In a decision that has sent ripples through scientific and community circles, the Trump administration has abruptly terminated a $417,000 federal grant funding a pivotal study by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-CH) and RTI International. This research, focused on the health and environmental impacts of biogas production from hog farms in North Carolina’s Duplin and Sampson counties, was poised to provide critical insights into how these operations affect air quality, water sources, and public well-being in areas with the highest density of swine farms in the nation. The cancellation, part of a staggering $783 million cut to National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants, has left researchers and residents grappling with unanswered questions about the safety of living near these industrial operations. While initial data collection had begun to uncover troubling signs of pollution, the inability to complete the study now casts a shadow over efforts to protect vulnerable populations and inform sound policy.
The implications of this funding cut extend far beyond a single research project. Biogas, often promoted as an environmentally friendly method to capture methane from swine waste, has been embraced by major pork producers as a way to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. However, the technology comes with significant risks that remain poorly understood due to the halted research. Communities in the affected counties, already burdened by the proximity to concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), now face heightened uncertainty about the pollutants and health hazards they are exposed to daily. This development has also reignited debates about environmental justice and the role of federal policy in addressing systemic inequities tied to industrial agriculture.
Environmental and Health Impacts of Hog Farm Biogas
Hidden Dangers in Methane Capture
The process of producing biogas from swine waste, while marketed as a sustainable solution to curb methane emissions—a greenhouse gas far more potent than carbon dioxide—carries a host of environmental risks that remain inadequately studied due to the recent funding cut. Open-air waste lagoons, a staple of industrial hog farming, continue to store untreated waste even as methane is captured for energy production, posing a persistent threat to groundwater and surface water through potential leaks and runoff. Additionally, the infrastructure for biogas, including pipelines, is not immune to failures that could release harmful pollutants into the environment. Early data from the UNC-CH study had already flagged bacterial contamination in local water sources, with levels of total coliform and E. coli exceeding state safety thresholds in some samples. Without the completion of this research, the full scope of these dangers remains obscured, leaving regulators and communities without the necessary evidence to enforce protective measures or demand industry accountability.
Beyond water concerns, air quality near biogas operations presents another layer of risk that the halted study was poised to investigate. Pollutants such as hydrogen sulfide and ammonia, byproducts of swine waste processing, were detected in preliminary air monitoring near residential areas in Duplin and Sampson counties. Some readings indicated brief but concerning spikes in fine particulate matter (PM 2.5), reaching levels classified as unhealthy for human exposure. These findings, though incomplete, align with prior research linking such pollutants to serious health issues, yet the absence of comprehensive data means that state standards for acceptable exposure remain elusive. The termination of funding has effectively stalled progress toward understanding how pervasive and severe these air quality threats are, placing nearby residents in a precarious position of uncertainty regarding their safety.
Community Well-Being at Stake
Residents of the affected North Carolina counties, many of whom live in close proximity to CAFOs and biogas facilities, have expressed profound concern over the health implications of these operations, a sentiment captured in the limited community engagement conducted before the study’s cancellation. Persistent odors emanating from hog farms and processing plants have long been a source of distress, often accompanied by reports of respiratory discomfort and other health complaints that locals attribute to their environment. The preliminary outreach by researchers revealed a striking lack of awareness among many about the specifics of biogas production nearby, yet the desire for transparency and answers about potential risks was unanimous. The loss of this study means these voices may go unheard, as the data needed to validate their experiences and push for change has been indefinitely postponed.
The emotional and psychological toll on these communities cannot be overlooked, as living near industrial swine operations often brings a sense of helplessness and frustration. Beyond physical health, the stress of constant exposure to odors and the fear of unseen contaminants in water and air weigh heavily on daily life. While some residents acknowledge the economic contributions of the hog industry to the region, this recognition is frequently tempered by a demand for accountability and safeguards—demands that the canceled research could have supported with hard evidence. Now, without the study’s findings, the ability to advocate for improved conditions or stricter oversight is severely hampered, leaving these communities to bear the burden of industrial proximity without adequate recourse or understanding of the true risks they face.
Policy and Industry Dynamics
Federal Rollback of Equity Initiatives
The cancellation of the UNC-CH and RTI International study is emblematic of a broader policy shift under the Trump administration, which has prioritized deregulation and a narrow interpretation of environmental protection over initiatives addressing equity and public health. By slashing funding not only for this specific project but also for over 400 other environmental justice grants, the administration has signaled a retreat from programs aimed at protecting marginalized communities disproportionately affected by industrial pollution. An EPA spokesperson articulated this stance as a rejection of what they termed “wasteful DEI programs,” emphasizing a refocused mission on core environmental concerns. This perspective, however, has deepened the rift between federal priorities and the needs of vulnerable populations, particularly in areas like Duplin and Sampson counties where systemic inequities are starkly evident.
This policy direction has faced legal and public scrutiny, yet recent developments have further entrenched the administration’s approach. A U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding the grant cuts, despite lower court challenges raising concerns about potential discrimination, has solidified the rollback of equity-focused research and support. The dismantling of the EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights adds another layer to this shift, removing institutional mechanisms that once sought to address disparities in environmental burdens. For communities reliant on such research to highlight and mitigate the impacts of industrial operations like biogas production, this loss represents a significant barrier to achieving fairness and protection, leaving them without critical federal advocacy or resources to confront ongoing challenges.
Corporate Growth and Regulatory Gaps
Amid the policy upheaval, the biogas industry continues to expand in North Carolina, driven by major players such as Align RNG, a collaboration between Dominion Energy and Smithfield Foods. This partnership operates facilities in Duplin and Sampson counties, processing swine waste into pipeline-ready energy, with plans for additional plants on the horizon. While this growth is positioned as a step toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it unfolds against a backdrop of significant operational and regulatory challenges. Many CAFOs permitted to install biodigesters have yet to complete construction, and state mandates requiring utilities to source a portion of energy from swine waste are often met with delays, highlighting gaps in enforcement and compliance that could exacerbate environmental risks.
The unchecked expansion of biogas operations, without the benefit of comprehensive research like the halted UNC study, raises serious concerns about the long-term consequences for nearby communities. Without data to assess the full spectrum of emissions and pollutants from these facilities, regulators are ill-equipped to impose necessary safeguards or hold industry accountable for potential harms. The preliminary findings of water and air quality issues near existing plants already suggest that scaling up operations could amplify these threats, yet the absence of ongoing research leaves a void in understanding how to balance industrial innovation with public safety. As corporate interests push forward, the lack of scientific oversight risks prioritizing profit over the well-being of those living in the shadow of these facilities.
Advocacy for Marginalized Communities
Environmental justice remains a central issue in the wake of the funding cut, as the communities surrounding CAFOs and biogas operations in North Carolina are predominantly Black, Indigenous, and Latino—groups historically burdened by disproportionate environmental hazards. Advocacy organizations, including the Southern Environmental Law Center, have taken action by filing civil rights complaints against the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, arguing that biogas permits issued in these areas have a discriminatory impact on minority populations. These legal challenges underscore the systemic neglect felt by residents, who often lack the resources or platform to push back against industrial encroachment without supportive data from studies like the one canceled by the administration.
The termination of the UNC-CH research, alongside broader cuts to environmental justice grants, has amplified the urgency of these advocacy efforts. Without empirical evidence to substantiate claims of health and environmental harm, affected communities face an uphill battle in securing protections or policy changes. The initial community engagement by researchers had begun to illuminate the lived experiences of residents—ranging from health concerns to emotional stress—yet the inability to complete the study leaves these narratives without the scientific backing needed to drive meaningful reform. As legal and grassroots efforts persist, the absence of comprehensive data remains a critical obstacle, highlighting the profound impact of federal decisions on the fight for equity in environmental policy.
