Legislators hear case for state support of local green‑ammonia production to stabilize fertilizer supply
Loading...
Summary
An informational hearing on HF2103 examined an $8 million package to back local green‑ammonia production in Minnesota, with industry and farm groups touting price and supply certainty, and agency officials answering questions on oversight, storage, safety and use of the Renewable Development Account.
Representative Gerry Anderson, chair of the House Agriculture Finance and Policy Committee, convened an informational hearing on House File 2103, the "Minnesota Made Ammonia Act," which seeks funding to support commercial‑scale local production of ammonia fertilizer.
Tristan Wilmes, vice president of agronomy at Central Farm Service, urged support for the proposal and framed the problem as both a price and supply shock. "Farmers don't just have a price problem. They have a supply and certainty problem as well," Wilmes said, noting ammonia terminal prices in the Corn Belt moved from $750 per ton on Feb. 26 to $1,000 per ton by April 6. Wilmes said Central Farm Service has committed private capital to storage and distribution and estimated the proposal would generate about $62,000,000 in direct affordability benefits for rural farm families over 10 years.
Tristan Pietz, president of Talis Ag, described modular distributed ammonia systems that use air, water and electricity and said the Blue Earth project could produce roughly 10,000–14,000 tons per year — about 5% of Minnesota's estimated 200,000‑ton annual anhydrous ammonia use. Pietz said the company expects to move financing this year, begin deployment in 2027 and have ammonia "ready for application in 2028."
Rob Davis of Clean Counts told the committee his organization would provide auditable tracking for local ammonia production "similar to how RNG tracking and renewable energy certificate tracking works today," saying measurable certificates and transparent data are essential for market trust. Rachel Stuckey of the Minnesota Conservative Energy Forum and Anne Schwagel of the Minnesota Farmers Union also testified in support, highlighting potential economic opportunities, use of curtailed wind power and potential carbon‑intensity benefits.
Committee members pressed presenters on accountability, procurement and public‑interest protections. Representative Emma Gottfried questioned why the DE amendment names specific nonprofit and private recipients rather than using a competitive grant process. Andrea Vavoy, deputy commissioner at the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, said the Department would apply standard Office of Grants Management processes — including pre‑risk assessments, reimbursement accounting and progress reporting — and that MDA could decline to issue state dollars if an entity failed to meet requirements.
Representative Hansen pressed on whether the Renewable Development Account (RDA) — funded by utility ratepayers — is an appropriate funding source, and on storage, safety and market‑consolidation risks. Testifiers said Blue Earth Light & Water partners with Excel (an RDA beneficiary) and that CFS plans to invest in storage capacity; Wilmes estimated new anhydrous storage costs around $4,000 per ton and said the cooperative would need roughly 5,000–6,000 tons of storage to absorb plant output. On inputs, Talis Ag said green production requires about 11 megawatt‑hours of electricity and roughly 900 gallons of water per ton of ammonia, with about half of that water used in electrolysis.
No formal committee action was taken; Chair Anderson said HF2103 is informational and may be heard next week in the Energy Committee. The hearing record includes letters of support and testimony from multiple farm, energy and research partners; members requested follow‑up information on grant safeguards, contract provisions and state protections if a facility were later sold.
