August 19, 2025
CHICAGO – U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced that USDA will “no longer deploy programs to fund solar projects,” a move that would presumably limit the Rural Energy for America Program’s (REAP) longstanding, bipartisan support for cost-cutting solar projects in rural communities. In addition, according to a USDA memo, it will block funding for solar panels “consisting of any component” made by a foreign adversary. In recent years, solar has been the most popular technology choice under REAP, by far.
Statement from Andy Olsen, Senior Policy Advocate,
Environmental Law & Policy Center
“REAP is a popular, voluntary, and competitive program that has served America since 2002. At its core, it gives farmers, ranchers, and rural small businesses greater freedom to decide how best to care for their operations, whether through renewable energy, energy efficiency upgrades, or other cost-cutting, energy-securing solutions.
However, the USDA’s new anti-renewable energy policies restrict farmers’ choices over their own land under the banner of ‘protection.’ These limits hinder farmers’ ability to generate energy independently, create new revenue streams, and provide rural jobs that benefit both their bottom line and their communities.
We support standards for solar development on cropland that require strong land stewardship, as many developers already implement today. Wind and solar can coexist successfully with crops or grazing. Strong solar land stewardship improves soil health and protects water quality through smart ground cover such as deep-rooted perennial plants, pollinator habitat, and rest from chemical-intensive farming. Plus, solar arrays are designed to be removable.
The USDA’s claim to protect farmland is dubious given it only exists to restrict wind and solar power while ignoring the legitimate threats to farmland – such as commercial development, including data centers, which permanently removes land from agriculture. Any conversation around protecting farmland should come from thoughtful, balanced input, not blanket restrictions that strip choices from the very people REAP was designed to serve.”