On Thursday, I republished the North Dakota Monitor story North Dakota couple plans to ‘dig in’ if Summit ethanol carbon pipeline is approved.
Today, we learned they'll have to implement that plan.
From the North Dakota Monitor.
North Dakota approves Summit carbon pipeline route
by Jeff Beach
North Dakota regulators on Friday approved a route permit for the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline, a significant win for what the company says is the world’s largest carbon capture project.
The three-person Public Service Commission voted unanimously to approve the pipeline permit. The commission had denied Summit a route permit in 2023, but changes the company made to its route helped convince the commission to reverse its position.
Summit plans to put 333 miles of pipeline through North Dakota, part of a 2,500-mile network of pipelines in five states. The pipelines are planned to connect 57 ethanol plants, including Tharaldson Ethanol at Casselton, to an underground carbon storage site west of Bismarck.
“We commend and respect the North Dakota Public Service Commission for their diligence and thoughtful approach in reviewing this project,” Wade Boeshans, executive vice president of Summit Carbon Solutions, said in a news release. “This decision is a testament to North Dakota’s commitment to fostering innovation while working closely with communities and industries.”
Ethanol plants emit carbon dioxide as part of the fermentation process in turning corn into fuel. That carbon can be captured, compressed and put into a hazardous liquid pipeline.
Summit announced its plans in 2021 and had hoped to begin construction in 2023, but has faced pushback from some landowners and several legal challenges as it has tried to obtain the needed permits.
Supporters view the project as vital to helping the ethanol industry compete in low-carbon fuel markets. Ethanol is a key market for corn growers.
Opponents cite safety concerns, damage to farmland and property values and an infringement on property rights. Some landowners also have complained about Summit’s business practices.
Troy Coons is president of the Northwest Landowners Association, a North Dakota property rights group that has challenged Summit over survey access and other issues.
“I don’t know that the PSC really answered adequately the citizens’ questions, or held the company accountable enough to move forward,” Coons said.
Brian Jorde of Nebraska-based Domina Law, which represents landowners fighting the pipeline in North Dakota and other states, said the decision was expected based on comments and questions by the PSC during the re-hearing process.
“We will carefully review the written order for errors and address those accordingly,” Jorde said in an email. “The PSC decision is phase one in a multi-phase process.”
While Summit has said the plan to capture greenhouse gas emissions is good for the environment, several environmental groups, including the North Dakota-based Dakota Resource Council, have opposed the project as doing more harm than good.
Summit would benefit from federal tax credits of $85 for every ton of CO2 stored. It would sequester 18 million tons of carbon dioxide per year.
Commission Chair Randy Christmann emphasized that the PSC approval in North Dakota does not guarantee that Summit has the right to use eminent domain to force landowners to provide easements for the pipeline. A decision on eminent domain would have to be made in the courts.
“I certainly do encourage the company not to use eminent domain, at least not more than absolutely necessary,” Christmann said before the vote.
Christmann recounted his family’s bad experience with eminent domain when a highway was routed through the family’s ranch.
“I understand how offensive it is,” Christmann said of eminent domain. “Occasionally, it’s needed. But I damn sure understand it ought never be abused.”
Summit says it is working on obtaining voluntary property easements. A Summit filing with the PSC said as of Oct. 9, it had obtained voluntary easements on about 81.4% of the miles it needs in North Dakota.
Burleigh County, which includes Bismarck, had the lowest voluntary easement rate at more than 65%.
Christmann also said the ruling does not conclude that the Summit pipeline is a common carrier, an important designation for obtaining the right to use eminent domain.
“We need to challenge the common carrier status of CO2 pipelines and restore power over zoning for pipelines to our county commissions,” landowner David Moch, a farmer in Emmons County, said in a news release through the Dakota Resource Council. “This is an attack on our property rights. Summit Carbon has shown my community who they are, after threatening the use of eminent domain at an Emmons County Commission meeting.”
Emmons and Burleigh counties had passed ordinances that would have severely restricted Summit’s ability to site a pipeline through those counties, but the PSC ruled that state law supersedes local ordinances on carbon pipelines.
Carbon pipeline regulation is of interest to North Dakota’s oil and gas industry. Summit’s plan is for permanent underground storage, but carbon dioxide can be pumped into oil well sites to help extract more oil, a process called enhanced oil recovery.
Summit CEO Lee Blank told the North Dakota Monitor earlier this year that it had not been approached by oil companies interested in taking CO2 from the pipeline.
Carbon capture and sequestration is being used by two North Dakota ethanol plants, Red Trail at Richardton and Blue Flint at Underwood.
Christmann noted that North Dakota has had a CO2 pipeline operating for about 20 years, running from the Dakota Gasification plant near Beulah to an oil field in Canada. It runs about 10 miles from his ranch in western North Dakota.
Commissioner Sheri Haugen-Hoffart also mentioned that pipeline.
“North Dakota has managed successfully the CO2 transportation and sequestration projects,” Haugen-Hoffart said. “Our state has a history of reasonable pipeline management, and thousands of miles of pipeline operate under strict state and federal regulations.”
Summit chose western North Dakota as a permanent storage site because the area has geology to keep the CO2 deep underground with a cap rock keeping it from reaching the surface.
Iowa-based Summit will need a separate storage permit from the North Dakota Industrial Commission.
Summit also needs a permit in South Dakota, where it already has been denied once.
Iowa has granted Summit a permit, and the company says it plans to try again for a permit in South Dakota. Minnesota’s Public Utilities Commission is expected to vote Dec. 12 on a 28-mile segment near the North Dakota state line.
The project also includes Nebraska, which has no state agency in charge of issuing permits for CO2 pipelines.
Photo: Public Service Commissioners, from left, Sheri Haugen-Hoffart, Randy Christmann and Administrative Law Judge Tim Dawson meet Nov. 15, 2024, on the Summit Carbon Solutions Pipeline. (Mary Steurer/North Dakota Monitor).
This North Dakota Monitor article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Readers can examine the order at the bottom of the article here.
Related posts
- North Dakota couple plans to ‘dig in’ if Summit ethanol carbon pipeline is approved
- Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: CO2 pipeline in MN moves forward; ND Public Service Commission decision coming Friday
- SD pipeline foes secure legislative leadership; MN Summit decision could come Dec. 12
- In unofficial results, ethanol carbon-pipeline law tossed out by South Dakota voters
- CURE: MN Administrative Law Judge’s report on Summit’s CO 2 pipeline expected November 4
- Seven South Dakota ballot measures, $7 million and counting: Reports reveal total spending
- Jeepers: ethanol coop kicks in another $400,000 to support carbon pipeline ballot question
- Ethanol carbon news digest: Summit Carbon pipeline in MN, Iowa & North Dakota media
- Summit Carbon Solutions CEO asks for prayer, while MN PUC wants public comment on FEIS of Otter Tail – Wilkin portion of CO2 Pipeline
- Public can comment on Otter Tail – Wilkin Co section of ethanol carbon pipeline until Sept. 11
- VIDEO: Carbon capture in Minnesota: public lands, fast money, and pipe dreams
- Summit pipeline segment enters final permitting stages in Minnesota; CURE raises objections
- Ethanol is fueling support of South Dakota carbon pipeline ballot measure
- Pipeline Fighters Hub: Summit Carbon Solutions numbers don’t add up in South Dakota
- Referred Law 21 & carbon pipelines: A landowner bill of rights or an undermining of local control
- Summit Carbon Solution's ethanol carbon pipeline takes #2 spot on Heatmap's The Most At-Risk Projects of The Energy Transition
- Ethanol carbon pipeline news: Attorneys differ on meaning of common carrier law in Summit case
- Summit Carbon Solutions pipelines won’t capture all carbon emitted by ethanol plants
- South Dakota Supreme Court ruling complicates Summit Carbon Solution’s push for land
- Referred pipeline law puts Summit Carbon Solution's permit quest in limbo
- Breaking crowded South Dakota ballot news: carbon pipeline law referendum validated
- Sustainable jet fuel company Gevo contributes $167K in defense of carbon pipeline law
- South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance turns in petitions to SD Secretary of State to force a vote on carbon pipeline policy
- South Dakota District 1 GOP House primary news round-up: carbon pipeline politics major issue
- New Midwest battles brew over CO2 pipelines
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