Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Soil Health Water Conservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Phoenix startup My Land Company tells lawmakers its microalgae service can boost soil organic matter and reduce irrigation needs
Summary
My Land Company CEO Dane Hague described a commercial microalgae-on-site service that the company says increases soil organic matter, reduces irrigation frequency and can lower fertilizer use; company presented pilot data and pricing to the Senate Natural Resources Committee.
Dane Hague, co-founder and CEO of My Land Company, told the Senate Natural Resources Committee that his firm delivers live, site-specific microalgae to farmland via a subscription service to restore soil biological activity, increase water-holding capacity and improve crop yields.
Hague described the company’s model: company-owned cultivation equipment is installed on a farm and operated remotely, and My Land provides live native microalgae tailored to a client’s soil. “We can deliver 20,000,000,000,000 algae cells a day to the farm,” Hague said, describing the largest containerized system the company operates.
Why it matters: Hague framed the product as a soil-health service that can increase water retention and reduce irrigation frequency. He cited case-study performance ranges presented to the committee: examples included a 23% single-year improvement in water-holding capacity in one pepper operation, a 43% increase in soil water-holding capacity on alfalfa over two years in a cited case, and reported first-year water reductions of about 10% and yield increases of about 12% in a third-party California pistachio trial.
Business model and verification Hague said My Land does not sell equipment to growers but provides it as a subscription service; pricing cited during the hearing was about $250 per acre per year for higher-value specialty crops, with the company expecting lower prices for commodity crops as density of service centers increases. Hague described data sources for reported results as a mix of third-party contract research organizations (CROs), grower-tracked metrics (electric bills, irrigation meters), and company monitoring, and he said the company is pursuing additional third-party validation.
Claims and limits discussed Committee members asked about verification of water savings and tracking methods. Hague acknowledged multiple data sources and measurement challenges: some growers measure water via electric bills for groundwater pumping; drip irrigation is easier to meter than flood irrigation; and some reported water reductions are reported anecdotally by irrigators rather than measured by a single standardized meter. He described nitrogen fertilizer reductions, soil organic matter increases and salt redistribution in treated fields as recurring results across case studies but said exact outcomes depend on crop, irrigation method and baseline soil conditions.
Ending Hague offered to share data and follow-up third-party study plans with the committee. He closed by reiterating the company’s focus on grower return on investment and said the firm will continue to expand service centers and third‑party validation.
