agencies. Swaths of the continent are seeing temperature rises up to 1.5 times the global mean, which imperils food security, ecosystems, and economies, and has fueled mass displacement and migration. Floods, heat waves, and droughts forced 700,000 people out of their homes in 2024, according to the U.N. World Meteorological Organization. A growing body of research has found food insecurity, climate change, and migration to be closely interlinked with geopolitical instability.
Gaffney said the State Department’s implicit deprioritization of Africa is likely to have created a chilling effect on the number of agricultural research and development proposals focusing on the continent, which could have serious knock-on implications for the global food system. “People say, ‘Well, it’s good, it’s great that we’re doing these things for these low-income countries,’ but it’s also great for U.S. research,” said Gaffney. “We solve problems in Africa, and those same problems might hit our shores someday here in the U.S., and we’ll be ready for them.” The other major change in the call for applications was the erasure of climate-related research priorities.
Across the country, universities followed the guidelines: They stripped their submissions of mentions of “climate change” and pivoted to “desirable” geographies.
Read Next Trump gutted USAID. Hunger and violence followed. Ayurella Horn-MullerDavid Hughes, the former director of the Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Current and Emerging Threats to Crops at Penn State, which had supported Boubacar Gaoh’s work in Niger, said his team swapped out terms like “climate change stress” for “drought” in their application. The State Department didn’t respond to a question about their decision-making process, but, referring to the practices of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, Hughes says that the Penn State team had in mind that the government had been “running these proposals through word search or AI.”
The Penn State lab also expanded its geographic range. Their application, shared with Grist, listed Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, Colombia, Peru, Ghana, Côte d’Ivoire, Kenya, and Nepal as proposed target countries. It did not mention supporting Boubacar Gaoh’s efforts in Niger. “We did, of course, maybe do a little more in this hemisphere. Although I point out that this hemisphere includes West Africa as well. I don’t think they know their geography,” said Hughes. Ultimately, the lab’s application was denied.
In a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing last June, Republican Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith, who represents Mississippi, asked Russell Vought, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, for assurances that specific innovation labs, including a Mississippi State University lab focused on fisheries, would be protected from budget cuts.
“The lab’s work illustrates the proverb, ‘Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.’ This is exactly what the MSU Fish Innovation Lab is doing,” said Hyde-Smith at the hearing. “Rather than giving other countries food, we are teaching them how to feed themselves through modern aquaculture practices.”
The next iteration of innovation labs is starting to take shape. A preliminary list obtained by Grist reveals that approximately seven new project proposals have advanced to the next and final stage of the application round. The labs advancing are from institutions almost exclusively in Republican-majority states. Kansas State University, Mississippi State University, the University of Florida, two labs at Alabama’s Auburn University, South Carolina’s Clemson University, and the University of Georgia were all asked to submit a full proposal, according to multiple sources familiar with the State Department’s new program. The work led by Clemson features a collaboration with the University of Hawaiʻi, making it the only lab with blue-state representation.
Sources told Grist that the team behind the Mississippi State proposal is from the very same fisheries lab that Hyde-Smith had publicly lobbied Vought for. The lab declined Grist’s request for an interview.
“It doesn’t feel like, by chance, it would just be red states receiving these awards,” said a former USAID official involved with the program who asked to remain anonymous.
Others are questioning whether the administration’s newfound version of the innovation labs will actually look all that different to the version that was culled. Carrie Seay-Fleming, an assistant professor specializing in food security and the environment at the University of Minnesota Duluth who has studied the impact of Feed the Future, found a surprisingly similar emphasis on “increasing productivity” and “market-based solutions” in the State Department’s language. “Which of course makes you wonder what the cancellation of the old programs achieved,” said Seay-Fleming.
A spokesperson at the State Department told Grist in an email that “applications are evaluated against the published criteria in the funding opportunity, without regard to the political characteristics of an applicant’s home state.” The spokesperson declined to clarify when grant awards would be finalized or announced, nor did they comment on changes to funding criteria. However, the spokesperson did note that the agency plans to obligate funds into awards by the end of the federal fiscal year on September 30.
The spokesperson said the Feed the Future Innovation Labs funding opportunity is evaluated to ensure it makes the country stronger, safer, and more prosperous. In order to align with national interests, foreign assistance and research investments must “directly benefit American farmers, researchers, and taxpayers, rather than being shaped by the priorities of the prior administration,” the spokesperson added.
Among those invited to advance was the Innovation Lab for Peanut at the University of Georgia, which worked with peanut farmers in roughly 13 countries but focused on Senegal, Ghana, Uganda, Malawi, and Zambia, and had been a participant in the earlier version of the USAID program. After the collapse of USAID, the lab was forced to close. When the administration resurrected the funds, former lab leadership decided to apply for the funds and see if they could rebuild much of the work they had been doing beforehand. Jamie Rhoads, former assistant director at the peanut lab, wasn’t optimistic about their chances.
“We tried to globalize it a little bit, and shifted the language a little bit toward the more safer, stronger, more ‘America First’ kind of language,” said Rhoads, who contributed to the new proposal. “We kind of made a pitch for the sake of the U.S. industry, and also the potential domestic demand happening in Africa, [that] this is a valuable investment to make in Africa.”
Read Next To keep climate science alive, researchers are speaking in code Kate Yoder, Ayurella Horn-Muller, & Clayton AldernSo it was a welcome surprise when, in June, the UGA lab advanced to the next, and final, stage of the State Department’s process. “It was kind of frustrating because we had to put all this ‘America First’ language into it, but a lot of what we were doing was already, in the best sense of things, using American goodwill and technology,” said Rhoads. “We were learning from African colleagues about genetic sources of disease resistance that we could bring over that are useful for our varieties potentially, or globally. It was a two-way street.”
Indeed, American farmers would also benefit from this type of research based in Africa. That includes farmers like Josh Johnson, who runs the Old Tyme Bean Company in Elloree, South Carolina. In recent years, as rising temperatures have made it increasingly difficult to grow varieties of heat-sensitive Southern crops, Johnson has pivoted toward growing cowpeas, a drought-tolerant crop that’s regionally popular and has long been a major food commodity throughout western and central Africa. But that introduced Johnson to a whole new threat: the cowpea curculio, a destructive weevil whose larvae feed on the seeds inside the legume’s pod. Within the last two years, the curculio has taken almost half of Johnson’s acreage of the bean plant.
Josh Johnson (right) and his sons grow crops like cowpea, a major food commodity in western and central Africa, on their family farm in Elloree, South Carolina. Courtesy of Josh Johnson“You’ll start shelling those peas, and you’ll end up with maggots and larva coming out the shells,” said Johnson. “You can imagine how selling something like that would be terrible. … It is a booger-bear to control.”
To fight the wily bug, Johnson sprays the perimeter of his fields with pesticides. But it only does so much. When the small weevil senses a tractor’s movement, it balls up, drops to ground, and plays dead to protect itself, also making it nearly impossible to spot. Johnson said he desperately needs a new tool or technique that would allow him to better track and stave off outbreaks well before they spread.
A solution not unlike the on-farm pest surveillance Boubacar Gaoh had been working to develop half a world away.
Climate change is only making crop infestations like these worse, forcing farmers and scientists from South Carolina to Niger to contend with new pathogens, as warming temperatures reshuffle the geographic range of pests worldwide. “Some pests that you find now in Africa, in a few years maybe you will find it in America. So I think it’s really relevant to deal with them at the source,” said Boubacar Gaoh. “Pests, they don’t need visas to travel.”
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Inside the ‘America First’ makeover of a global hunger program on Jul 28, 2026.
Next stop for California’s high-speed rail: Finding private investors
California has spent nearly two decades relying on taxpayers to finance its high-speed rail project. Now it’s looking to private investors.
Whether any step up remains an open question.
The search for private money was always part of the plan. When Californians approved a bond measure to fund the project in 2008, they pictured a system to rival the best in the world. Sleek trains would whisk riders between San Francisco and Los Angeles in just 2 hours and 40 minutes. Using renewable energy would cut emissions by up to 3 million metric tons annually. Voters were willing to put up $10 billion to make this dream a reality.
Everyone knew that wouldn’t be enough.
The bond was never meant to cover the entire cost. State officials envisioned the federal government and private sector contributing equally toward the projected $45 billion budget. But Washington’s support ebbed and flowed with each president. After years of legal battles with the Trump administration, the state said “the federal government is not a reliable, constructive, or trustworthy partner” in advancing the project. Private capital, meanwhile, has largely remained on the sidelines.
That may soon change. The California High-Speed Rail Authority recently announced a $25 million agreement with a consortium of companies that will explore ways to advance the project. Over the next six months, it will develop funding strategies to expand the project beyond the state’s Central Valley, potentially into San Francisco and Los Angeles.
“This agreement reflects growing market confidence in that strategy and the long-term potential of California high-speed rail as a transformative investment in California’s future,” Ian Choudri, the agency’s CEO, said in a news release. Choudri said the agency has spent the past year taking steps to “reposition” the project around “a more commercially focused and delivery-oriented strategy.”
Most of the construction is focused in the Central Valley, where the first phase will connect the cities of Merced and Bakersfield. The rail authority chose to start there because it offered the quickest and cheapest path to getting trains running. It is also an opportunity to bring a state-of-the-art transportation system to a region long overlooked by the state. Crews have completed dozens of bridges and viaducts and laid almost 90 miles of guideway. Their efforts will soon shift to laying track.
Linking San Francisco and Los Angeles is expected to cost $126 billion, with service slated to begin in 2040. Even the first phase alone will likely require tens of billions of dollars. Last year, the state committed $1 billion annually to finance the project through 2045.
Read Next Billions spent, miles to go: The story of California’s failure to build high-speed rail Benton GrahamGenevieve Giuliano, a professor emeritus of public policy at the University of Southern California, said the rail authority’s announcement doesn’t mean an influx of private capital is imminent. It is simply an agreement to explore how that might happen. “Until I see something that says, ‘Company X is going to put up $10 billion under the following conditions,’ I don’t see that as we’re getting private money in here,” she said.
She also doesn’t see the private sector taking on any risk until it has a guaranteed revenue stream and is confident the project will be profitable.
Others see opportunities for private investment, but not necessarily in financing the railway.
“I do not believe there will be any at-risk private investment in expanding the system,” said Lou Thompson, who chaired the High-Speed Rail Peer Review Group from 2012 until 2024.
Instead, he sees investors finding opportunities in merchandising, such as T-shirts, caps, and model trains, and residential and business development around stations. The rail authority sees that potential, too. It could allow cable companies to install fiber optic lines alongside tracks, for example, or produce surplus energy for utilities. The agency expects to have an agreement in place with power companies later this year to consider opportunities.
Whether those opportunities lead to significant investments remains uncertain. But establishing a business consortium to find out shows California is willing to get creative, said transportation expert Joe Schwieterman.
“They’re not settling for a go-slow approach that pushes key decisions off to the next generation,” said Schwieterman, who leads the Sustainable Urban Development Project at DePaul University. He conceded that “there’s still gigantic financial hurdles ahead,” not the least of which is that the funding needed to finish the project “has yet to be identified.”
Andy Kunz sees reason for optimism. He sees private capital helping the rail system reach the more profitable cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles. “Having private sector groups show up just gives us more confidence that it’ll be done more quickly,” said Kunz, head of the U.S. High-Speed Rail Association. That’s important, given the meager federal support the project has.
“Because our public sector is not really leading the charge, this is really exciting,” he said. “We now have a private sector group stepping in to help get these first couple of projects going.”
Choudri has been pursuing that exact strategy since taking the helm at the California High-Speed Rail Authority in 2024. He told Grist the timing is right, given the state’s promise of annual funding and the project now owns all of the land needed to complete the first 119 miles.
“We need to turn this project into a business,” he said. “We need to build this corridor having rail as primary service, but then use it for other economic development and growth in order for us to be self-sustainable.”
Correction – An earlier version of this story misstated the initial projected budget for the project and the amount of guideway that has been laid.
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Next stop for California’s high-speed rail: Finding private investors on Jul 28, 2026.
Book previews: summer 2026
David Matthews shares his pick of the best books upcoming and hot off the press – perfect for holiday and sunny day reads
The post Book previews: summer 2026 appeared first on Red Pepper.
Rapid decline in Arctic sea ice
Sunset at the Gualala River
Sunset at the Gualala River on July 21, 2026
Photo courtesy of Michael Coustier
International Longshore and Warehouse Union Local 6 and C&H Sugar Company, Inc. Take Steps Toward Resolving the Parties’ Contract Negotiations
Ave Maria University Student Documents Changes in Insect Populations Following Development
Pages
The Fine Print I:
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are not the official position of the IWW (or even the IWW’s EUC) unless otherwise indicated and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s, nor should it be assumed that any of these authors automatically support the IWW or endorse any of its positions.
Further: the inclusion of a link on our site (other than the link to the main IWW site) does not imply endorsement by or an alliance with the IWW. These sites have been chosen by our members due to their perceived relevance to the IWW EUC and are included here for informational purposes only. If you have any suggestions or comments on any of the links included (or not included) above, please contact us.
The Fine Print II:
Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc.
It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.




