Glyphosate has long been a cornerstone herbicide for weed control across a range of cropping systems. However, its widespread use has also brought increased legal scrutiny. Under pressure from ongoing lawsuits, Bayer has announced it may halt glyphosate production unless it receives legal protection. Given this possibility, Derek Washburn, Farm Management Extension Associate, and I analyzed the potential short-term economic impact of losing glyphosate in North Carolina.
Our analysis focused solely on projected changes in herbicide programs if glyphosate were no longer available. It's important to note that this estimate does not account for several indirect costs, such as increased tillage (and the resulting negative effects on soil health and water quality), or increased hand-weeding, which depends heavily on weed species and pressure, as well as labor availability and cost.
Burndown Programs
In current burndown applications, the average North Carolina farmer uses a combination of glyphosate, 2,4-D, and flumioxazin (Valor or generics). Without glyphosate, most farmers would likely turn to paraquat (Gramoxone), increasing the cost of burndown by approximately 62%. This translates to an added cost of $6.50 per acre. Including crops like tobacco, sweetpotatoes, peanuts, and small grains—where glyphosate is used preplant but not in-season—this would represent an additional $17 million in costs statewide.
Corn
Corn producers stand to see the largest cost increase due to limited alternatives for grass control. Without glyphosate, they would need to adopt more expensive preemergence herbicide programs (three or four active ingredients). For postemergence grass control, options like nicosulfuron (Accent Q) or other ALS-inhibitor mixtures would likely be used. Overall, we estimate that weed management costs in corn would rise by 73%, or $38.35 per acre—totaling around $34 million in additional expenses for North Carolina growers.
Cotton
In cotton, farmers would likely need to add two residual herbicides—one preemergence and one postemergence. To replace glyphosate postemergence, clethodim (Select Max and generics) or similar grass herbicides like sethoxydim, fluazifop, or quizalofop would be required. These changes would increase weed control costs in cotton by 24%, or about $14.85 per acre, adding up to $6 million statewide.
Soybeans
Similar to cotton, soybean producers would need to include an additional preemergence residual herbicide and replace glyphosate postemergence with clethodim or related products. These changes would increase weed control costs by $15.10 per acre—a 38% rise. With 1.6 million acres of soybeans in North Carolina, this equates to an additional $25 million in costs for the state's farmers.
Summary
In total, we estimate the immediate economic impact of losing glyphosate in North Carolina would be approximately $82 million. This figure is conservative and based only on predicted changes to herbicide programs, using projected 2025 herbicide prices. If glyphosate were withdrawn from the market, demand—and prices—for alternative herbicides would liley rise further.
The bottom line: glyphosate remains a vital tool in modern agriculture. Its loss would be a major disruption, both economically and operationally, for North Carolina farmers.
