Vijay Jayaraj
While news about President Trump’s tariffs and crackdown on suspicious financial management of federal agencies dominates media coverage in recent weeks, a quiet transition to agricultural policy is still underway.
The command to remove climate change references from the USDA website, signal deviates from the climate regulations of family farming practices and strings related to our agriculture abroad.
Through the U.S. International Development Agency, the federal government devotes millions of dollars to climate-centric programs that may have no positive impact on climate-promoting “green” orthodox ideas on agricultural productivity.
Some of these plans are intertwined with other activities in rural agricultural communities. For example, USAID and USAID joined “$55 million credit guarantee to address the economic impact of Covid-19 by supporting farmers’ producer organizations, AG-Tech and companies that provide clean energy solutions to the agricultural sector.” A $1.5 million program aims to “authorize” female climate activists in northern Kenya.
USAID also works with organizations such as the Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security Research Program that operates in developing countries and focuses on so-called research topics including “low emissions” development, climate services and safety nets, expanding “climate-smart” agriculture, and gender and social inclusion.
All of this expenditure falls under the protection of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) 2022-2030 climate strategy, a $150 billion “all-institutional approach” to build a “equitable world with net zero greenhouse gas emissions.”
USAID’s financial support for farmers and businesses has always been dependent on compliance with absurd climate agenda and ill-just views on human nature, which has nothing to do with feeding hungry people.
The government's freeze on this funding cuts funds from hundreds of such programs that disrupt the use of smart agricultural practices in places like Africa, Asia and Latin America.
Not only farmers abroad, they will benefit from the demolition of the USIA’s climate initiative. One of the first casualties of the current policy shift will be an unscientific $3.1 billion program to promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from farms in 55 states and regions through 135 projects.
Imagine a program designed to help crop cultivation, but this strips them of carbon dioxide that can photosynthesis. Carbon dioxide is necessary for plant life, and ultimately all life.
NASA attributes much of the earth's greening over the past 100 years to the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Plans trying to lower CO2 levels are destructive – period.
Without President Trump’s bold moves, American farmers could be constrained by externally imposed climate frameworks that in many cases stifle innovation and reduce American farmers’ competitiveness on the world stage.
USDA greenhouse gas emissions for climate smart agriculture and forestry programs. These moves include forcing American farmers to adopt low-pressure irrigation systems to reduce the use of fossil fuel energy. Other measures are designed to manipulate the quantity and quality of dietary nutrients to reduce methane emissions from the animal's digestive tract. It may only be a matter of time before critically important nitrogen fertilizers are used as a source of greenhouse gas emissions, just like in some other countries.
By contrast, countries such as China and India prioritize productivity and food security over this practice. They have made significant investments in fossil fuel-based agricultural technologies and products, achieving record crop yields for a large population.
In addition to injuries, climate currencies obtained by these countries for “climate justice” may have funded fossil fuel projects. U.S. taxpayers often pay bills for overseas projects that have little benefit.
The highly politicized, fabricated climate crisis is based on false climate models and so-called exaggerations of greenhouse effects and should not mask direct economic and operational problems for farmers in the United States and elsewhere.
Trump's withdrawal from international climate initiatives, including the UN Paris Climate Agreement, marks a victory for American farmers and taxpayers. His decision ended our participation in expensive and unrealistic mandates (such as the net zero agenda) that strained the global economy and exacerbated unrest among farmers and the wider public.
The comment was originally Blaze Media March 29, 2025.
Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Assistant company2 allianceArlington, Virginia. he He holds a Master of Environmental Science from the University of East Anglia and a Bachelor of Science in Energy Management from Robert Gordon University in the UK, and a Bachelor of Engineering from Anna University in India.
Related
Discover more from Watt?
Subscribe to send the latest posts to your email.
