Summit Carbon Solutions wants the schedule of proceedings for its South Dakota permit application “paused for review and adjustment” after that state’s Legislature and governor approved a ban on the use of eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines.
Iowa’s Summit Carbon Solutions says ‘all options are on the table’ for taking legal action
Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions awaits a decision from South Dakota regulators on its project to build a pipeline across five states.
After years of House Republicans taking the lead, Senate Republicans have introduced sweeping legislation that would address pipeline regulations and landowner rights
Also, Iowa House Republicans advanced a series of bills addressing carbon capture pipelines and landowner rights
The bills don’t name Summit Carbon Solutions, but they’re a response to the Iowa company’s proposed $9 billion, five-state pipeline.
The prospects for proposed carbon capture pipelines in Iowa remains unknown; more certain is the will of advocates and Republican lawmakers in the Iowa House to prevent those pipelines from using eminent domain to secure Iowa land.
Proponent objects to Iowa permit given carbon capture pipeline
The ethanol industry has been a stabilizing force for corn prices in recent years, and boosting ethanol demand might help counteract diminished farm income.
The proposed rule, if adopted, would require CO2 pipeline operators to train emergency responders and ensure local first responders have the necessary detection equipment in the event of an emergency.
A South Dakota commissioner has declined to recuse herself again from the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline permit process, potentially delaying a decision there. Litigation is pending in Iowa.
In North Dakota, under a process called amalgamation, if 60 percent of the landowners in a proposed carbon dioxide underground storage area agree to the plan, the state can force the other 40 percent to comply.
But the state regulator states: ‘“I am an elected Public Utilities Commissioner and will carry out my duties as such. I do not have a legal conflict.”
She cited a conflict in 2022 and recused herself, but now returns without explanation.
Fees for the state’s regulators to analyze proposed routes could hit nearly $1.47M
Daily Newsletters