In a move that could have significant ramifications for a proposed extensive pipeline project in the Midwest, South Dakota has enacted a new law that prohibits the use of eminent domain for acquiring land for carbon capture pipelines. The legislation presents a formidable obstacle for the ambitious 2,500-mile (4,023-kilometer) pipeline proposed by Summit Carbon Solutions, which is intended to traverse five states in the region.
The undertaking, estimated to cost $8.9 billion, is designed to channel greenhouse gas emissions from over 50 ethanol plants located in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota to a North Dakota site for underground storage. Despite this new hurdle, Summit Carbon Solutions remains persistent, affirming their commitment to the project. This follows South Dakota Governor Larry Rhoden’s announcement of signing the bill that restricts Summit from mandating land access from reluctant property owners.
Though the new law complicates the pipeline’s proposed routing, Summit Carbon Solutions hinted at the possibility of pursuing various strategies but has not confirmed whether legal action will be among them. The company clarified that progress continues in other states, where they have already secured more than 2,700 easements and have received route approvals in Iowa and North Dakota, as well as a segment in Minnesota.
A key challenge lies in the pipeline’s current trajectory, which spans nearly 700 miles through South Dakota. Consideration of rerouting via Minnesota presents difficulties, although a segment of the project has been approved in Minnesota as a 28-mile stretch extending from near Fergus Falls to the North Dakota border. Nonetheless, Summit has yet to comment on pursuing any new routing options.
Republican Representative Karla Lems, the bill’s sponsor, suggested alternatives for Summit, such as negotiating with South Dakota landowners or realigning the route through Minnesota towards North Dakota. While Governor Rhoden emphasized that the law was not designed to terminate the project, he sees it as a chance for Summit to reassess and potentially amend its approach.
The pipeline holds substantial significance for the ethanol industry, crucially as the market adapts with evolving energy needs. Ethanol, made from nearly 40% of the nation’s corn yield, is a common gasoline additive. As the industry anticipates market shifts with the gradual prevalence of electric vehicles, there is an expectation to pivot ethanol’s application, particularly as a sustainable aviation fuel contender. Current regulations require reduced carbon emissions in ethanol production for tax incentives linked to green energy initiatives, making the carbon capture pipeline a pivotal component.
Despite these challenges, industry representatives warn of possible disadvantages for South Dakota ethanol producers due to the legislation. The uncertain path ahead marks the continuation of a four-year journey since Summit initially unveiled their pipeline proposition. This effort has not been without its hurdles, including legal disputes in Nebraska and regulatory opposition in Iowa.
As the landscape of U.S. climate policy has evolved with both the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law under the Biden administration, emphasizing carbon capture to combat climate change, contrasting visions between administrations add further uncertainty. Previous policies under President Trump favored expanded fossil fuel production with less focus on alternative energy, casting doubt on future federal directions regarding carbon capture endeavors.
