We're pleased to see that the carbon pipeline industry will be regulated at the state level in Minnesota. Minnesota Public Radio's Dan Gunderson reported Thursday afternoon in Minnesota moves to regulate carbon dioxide pipelines:
Two companies are planning to construct pipelines to collect carbon dioxide emissions from ethanol plants in Minnesota and surrounding states and store the CO2 underground in North Dakota and Illinois.
Current regulation of those pipelines is left to counties.
The Montevideo-based environmental group Clean Up the River Environment, or CURE, petitioned the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission to regulate carbon pipelines like these.
The Commission decided it has regulatory authority and voted to initiate a rulemaking process.
“We agree with the PUC that they have both the authority and the duty to the public to regulate where these pipelines will go,” CURE Campaigns Director Maggie Schuppert said in a statement following the vote.
“There are already communities, tribes and landowners who are in the pathway and impact zone of these proposed projects and they deserve a process where information can be made public and rural communities can have a say.” ...
The pipelines already face state-level scrutiny here in South Dakota, South News Watch's Bart Pfankuch reported in CO2 pipelines could affect the land, lives and livelihoods of S.D. property owners:
The 2,000-mile, $3.7 billion Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline would cross 469 miles in South Dakota, carrying CO2 north from 32 ethanol plants in five states to a site in central North Dakota, where the CO2 would be buried more than a mile underground.
The South Dakota portion of the Summit project was submitted for permitting to the PUC in February, and a public hearing is expected to be held before the end of 2022.
The $3 billion, 1,300-mile Navigator project would capture CO2 from 20 ethanol and fertilizer plants in five states. The Navigator pipeline would cross 62 miles in South Dakota and terminate at a site in central Illinois. Navigator plans to submit its pipeline permit application to the PUC this summer, said Elizabeth Burns-Thompson, a company spokeswoman. . . .
At the Star Tribune, Mike Hughlett reports in Minnesota state utility panel says CO2 pipelines should be regulated:
Minnesota utility regulators Thursday deemed carbon dioxide pipelines as hazardous, meaning they must get state approval to be built.
The unanimous decision affects two multibillion-dollar CO2 pipelines slated to cross Minnesota, transporting CO2 waste from several ethanol plants in the Midwest.
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) must approve pipelines that carry hazardous materials — oil for instance — but state law does specifically list carbon dioxide as hazardous. PUC commissioners interpreted the 1988 law as including CO2 pipelines.
- "The Legislature was being rather broad and gave us broad scope," Commissioner John Tuma said at Thursday's PUC meeting. Both pipeline companies disagreed, saying that scope is narrow.
The PUC will now initiate a rulemaking process, which will likely take a year, to codify CO2 as a hazardous pipeline material for regulatory purposes. Actual approval of any CO2 pipeline could take many months after that.
CO2 is considered a hazardous pipeline material under federal law and in other states that would host the pipelines. . . .
Several state agencies submitted comments to the PUC favoring state regulation, including the departments of public safety, commerce and transportation. So have environmental groups, Indian bands and labor unions.
"We would encourage you in your review to use common sense," Kelly Applegate, the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe's natural resources commissioner, told the commission Thursday. "If there is a breach in this pipeline there will be violent plumes of gas that could suffocate people and animals."
CO2 is heavier than air, so if a pipeline ruptures it can collect in low-lying areas and displace oxygen. It's a potential asphyxiant and can cause breathing difficulties, rapid heartbeat, vomiting, headaches and impaired thinking.
The worst U.S. accident on a CO2 line appears to have occurred in 2020 near Satartia, Miss. A 24-inch pipeline owned by an oil and gas company ruptured, leading to the evacuation of more than 300 people. Forty-six were treated for injuries at local hospitals.
No known fatalities have been reported from any CO2 pipeline incidents in the United States.
While CO2 is not flammable, it's heavily pressurized in pipelines, leading to the possibility of "ductile fractures" that rip open a pipeline if there's a leak.
"There aren't small leaks in any of these pipelines," said Hudson Kingston, policy and litigation attorney for Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, which pushed for PUC regulation. "When it blows up, it blows up."
"These are highly pressurized gases that meet that meet the definition the Legislature set out," Kingston said.
Kingston was referring to a provision in state law granting PUC authority over pipelines designed to operate "at a pressure of more than 275 pounds per square inch and carry gas." CO2 pipelines operate at three to four times that pressure.
The PUC sided with that argument.
"If it is over 275 psi, it seems the Legislature is saying it is dangerous," Tuma said. . . .
We'll continue to watch the proposed ethanol CO2 pipeline projects.
Related posts:
- CO2 pipelines could affect the land, lives and livelihoods of South Dakota property owners
- SD News Watch: Proposed CO2 pipelines thrust SD into billion-dollar climate change debate
- About that permanent carbon storage by the Summit ethanol pipeline & Project Tundra
- Ethanol carbon capture pipeline news digest: political power and big money edition
- Ethanol carbon pipeline digest: trust & protest
- South Dakotans, Iowans don't hug CO2 pipeline
- Keloland: mostly negative public comments to SD Public Utilities Commission on CO2 pipeline
- Strib: Ethanol's per-gallon carbon output shrinks, but greenhouse gas from plants remains high
- We agree: It's time to move on from ethanol
- Another IA newspaper editorial board questions ethanol industry, carbon capture pipelines
- Ethanol CCS pipeline update: Reuters & Agweek
- Not a lot of easements for Midwest carbon pipeline, but plenty of political connections
- 2 ethanol CO2 headlines that make us go hmmm
- CO2 pipelines: who wins & who loses?
- Coming soon from a cornfield near you: mammoth carbon capture pipeline system
- Mother Jones: USDA Secretary Vilsack’s son works for a controversial ethanol pipeline project
- Iowa county boards scorn construction of CO2 pipelines, use of eminent domain to build them
- Digest of news about carbon dioxide pipelines
Map: The proposed route of the 2,000-mile Summit Carbon Solutions CO2 pipeline that will carry pressurized carbon dioxide from ethanol plants to a sequestration site a mile underground in central North Dakota. About 470 miles of the pipeline would be located in South Dakota.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.
I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6
Comments