Committees in the North Dakota legislature are considering bills related to the proposed Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline this week, North Dakota Monitor's Jeff Beach reports in the article republished below.
The response of residents and legislatures in each state where the web of the pipeline will traverse varies, but each episode is part of a larger saga.
Carbon pipeline bills set for hearings in North Dakota this week
by Jeff BeachSeveral bills related to carbon capture pipelines are set for hearings this week in the North Dakota Legislature covering topics including eminent domain, common carrier status and liability in the case of a pipeline rupture.
Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions plans to build a pipeline to transport carbon dioxide from ethanol plants in five states to underground storage sites in western North Dakota. It has the needed permits in North Dakota but is still facing some landowner resistance.
If a company such as Summit is not able to negotiate an agreement with a landowner for construction on their property, it can resort to a legal proceeding known as eminent domain. With eminent domain, a landowner can be forced to allow construction of a project with a public benefit, such as roads, utility lines and, under current North Dakota law, carbon pipelines.
The landowner would be paid if a court allows eminent domain.
Bills introduced in the Legislature propose to change when eminent domain can be used.
House Bill 1414 specifies that the state may not use eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines and revokes common carrier status for carbon pipelines. Being a common carrier, allowing other companies to use the pipeline for a fee, can be a factor in determining if eminent domain can be used.
The bill also removes solar, wind and hydrogen energy projects from being able to use eminent domain.
House Bill 1292 also removes common carrier status for carbon pipelines but without specific changes to eminent domain.
House Bill 1210 specifies that carbon dioxide pipeline companies are liable for damages if a pipeline leaks or ruptures. Carbon dioxide is a hazardous material and a rupture is potentially fatal.
All three bills are scheduled for 2:30 p.m. Thursday in the Coteau Room before the House Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Written testimony can be submitted online until 1:30 p.m. Thursday.
Senate Bill 2322 is similar to House Bill 1414, revoking common carrier status for carbon pipelines and limiting use of eminent domain. The hearing is at 9 a.m. Thursday in Room 216, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
Senate Bill 2320 removes property tax exemptions for interstate carbon pipelines. Current law exempts carbon pipelines from property taxes for 10 years. The hearing is at 9:30 a.m. Wednesday in the Fort Totten Room, Senate Finance and Taxation Committee.
Senate Bill 2333 would encourage carbon capture. It creates a carbon fuels fund for incentives to ethanol plants to produce lower-carbon fuels. Carbon capture and storage would be among the projects eligible for funding. The state would put $3 million into the fund each biennium. A hearing is set for 10:30 a.m. Wednesday in the Fort Totten Room before the Senate Finance and Taxation Committee.
Sen. Jeff Magrum, R-Hazelton, tried to limit carbon dioxide pipelines in the 2023 session with several bills that were voted down.
He noted that there are more sponsors of anti-carbon pipeline bills in the current session.
“People have become aware of the attack on private property rights,” Magrum told the North Dakota Monitor.
Power line bill
The controversial Summit pipeline was also referenced last week during a hearing on a bill related to power lines.
House Bill 1258 would give the state of North Dakota authority over setback rules for electric transmission lines, similar to pipelines, where state rules override county and township ordinances.
The North Dakota Public Service Commission approves the route permits for both pipelines and power lines, but currently, pipeline companies follow state rules on setbacks while electric utilities follow local ordinances. The bill changes which rules the utilities must follow from local to state.
Rep. Mike Brandenburg, R-Edgeley, is the lead sponsor of the bill and referenced his support of the Summit pipeline that runs through his district when he testified Thursday before the House Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
A planned powerline from Jamestown to Ellendale would also run through his district and he fears the project could be hindered by restrictive local ordinances.
Power companies also lined up in favor of the bill.
The committee gave the bill a do-pass recommendation.
The PSC last year interpreted state law to determine that state rules over setbacks for pipelines take precedence over local rules. The determination came during the permitting of the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline.
Emmons and Burleigh counties had passed zoning ordinances that Summit felt were overly restrictive. Summit asked the PSC for clarification of what it argued was a law saying that state rules preempt local ordinances for pipeline siting.
The PSC ruled in favor of Summit and later granted the company a route permit for its carbon capture pipeline.
Emmons and Burleigh counties are challenging the PSC permit for Summit in court.
- Ban on eminent domain for carbon capture pipelines makes it out of SD House committee
- Carbon pipeline company asks court to force SD regulator’s recusal due to alleged conflict
- 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
- Hundreds pack SD PUC Summit ethanol carbon pipeline hearings in Watertown and Aberdeen
- 100s attend first day of SD PUC ethanol carbon pipeline meetings in Mitchell and Sioux Falls
- Federal regulators announce proposed rule for CO2 pipeline safety
- Carbon pipeline opponents rallied Monday in Pierre amid push for eminent domain ban
- North Dakota landowners appeal Summit ethanol carbon storage decision
- 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