We're fighting for our homes and our land, and for the safety of South Dakota communities just like yours. But we can't do this alone, we need your help, so if you can, pitch in and let's make some hay.
We're fighting for our homes and our land, and for the safety of South Dakota communities just like yours. But we can't do this alone, we need your help, by being informed and taking action when it matters most.
Cedar Rapids, IA (The Gazette) – Summit’s proposed route in North Dakota is part of a 2,000-mile, five-state Carbon Storage and Sequestration (CCS) plan to carry hazardous liquid CO2 from 17 ethanol plants in South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota and Iowa to North Dakota where it would be permanently buried underground in abandoned oil wells west of Bismarck. When operational, investors in the $5.5 billion project would reap billions of dollars profit in carbon capture with 45Q federal tax credits. However, without the PSC permit and access to North Dakota’s underground storage sites, the Midwest Carbon Express is a pipeline to nowhere.
An ethanol refinery in Chancellor, S.D., one of many in the midwest, is shown, July 22, 2021. North Dakota’s biggest oil driller says it will commit $250 million to help fund a proposed pipeline that would gather carbon dioxide produced by ethanol plants across the Midwest and pump it underground for permanent storage. Billionaire oil tycoon Harold Hamm’s Continental Resources was scheduled to make a formal announcement of the investment into Summit Carbon Solutions’ $4.5 billion pipeline Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at an ethanol plant in North Dakota. (AP Photo/Stephen Groves, file) North Dakota’s Public Service Commission threw a major roadblock in the path of Summit Carbon Solutions’ Midwest Carbon Express on Aug. 4 when it voted unanimously to deny the company’s hazardous CO2 pipeline permit. According to PSC Chair, Randy Christmann, Summit “failed to meet its burden of proof to show that the location, construction, operation and maintenance will produce minimal adverse effects on the environment and on the citizen of North Dakota.”
The Midwest Carbon Express is on shaky ground all along its multi-state route. Summit is seeking a permit in Iowa with little more than two-thirds of easements voluntarily signed. Hundreds of Iowa landowners refuse to sign and choose instead to face the prospect of eminent domain. Minnesota requires an Environmental Impact Study (EPS) and will not allow eminent domain to be used for this project. South Dakotans are outraged by the lack of action in their Legislature, and thousands have signed a petition demanding Gov. Kristi Noem call a special session.
Summit’s risky CO2 pipeline faces strong opposition. Environmentalists, conservatives, Indigenous Peoples, Republicans, Democrats, independents, and civic groups have joined with impacted landowners to stop one of the biggest land grabs in American history. A recent Iowa Poll by Selzer & Co. in The Des Moines Register found that 80% of Iowans across all demographics oppose the use of eminent domain for the dangerous CO2 pipelines being built by a private company for profit.
In Iowa, Summit-impacted landowners, the Sierra Club, and other interested parties have been frantically preparing for the Iowa Utilities Board (IUB) hearing for Summit’s permit, scheduled to begin in two short weeks on Aug. 22. Recently, the date was unexpectedly moved ahead from an anticipated start in October. This move by the IUB was a suckerpunch to intervenors who suddenly have four months less time to prepare testimony and consult with legal counsel.
Now that Summit has no way to get to the sequestration site in North Dakota, and the Midwest Carbon Express has no endpoint, the IUB hearing should be postponed indefinitely. Without a CCS storage location, there is no reason to waste time, resources, and taxpayer money to hold a hearing on a half-baked proposal for Summit’s permit.
The Iowa Utilities Board needs to put the brakes on the Midwest Carbon Express. There is no urgent need to approve a permit for a dangerous CO2 pipeline to nowhere.
Bonnie Ewoldt is a Milford resident and Crawford County landowner.
The Sangamon County Board voted unanimously Tuesday to place a moratorium on carbon dioxide pipeline sequestration sites through the end of the year.
In a public meeting held at the Bank of Springfield Center, members of the board said too many questions remain unanswered as Sangamon along with 11 other counties in Illinois could see construction on a multi-state pipeline carrying and storing liquified carbon dioxide underground in Montgomery or Christian County.
Nearly 300 miles of a CO2 pipeline from Navigator CO2 Ventures will run through, now being considered by the Illinois Commerce Commission. Already petitioning to be involved in the commission’s 11-month review of Navigator’s pipeline, the board moved forward with a resolution opposing any state or federal approval of a pipeline or sequestration site in the county.
Navigator CO2 Ventures filed a new application with the Illinois Commerce Commission on Friday, Feb. 24, 2023. The filing expands the carbon dioxide pipeline into Montgomery.
What the county is wanting to secure from Navigator is a guarantee to help provide training and equipment in case of a pipeline burst. The need for electric vehicles has been emphasized since they do not rely on internal combustion – how a gas-powered car’s engine starts requiring oxygen to be present in the air.
“We still haven’t fully heard everything that we need to hear, especially on the safety,” Greg Stumpf, District 16, said after the meeting. “If we’re going to ever approve a program, a pipeline that comes through like this, if we get that authority to do that, if the ICC doesn’t take that out of our hands, well we want to make sure that all these questions can be answered.”
Navigator, a Nebraska-based company, has stood by the safety measures that it will take with its pipeline – Navigator Heartland Greenway. Still, opponents remain concerned for the potential of a pipeline burst close to communities like New Berlin and Glenarm.
The fear has led many to not give Navigator access willingly to their property. As of June, Navigator has also only received 13.4% of the right-of-way easement agreements statewide and 5.2% in Sangamon County according to its own data.
Selling the project has meant scheduling countless meetings with landowners and emergency response teams, Navigator representative James Prescott said.
“It’s fair to say the burden of truth is on us to present the facts, present the data,” he said.
The vote follows a July 17 hours-long forum held by the county Zoning and Land Use Committee also attended by Navigator representatives and hundreds of community members mostly in opposition.
There, Navigator pledged to meet and exceed standards set by the United States Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
“This project is not for the good of Illinois without risking our citizens’ lives for their profit, which will be paid by our tax dollars,” Glenarm resident and pipeline opponent Kathleen Campbell said during a public comment section of the meeting.
Contact Patrick Keck: 312-549-9340, pkeck@gannett.com, twitter.com/@pkeckreporter
Sioux Falls, SD (Argus Leader) – Sen. Mike Rounds did not mince words when talking about Summit Carbon Solution’s controversial carbon dioxide pipeline that’s planned to run through eastern South Dakota.
“[Summit Carbon] had some people in there basically blowing their way through, and that irritated a whole lot of people, and I don’t blame them,” Rounds told Rotarian Tony Nour, during Rotary Club of Downtown Sioux Falls’ weekly meeting on Monday.
The Republican U.S. senator commented on the company’s proposed pipeline while taking a part in a dialogue with club members.
A portion of his comments referred to a series of controversial land surveys conducted by the company. Summit Carbon’s actions are considered particularly notorious in the eyes of landowners opposed to carbon dioxide pipelines.
This included Brown County farmer Jared Bossly, who told Argus Leader in June he suffered damage to his some of his corn crop when surveyors drove a large drilling machine through his farmland.
South Dakota Fifth Judicial Court Judge Richard Sommers issued a court order in April that allows Summit Carbon to perform the surveys necessary to build its proposed $4.5 billion Midwest Carbon Express pipeline.
The order came a few weeks before allegations arose that Bossly had threatened the lives of Summit Carbon surveyors who came to perform land surveys on May 3. Bossly has since denied the incident took place.
Bossly was never held in contempt for the alleged threat, and Sommers, who presided over a hearing on the matter, allowed the company to continue its survey work on a mutually-agreed date in June.
Rounds told the club members he had since spoken with representatives of Summit Carbon “to hear their side of the story.” The South Dakota senator said he brought up the unresolved public relations problem to the company in this conversation.
“You have really created a black eye for yourself because of the method in which you went after landowners, trying to get them to allow for their property to be accessed,” Rounds said, paraphrasing his comments to the company. “I said that part is now one you have to solve because the public relations on that are not good for you.”
Summit Carbon’s public relations problems are also going to cost them money, Rounds added.
Summit responds to Rounds’ statements
Summit Carbon Solutions was not immediately available for comment, but a company official later responded to Argus Leader late Monday evening with the following statement:
“We respect Senator Rounds and other South Dakota policymakers for their service to the state. We will continue to meet with the Senator and all policymakers — keep them updated — and respond to any questions they have about the project. Additionally, we will continue hosting safety information events throughout the state to answer questions and hear feedback from landowners and stakeholders, while highlighting the longstanding record pipelines enjoy as the safest form of transporting materials,” the company said.
Summit Carbon also pointed to the company’s progress in acquiring signed voluntary easement agreements, writing that it has secured 75% of its proposed route through these partnerships.
Nour brought up Summit Carbon’s number of signed agreements, which the company often touts as a supporting evidence of the popularity of their Midwest Carbon Express pipeline. Rounds said he had heard they acquired about 70% of their easements ― it is unclear if he was referring to a South Dakota-specific or overall figure.
Nour suggested the remaining 30% would be the most challenging.
“Safety is going to be the key factor,” Rounds responded. “[The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission] is going to look at this, and you’re going to have the obligation to show that you can actually do this pipeline and do it safely, or it won’t get built.”
Rounds: ‘I think carbon is a commodity’
Rounds also provided his opinion on the issue of eminent domain, which is the process Summit Carbon could use to acquire land easements from uncooperative landowners against their wishes.
The company has taken the preliminary steps toward utilizing eminent domain by filing dozens of condemnation proceedings against said landowners in April.
“You have some folks that talk about whether or not this should be identified as far as a taking and whether or not you can legally come in and say, ‘I get to put this pipeline on your land,'” Round said. “That’s going to be decided in the courts where it should be.
The process of utilizing eminent domain requires a company to qualify as a common carrier, or a group that holds itself out to the public to transfer goods for a fee.
The question of whether Summit Carbon fits that description, however, is one pipeline opponents have levied at the company.
South Dakota’s legislature took it up, in part, during the most recent legislative session after Rep. Karla Lems introduced a bill to specifically exclude carbon dioxide as a commodity when delivered by carbon capture companies for sequestration or to qualify for tax credits. However, this attempt failed after the state Senate Commerce and Energy Committee unanimously voted to kill the bill in February.
Rounds was the most recent voice to renew the topic Monday after giving his “message to landowners”: “I think carbon is a commodity.”
“I think the courts will tell you that there is, through this public pipeline … it is an allowed item to be transported, and they can use a right of way,” Rounds said. “Now, that’s my opinion. I think the courts are going to go that direction, but the safety is totally on the company.”
Argus Leader Political Reporter Annie Todd contributed to this article.
Dominik Dausch is the agriculture and environment reporter for the Argus Leader and editor of Farm Forum. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook @DomDNP and send news tips to ddausch@gannett.com.
Map of the proposed pipeline route is presented at an Empower ND event.
BISMARCK, ND (KFGO) – The North Dakota Public Service Commission (PSC) denied a siting permit for the Midwest Carbon Express CO2 Pipeline Project on Thursday but the company behind the project says it will revisit its application and reapply.
Summit Carbon Solutions (SCS) filed an application last fall to construct approximately 320 miles of carbon dioxide pipeline in the state. The proposed route of the pipeline would originate at facilities in Nebraska, Iowa, South Dakota, and Minnesota and cross through parts of Burleigh, Cass, Dickey, Emmons, Logan, McIntosh, Morton, Oliver, Richland and Sargent Counties. The CO2 would then be injected into pore space for permanent sequestration northwest of Bismarck.
Prior to denying the permit, PSC held five public hearings around the state which included hours of testimony and public comment during which concerns from landowners and citizens regarding eminent domain, safety, the policy of permanent CO2 sequestration and storage, setback distances, potential harm to drain tile systems, impacts on property values, and the ability to obtain liability insurance due to the project were raised.
PSC Chairman Randy Christmann said Summit failed to follow some of the steps in state law, when it comes to siting pipelines.
“SCS has not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the location, construction, operation, and maintenance of the project will produce minimum adverse impacts upon the welfare of the citizens of North Dakota with the existing record,” he said.
In its release announcing the permit denial, the PSC said the State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) raised concerns about the pipeline which were not addressed. In addition, the PSC said the U.S. Geological Survey noted 14 areas of potential geological instability within the project corridor, and Summit did not submit information demonstrating how it would address these concerns.
Summit Carbon Solutions said in a statement that it respects the decision by the PSC.
“We will revisit our proposal and reapply for our permit. We’re committed to understanding and incorporating the considerations outlined in the decision. We are confident that our project supports state policies designed to boost key economic sectors: agriculture, ethanol, and energy,” a statement from the company read.
The issues of eminent domain, safety compliance with the U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration construction and operation, and permanent sequestration and storage of CO2 were outside the jurisdiction and consideration of the Commission.
FORT PIERRE, S.D. (KELO) — A state legislator was the first of more than a half-dozen landowners Tuesday who told the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission why they don’t want Navigator’s proposed carbon-dioxide line to be permitted anywhere in the state.
Karla Lems, a state lawmaker from rural Canton, was first landowner to testify Tuesday against Navigator getting a permit from South Dakota Public Utilities …
Republican Rep. Karla Lems from rural Canton spent several hours on the witness stand. She was the prime sponsor of HB1133, which sought to ban carbon-dioxide from being defined as a common carrier under certain circumstances and, in turn, make a project no longer eligible to use eminent domain to force access through a property. The House of Representatives approved her bill, but a Senate committee killed it.
Lems’ testimony followed hours of explanation from a Navigator-affiliated official about safety steps that the company plans to take for the line. Lems said she hadn’t heard anything that reduced her concern. “It literally could wipe somebody out,” she said.
Lems said she tried to sell at auction some agricultural-zoned property in Lincoln County that carry what’s known as ‘housing eligibility.’ In Lincoln County, that eligibility would allow a house to be built on each 40-acre tract. The property was withdrawn from the market after attracting bids that were lower-priced than she expected.
Meanwhile, other properties without the prospect of what she described as a hazardous pipeline sold for higher amounts. Lens said she concluded that a potential CO2 pipeline hurt the market value of her properties.
Navigator wants to run about 13,000 feet of CO2 pipeline through other pieces of property that her family owns. She said the family leases its agricultural land to various tenants who pay according to productivity. “Therefore we’re taking land out of productivity. It’s less money for us. It’s less money for him,” Lems said.
Under cross-examination, Lems told Melanie Carpenter, one of Navigator’s attorneys from Sioux Falls, that she hadn’t tried to negotiate any easement terms or crop-damage payments with Navigator. Lems denied she was waiting for the PUC to decide whether to grant the permit.
Lems acknowledged that the Northern natural-gas pipeline runs through some of the family’s farm ground. She said the property was insured and farming took place over the line. One of her estimated 10-plus tenants had told he wouldn’t farm over a Navigator easement, she said.
She didn’t know how much of the corn that tenants grow on her family’s ground was sold to ethanol plants. Navigator plans to collect CO2 from the Valero ethanol plant at Aurora and POET ethanol plants at Chancellor and Hudson. The CO2 would be shipped to Illinois for disposal.
“I can tell you some of them said they’re not going to take it to the ethanol plant anymore,” Lems said. She acknowledged that her mother is an investor in an ethanol plant.
William Taylor, a Sioux Falls attorney representing several labor unions that would build the Navigator line, pointed out through his questions to Lems that numerous pipelines cross through Lems’ legislative district. He also noted through his questions that several of Sioux Falls’ higher-priced housing areas have pipelines running beneath them. Lems emphasized that those lines are for products that the public uses.
Taylor asked what Lems meant by “in the public use.” She answered, “I meant something that is used frequently by a majority of the public.” Under further questions, Lems acknowledged that several of the pipelines didn’t carry products that South Dakotans use.
Lems agreed with Taylor’s question that the PUC has no greater authority than the Legislature has given. He asked her to show the state law that allows the PUC to tell a company where to put its route. State law only lets the commission decide where a project shouldn’t go.
Said Lems, “I believe that if they (PUC) rule in favor of granting a permit for a project as a common carrier, it then allows that company to move forward and have a project.” Then the company can use eminent domain to force access through a property owner’s land, she said: “It’s a chain link.”
Commission chair Kristie Fiegen asked for more information about the history of Lems’ late father purchasing properties. Lems said some of the land has been held for 15 years waiting for “the right moment, the right person” to come along.
Regarding what sets CO2 apart from other commodities, Lems said, “I believe that we can see organically that it obviously is different.” She said there were no outcries against water or natural gas or electricity lines. “This is different. It is different because people don’t see it as a public use,” she said. She added, “You can clean up an oil spill. Yes, there are some dangers with natural gas, but not the possibility that you could see with a CO2 pipeline.”
In answer to a question from commissioner Gary Hanson, Lems agreed that she was aware that Navigator hasn’t pursued eminent domain against any property in South Dakota at this time. Commissioner Chris Nelson asked whether some things are more valuable than dollars and cents.
“Absolutely,” Lems said. She disagreed with the company being able to force its way onto private property and said the safety questions were “very, very huge.”
“We can have the best safety mechanisms in place, and we can still have an accident,” Lems said. Nor does she want her family or neighbors or anyone who buys property from the family her property to face that threat.
Lems also dislikes that BlackRock has provided financing for the project, in part because the investment group has recently established a financial relationship with the United Arab Emirates. “The foreign ownership itself is enough for me to say I don’t want to do business with this company,” she said. “I don’t feel my morals and values line up with that company and I don’t feel they are friendly to most of South Dakota’s patriotic values.”
People should have the right to say, No thank you, Lems said. Commissioner Nelson noted that one of the criteria the Legislature set for PUC permits is whether a trans-state facility would “substantially impair the health, safety or welfare of the inhabitants.”
“Well I definitely feel it could impair if we had a rupture,” Lems said. She said Navigator’s pipeline would require people to be on a higher awareness of a potential leak or rupture. “I don’t want to have to live that way, and I don’t want to put it on anyone else to have to live that way.” She said maybe “moral duty” needs to be added to the siting criteria.
Others who testified Tuesday against the project included Rick Bonander, R.J. Wright, Todd Dawley, Glenn Scott, Miles Lacey, Connie Beyer-LaLonde and Keith Myrlie.
“If you allow this to go through the commission could change the lives of hundreds of rural families forever,” Myrlie said.
“I just hope things work out for everybody,” commissioner Hanson replied.
