The ‘biogas’ Plot: Fueling Factory Farms In The Midwest

Generated Summary

This report, “The ‘Biogas’ Plot: Fueling Factory Farms in the Midwest,” investigates the role of factory farm gas (FFG), often referred to as “biogas” or “renewable natural gas” (RNG), in the expansion of factory farming in the Midwest. The study examines how industry, with industrial dairy at the forefront, is utilizing FFG to secure public funds and manipulate clean fuel standards, thereby entrenching factory farming practices. The research, conducted by Farm Forward and supported by Data for Progress, employs a survey methodology to gauge public opinion on climate policy, the impacts of various industries, and the influence of stakeholders on the legislative process. The report highlights the potential for FFG to exacerbate environmental issues and misappropriate public funds, while also analyzing public perceptions of the stakeholders involved.

Key Findings & Statistics

• The report reveals that Michiganders strongly oppose the expansion of factory farms and FFG when they are aware of the industry’s practices and the influence of lobbying.
• A survey conducted by Data for Progress found that Michigan voters want environmental organizations (64%), clean energy companies like wind and solar producers (62%), public health organizations (62%), and small family farms (59%) influencing climate policy.
• The survey also indicated that support for the Clean Fuel Standard bill, which incentivizes FFG production, dropped from 52% to 37% after voters learned about the involvement of agricultural, oil and gas, and utility companies in the bill’s provisions.
• Michigan voters reject the idea that major industry polluters should benefit from lucrative public policy, including for FFG.
• Voters hold favorable views of small family farms (89%) and clean energy companies (73%), contrasting with the views of large-scale factory farms (28%) and fossil fuel companies (50%).
• Around two-thirds of Michiganders also hold favorable views of farm animal protection organizations (70%), public health organizations (70%), and environmental organizations (66%).
• When asked about their views toward types of energy, Michigan voters strongly favor clean energy sources, like solar (81%) and wind (79%), over gasoline (63%), biofuels including manure biogas and biomethane (62%), and oil (58%).
• A majority of Michiganders believe that oil and gas companies negatively impact air quality (58%) and water quality (51%).
• Pluralities of Michigan voters think large factory farms have a negative impact on farm animal well-being (49%), water quality (43%), animal-to-human disease transmission (43%), air quality (42%), public health (40%), and food quality (39%).
• A majority of Michigan voters oppose the state providing incentives to oil and gas (57%), while a plurality oppose financial incentives for agricultural (46%) and utility companies (43%).
• Almost three-quarters of Michigan voters (73%) support making polluters pay for damages from climate disasters.
• After learning more information about industry lobbyists, the support for the Clean Fuel Standard bill dropped from 52% to 37%.

Other Important Findings

• The report highlights that “biogas” is often a misleading term and is more accurately described as factory farm gas (FFG), as it processes waste from factory-farmed animals.
• Industry is positioning itself to exploit regions that will remain habitable as the climate crisis worsens.
• FFG operations actively make the problem worse by pumping climate dollars into the expansion of factory farms.
• The 50-Year Plot involves a web of strategic partnerships between factory farms, utility companies, and fossil fuel corporations.
• Deregulation is a classic part of the playbook for industry expansion, and FFG is no different.
• SB 275, the Clean Fuels Standard bill, is modeled after California’s controversial Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and incentivizes FFG production, rewarding FFG producers with carbon credits.
• Michiganders are increasingly waking up to the industry’s plans, and concerned citizens are resisting and opposing the growth of CAFOs in their states.
• The American Biogas Council estimates a possible near-5,000 percent surge in FFG operations across Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Illinois.
• The push for FFG, through legislation like SB 275 or by raiding the Michigan Strategic Fund, is a means to lock in factory farms.
• Food system reform stands at a crossroads: one path follows industrial animal agriculture’s vision, and the other leads toward a more sustainable and humane future.

Limitations Noted in the Document

• The report is based on a survey conducted with 834 likely voters in Michigan, which may not fully represent the views of all Michigan residents.
• The survey’s findings are based on responses collected via a web panel, which may introduce certain biases.
• The margin of error for the survey is ±3 percentage points, which could affect the precision of the results.
• The report focuses primarily on the situation in the Midwest, particularly Michigan, and its findings may not be directly applicable to other regions.
• The study is limited to the information available at the time of the report’s compilation, and new developments or data could alter the conclusions.

Conclusion

The report highlights that the expansion of factory farms and the use of FFG are driven by industry interests seeking to profit from taxpayer subsidies and lax environmental regulations. The strategy involves manipulating clean fuel standards, deregulating waste management, and influencing public opinion to secure a long-term foothold in the Midwest. The research underscores the importance of understanding the complexities of the issue and calls for a critical assessment of climate policies that may inadvertently benefit polluters. “It’s crucial that we continue to drive down the carbon intensity of American milk to dispel poor public perception about America’s dairy industry,” a quote from the former VP of Dairy RNG operations for DTE Energy, reveals the industry’s motivation: to rehabilitate its image while expanding its operations. The report concludes that supporting FFG, through legislation like SB 275 or by raiding the Michigan Strategic Fund, is a means to lock in factory farms. The report advocates for a transformative shift towards a food system that is both humane and sustainable. It emphasizes that the current policies are perpetuating a broken system, and policymakers have the opportunity to make a change by prioritizing meaningful environmental and health benefits. The data indicates that Michigan voters recognize the negative impacts of factory farms and oil and gas companies and prefer environmental organizations, clean energy companies, and small family farms to be involved in climate policy. The report concludes by highlighting the critical need for policies that prioritize environmental and health benefits without unduly benefiting polluters. The survey’s findings highlight a significant disconnect between the public’s desire for environmental protection and the strategies employed by industrial agriculture. The report suggests that current efforts to expand factory farming, driven by FFG, may be undermining public trust and support for genuine climate solutions. The report’s conclusions underscore the urgency of reevaluating policies that enable the expansion of polluting industries under the guise of environmental progress. The key takeaway is the need for climate policies that truly benefit the environment and public health, rather than serving the interests of large corporations. By making polluters pay for climate damages, supporting policies that address methane emissions, and involving trusted environmental and health organizations, Michigan can move towards a more sustainable and equitable food system.