News from the populist revolt in South Dakota.
From the South Dakota Searchlight.
Carbon pipeline opponents rally in Pierre amid renewed push for eminent domain ban
by Joshua HaiarPIERRE — Standing before a crowd of hundreds of carbon dioxide pipeline opponents Monday at the South Dakota Capitol, a lawmaker announced her bill to ban the use of eminent domain for carbon pipeline projects.
Rep. Karla Lems, R-Canton, introduced the bill to attendees as “a building block” toward protecting property rights.
“This bill will bring legislative certainty, and constitutional certainty, to the people of South Dakota,” Lems told the crowd.
The rally — held a day before Gov. Kristi Noem’s State of the State address will kick off the 2025 legislative session — brought together landowners, property rights advocates and other critics of carbon pipeline development.
Speakers voiced frustration over Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions’ potential use of eminent domain to acquire land for its proposed pipeline. The $9 billion project would capture some of the carbon dioxide emitted by 57 ethanol plants in five states, including eastern South Dakota, and transport it to an underground storage area in North Dakota. The project would capitalize on federal tax credits intended to incentivize the prevention of heat-trapping carbon emissions into the atmosphere.
Some landowners on the Summit route have refused to sign agreements, known as easements, granting access to their land. The company may seek to use eminent domain, which is a legal process to force land access in exchange for fair compensation determined by a court. The power has typically been used for projects such as electrical power lines, oil pipelines and water pipelines.
Lems said her legislation will be introduced Tuesday and would specifically target carbon pipelines.
Incoming Sen. Mark Lapka, R-Leola, will carry the bill in the state Senate, while Lems will carry the bill in the House of Representatives. Both own land that would be crossed by the pipeline.
Some other legislators had already pre-filed their own bill to ban eminent domain for carbon pipelines prior to Monday. That bill was not discussed at the rally.
Rally speakers noted that in August, the South Dakota Supreme Court ruled that Summit had not yet proven its status as a “common carrier,” a designation necessary to exercise eminent domain. The court remanded the case to a lower court for further proceedings, leaving Summit’s eminent domain eligibility unsettled.
The bill comes after years of contentious debate over carbon pipeline development. Lawmakers previously considered similar bills, but they faced resistance and failed, with opponents claiming such restrictions could stifle economic development and hurt South Dakota’s ethanol industry and the corn farmers who depend on it.
Pipeline supporters have defended the use of eminent domain, asserting the project serves the public good by increasing ethanol demand and addressing climate change.
This year, legislation banning eminent domain may receive more support. Eleven Republican legislators lost their reelection campaigns last year after supporting pipeline legislation that did not include an eminent domain ban. Republican legislators have also replaced their leadership team with lawmakers like Lems — set to serve as House speaker pro tempore — who are critical of Summit’s project.
Summit is seeking a permit from South Dakota’s Public Utilities Commission. The commission will host a series of public input meetings Wednesday through Friday in eastern South Dakota cities near the pipeline route.
The project already has a storage permit in North Dakota and route permits in North Dakota, Iowa and Minnesota, while Nebraska has no state permitting process for carbon pipelines. The project also faces litigation from opponents in multiple states.
Photo: Rep. Karla Lems, R-Canton, speaks to hundreds of rally attendees in Pierre on Jan. 13, 2025, during an event highlighting opposition to a carbon dioxide pipeline. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight)
This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
Related posts
- North Dakota landowners appeal Summit ethanol carbon storage decision
- Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline company formally asks SD regulator to recuse herself
- South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioner stays on new carbon pipeline case after prior recusal, with no explanation this time
- Punt! Lincoln County commissioners push back decision on ethanol carbon pipeline rules
- Summit Carbon Solutions in the news: landowners & counties appeal North Dakota pipeline permit; Summit tells Iowans to cease & desist; Pipeline Fighters Hub & CURE statements
- North Dakota Industrial Commission approves CO2 storage for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline
- Minnesota PUC granted a permit for Summit Carbon Solutions Otter Tail to Wilkin County pipeline
- South Dakota Public Utilities Commission schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application
- Summit ethanol CO2 injection wells up for approval but court appeal already in the works
- Oh the irony: ethanol carbon pipeline company has failed to address crossing concerns, DAPL oil pipeline company says
- Iowa Supreme Court upholds land survey abilities of pipeline companies in Summit case
- U.S. appeals court hears Summit pipeline case against Iowa's Shelby and Story counties
- Never mind the voters: ethanol carbon pipeline company reapplies for South Dakota permit
- Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Summit sues another Iowa county and more!
- 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