Meanwhile, down over in Iowa, another skirmish in the ethanol carbon pipeline battle, with a kick in the pants to climate change science.
Glad to see the state's environmental groups are opposed to the bill--and the pipeline.
From the Iowa Capital Dispatch.
House subcommittee advances bill to remove climate change language; aimed at stopping CO2 pipeline
by Cami KoonsAn Iowa House of Representatives subcommittee advanced a bill that would prohibit the Iowa Utilities Commission from considering climate change when issuing a permit for a hazardous liquid pipeline.
House Study Bill 67 was introduced by Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, who has been an outspoken opponent, and intervenor, of the proposed Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline that would transport sequestered carbon dioxide from biofuels facilities to underground storage in North Dakota.
The Iowa Utilities Commission approved a permit for the project in June 2024.
Thomson said “climate change is a hypothesis” that is “not strong enough” to support a justification of public necessity for the construction of a pipeline.
He told reporters after the subcommittee meeting he thinks there is a “big question” on how reliable the theories about anthropogenic climate change are, adding “… I think that we as a Legislature need to make a statement that it is not at the level that justifies being taken into account.”
Anthropogenic climate change is the theory that human activity has created excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, causing global temperatures to rise. This is a theory accepted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Thomson said he “it’s pretty clear” the IUC “got some things wrong” when it approved the pipeline permit for the Summit Carbon Solutions.
“I believe very strongly they got the constitutional analysis wrong; I believe they got the insurance analysis wrong, and this is one of the areas where I think they were incorrect, is taking into account the climate change hypothesis, in the way they did,” Thomson said.
A representative from the Sierra Club Iowa Chapter spoke in opposition to the bill, saying that commissioners should be able to consider “a whole range of issues” including climate change.
The state chapter of the Sierra Club has been opposed to the carbon pipeline project, but was not supportive of the bill, nor were any of the other lobbyist declarations from Iowa environmental groups.
Rep. Adam Zabner, D-Iowa City, was opposed to the bill and noted the Iowa Department of Natural Resources already acknowledges the existence of climate change and its impact on Iowa’s agriculture, habitat and public health.
“I don’t see this as the time for us to pull back on our actions,” Zabner said, noting that many climate-related projects are 30-50 years in the making.
Zabner also disagreed with a portion of the bill that would remove the commission’s requirement to support projects that reduce the state’s dependency on petroleum products.
Thomson moved the bill forward and said he would like to have “more wholesome” discussion in the full committee. The bill moves next to the House Commerce Committee.
Photo: The Iowa State Capitol on Feb. 5, 2025. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch).
This Iowa Capital Dispatch article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
Related posts
- Landowners, energy industry at odds over bills limiting ethanol CO2 pipelines in North Dakota
- Ban on eminent domain for carbon pipelines passes South Dakota House, heads to Senate
- Ethanol carbon pipeline bills set for hearings in North Dakota legislature this week
- 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