On Friday, I republished North Dakota Public Service Commission approves Summit carbon pipeline route from the North Dakota Monitor.
Over at the Monitor's sibling paper, the Iowa Capitol Dispatch, two more stories look at the latest developments in the ethanol carbon pipeline saga in the Upper Midwest.
In Summit sues a third Iowa county over local pipeline ordinances, Clark Kaufmann reports that Summit Carbon Solutions has added Bremer County to its bullying list:
Another Iowa county is being sued by Summitt Carbon Solutions over attempts to regulate the company’s planned carbon dioxide pipeline across Iowa.
In 2022, Summit sued Story County and Shelby County in U.S. District Court for Southern District of Iowa. Both lawsuits alleged the locally elected county boards of supervisors were attempting to impose on the project siting requirements that are the exclusive province of federal regulators.
In December 2023, a federal judge sided with Summit and permanently barred the two Iowa counties from enforcing their ordinances that restrict the placement of carbon dioxide pipelines.
This week, Summit sued Bremer County over the same issue.
The new lawsuit claims that despite the December 2023 court ruling in the two previous cases, Bremer County has passed and let stand similar – and, in some respects, identical — local regulations of carbon dioxide pipelines and related construction activity. The county is also accused of threatening to fine Summit if it does not comply with those ordinances.
The company says that on Oct. 30, 2024, Bremer County Attorney Darius Robinson wrote a letter to Summit’s legal counsel, stating that Summit was not in compliance with ordinances passed in September 2024, and threatening to fine Summit.
In the letter, Robinson allegedly warned Summit that “that any non-compliance with the Bremer County ordinance can result in all legal remedies being pursued” and formally requested that company representatives attend an upcoming public meeting to discuss the matter.
As a result, the company says in its court filings, Sumit must now seek declaratory and injunctive relief against the enforcement of the Bremer County ordinances.
Bremer County has yet to file a response to the lawsuit.
Summit’s planned pipeline is intended to transport carbon dioxide captured from more than 50 ethanol plants across Iowa, South Dakota, North Dakota, Minnesota, and Nebraska. Plans call for the pipeline to utilize a network of more than 2,500 miles of underground pipes across the five states and deliver it to a site in North Dakota.
In Iowa, the pipeline will travel through 39 counties, including Bremer County.
Construction of the pipeline project is already underway, and Summit has been engaged with the Iowa Utilities Commission for more than three years as part of the planning and permitting process.
The commission has granted Summit a permit from the first phase of the project and the company is now in the process of securing the Iowa permit for phase two, which will serve ethanol plants east and west of Bremer County.
Summit says it has already obtained voluntary easements for much of the proposed route across Iowa and has paid more than $159 million to Iowa landowners for access.
On Friday, the Dispatch's Kami Koons took a quick look at the progress of the pipeline as a whole in Summit one step closer to pipeline construction with North Dakota permit:
Summit Carbon Solutions’ pipeline route was approved Friday morning in North Dakota, bringing the company one step closer to meeting conditions set by the Iowa Utilities Commission to begin construction.
The carbon pipeline would stretch across five states with over 2,000 miles of pipeline, to transport carbon dioxide from nearly 60 ethanol refineries to underground storage.
The Iowa Utilities Commission approved Summit’s permit in June for over 600 miles of pipeline in the state, and granted the company eminent domain. The commission stipulated the company must secure permits in both North Dakota and South Dakota before it could begin construction in Iowa.
North Dakota’s Public Service Commission had previously denied Summit’s permits in the state, but after the company made some modifications to the plan, the commission unanimously approved the permit on Friday.
The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association said, in a statement, it was “encouraged” by the decision.
“In agriculture, if you’re not growing, you’re dying. On the heels of approval in Iowa, today’s permit approval in North Dakota is a crucial step in making sure this vital project comes to fruition,” the association’s Executive Director Monte Shaw said in a statement.
Shaw urged all parties to “come together” to move forward with the project.
“The biggest opportunities to grow corn demand all have one thing in common – super low carbon ethanol,” he said. “Capturing and sequestering CO2 is the ‘easy button’ to lower carbon.”
Summit Carbon Solutions is seeking an additional permit in its home state of Iowa for a second phase of the project that would connect to 17 more biorefineries in Iowa and bring the total Iowa pipeline footprint to over 1,000 miles.
Ava Auen-Ryan, an organizer with Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, said the longstanding Iowa group that has organized against the pipeline, was disappointed with North Dakota’s decision.
“It’s disappointing to continue to see state regulators put Summit’s profit driven project before the health and safety of our communities and our environment,” Auen-Ryan said in a statement.
South Dakota, who has not yet approved a permit for the pipeline, voted against a law in the General Election that opponents say would have benefitted carbon pipeline companies.
Auen-Ryan said South Dakotans’ vote showed that “everyday people do not want this CO2 pipeline.”
“Sustained public pressure has stalled the project to this point,” Auen-Ryan said. “CCI members and Iowans across the state will continue to fight back against Summit and have no intention of slowing down now.”
The pipeline would carry liquid carbon-dioxide to underground storage west of Bismarck, North Dakota, for which Summit still needs a storage permit.
Tom Buis, CEO of American Carbon Alliance, an Iowa-based group advocating for ethanol production and carbon capture pipelines, applauded the North Dakota decision in a statement.
“The project is crucial for America’s energy security, restoring profitability to farmers, creating jobs in rural communities, and producing next-generation biofuels,” Buis said.
The commission in North Dakota approved the route for the Summit pipeline, but did not grant the company eminent domain. Common carrier status of the pipeline is still being disputed.
Opponents of the pipeline leaned into this fact in their statements about the North Dakota news.
Brian Jorde, an attorney for North Dakota and Iowa landowners opposed to the pipeline said to “stay tuned,” in a statement with BOLD Alliance.
“The PSC did not determine Summit is a common carrier and did not determine if Summit is able to use eminent domain,” Jorde said. “Those questions are likely also headed to the courts.”
These Iowa Capital Dispatch articles are republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
Photo: Iowa landowners at a rally in opposition to carbon sequestration pipelines outside of the Iowa Capital on Oct. 8. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch).
Related posts
- North Dakota Public Service Commission approves Summit carbon pipeline route
- 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