America’s municipal solid waste (MSW) management is approaching a point of no return. While national political attention is focused mainly on plastic pollution or carbon capture technologies, a more immediate and potent climate threat is rotting in our communities. Food waste accounts for approximately 58% of methane emissions from municipal landfills. Despite legislative mandates in states like California, Maryland, and Massachusetts requiring large-scale food waste diversion, the infrastructure to process this organic material has not kept pace with the law. We are attempting to solve a 21st-century waste crisis with 20th-century composting methods that are often land-intensive, slow, and odor-prone. To close this gap, American policy-makers must look toward a misunderstood biological engine: the cockroach. The technical term is blatticomposting: the use of cockroaches to facilitate the rapid decomposition of organic waste. While the concept may trigger a visceral emotional response, the industrial logic is undeniable. Cockroaches are omnivorous, highly reproductive, and were engineered by evolution to thrive in the exact high-temperature, high-humidity environments that organic waste’s decomposition naturally generates. International precedents already exist. In Jinan, China, facilities utilize hundreds of millions of Periplaneta americana (the American cockroach) to process upwards of 60 tons of food waste daily. The waste arrives as a slurry, is consumed by the colony, and is converted into two high-value outputs: insect biomass and nutrient-rich frass (insect manure). In a domestic context, blatticomposting offers a scalable, modular solution that can be integrated into existing waste management campuses. Lab studies indicate that cockroaches can reduce waste mass by 50–70%, performing at rates comparable to the current industry standard, the Black Soldier Fly (BSF). The primary obstacle to blatticomposting is not biological or economic, but cultural. In the Western imagination, the cockroach is a symbol of domestic decay and a vector for disease. However, as a matter of public policy, we must distinguish between the “feral” cockroach in an unsanitary home and the “industrial” cockroach in a regulated bioconversion facility. Relinquishing our environmental social prejudice is essential if America means to enact the creative and organic solutions necessary to sustain our climate infrastructure. We currently tolerate the massive methane plumes of landfills because they are largely “out of sight,” yet we recoil at the prospect of controlled insect rearing that could mitigate those very emissions. A pragmatic approach to the climate crisis requires us to embrace “strange” solutions when the data supports it. By utilizing enclosed, negative-pressure facilities and strict biosecurity airlocks, the risk of escape or odor is neutralized, transforming a perceived pest into a public asset. The main reason blatticompositng exists in places like China and not the US, other than the cultural differences, is FDA restrictions. In China, the primary byproduct of blatticompsting (the dead cockroaches) is used as nutrient-rich chicken feed. In the US, however, the government would likely prevent the usage of cockroaches used as chicken feed for hens raised for human consumption, seemingly thwarting any potential for blatticompostings’ US market feasibility. But if the lawmakers won’t adjust to the markets, then the markets must adjust to the laws, and my proposed solution to both is: reptile feed. Pursuing a formal AAFCO ingredient definition for livestock feed can take upwards of nine years. However, the live and dried feeder insect market (reptiles, amphibians, and ornamental fish) is a multi-million dollar industry with significantly lower regulatory barriers. By positioning the initial output of blatticomposting facilities as specialty pet food rather than agricultural livestock feed, operators can generate immediate revenue and operational data without waiting a decade for federal reclassification. The motivation for this shift is rooted in public service. Landfill diversion is no longer a “nice-to-have” environmental goal; it is a fiscal and atmospheric necessity. Methane Avoidance: Every 1,000 tons of food waste diverted from a landfill prevents roughly 34 metric tons of methane from entering the atmosphere. Carbon Sequestration: The secondary product, frass, is a premium organic fertilizer. Studies show it can contain 43% more carbon and 47% more nitrogen than traditional poultry litter, offering a sustainable alternative to synthetic, petroleum-based fertilizers. Economic Stability: Unlike traditional composting, which is often a cost-sink for municipalities, insect bioconversion creates a “circular” revenue stream. The sale of biomass and fertilizer can offset the operational costs of waste management, reducing the burden on taxpayers and lowering municipal tipping fees. To ensure these facilities serve the public interest rather than purely private profit, they should be structured as Public-Community-Private Partnerships (PCPPs). In this model, the public sector provides the land and regulatory framework; a private benefit corporation manages the technical operations; and local community organizations hold a meaningful equity stake. This ensures that the benefits of “green-collar” job creation and profit-sharing remain within the host community—particularly in areas that have historically been overburdened by industrial waste infrastructure. The fundamental question facing American waste management is not whether cockroaches are aesthetically pleasing, but whether we are brave enough to let something “strange” be useful. The biology is proven, the market for the output is established and the regulatory hurdles are navigable through clever lane selection. By scaling blatticomposting, we can transform regional burdens into national resources. We have the waste streams; we simply need the political will to relinquish our prejudices and adopt a more symbiotic relationship with the biological engines that are happy to do the work for us.
By Micah Allred
In-N-Out is a staple of Californian culture and an iconic American fast-food chain. Founded in 1948 in California, In-N-Out has remained a privately owned company, refusing to franchise to preserve the quality of its food and service. The chain has deep roots in Christian values, as evidenced in both the products it sells and its company culture. The current owner, Lynsi Snyder, is very open about her faith, and since the 90s, the company has printed Bible verses on the cups and wrappers. For instance, on the bottom of the In-N-Out double-double wrappers are “Nahum 1:7,” a reference to the Bible verse “The Lord is good, a stronghold in the day of trouble; he knows those who take refuge in him.” The company aligns itself with conservative causes, and it faced backlash for donating $25,000 to the Republican Party in 2018 and $40,000 during the Governor Newsom Recall Campaign, when the COVID-19 pandemic was ongoing. Lynsi Snyder herself donated $2 million to President Trump’s super PAC in 2025. Despite the perception that many conservatives do not value the working class and are the party for the rich, In-N-Out actually has the highest employee satisfaction among major restaurant chains. In-N-Out’s pay and benefits are well above the standard for American fast-food chains, and they provide ample opportunities for promotion. The company has a system that allows hourly associates to advance through different levels into management positions, with store managers often making six-figure salaries. The employment model allows for upward mobility without having a college degree or connections. In-N-Out is one of the few companies still embodying the classic “American Dream,” where you can start at an entry-level position and advance to a management position that allows you to have a comfortable lifestyle. In-N-Out is proof that you can embody traditional conservative values and be successful, while also treating your employees well and not sacrificing everything for profit. In-N-Out’s approach is an example of a better way for conservatives to approach capitalism: by embracing free market principles while also investing in the well-being of workers, rather than taking a “whatever makes the most money,” approach. Focusing solely on deregulation and tax policy is also important; it is equally important to prioritize American workers and their futures. America is not just a machine that generates profit, but a nation built on the promise that prosperity should uplift its people.
By Alexia Silva
Through March 31st, 2026 from the start of the year, the number of competitive grants awarded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is down by more than half compared with the same period last year, according to an analysis done by the Washington Post. The same analysis also reports that biomedical funding has also been cut and there have been fewer grants focused on women’s health, cancer, and mental health. The NIH supported 2,700 fewer scientific projects in the fiscal year of 2025 and there was a 31% drop in the number of projects funded that included the word “women”. For Katherine Burns, the leading researcher at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine’s endometriosis lab, the prospect of the end of her research haunts her. “It’s very scary. It’s very hard. It’s very emotional for me because I’ve worked so very hard to get to this point. I’ve worked and dedicated who I am to this because I have this disease…We really made some strides, and we really made some sacrifices to keep this going.” Burns said. Endometriosis is an extremely stigmatized and misunderstood disease that impacts 1 in 10 reproductive age women. The exact cause still isn’t known, which has led many women to be misdiagnosed, experience blackout levels of pain, and even infertility. If Burn’s research is cut, a leading source for the improved health of millions of American women will be lost. Last month, NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya told the House Appropriations Committee, which is in charge of giving and withholding funding, that just like last year, the agency will spend its entire budget. “Scientists that are listening, don’t pay attention to the hype. We are in the process of identifying the excellent projects. The grants are already going out the door” he said. However, administrators at research universities struggle with hiring and admissions due to the host of unknowns regarding funding. Since a large portion of grant money goes toward support for trainees in labs, others such as graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, research staff, and assistant professors are all affected by the lack of funding clarity. The future of science in the United States is at stake. California is trying to change that. On March 5th, 2026, James B. Milliken announced that the University of California is sponsoring state senator Scott Wiener’s SB 895, also known as The California Science and Health Research Bond Act. This bipartisan legislation would place a $23 billion bond to fund scientific research across California. If passed by voters on the November 2026 ballot, it would be a monumental step in preserving research that is important to protecting jobs, sustaining lifesaving medical advancements, supporting the health of communities across the state and maintaining California’s global leadership in innovation. “University research has been under sustained attack over the past year. This bill aims to protect the remarkable advances benefiting millions of Californians now and in the future. We are proud to consponsor this bill and will always stand up for science.” said Milliken. On May 4th, a rally will take place in Sacramento, California for this bill. Students, faculty, staff, researchers, and other supporters are encouraged to attend. If this rally is affected and The California Science and Health Research Act is passed, other states can follow suit and help fund other valuable ventures into science. I encourage readers of Our National Conversation to spread the word about this act and even if you are outside of the state, call lawmakers in your own state and let them know about this act. This act can save many lives, even your own if you get sick. The future of science is at stake, so fight to protect it in any way you can.
By Chandler Flowers
Follow Us