On Thursday, I'd posted 100s attend first day of SD PUC ethanol carbon pipeline meetings in Mitchell and Sioux Falls.
I'd hoped to attend the South Dakota PUC meeting on the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline on Friday in Aberdeen, but stayed home with a cold.
Fortunately, there's fine coverage of Thursday's meeting in Watertown and Friday's event in Aberdeen. It seems the opposition to the pipeline isn't being silent.
In the Watertown Current, Roger Whittle reported in Summit pipeline meeting draws big crowd in Watertown:
A public input meeting on the proposed CO2 pipeline by Summit Carbon Solutions drew a large crowd Thursday, Jan. 16, to the Heritage Theater at the Watertown Event Center.
The Heritage Theater has 284 seats, and the vast majority of them were filled, with dozens more people standing in the back and along the sides of the room.
The meeting was organized by the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission, one of several such gatherings about the project. All three PUC commissioners were present, along with staff members.
A group of executives from Summit Carbon Solutions was on hand to provide information and answer questions.
Following Summit’s 20-minute overview of the project, all audience members were given the opportunity to address the PUC, Summit officials and the audience. Thirty-five people spoke, with each given a four-minute time limit.
But despite the company’s pitch, the majority of the 35 audience members who addressed the crowd were critical of the pipeline and urged the PUC to reject the Summit proposal. . . .
Reporting for South Dakota Public Broadcasting, Evan Walton reported in Hundreds gather in Watertown to talk CO2 pipeline at PUC meeting:
Summit Carbon Solutions is trying to soothe concerns over a proposed CO2 pipeline in a series public input meetings.
But some are still not convinced by the company’s promises.
Hundreds gathered for the Watertown meeting Thursday evening, one of several arranged by the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission to discuss the pipeline.
The project aims to capture carbon from ethanol plants and sequester it underground in North Dakota. Summit’s first application with the PUC was denied. Part of the PUC’s reasoning was due to the proposed pipeline route conflicting with local ordinances mandating minimum set back distances. . . .
On Friday, the Aberdeen Insider's Scott Waldman reported in Hundreds gather in Aberdeen as PUC hears feedback about Summit pipeline plan:
No means no not only on a date, but when it comes to a proposed carbon capture pipeline planned to cross parts of eastern South Dakota.
That was the comparison Lanette Butler of McPherson County made during a state Public Utilities Commission meeting on Friday, Jan. 17 at the Dakota Event Center in Aberdeen. The session was to gather feedback about Summit Carbon Solutions‘ pipeline plan.
The no-means-no-theme was a prime one during the meeting, which was attended by roughly 300 people.
Based on comments, applause and an informal survey, a strong majority were opposed to the pipeline plan. But, the audience also heard about the potential benefits of the project during a presentation given by Summit officials to open the meeting. Others in favor of the line also spoke during the three-hour gathering, which remained civil, though there were law officers on hand. . . .
Opponents touched on many concerns that have been raised in the past, including safety, the use of eminent domain by a for-profit business, how Summit has interacted with landowners and whether the company has to adhere to local laws and regulations such as county setback requirements.
‘Summit does not comply, please deny’
“Summit does not comply, please deny,” said Kim Hoffman of McPherson County.
Others used some variation of the catchy phrase as they spoke against the pipeline.
Opponents also mentioned how voters in November rejected Senate Bill 201/Referred Law 21. The bill was approved during the 2024 legislative session and signed into law by Gov. Kristi Noem before being referred to a statewide vote.
The so-called “Landowner Bill of Rights” set out some benefits for landowners, but not nearly enough, according to those who don’t want to see the pipeline proceed. . . .
Read all three articled at the links.
Photo: South Dakota Public Utilities Commission Watertown Public Input meeting. Photo by Evan Walton, SDPB.
Related posts
- 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
- 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