BISMARCK, N.D. — On Friday, utility regulators in North Dakota approved a proposed carbon dioxide pipeline, marking a significant achievement for Summit Carbon Solutions, which has encountered staunch opposition from landowners and faced numerous obstacles in advancing its plans.
The North Dakota Public Service Commission unanimously granted a siting permit for Summit’s altered 333-mile pipeline route. This project is part of an ambitious $8 billion, 2,500-mile pipeline network intended to transport substantial amounts of CO2 emissions from 57 ethanol facilities across five states for underground storage in North Dakota.
As of now, construction has yet to commence on any segment of Summit’s proposed pipeline. While Iowa has given the green light to the initiative, other challenges remain in North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Nebraska.
This new approval is particularly crucial for Summit, as its earlier permit request in North Dakota was denied in 2023, a setback that was soon followed by a rejection in South Dakota. Another contender in the carbon capture space, Navigator CO2 Ventures, abandoned its project due to uncertainties stemming from state regulations and government processes, particularly in South Dakota and Iowa.
Proponents of the carbon capture initiative regard such projects as instrumental in addressing climate change, especially given the attractive federal tax credits available for their implementation. The ethanol sector anticipates that Summit’s pipeline will unlock new markets for sustainable aviation fuel, thereby benefitting both ethanol producers and Iowa, the leading corn-producing state.
North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, who is now the President-elect’s choice for the position of Interior Secretary—a role with significant authority over natural resources—has highlighted North Dakota’s exceptional capacity for underground CO2 storage, referring to it as a “geologic jackpot.” However, critics of carbon capture technology argue that it is unproven on a large scale and enables the fossil fuel sector to persist without adequate changes.
Many landowners and opposition groups in the Midwest express significant worries about the risks posed by potential pipeline ruptures, which could lead to the release of hazardous CO2 gas, threatening public health and safety. Eminent domain concerns, where land may be taken for public use, also weigh heavily on local residents.
Commission Chairman Randy Christmann urged Summit to minimize the use of eminent domain, clarifying that the commission does not oversee this aspect of the siting process.
Lee Blank, the CEO of Summit, conveyed satisfaction with the commission’s decision. He affirmed that the company strives to collaborate with landowners voluntarily and aims for 100% voluntary acquisition.
Summit announced that it has secured easements for over 82% of its route in North Dakota.
In opposition, Republican state Senator Jeff Magrum argued that investments in infrastructure—such as roads and bridges—would be more beneficial for the state than what he termed “Green New Deal projects.” He anticipates challenges to the commission’s decision.
Landowner advocate Brian Jorde stated that while the ruling was expected, they would assess the written decision and pursue legal avenues as needed. He noted that the legal system had played a crucial role in Iowa, where regulatory decisions were contested in court.
Earlier this year, the Iowa Utilities Commission granted Summit a permit for a hazardous liquid pipeline after evaluating its application. However, construction cannot commence until Summit secures the necessary route approvals in both Dakotas and obtains authorization for underground storage in North Dakota, among other steps. The Iowa Utilities Commission’s approval has prompted legal challenges.
Christmann specified that the North Dakota permit is independent of decisions made in other states. Last August, the commission had previously denied Summit’s permit due to inadequate responses to concerns related to geologic stability, wildlife habitats, cultural resource impacts, and landowner issues.
After the denial, the commission opted to reconsider, initiating over a year of meetings and submissions.
Summit has applied for three storage facility permits with the North Dakota Department of Mineral Resources, but a ruling is still pending.
In 2022, Minnkota Power Cooperative entered a partnership with Summit to develop CO2 storage options in central North Dakota, which includes access to Minnkota’s approved underground storage.
In September 2023, South Dakota’s Public Utilities Commission rejected Summit’s application, citing the route’s noncompliance with local setback ordinances. Summit plans to resubmit its application this month.
Recently, South Dakota voters also declined a set of regulations that opponents argued would minimize local control over pipeline projects, consolidating more authority with state regulators. Supporters framed it as a measure to protect landowner rights.
Meanwhile, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission is and anticipates making a decision on December 12 regarding a 28-mile pipeline segment intended to connect an ethanol plant near Fergus Falls to Summit’s North Dakota pipeline network. An administrative law judge has already suggested that the environmental review complies with legal standards, recommending approval for Summit.
In Nebraska, the lack of a state regulatory framework for CO2 pipelines means that Summit is engaging with individual counties to progress its project, although at least one county has denied a permit request.
