Attendees at this year’s Dairygold tillage conference were challenged from the outset to think differently about the future of the sector.

The event opened with the outlook for tillage from Teagasc economist Fiona Thorne, who painted a challenging picture for the sector heading into 2026, with margins under pressure from stagnant prices and rising costs. Livestock sectors, per hectare, are again expected to outperform tillage.

This outlook was reflected in the frustration expressed by many in attendance, particularly around whether the sustainability and quality credentials of Irish-grown grain will translate into real value for growers.

Efforts to address this are underway through a new pilot project exploring a grain assurance scheme, supported by Bord Bia alongside industry partners, including the Malting Company of Ireland.

As chair, Andy Doyle noted that it may only be the first spoke in the wheel, but it is an important starting point.

For me, however, the standout remark came from Dairygold’s Liam Leahy, who suggested that now may be the time for the industry to challenge itself and think outside the box. And as it happens, opportunities do exist for tillage farmers in renewables, opportunities that could complement and support the sector, provided the industry and farm organisations are willing to put the work in.

Rethink solar farms

Solar farms have turned into a divisive topic. Some farmers see it as an opportunity to future proof the financial position of their farm, others see it as a means to take farm land out of production. I posed the question to farmers at the conference, why lease the land when you can do it yourself, while continuing to farm.

This may now be possible due to the Small-Scale Renewable Electricity Support Scheme (SRESS) which was launched last year.

The new State-supported scheme is designed to enable the development of small-scale (50kW-6MW) commercial renewable electricity projects that export power to the grid. The scheme provides a fixed tariff for 15 years and is targeted at renewable energy communities, which are eligible for higher tariffs, as well as SMEs and farmers, offering a simpler route to market.

I have written at length about this scheme, and believe that rather than leasing land for large-scale solar farms, farmers, or groups of farmers, could develop their own commercial-scale solar projects alongside their farming enterprises. Projects may be particularly viable for farms located close to substations, major overhead lines or large energy users.

Putting it into practical terms, a 6MW solar project would typically require around 25ac of land. Under the SRESS scheme, annual income could range from €500,000 to €700,000 per year, against an estimated build cost of €6-8 million.

With an operational lifespan of around 40 years, such a project has the potential to provide a long-term, stable income stream alongside the farming enterprise.

Scheme changes

Don’t get me wrong, projects of this nature are riddled with challenges, not least the complex process of connecting to and exporting to Ireland’s creaking grid.

However, I deliberately chose this topic because, despite some small-scale, export-only solar projects progressing through planning and development, uptake of the scheme is likely to remain low. The reason is simple; several highly questionable decisions were made during the scheme’s design.

I put this challenge directly to the farm organisations in the room, to push for changes that would make the scheme workable for farmers. I also urged farmers themselves to press their organisations to take this on.

The changes required are straightforward and reasonable. Where the grid cannot accept electricity, farmers should be compensated in line with large-scale solar projects. The full tariff must be index-linked, not just 30%, and a farmer-only category with higher rates is needed. At a minimum, returns should allow farmers to recoup their investment within seven years, reflecting the added risk involved.

This is achievable, but it requires farm organisations to develop and defend a clear policy position. Otherwise, they cannot credibly criticise farmers for leasing land to solar developers if they fail to secure the tools that would allow farmers to invest in and benefit from renewable energy projects themselves.

Get ahead of AD

The second subject chosen for discussion was the increasingly topical area of anaerobic digestion (AD). However, I deliberately avoided focusing on farmers building and owning their own plants. Instead, I concentrated on the here and now, how farmers can organise themselves to capitalise on projects already in development and position themselves from a place of strength.

Current Government supports and policy is geared towards large-scale plants delivering significant volumes of biomethane into the gas grid. In most cases, farmers are not directly involved in these projects. The cost and complexity of developing and operating a modern, large-scale biomethane plant are beyond the reach of most individual farmers.

That said, the plants currently in development share a number of common parameters, and every one of them requires farmers.

Parameters

Each AD plant requires a secure supply of feedstock, with virtually all new facilities relying on agricultural inputs. Typically, 50,000-100,000t of feedstock are needed annually, drawn from a carefully balanced mix of agri-food waste, whole crops, beet, crop residues such as straw, silage, slurries and manures.

Most developers will not produce this feedstock themselves, instead offering contracts to farmers and creating a new market for a portion of their cropping area. To meet sustainability criteria, AD plants also require substantial nutrient inputs, with slurries and manures typically accounting for 30% or more of total feedstock.

More than 90% of feedstock volume is returned as digestate, requiring developers to secure land and farming partners for its use. Land spreading is the most cost-effective option and, for tillage farmers, provides a valuable and effectively free source of nutrients.

Why wait?

Typically, developers identify a site first and, as projects progress through planning, they then begin to line up farms to supply feedstock and manage digestate. In most cases, this is done by approaching farmers individually. My message to the audience was to challenge that model.

We know developers are actively building projects in Ireland and are constantly looking for new sites. Rather than waiting to be approached, could farmers organise themselves in advance and be ready to engage from a position of strength? Could a group of farmers come together and assemble, for example, 20,000t of slurry, 2,000ac to produce feedstock, 5,000t of manure and 5,000ac to manage digestate?

Such a group could be structured as a cooperative, or as Tetra Tech’s Chris McCallum described in an interview with the Irish Farmers Journal earlier this month, a “carbon cooperative”. This would be a formal, registered structure, similar to a producer organisation, ensuring that when a developer comes knocking, farmers are negotiating collectively rather than individually.

Acting as a group brings real strength to dictate terms and prices. Farmers not only have the capacity to supply feedstock, but also to organise the logistics around harvesting, transport and digestate management, along with potential sites for the plants. Packaged as a clear proposal, few AD developers would find such an offering easy to ignore.

And once established, why stop there? Farmers could insist that the cooperative secures an ownership stake in AD projects.

The author Stephen Robb is currently involved in a family/community proposal for an anaerobic digestion facility in Co Donegal.