I missed this news brief about ethanol carbon pipeline politics in Monday's South Dakota Searchlight.
Hundreds of CO2 pipeline critics converge on Capitol ahead of legislative session
By Joshua HaiarPIERRE — About 200 landowners braved the winter weather Monday to descend on the state Capitol and demand greater property rights protection and local control in the face of a proposed carbon dioxide pipeline.
The rally occurred one day before Governor Kristi Noem is scheduled to kick off the 2024 legislative session with her State of the State address.
The opponents of CO2 pipelines want lawmakers to pass legislation prohibiting the pipelines from utilizing “eminent domain,” a legal maneuver to access land for a project without landowners’ consent; and to defend the right of counties to set their own pipeline setback ordinances, which determine the minimum distance required between pipelines and existing structures or features.
“Let’s keep the local control in the hands of the citizens that know their local communities best,” Ed Fischbach, a farmer from rural Aberdeen, told the crowd.
The rally in the rotunda underscored the tensions surrounding the remaining CO2 pipeline proposal in South Dakota.
That project, proposed by Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions, would collect carbon dioxide emissions from 32 ethanol plants, including some in South Dakota, and transport it for underground storage in North Dakota. Doing so would make the project eligible for federal tax credits that incentivize greenhouse gas sequestration and could create access to new ethanol markets, according to proponents. Those include states demanding cleaner ethanol, and new ventures like ethanol-based jet fuel.
The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission denied Summit a permit last year, citing problems including conflicts with county setback ordinances. Summit plans to resubmit an application.
A recently formed group, South Dakota Ag Alliance — one of several interest groups formed in response to CO2 pipeline proposals — has said it will push to replace the minimum setback distances for carbon pipelines adopted by counties with a statewide standard.
“At the state level, we should talk about setbacks,” the organization’s co-founder, Rob Skjonsberg, told South Dakota Searchlight last year. “You could end up with a complete hodgepodge of setback distances. And if you’re a company, how do you deal with that? It’s nonsense.”
South Dakota Ag Alliance said it would also advocate for reforms of land survey processes, liability protections for landowners, minimum depth requirements for pipelines, and additional recurring compensation for landowners.
Critics, including landowners present at the rally, argue that the use of eminent domain by the project would infringe on property rights, and a statewide setback law would undermine local control.
Mark Lapka, a farmer from Leola, described those issues as “fundamental principals our state claims to care about.”
“South Dakota’s soils and topographies are diverse, and no one-size-fits-all approach will be better than what we have,” Lapka told South Dakota Searchlight. “Which is to leave it up to the counties who know what’s best for the people from there.”
Jason Glodt, co-founder of the South Dakota Ag Alliance, responded in an email to South Dakota Searchlight.
“I believe people would be surprised to know that a super majority of landowners on the proposed route see merit in the pipeline project,” he wrote. “Unfortunately, that fact is being lost as a result of all of the campaigning that has been going on.”
Rural advocate Amanda Radke offered a different take during the rally.
“We are not a small minority that’s causing a ruckus,” she said. “It’s not about just one pipeline. It’s that a dozen more projects are waiting in the wings.”
Summit Carbon Solutions says it has negotiated voluntary easements with about 70% of landowners along the project’s multi-state footprint.
This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
Photo: Carbon dioxide pipeline critic and farmer, Mark Lapka, of Leola, speaks during a rally at the South Dakota Capitol in Pierre on Jan. 8, 2024. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight).
Related posts
- CCS squabble: CO2 pipeline debate has resulted in divisions among SD ethanol proponents
- Republican presidential field generally opposes eminent domain for ethanol carbon pipelines
- Poor beleaguered ethanol carbon operatives organize to escape chains of oppression
- Ethanol carbon capture update: Lincoln could become 6th county to regulate carbon pipelines
- South Dakotans First: property rights coalition plans to lobby for eminent domain restrictions.
- Final arguments for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline Iowa permit are due in January
- Critics allege CO2 pipelines ‘farm the government’ for climate $$ while helping oil industry; bills fuel debate over ethanol’s environmental impact, with climate implications
- Ethanol carbon pipeline update: Summit permit decision in Iowa not expected until next year
- If first you don't succeed: Summit's new route in North Dakota adds thirteen miles of pipeline
- Defying the odds: Meet the attorney for 1,000 clients who beat two pipeline companies
- Summit Carbon stands to benefit from Navigator's canceled pipeline, but IA opponents sue to block Summit Carbon water permit
- Cancel culture: Navigator withdraws ethanol carbon pipeline permit application in Iowa
- Navigator CO2 cancels multistate pipeline project
- Summit Carbon Solutions says ethanol carbon pipeline system won’t be operational until 2026
- Some Iowa landowners were confused by Summit Carbon Solution eminent domain process
- Navigator CO2 pulls its ethanol carbon pipeline permit application in Illinois
- Ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Gevo aviation fuel needs Summit Carbon Solutions and more!
- Iowa Capital Dispatch: Summit pipeline hearing will resume on Tuesday; Navigator asks Iowa regulators to pause its pipeline permit request
- Iowa Capital Dispatch: Local officials in Iowa have potential to block carbon capture projects
- IA Capital Dispatch: Summit permit process in North Dakota has reached ‘uncharted waters
- North Dakota Public Service Commission votes 2-1 to reopen Summit Carbon pipeline case
- Navigator CO2 has not ‘taken any state off the map’ after SD pipeline permit rejection
- Ethanol carbon pipeline digest: reaction to denial; water use in IA; rich guy resists subpoena
- Iowa utility regulators want to finish Summit pipeline permit hearing by month’s end
- State denies Summit permit; both ethanol carbon pipelines proposed in South Dakota now rejected
- Summit Carbon Solutions forges ahead despite SD PUC staff's motion to deny pipeline permit
- SD PUC staff motion: non-mysterious portents in the air about potential denial of Summit Carbon Solution's pipeline permit application
- South Dakota Navigator pipeline decision might jeopardize Summit Carbon Solutions proposal
- Breaking: South Dakota Public Utilities Commission unanimously denies Navigator ethanol CO2 pipeline project permit
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