News Feeds

The showroom at the Washington Cattlemen’s Association Convention & Tradeshow was bustling on a November afternoon. The keynote speech had just let out, and people shuffled from booth to booth...

EWG statement: RFK Jr. doubles down on defense of Trump order boosting glyphosate production, betraying vow to crack down on toxic pesticides Monica Amarelo February 23, 2026

WASHINGTON – Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is standing firm in his defense of a White House executive order to ramp up production of the weedkiller glyphosate. 

That’s the very herbicide Kennedy once condemned in court as a “probable carcinogen.” 

Now the Trump administration is treating this toxic pesticide as if it were a matter of national defense. And it’s invoking the Defense Production Act, a power typically reserved for wartime emergencies, as justification.

Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in American agriculture. It has been linked to non-Hodgkin lymphoma in thousands of lawsuits that have cost manufacturers tens of billions of dollars. 

As a trial lawyer, Kennedy in 2018 helped secure a landmark $289 million jury verdict against Monsanto, arguing the company knew glyphosate exposure increased cancer risk. 

But the chemical he once portrayed as a poison is now being framed as essential infrastructure that’s “critical to national security.”

The following is a statement from EWG President and co-Founder Ken Cook:

This isn’t a policy adjustment, it’s a total surrender to the chemical industry. 

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. built his political brand by holding chemical companies accountable for poisoning communities. Now he is defending a federal order designed to accelerate production of the very pesticide he once called dangerous.

He has officially traded the health of America’s children for a seat at the table of power.

The rationale for liability protection Kennedy is now championing for a weed killer he considers carcinogenic, and is found in most Americans, is remarkably similar to the rationale for liability protection for vaccine manufacturers that he has vehemently opposed. 

It’s just another glaring example of Kennedy’s betrayal of his professed values and the long-held positions he used to sell MAHA supporters on voting for Trump.

One important difference between the administration’s approach to vaccines and glyphosate is that no compensation mechanism will be offered to people injured by glyphosate after Monsanto/Bayer is shielded from liability.

In the face of an administration that habitually never shows its work, the public has a right to know what plans the administration has implemented to advance the ‘emerging technology’ Kennedy mentions. Where are those plans? Who is developing them? Does the Agriculture Department agree glyphosate should be phased out – is that the formal position of the Trump administration?

To the concerned parents who put their trust in his promise to ‘clean up the food supply,’ this is the ultimate betrayal. 

The real national security crisis is not a temporary disruption to glyphosate supply. It’s the epidemic of chronic disease devastating American children. It's the cancer clusters in agricultural communities that RFK Jr. himself acknowledges. 

It's a food system so saturated with pesticides that the U.S. uses 25% of global pesticides, despite being 4% of the world's population.

If anyone still wondered whether ‘Make America Healthy Again’ was a genuine commitment to public health or a scam concocted by President Trump and RFK Jr. to rally health-conscious voters in 2024, the administration’s ramping up the use of glyphosate answers that question. 

###

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

  Areas of Focus Food & Water Farming & Agriculture Glyphosate Pesticides Press Contact Monica Amarelo monica@ewg.org (202) 939-9140 February 23, 2026

Norway has won the most medals at the Winter Olympics since the games began in 1924 — 405 total, including 148 gold. On top of its winter sport dominance, Norway has led the way in clean energy and emissions reduction.

Approximately 98% of electricity is from hydro or wind power

Norway has a legacy of hydropower that goes back to the 19th century — the first hydropower plant owned by a municipality came into production in 1891 in the Arctic town of Hammerfest. Today, hydropower supplies almost 90 percent of Norway’s electricity generation. Although hydropower is likely to remain the backbone of the Norwegian power system, support for wind power is growing (currently around 9 percent of electricity generation), and the government aims to have 30,000 MW of offshore wind production by 2040.

Electric vehicles made up 96% of new car sales in 2025

Norway has the highest number of electric vehicles per capita in the world. In 2017, the Norwegian Parliament set a goal that all new cars sold by 2025 should be zero-emission (electric or hydrogen). Through a combination of carrots and sticks, Norway has incentivized the purchase of electric vehicles to the point that 96 percent of new cars sold in 2025 were electric (up from 89% in 2024).

The lowest methane emissions intensity of any oil and gas producer

Although its grid is clean, the country is the fourth largest natural gas exporter in the world, with about 95 percent of Norwegian gas going to the European Union and United Kingdom.

Norway leads the world in ensuring its oil and gas production limits methane, a powerful greenhouse gas with more than 80 times more warming power in the near term. It wastes less gas for each barrel it produces than any other nation. By banning non-emergency flaring in 1971 and imposing a tax on natural gas venting and flaring in 2015, Norway has been able to significantly slash its oil and gas methane emissions.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) finds that global oil and gas methane emissions would drop by over 90 percent if every country matched Norway’s emissions intensity for oil and gas operations.

The rest of the world

Curious about how other countries rank in methane intensity? Check out RMI’s Oil Climate Index Plus Gas (OCI+) tool to see and compare greenhouse gas emission intensities from oil and gas assets. OCI+ also provides guidance and insights for reducing energy waste and life-cycle emissions across the oil and gas supply chain. https://ociplus.rmi.org

The post Norway’s Wins Go Beyond the Olympic Podium appeared first on RMI.

(February 23, 2026) The Great Lakes form the largest fresh surface water system on Earth, providing habitat for millions of birds and drinking water for 40 million people. Congress continued its...

The West can shield its critical mineral producers from China’s predatory pricing by deploying existing antidumping laws that neutralize supply flooding before it destroys domestic investment.

In the iconic American comic strip Peanuts, Lucy promises to hold the football for Charlie Brown, then yanks it away at the last second. In critical minerals, China plays Lucy and the West keeps charging at the ball convinced that this time will be different.

China’s playbook runs in two directions. It restricts exports to drive prices high enough to make Western projects look viable, extracting a windfall as markets tighten. Once Western capital mobilizes, projects advance and new supply threatens its dominance, Beijing reverses course. It floods the market, prices collapse, and unsubsidized competitors fail.

Andy Home argued in a recent Reuters column that the West needs independent pricing to loosen China’s grip on rare earths. He is right that better price discovery would improve transparency and reduce information asymmetry. The US Department of Defence’s floor-price agreement with MP Materials (NYSE: MP) demonstrates how structural protection can underpin a project’s economics.

But pricing efficiency is not the same as market security. The MP deal works because the US government stands behind it as buyer. Every other domestic producer remains exposed to a pricing cycle China can weaponize at will. A more accurate Western price index would record the rise and fall perfectly. It would not prevent the fall.

Molycorp’s collapse illustrates the pattern. China’s 2010–2011 rare earth export restrictions sent prices to historic highs, making Western projects briefly compelling. Molycorp attracted more than $1 billion to restart Mountain Pass. When China relaxed controls and restored supply, prices plunged. Molycorp filed for bankruptcy in 2015. This was not a conventional market failure. It was a deliberate exercise of supply discipline by a state actor willing to subsidize losses to protect strategic dominance.

Existing law, strategic intent

The problem is not a lack of market data. It is structural vulnerability. As long as Chinese producers can price below cost with state backing, any Western project serving the open market can be undercut.

The solution does not require new legislation or novel executive authority. The instrument already exists in US law and survived last week’s Supreme Court ruling that curtailed IEEPA-based tariffs. Antidumping duties under the Tariff Act of 1930 were designed to counter foreign producers that price below cost to eliminate competition. That description fits China’s conduct in critical minerals with precision.

Unlike fixed-rate tariffs, which impose a static % regardless of how aggressively imports are priced, antidumping duties can function as a floating mechanism. If authorities set the duty as the gap between the import price and a defined fair-value threshold, the levy automatically rises as export prices fall. The lower China prices its exports, the higher the compensatory duty. Predatory pricing becomes self-defeating rather than strategically rewarding.

Crucially, this approach extends the logic of the MP Materials floor agreement across the domestic sector without turning Washington into a permanent buyer of last resort or forcing the government to take equity stakes in individual projects.

The legal footing is also stronger than critics suggest. The Supreme Court did not invalidate tariffs as such; it rejected broad-based measures enacted under emergency authority without clear statutory grounding. Antidumping duties rest on explicit congressional authorization and align with Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and the WTO Antidumping Agreement. They are among the most litigated and internationally recognized tools in trade law.

US law also permits findings based on threatened material injury, not just damage already done. China’s documented use of export restrictions, its capacity to subsidize production indefinitely, and its history of market flooding provide a substantial evidentiary record. Policymakers do not need to wait for the next bankruptcy to act.

This framework also creates room for coordination with allies. Instead of directing trade measures at Canada, the EU, Australia, Japan or South Korea, the US and its partners could initiate parallel antidumping proceedings against Chinese critical mineral imports. A coordinated response would establish effective price floors across multiple Western markets simultaneously, aligning trade enforcement with shared geopolitical interests.

Independent pricing benchmarks, strategic stockpiles and targeted procurement agreements all have merit. But none removes China’s ability to pull the football away from producers that lack structural protection. Systematic use of antidumping duties across USGS-designated critical minerals would.

The legal authority exists. The historical pattern is clear. If the West wants durable critical mineral supply chains, it must stop running at the football and start taking it out of China’s hands.

* Erik Groves is Corporate Strategy and In-House Counsel at Morgan Companies.
The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of MINING.COM or The Northern Miner Group.

Solar panels, fertilizers, and even your workout gear contain chemicals that are derived from fossil fuels. These chemicals pose a dual fossil fuel challenge — they are made from fossil fuels, but the high-temperature heat used in production is also powered by fossil fuels. This latter step contributes a significant percentage of the greenhouse gas emissions of these products, and rethinking the heating and chemical conversion processes can deliver substantial emissions reductions.

RMI’s Chemistry in Transition report indicates that the solutions to reducing half of current emissions from chemical production exist today. But addressing the remaining emissions will call for innovation, particularly for processes that continue to rely on fossil fuel-based heat and reaction systems.

Process electrification is one of the most promising innovations. By substituting electricity for combustion-based heat, or by using entirely new electrically-driven reaction pathways, we can significantly reduce emissions from chemicals production.

However, many electrification technologies remain in early stages and require further validation, optimization, and scaled demonstration before they are ready for commercial deployment.

RMI’s Applied Innovation Roadmap (AIR) for Chemicals offers a roadmap to bridge those gaps and move toward deployment. It highlights six electrification technologies with meaningful emissions reduction potential. It assesses the technologies’ current readiness, identifies key barriers to scale, and outlines priority research, development, and deployment (RD&D) and funding needs to achieve technical feasibility and economic viability.

Here’s how those processes could transform a selection of essential products, from plastics, to clothes, to fertilizer.

Plastics

Main component:  Ranging from PET (drinking containers), to LDPE (garbage bags)
Chemical building blocks: Ethylene, propylene
Emissions reduction possible through electrification of process heat: 15%+

Many household appliances, car parts, and even solar panels call for plastic to keep their construction light and to provide durability. By targeting the heating processes that make these plastics’ building blocks — ethylene and propylene — we can make plastics that contain the same characteristics, but with significantly lower emissions.

Both ethylene and propylene come from a process called steam cracking, where hydrocarbons are super-heated to convert into plastic precursors. The fossil fuel heat for cracking contributes at least 33 percent of emissions from this process, so if we can remove fossil fuels as the heat source, we can dramatically cut emissions.

RMI’s AIR for chemicals outlines a range of ways to electrify or otherwise improve the current steam cracking process. One solution, resistive heating, runs off the same principle as your toaster: heating coils (using renewable energy) to induce the cracking reaction rather than burning fossil fuels. Resistive heating’s compatibility with existing steam cracking equipment also makes it attractive for retrofitting plants, while reducing emissions by around 15 percent compared to fossil-fuel-fired steam cracker furnaces.

Resistive heating for steam cracking

/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Ex4-resistive-heating-2.mp4

 

Clothing

Main component: Polyester
Chemical building block: Ethylene and paraxylene
Emissions reduction possible through electrification of process heat: 15 –100%, depending on process used

Head to any gym and you’ll immediately see chemically derived clothing all around you. Athletic-wear materials like spandex, nylon, and polyester are all synthetic fibers that come from chemical processes.

Take polyester, for example. Before it can be made into a t-shirt, it begins with a chemical reaction between ethylene glycol and purified terephthalic acid (PTA) at very high temperatures to eventually create a polymer that is extruded and spun to create polyester fiber.

How polyester garments are made from fossil-fuel derived inputs

That second step, the chemical reaction (outlined above), takes an enormous amount of energy that is today achieved by burning fossil fuels, usually natural gas. But as our AIR for chemicals indicates, a host of other options to create that heat are now on the table. From the more traditional resistive heating (like a heating coil on an electric stove) to the less orthodox shockwave reactor (see animation below) to the emerging process of CO2 electrolysis, fossil fuels are no longer the sole route to creating the building blocks of these clothes.

Shockwave heating for steam cracking

/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Ex9-shockwave-heating-3b.mp4
 

Fertilizer

Main component: Ammonia
Chemical building block: Hydrogen
Emissions reduction possible through electrification of process heat: 40% (if powered by 100% renewable energy)

Fertilizer helps feed the world, but it also carries a heavy emissions footprint: the 1.31 gigatons of CO2e emitted each year from synthetic nitrogen fertilizer is more than the aviation and shipping sectors combined. And while two-thirds of emissions come from fertilizer use in the field, the other one-third comes at the production stage — making it a ripe target for reductions.

Much of fertilizer’s production emissions come from producing hydrogen, the precursor to ammonia. Today, this happens through steam methane reforming (SMR), where methane and water are superheated and react to produce hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Fossil fuels currently power this heating process, but switching to innovations like green hydrogen eliminates the need for SMR altogether, and could cut emissions to near zero.

For existing fossil-fuel-powered sites, options like induction heating could electrify SMR, with the potential to cut direct emissions by 40 percent. Although induction heating is common in other areas, such as in home stoves, its industrial application is still nascent, with commercial projects likely still decades away.

Induction heating for steam methane reforming

/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Ex5-induction-heating-1.mp4

 

Where we go from here

The problem of fossil-based chemical manufacturing has many solutions, but hurdles still remain to scale the technologies needed to make them a reality. Because of the relative novelty of some of these solutions, we are still decades from making them an ordinary part of chemicals production. Moving as quickly as possible to invest in and scale these technologies means we can avoid tons of emissions while creating a resilient and diversified manufacturing base. 

RMI’s Applied Innovation Roadmap for Chemicals outlines the gaps in RD&D and, critically, the funding needed to make these solutions part of everyday manufacturing, and provides guidance on where stakeholders across industry, research, policy, and finance can engage for maximum impact.

The post How Electrification Can Shrink the Emissions in Everyday Products appeared first on RMI.

Gold prices climbed above $5,200 for the first time in nearly a month as heightened uncertainty over US trade policy unsettled global markets and drove investors towards safety of the metal.

Spot gold rose nearly 2% to $5,205.06 per ounce by 1 p.m. ET Monday, following a run of three weekly gains. Silver, too, advanced 3% to over $88 an ounce.

Click on chart for live prices.

Gold’s recent run of gains has helped the metal to recover ground following a sudden rout at the turn of January. The advance has been underpinned by long-term factors — including heightened geopolitical tensions and investor wariness of sovereign bonds and currencies.

On Saturday, US President Donald Trump said he would impose a global tariff of 15% after the Supreme Court ruled against his use of emergency powers to levy duties, fueling additional demand for bullion.

“There are enough structural factors in favor of gold in the medium term,” said Vasu Menon, strategist at Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp. “In the short term, however, expect gold prices to be volatile after the sharp gains in recent months given still-unfolding developments with US trade policy.”

Traders are also monitoring the situation in the Middle East as the US-Iran nuclear talks enter a critical juncture this week. A further escalation, including a potential US military operation, would drive safe-haven assets like gold higher.

(With files from Bloomberg)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 23, 2026

MEDIA CONTACT
Thairy Martinez, 213-421-7304, tmartinez@leadershipcounsel.org

Visalia, CA — After a year of litigation, a Tulare County judge ordered the City of Tulare to void its approval of a Zoning Ordinance Update that allowed the City to approve certain light and heavy industrial uses without complying with state environmental law. 

The update, approved in December 2024, allowed the City to approve certain harmful industrial uses — including cold-storage and warehouse facilities — with “by-right” review in light and heavy industrial zones. These projects are often sited close to communities and schools, including in Matheny Tract. This update completely eliminated environmental analysis for these projects. Notably, the City’s own general plan acknowledged that these projects can harm public health and required mitigation as a result. The Zoning Update walked these positive changes back and failed to implement this required mitigation. 

Matheny Tract, a residential and unincorporated community, is surrounded on three sides by City jurisdiction and is encroached by industrially zoned land. For many years, residents living in the small town have endured impacts from heavy truck traffic, warehouse activity, and heavy machinery passing through their neighborhood, raising concerns about their air quality and health. Residents intervened in the case because they saw the zoning changes as another willful action on behalf of the City to allow industrial development without informing and engaging the community in a process which has the potential to impact their health and quality of life. 

“We want it to be known that the City is harming us, our community,” said Hugo Trujillo, a member of the Matheny Tract Committee. “We aren’t against development. We’re against projects that affect our health, with their traffic, their noise and above all for not taking into account the environmental impact. Going over our community and making decisions that affect us, without us.” 

The consolidated lawsuits heard on Thursday, brought by Petitioners that include the California Department of Justice and Matheny Tract Committee, argued that the City improperly relied on a “common sense exemption” to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and adopted zoning changes that conflict with its own General Plan, previously adopted in 2014 to address air quality and health impacts associated with industrial development. 

“This decision means that the City will need to engage the public and conduct environmental review of its zoning ordinance update,” said Seth Alston, staff attorney with Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability. “This is a critical win for public health and the residents of Matheny Tract.” 

As a result of the ruling, the City is required to rescind its approval of the Zoning Ordinance Update and fully comply with the environmental review required by CEQA before any future approval actions. Any future project approvals must also comply with the proper health protection measure requiring warehouses near homes to conduct health risk assessments and reduce air pollution impacts before approval. 

Although the decision does not reject any specific project, it restores the expectation that major industrial developments — especially those with known environmental consequences and health implications — cannot move forward without following and respecting safeguards already in place by state law.

###

Matheny Tract Committee is a resident-led group made up of individuals who live in and around the unincorporated community of Matheny Tract. The Committee was formed to advocate for fair land-use practices, environmental protections, and meaningful community participation in decisions that affect their neighborhoods.

Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability works alongside the most impacted communities in the San Joaquin Valley and Eastern Coachella Valley to advocate for sound policy and eradicate injustice to secure equal access to opportunity regardless of wealth, race, income, and place. Leadership Counsel focuses on issues like housing, land use, transportation, safe and affordable drinking water and climate change impacts on communities.

The post Court Rules in Favor of Tulare County Community Group and California Department of Justice in Industrial Zoning Case appeared first on Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability.

Lundin Gold (TSX: LUG) will sell a silver stream on its Fruta del Norte (FDN) mine in Ecuador for newly issued shares of LunR Royalties (TSXV: LUNR) valued at approximately C$670 million ($490 million).

LunR Royalties was created last year as a spin-out of NGEx Minerals (TSX: NGEX) to hold its net smelter royalty interests in Latin America. Part of the Lundin group of companies, NGEx is currently developing the Lunahuasi project in Argentina and operates the Los Helados joint venture with Japan’s JX Advanced Metals in Chile.

Adam Lundin, current chair of Lundin Mining, serves as the president and chief executive officer of LunR Royalties.

Trading of LunR Royalties began on Dec. 19, 2025, and has since nearly doubled in value as copper prices surge to record highs. Trading at about C$21.50 per share, the company’s market capitalization is approximately C$1.5 billion ($1.1 billion).

‘Small byproduct’

In a press release on Sunday, Lundin Gold said the stream-for-equity deal with LunR would unlock value from a minor byproduct produced at FDN. The company estimates that silver currently represents only 1–2% of its total revenue, with forecast production of 500,000 to 600,000 oz. of payable silver in 2026.

Under the terms of the transaction, LunR will buy all of FDN’s payable silver production until 12.2 million oz. have been delivered. After that, it will buy half of FDN’s payable silver until an additional 7.8 million oz. have been delivered. Thereafter, the company will purchase 7.5% of the payable silver for the remaining life of mine, currently estimated at 12 years. The silver stream is expected to be effective on March 1.

In exchange, Lundin will receive approximately 50.5 million shares of LunR, priced at the stock’s 20-day volume-weighted average price as of Feb. 20, 2026, totalling about C$670 million.

“By converting a small byproduct into an equity interest in a rapidly emerging royalty company, we are crystallizing value now and creating a new avenue of long-term value for our shareholders,” stated Brendan Creaney, VP of corporate development and investor relations at Lundin Gold. “LunR’s participation in this transaction underscores their confidence in FDN’s exceptional quality and its exploration potential to continue delivering silver for many years to come.”

Lundin Gold expects Ecuador mine to produce 475,000-525,000 oz through 2027

Located in southeast Ecuador, FDN represents one of the highest-grade, lowest-cost operating gold mines in the world. Lundin Gold acquired the asset in late 2014 and brought it into commercial production in February 2020, ahead of schedule.

The company is currently implementing a major near-mine expansion program, including a $100 million investment this year, to build on its existing reserve base, which is estimated at 5.8 million oz. of gold and 8.9 million oz. of silver.

‘Sixth-largest’ royalties company

For LunR, the FDN stream would transform it into a precious metals weighted company, with added scale and cash flow that will increase its competitiveness, the company said in a separate release.

“Life-of-mine, uncapped streams on premier operations are rare, and this transaction establishes LunR as a leading competitor in the space. FDN has significant exploration upside, and the stream structure will allow LunR to surface value from Lundin Gold’s continued success for years to come,” Adam Lundin said.

He added that based on today’s prices, LunR would be “the sixth-largest precious metals royalty and streaming company globally” upon closing, which is expected to occur in the second quarter of 2026.

An updated feasibility study for Century Lithium’s (TSXV: LCE) Angel Island claystone project in Nevada significantly improves its economics over a previous study and positions it near the top tier of lithium development projects in the United States.

The study, released Monday, raises Angel Island’s post-tax net present value (at an 8% discount rate) by one-third to $4.01 billion, based on a lithium carbonate price assumption of $24,000 per tonne. The update cut initial capital costs by about 35% to $997 million, compared to the feasibility released in 2024. The internal rate of return (IRR) rose to 27%, a 10% increase. Angel Island is about 350 km northwest of Las Vegas.

“These results were made possible by Century Lithium’s team who, through many steps of optimization including those at the company’s pilot plant, have delivered a more efficient development plan for the project,” Century Lithium CEO Bill Willoughby said in a release.

Leading project

The study puts Angel Island, formerly known as Clayton Valley, among just four projects in the US to have reached the feasibility stage, while its $4 billion NPV ranks it near the top for value. Located in Clayton Valley, Angel Island is also near Albemarle’s (NYSE: ALB) Silver Peak brine project, the country’s only producing lithium mine.

Angel Island was given transparency status last August by the US Federal Permitting Council on its fast-track approval list, or FAST-41, one of just three lithium projects to gain that recognition.

Century Lithium shares gained 11% to C$0.57 apiece on Monday morning in Toronto, for a market capitalization of C$94.4 million ($69 million).

Angel Island ranks second behind Lithium Americas (TSX, NYSE: LAC) Thacker Pass project in the same state, which has an NPV of $5.9 billion. Piedmont Lithium’s (Nasdaq, ASX: PLL) Carolina project in North Carolina is third with its NPV of $2 billion, followed by Ioneer’s (Nasdaq: IONR; ASX: INR) Rhyolite Ridge project in Nevada, with an NPV of $1.37 billion.

40-year life

The update envisions a staged, 40-year mine life based on a direct lithium extraction operation using hydrochloric acid leaching and chlor-alkali processing that enables on-site production of battery-grade lithium carbonate. Annual output is pegged at about 26,500 tonnes, with stage one throughput of about 7,500 tonnes per day, doubling to 15,000 tonnes in the second stage starting in year five.

The project is set to gain additional revenues of $5,393 per tonne from sodium hydroxide (NaOH), produced as a byproduct of lithium carbonate. NaOH, also known as caustic soda, is an industrial chemical that aids in the production of lithium hydroxide for high-nickel EV batteries. Regarded as a co-product credit, it would result in net operating costs below zero, Century said.

The stage two expansion is estimated to cost $660 million, up from the $651 million outlined in the previous study. The update removes a third stage that was included in the initial feasibility.

Angel Island hosts proven and probable reserves of 287.65 million tonnes grading 1,149 parts per million lithium, containing 1.759 million tonnes lithium carbonate equivalent.

The Trump administration is erasing the history of Black Americans on public lands across the country, according to a new article from the Center for American Progress.

The administration has implemented a series of orders to censor or rewrite historical exhibits, particularly those targeting the history and impact of Black Americans on public lands. Examples include the administration’s rollback of fee-free days to national parks on Martin Luther King Jr. Day and Juneteenth, as well as President Donald Trump’s executive order to restore “truth and sanity” to national public lands by censoring any signage that paints a negative picture of American history.

A recent example includes the administration’s removal of interpretive panels outside the President’s House Site—George Washington’s former home—that tell the stories of Black Americans enslaved by Washington. The move drew widespread public backlash, and a U.S. federal judge recently ordered the panels be put back up.

“An America confident in its future does not fear its past,” the article reads. “The federal government must protect and strengthen the integrity of historical interpretation across America’s public lands and waters, restore and expand public access—including on commemorative days that honor Black history—and invest in storytelling that reflects the complexity of the American experience.”

Quick hits Trump administration reverses emissions rule that limits toxins from coal plants

Associated Press | Montana Free Press

Environmental groups warn of dire impacts after Colorado River negotiators miss another deadline

KUNC

Former USFS workers: Roadless Rule doesn’t hinder management

Missoula Current

Trump administration accused of removing history and science from Mountain West parks

KUNR

Opinion: National monuments sustain Colorado’s local economies

Colorado Newsline

Colorado case challenging buffer zone around billionaire landowner’s new house wraps up

Colorado Sun

Western voters remain supportive of conservation, public lands

Daily Montanan | Deseret News

Opinion: Senate should say no to Steve Pearce at BLM

Santa Fe New Mexican

Quote of the day

When you say roadless areas, some people think we can’t do anything in those areas. The Roadless Rule was established to limit or restrict new roads in these areas that don’t have roads. It wasn’t designed to say you can’t go hiking, you can’t do fire management activities.”

—Brian Riggers, retired Region 1 roadless coordinator and fisheries biologist, Missoula Current

Picture This @usinterior

Early winter storms have brought vibrant blooms to landscapes across California. At Carrizo Plain National Monument, strong rainfall years can paint the Temblor Mountains in sweeping bands of color like those seen here.

If you’re planning a visit, stay on designated roads and trails to protect fragile blooms. Some areas may still be wet or impassable, so check conditions before heading out.

For additional wildflower viewing opportunities, visitors can explore the Merced River Recreation Management Area in Mariposa County, Berryessa Snow Mountain National Monument in Lake County, and Fort Ord National Monument in Monterey County.

Photo by Bob Wick / @mypubliclands

 

(Featured image: George Washington Carver bust at George Washington Carver National Monument, Missouri. National Park Service)

The post Trump administration is erasing Black History on public lands appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

Faraday Copper (TSX: FDY) is undertaking a C$100 million ($73 million) private placement backed by the Lundin Family Trusts and BHP Group (ASX: BHP) to fund the ongoing development of its projects based in Arizona. Shares of the company surged.

In a statement on Monday, the Vancouver-based copper developer said it plans to issue up to 23.81 million common shares at C$4.20 per share, which is the same as its market open price. Closing of the placement is expected by March 11.

Trusts settled by the late Adolf H. Lundin — currently the company’s largest shareholder — are expected to participate in the financing. BHP, which became a major investor following last week’s deal to sell its San Manuel property to Faraday, is also looking to participate.

BMO Capital Markets, in a note published on Monday, said the C$100 million financing “is stronger than previously modeled” as it previously anticipated a smaller amount of C$45 million and at a lower share price of C$3.00. The financing also came earlier than the bank’s forecast, as the announcement essentially came right after Faraday’s transaction with BHP.

The proceeds are also expected to fund certain expenses related to the BHP transaction, Faraday said.

Former underground mine

On Friday, Faraday announced that it will acquire BHP’s San Manuel property, which is located 19 km southwest of its flagship Copper Creek property in Pinal County. As consideration, BHP will receive 30% of its issued and outstanding common shares — representing about C$300 million ($220 million) in implied value — and have the right to participate in future equity raises to maintain its ownership.

The transaction, once completed, allows Faraday to consolidate two adjacent properties in the heart of the Arizona copper corridor. Its 100%-owned Copper Creek property is host to a large, 3-km-long porphyry copper deposit that holds 422 million tonnes in measured and indicated resources grading 0.48% copper equivalent, for nearly 4.5 billion lb. of contained metal.

The San Manuel property comprises two deposits that operated as a combined underground block cave and open‑pit mine between 1955 and 1999. During that time, it was one of the largest underground mines in the US, generating over 4.5 million tonnes of copper production. The project currently has a non-43-101-compliant resource totalling 14 billion lb. of copper, according to company estimates, and has no recent exploration records.

‘Multi-generational’ copper district

“The combined project has the potential to become a multi-generational copper district delivering made-in-America copper, while providing significant economic opportunities to the local communities,” Faraday’s CEO Paul Harbidge stated in the Friday press release. “This would allow for the optimization of infrastructure and minimized environmental footprint compared to each project advancing independently.”

Haywood Capital Markets said in a note that the transaction is “transformational” for Faraday, as it would create “a major copper district” with the potential to produce 100,000-150,000 tonnes per annum of copper for decades.

Shares of Faraday Copper surged to a 52-week high of C$4.51 on Monday following the announcements, taking its market capitalization to C$1.13 billion ($830 million). Following the BHP transaction, Haywood raises its price target for the stock from C$4.00 to C$5.50. BMO also lifted its target from C$4.50 to C$5.00 after the C$100 million financing.

B2Gold (TSX: BTO; NYSE-A: BTG) will replace its long-time chief executive this year as the company enters what analysts describe as a transition period marked by shifting production levels.

Clive Johnson, who founded the Vancouver-based miner two decades ago, will retire as president, CEO and director at the company’s annual meeting on June 4, the company said on Monday. He is to be succeeded by chief financial officer Mike Cinnamond.

“While no one can replace Clive Johnson and his legacy in founding BTO and lasting positive influence across the sector, the succession discussion has been topical and Mike Cinnamond was among the favoured replacement candidates,” Don DeMarco, a mining analyst at National Bank Financial, said Monday in a note. Cinnamond “is well regarded and widely recognized having been with the company since the early days, and we expect a seamless transition.”

Johnson, who drew on experience in Russia and Canada to expand the company’s footprint to Nunavut, Africa and the Philippines, accepted The Northern Miner’s Person of the Year award for 2025 in December at the media group’s symposium in London. He brought the Goose mine into production in the Canadian Arctic and maintained production at Fekola in junta-led Mali.

“It has been a great privilege to have led B2Gold since its formation in 2007,” Johnson said. “We have grown the business through timely and well-executed acquisitions to make the company what it is today, a leading gold producer with multiple operating mines and development projects located around the world.”

Earnings

The leadership change comes as the company contends with ramp up issues at Goose in Nunavut and lower than expected fourth quarter earnings. B2Gold posted adjusted earnings of C$0.11 per share for the fourth quarter of 2025, below estimates of C$0.20 per share and consensus of C$0.17, BMO Capital Markets said Friday.

B2Gold shares gained 5.4% on Monday morning in Toronto to C$7.77 apiece, valuing the company at C$10.2 billion.

Operationally, the quarter was stronger than the earnings line suggests. Consolidated gold production reached 303,000 oz., above both BMO and consensus estimates, while full-year output of 980,000 oz. landed slightly below the midpoint of revised guidance.

Costs were mixed. Cash costs of $736 per oz. came in below expectations, while all-in sustaining costs (AISC) of $1,754 per oz. also beat estimates for the quarter. However, full-year AISC of $1,584 per oz. exceeded the company’s guidance range, reflecting higher sustaining capital spending over the year.

Forecast

Looking ahead, B2Gold has forecast 2026 production of between 820,000 oz. and 970,000 oz., broadly in line with expectations, though costs are expected to rise. The company forecast AISC of $2,400 to $2,580 per oz., above BMO’s estimate of $2,305 per oz. Production is expected to return to 2025 levels by 2027.

In Mali, the Fekola regional permit is expected shortly, with first gold targeted in this year’s second half. At the Goose project in Nunavut, modifications to the crushing circuit are planned for later this year, alongside studies to increase throughput to 4,000 tonnes per day.

Cinnamond, currently senior vice-president of finance and CFO, will also join the board as part of the leadership transition. Johnson will remain involved as chair emeritus, providing continuity as the company moves through its next stage of development.

“I am especially proud of the fact that our values and our reputation as an efficient and transparent operator have enabled us to recruit and retain some of the best people in the mining industry,” Johnson said. “I am proud of the contributions to the communities in which we operate around the world, which hopefully leave them in a better place than when we arrived.”

By KAY MATTHEWS

The prescription for the 900-acre forest restoration project between Chamisal and Vallecitos, part of the Rio de Las Trampas Watershed Project, has been finalized by the project partners and awaits Carson National Forest approval. The prescription was discussed at the January 10 public meeting with partners Taos Soil and Water Conservation District, Forest Stewards Guild, the Rio de Las Trampas Forest Council, New Mexico State Forestry, and Taos County. The project moves forward under the umbrella of the Good Neighbor agreement between the Carson and Taos Soil and Water, and $3 million funding from New Mexico State Forestry. The prescription calls for a more mosaic, natural, site-specific plan that takes into account wildlife needs, soil and erosion controls, and natural disturbances such as fire, disease, and climate change.

The Rio de Las Trampas Forest Council, which initiated the leñero program near El Valle, will oversee the 80-acre leñero unit within the 900-acre project with funding from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). Forest Stewards Guild will begin flagging the leñero units, approximately one-acre in size, and marking the leave trees in the first 15 units in mid-March with the help of a youth team sponsored by River Source. The units are predominantly piñon/juniper. Doug North and Priscilla Lopez, mayordomo and asistente of the Rio de Las Trampas Forest Council, will oversee the leñero project. Forest Stewards Guild will also draft a monitoring plan in conjunction with Ecotone Landscape.

The Las Trampas Land Grant is the new fiscal sponsor through an agreement with Taos Soil and Water. They have raised the amount that leñeros will be paid from the $300 per unit, previously paid by the Rio de Las Trampas Forest Council, to between $600 and $1200 per unit depending upon how quickly the leñero finishes the work. Leñeros will be classified as independent contractors. If you’re interested in becoming a leñero you can contact Priscilla Lopez at pelopez@cybermesa.com. Leñeros will need to attend a safety training program, which will be reduced from the previous three-day requirement.

Wood Sharks, a community contractor, will be hired to thin the first 50 acres of predominantly ponderosa pine in the larger project area. The wood will be pulled out of the unit for access to the public for firewood. The project is hoping to establish a wood yard with the land grant for this purpose.  

Another public meeting is scheduled for March 14 for anyone interested in taking a look at the restoration site and proposed actions. La Jicarita will provide more details as that date approaches.

The PFAS and Agriculture Policy Workgroup, led by American Farmland Trust (AFT), recently released policy recommendations urging federal lawmakers and agencies to address PFAS contamination on agricultural land.

Often referred to as forever chemicals, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of thousands of synthetic chemicals widely used in industrial and consumer products. They break down very slowly, and research in the Journal of Environmental Research has shown that they can accumulate in water, air, soil, and plants.

On farms, PFAS contamination can be a result of the spreading of wastewater sludge, or biosolids, by farmers unaware that their fertilizer is contaminated. They can also infiltrate soil and water through runoff from manufacturing plants, landfills, and military facilities.

Several studies have linked PFAS exposure with negative health outcomes, including liver, kidney, and immune diseases, according to a study in the Journal of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. PFAS exposure has also been associated with certain forms of cancer.

Amid growing concern about the threat PFAS contamination poses to farmers, farm businesses, and food safety nationwide, AFT launched a multi-stakeholder effort in 2024 to create a set of policy recommendations. Representing commodity, farmer, conservation, health, and research groups, as well as state departments of agriculture, the Workgroup calls for a coordinated federal response.

“This is not just another set of recommendations on PFAS. This is the first and only set of comprehensive federal policy recommendations on PFAS and agriculture,” Emily Liss, Farm Viability Policy Manager at AFT, tells Food Tank. She describes them as first steps, designed to be pragmatic and bipartisan.

The Workgroup advocates for Congress to create a dedicated agricultural PFAS relief and support program. Contamination can be devastating for farmers and ranchers, who may be forced to stop or change their production, in addition to grappling with potential health implications. This program would support farmers’ physical and mental health, assist them in replacing lost income, and help farmers invest in operational changes to stay safely in production, among other supports.

“This is about people. This is about families and human health first and foremost,” Liss tells Food Tank.

This approach draws from Maine’s experience, where PFAS was first detected on a dairy farm in 2016. The state established a comprehensive safety net to support PFAS-impacted farmers’ health, businesses, and land. “In Maine we have found that, with adequate support, many farms impacted by PFAS contamination are able to stay in operation,” Shelley Megquier, Policy and Research Director at Maine Farmland Trust, tells Food Tank.

The Workgroup also recommends measures to reduce additional PFAS contamination—an approach they call “turning off the tap.” As there is currently no known, scalable way to remove PFAS from soil, the Workgroup says this is critical. “The only way that we’re ever going to get ahead of the PFAS issue is if we stop putting it on farmland,” says Liss.

To achieve this, the Workgroup calls for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to consider setting a threshold for PFAS in biosolids used in agriculture and to identify existing programs to help farmers transition away from their use. But Liss says this is a challenging issue, as many farmers have long relied on biosolids as a low-cost fertilizer. She emphasizes that the EPA should conduct research to set a threshold that is protective of human health. “Farmers just want to know what they’re putting on their land. They want to make sure that they’re putting safe things on their land,” she says.

Research on PFAS is another priority area of the recommendations. The Workgroup urges the federal government to establish PFAS as a research priority and to coordinate research across federal agencies. “PFAS is still an emerging issue, there is established research that can inform a policy response but there also continues to be a lot to learn,” Megquire tells Food Tank. “We know that the most severe levels of PFAS contamination are highly localized – better understanding where those ‘hotspots’ are around the country is important so that impacted farmers can get support.”

The recommendations also propose measures to protect farmers from legal liability for having contaminated land, strengthen collaboration across federal programs and agencies, and improve communication to farmers and the general public.

The recently reintroduced bipartisan, bicameral Relief for Farmers Hit with PFAS Act addresses critical needs outlined in these recommendations and was strongly endorsed by AFT.

“PFAS contamination is a threat to American agriculture—but with the right policies, we can protect the health of farmers and farm families, keep farms in business, maintain a safe food supply, and protect our farmland,” Megquire tells Food Tank. “Lucky for all of us, this is a nonpartisan issue with commonsense solutions.”

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Bill Sturgell, Unsplash

The post Policy Recommendations to Address PFAS Contamination on Farms appeared first on Food Tank.

Tungsten prices have surged fivefold over the past year as prolonged underinvestment and tightening Chinese supply push the market toward what analysts warn could become a severe global shortage.

In a note published on Monday, BMO Global Commodities Research analysts George Heppel and Helen Amos say the world has “sleepwalked” into a tungsten crunch, driven by persistent ore grade decline, environmental restrictions and a lack of new mining investment. With global inventories critically low and another deficit forecast for 2026, they expect tightness to persist.

Tungsten is a cornerstone of heavy industry, though it often receives little public attention. Tungsten carbide, prized for its extreme hardness and density, is essential in machine parts, drill bits and hard-facing materials. In many applications, it is close to irreplaceable, making the metal a key enabler of manufacturing, mining and defence.

China dominates the market, accounting for roughly 75% of global supply. Production has stagnated in recent years as ore grades decline, environmental controls tighten and Beijing has moved to restrict exports of dual-use tungsten.

As of early 2026, Chinese, exports have plummeted, with some, such as Ammonium Paratungstate (APT), falling to zero in late 2025. As a result, ammonium paratungstate prices broke out of their long-term average of about $300/t in 2025 and now trade around $1,775/t, according to Fastmarkets.

BMO expects 2026 to be a pivotal year. With stocks depleted and supply growth constrained, the market appears headed for another deficit. That dynamic, the analysts argue, is likely to keep prices elevated.

Five options

The bank outlines five potential mechanisms that could eventually rebalance the market, though none offers a quick fix.

A meaningful expansion of Chinese mine supply appears unlikely in the near term due to grade challenges and environmental limits, although projects such as Dahutang could add material volumes over time. Outside China, several projects are advancing, but new mines typically take years to permit, finance and build.

Artisanal mining, which accounts for about 6% of global supply, may respond to higher prices. BMO expects some short-term growth in this segment, but not enough to materially replenish depleted inventories.

Recycling presents another avenue. While there is limited scope to significantly increase recycling rates in western markets, China could expand secondary supply over time if it builds out collection and processing infrastructure. Even so, this would require investment and time.

Demand destruction is also possible, particularly at current price levels. However, substitution is challenging because of tungsten’s unique properties. The analysts identify limited areas where users might switch materials, but they do not expect widespread replacement.

High price cure

In the near term, BMO believes the market will balance through a mix of artisanal supply growth and some demand destruction. That adjustment, however, will not be enough to restore comfortable inventory levels. Over the longer term, the analysts argue that sustained higher prices will be required to incentivize new mine development.

“The cure for high prices is high prices,” they write, adding that meaningful investment in mined supply will likely occur only at price levels well above historical norms.

With reindustrialization and defence spending accelerating in the US and elsewhere, tungsten demand is set to grow. BMO expects the metal’s supply challenges to keep it firmly in the spotlight of critical minerals strategies in the years ahead.

IWW-Mitglieder finden sie dieser Tage im Postkästchen – alle anderen können die erste diesjährige Ausgabe unserer Flugschrift SOLID! hier nachlesen: SOLID! 1/2026

Wer eine oder mehrere Ausgaben zugeschickt bekommen will, muss uns nur ein kurzes Mail schreiben – wir freuen uns über Multiplikator:innen!

The campaigner who won a landmark Supreme Court ruling on onshore oil and gas emissions is urging the prime minister to resist calls to overturn the judgement.

Sarah Finch outside the Supreme Court on the day of the landmark ruling (20 June 2024)
Photo: DrillOrDrop

Sarah Finch, on behalf of the Weald Action Group, was responding to recommendations in a report to government by the economist, John Fingleton.

His review of civil and defence nuclear regulation in November 2025 recommended reversing the Finch judgement for low-carbon infrastructure.

In a letter to Sir Keir Starmer, Ms Finch said she was concerned by  the prime minister’s remarks in a speech that the Fingleton recommendations should be applied across “the entire industrial strategy”.

Sarah Finch letter to PM on Fingleton ReviewDownload

Finch judgement

The Finch case set a precedent that decisionmakers must take into account the carbon emissions from fossil fuel production.

The ruling led to the quashing of approvals for the Biscathorpe and Wressle oil developments, consent for a new coal mine at Whitehaven in Cumbria and decisions by the Sunak government on the Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas fields.

It also led to changes in government guidance on the assessment of the climate impacts of new offshore oil and gas developments.

But John Fingleton said the government should legislate to overturn the Finch judgement (his recommendation 15).

He said the judgement might create a need to assess greenhouse gas emissions associated with nuclear developments multiple times along the supply chain.

In her letter to Keir Starmer, Ms Finch said:

“there’s no need for developers to repeat assessments that have already been done.”

She said any information provided in environmental impact assessments (EIA) earlier in the supply chain could be relied on again.

“Legislating to replace the current EIA regime would undermine the substantial work undertaken in developing the new guidance.”

She added:

“Fingleton seems to miss the key point that a thorough assessment of greenhouse gas emissions, including downstream emissions, is actually helpful for nuclear and other forms of low-carbon energy.

“It provides a transparent and firm basis for arguing the (not universally accepted) pro-climate credentials of such development, because it enables the full benefits of the much lower greenhouse gas emissions to be taken into account in comparison to energy produced from fossil fuels.”

Riskier legal challenges

Ms Finch also argued against another Fingleton proposal to make legal challenges risker for claimants (recommendation 20).

It recommended raising and, in some cases, removing the cost cap for judicial reviews (currently £5,000 for individuals and £10,000 for organisations).

The review also recommended that legal challenges to Nationally Strategic Infrastructure Projects should be limited to a “single bite of the cherry”.

Ms Finch said the judicial review process and the cap on costs, adopted by the Aarhus convention in 1998, were vital to allowing people to challenge public bodies that made mistakes.

She said:

“I was able to bring my judicial review challenge because of the Aarhus costs cap. Had we faced the prospect of paying the other side’s full costs, the Weald Action Group would not have embarked on the case.

“And our application for judicial review was refused twice and we went to the Court of Appeal. We took several bites of the cherry – and went on to win what was an important ruling.”

She said the many legal challenges relating to environmental impact assessments were not because challenging decisions were too easy.

“There is already a high bar to being able to bring a judicial review case. Already cases deemed without merit can’t proceed.

“The vast majority don’t make it past the permission stage. The reason that claims are permitted and do succeed is that developers’ consultants sometimes omit information or minimise impacts in a way that is unlawful.

“If the developer does their job properly, there is no risk of successful legal challenge.

Wider recommendations

Ms Finch said the Nuclear Regulatory Review had been commissioned to review civil and defence nuclear regulation and to propose reforms to regulate nuclear energy.

She said:

“Yet the Prime Minister has said he wishes to see the recommendations applied across the entire industrial strategy.

“Given the specific remit of the Review, I don’t understand why its recommendations would be applied beyond the nuclear sector.”

Fingleton Review John Fingleton Nuclear Regulatory Review 2025Download

A Chilean court of appeals has overturned a favourable court ruling in the long-running dispute over Andes Iron’s $2.5 billion Dominga iron ore and copper project, effectively sending the development back into legal limbo.

The Antofagasta Court of Appeals on Saturday unanimously annulled a ruling by the First Environmental Court that had ordered a committee of ministers to hold a new vote on the proposed mine and port in the central Coquimbo region, calling the move inadmissible and procedurally flawed. 

The court did not assess the project’s merits, focusing instead on whether the enforcement vote process was valid.

Penguins and red tape: Chile says ‘no’ to $2.5bn Dominga mine again

It said the earlier judgment did not create an enforceable right or resolve the core dispute. Because the Supreme Court had previously instructed the Committee of Ministers to issue a new decision rather than approve or reject Dominga outright, there was no final ruling to enforce, the appeals court found.

The decision send the case back to the special Committee of Ministers, which has already rejected Dominga three times, most recently in January last year. Andes Iron appealed that rejection, and in September the Supreme Court revived the project and ordered ministers to vote again, which didn’t happen.

Two pits and a port

Dominga, first submitted in 2013, would include two open-pit mines, North and South, and a port, with an estimated 26.5-year lifespan. The project is designed to produce 12 million tonnes a year of high-grade, low-impurity iron concentrate and 150,000 tonnes a year of copper concentrate. Andes Iron says it would create 30,000 jobs and meet strict environmental standards after years of review.

The site lies about 500 km north of the capital, Santiago, near the Humboldt Penguin National Reserve and other protected areas. Environmental groups and President Gabriel Boric’s government oppose the project, arguing its proximity to ecologically sensitive zones poses unacceptable risks to protected species. The location has turned Dominga into a flashpoint in Chile’s broader debate over resource development and conservation.

Andes Iron called the decision disappointing but stressed it was procedural and did not address the project’s technical or environmental merits. “This decision in no way discourages us or alters our commitment to move forward with the Dominga project,” the company told Emol.com, adding that Dominga has passed rigorous reviews and complies with regulations.

Billions in stalled projects

The drawn-out dispute has made Dominga a symbol of the complex permitting system in one of the world’s leading mining jurisdictions. Business groups and conservative politicians argue political considerations have weighed too heavily on major investment decisions.

Chile faces an estimated $105 billion backlog in mining investments, according to industry estimates, as companies push for reforms to environmental assessment and permitting rules they say have slowed approvals and raised costs.

Expectations are growing that President-elect José Antonio Kast, who takes office March 11, could move to accelerate major projects.

For those coaxing thirsty crops like alfalfa from the parched fields and withered pasturelands in Eloy, Arizona, water is as good as gold — and just as scarce. “We’ve had nothing from the Colorado River for the last two or three years. I mean, we’ve had to cut back the volumes to the growers and have had to reduce acres and stuff to make it work,” said Ron McEachern, former general manager of the Central Arizona Irrigation and Drainage District, which serves the Eloy area.

The agricultural hub draws from the Colorado River basin through a vast canal network, but drought, overexploitation, and aging irrigation equipment are draining what little remains. “We got gates that are leaking and leaking downstream,” McEachern said. “The water spills and it spills, and nobody’s getting any use out of it.”

Nearly two years ago, the irrigation district was invited to apply to a new non-competitive grant program that the U.S. Department of Agriculture under the Biden administration was launching to help farmers in areas grappling with devastating droughts. McEachern collaborated with the federal agency to identify what his team would do with the grant: replace and upgrade the 35-year-old deteriorating radial arm gates in their local canal system. The district needed the components to more precisely regulate water levels in the canals, but they are much too expensive for them to buy and install on their own.

Then, in late 2024, they got the break they’d been hoping for. The Central Arizona operation was one of 18 irrigation districts spread across 12 western states initially selected to receive up to $15 million each from the USDA. The agency’s Water-Saving Commodities program also earmarked grants for three tribal communities and two state associations of conservation districts. In total, the USDA planned to spend a $400 million pool of funds on the initiative. 

Gloria Montaño Greene, who served during the Biden administration as Deputy Under Secretary for USDA’s Farm Production and Conservation, told Grist that the idea for the program started back in 2021, as severe drought conditions enveloped agricultural powerhouse states across the country. The $400 million, according to Montaño Greene, was set to be distributed through the Commodity Credit Corporation, a financial institution used to implement specific agricultural programs established by the federal government. By the close of 2024, she said the Biden administration had entered final agreements with selected recipients and notified Congress of how they intended to use the money. 

“When we left the administration, we already had the signed agreements and the commitments that were going to be going through with the process,” said Montaño Greene. Based on those final agreements, the money, which was structured to be either reimbursement-based or in the form of advance payments — or both, depending on the agreement — should have started flowing last year, as part of a five-year payment plan. “Everything was done, vetted, and reviewed,” said Montaño Greene. But because this money wasn’t voted on by Congress, the USDA may have the authority to backtrack on its commitments under an earlier administration.

Read Next Trump radically remade the US food system in just 100 days Ayurella Horn-Muller

Another former top USDA official familiar with the program, who requested anonymity, confirmed that the agreements were “100 percent” finalized before the end of 2024 — with the expectation that the incoming administration would need to honor them. “I can speak to the assumptions and guidance that we were working on from legal counsel at that time, which was by entering into these agreements with the districts and other partners, we’re committing those dollars to this purpose,” the former official added. “From our perspective, we were operating under a framework and counsel that we were committing those funds to the USDA partners.” 

Beginning last January, the Trump administration threw that into a tailspin. Federal monies were frozen, grant programs culled, and an unprecedented number of federal staffers were forced out of work. Many operations at USDA have since resumed to some semblance of normalcy. But the $400 million promised to the irrigation districts, associations, and tribes in 2024 remains unaccounted for, and the grant recipients have received no indication of whether the program would start or the money would be paid out. 

In fact, McEachern no longer even knew who at the USDA to ask for help. The last he heard from the agency about the water-saving grant was an email from his former point of contact to let him know they were leaving the USDA. That was over a year ago. 

“I think some of the people that were involved are probably no longer there, and nobody was really kind of pushing to get this off the ground,” said McEachern. “One thing is, they haven’t swept the money. So the money is there. It’s just getting them to release it.” 

Dan Crabtree, superintendent of Palisade Irrigation District, based in Colorado, one of the other 18 irrigation districts, has had much the same experience. “Since the election, we have not heard anything from USDA, other than to say they were evaluating the program and the application,” said Crabtree. Another recipient — Greybull Valley Irrigation District in Wyoming — told Grist in an email that it also knew nothing about the program’s status. 

Randall Winston, general manager of Hidalgo & Cameron Counties Irrigation District 9, in Texas, another of the USDA’s selected recipients, said that while they’ve been waiting, the severe drought in the Rio Grande Valley has only gotten worse. As a result, they have been forced to dramatically reduce how much agricultural land the district is able to irrigate — last year, they supplied water for roughly 8,000 acres, when on a typical year they irrigate 120,000.

“Every drop of water, we’re trying to maximize that and save as much as we can,” said Winston. Prices for the equipment they need to manage the water they do have have also continued to climb, according to Winston, further setting them back. “We are concerned because we need to know the direction to take … We’re not mad at USDA, we just need to find out where we’re at with this,” he said.

Exactly why the administration has kept the funding locked without any communication to grantees for over a year is difficult to discern, according to Food & Water Watch research director Amanda Starbuck. “Is this specifically because it’s intended to help farmers adapt to climate change, and climate change is a bad word in the administration, or it’s simply just trying to cut corners wherever they can?” said Starbuck. 

The USDA did not respond to multiple requests for comment. 

During one former USDA staffer’s last few months working at the Farm Service Agency, they claim they were forced to partake in information “gatekeeping” as it related to the water-saving program. According to the staffer, who left their role in 2025 and asked to remain anonymous, “I was getting a lot of questions about, like, ‘Can we start or not?’ and I didn’t know the answer. I couldn’t get an answer. I really wasn’t allowed to communicate with them directly. Like, I couldn’t tell them ‘Your grant is frozen. Don’t spend any money because the money may never come to you.’ It was just ‘Tell them it’s under administrative review’ … And then I couldn’t get a clear answer out of my leadership, or my direct manager, or my manager’s manager, about where the program was in the review process.” 

As for the suspicion that the program may have been targeted in the way that other Biden-era programs geared toward mitigating climate change have been, the former staffer isn’t convinced. “To me, it does seem pretty neutral from a climate perspective, because a lot of the states that have water problems are not necessarily blue states,” they said. “So I don’t think it was something that someone, like a high level official, would come in and say, ‘That’s the program I want to gut.'”

Although they can’t be certain, the former staffer believes the explanation is actually quite simple: There are no employees left to distribute the money. 

Read Next Drought is quietly pushing American cities toward a fiscal cliff Tik Root

Within the first five months of the Trump administration, the Farm Service Agency lost around 24 percent of its federal workforce. “It’s very possible it’s frozen because no one who works there that interacted with the program, like all of the people who know anything about the program, have now left the agency,” they said. The former staffer also said they have “a sinking suspicion” that the internal organizational disarray at USDA may have led the agency to forget about the program, which they described as having “a pretty small footprint” when compared to other initiatives that were dismantled in the last year. “I just don’t understand why we couldn’t be more transparent. … I don’t believe that that is the role that public servants, broadly speaking, both politically appointed and career, should play.” 

As the planet continues to heat up, rainfall is becoming increasingly erratic — ushering in longer dry spells punctuated by intense, sudden downpours that can overwhelm the land’s ability to absorb too much water. The resulting whiplash between periods of drought and flood can disrupt farming operations for multiple seasons. Extreme weather fueled by warming already costs the nation’s agricultural industry billions in lost crops and rangeland every year. 

Agriculture is not only a victim of this vicious cycle, but one of its drivers. In the U.S., the sector is responsible for at least 80 percent of all water consumed. Crop irrigation, which is often done inefficiently, makes up the single largest share of freshwater withdrawals nationwide. Take alfalfa. The crop used an estimated 2.15 trillion gallons of water across the seven states in the Colorado River basin in 2024 — most of it grown to feed cattle and dairy herds. 

“At USDA, we need to do more to also shift production systems to really be lined up with the climate reality,” said Starbuck, who argues that the burden of adaptation shouldn’t fall on individual farmers, or the irrigation districts that support them, but rather to federal regulators.

Yet even as demand for water grows, the policies intended to protect remaining supplies are being systematically dismantled. Over the last year, the administration has aggressively rolled back climate and environmental safeguards — revoking the government’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, proposing the removal of federal protections from the vast majority of the nation’s wetlands, and holding up billions in conservation efforts. 

Together, says Starbuck, these actions are putting at risk the very water supplies that American agriculture depends on. 

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Did the USDA just forget about $400M in drought aid for farmers? on Feb 23, 2026.