Earlier Monday, I'd posted CURE action alert: carbon pipelines & CCS not Minnesota's answer to a carbon free future.
Meanwhile, in South Dakota, CCS was having a bad day in the state legislature.
Indeed, those carbon pipeline dreams haven't really recovered from the primaries and the ballot measure in November that removed the so-called "landowner bill of rights" that in fact favored the pipeline developers. Moreover, as the South Dakota War College reported over the weekend, anti-pipeliner Jim Eschenbaum is the new Chair of South Dakota Republican Party.
Jeepers.
South Dakota Searchlight reported on the CCS pipeline's bad day in Pierre.
SD lawmakers endorse hurdles for eminent domain and environmental studies for carbon pipelines
by Joshua HaiarPIERRE — South Dakota lawmakers advanced legislation Monday at the Capitol that would make it more difficult for carbon dioxide pipeline companies to use eminent domain and would subject their projects to required environmental impact statements.
The bills are among several filed in response to controversy over Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions’ proposed $9 billion, five-state pipeline that would pass through eastern South Dakota.
New eminent domain requirements
Eminent domain is a legal process for obtaining land access from unwilling landowners with just compensation determined by a court, for a project beneficial to the public — traditionally for projects such as electrical power lines, crude oil pipelines, water pipelines and highways. A bill to ban eminent domain for carbon pipelines passed the House last month and is awaiting action in the Senate.
Meanwhile, a bill approved by the Senate 17-16 on Monday would retain eminent domain as an option. But it would require entities using it to first attend mediation with the affected landowner and to also have a state permit before commencing eminent domain proceedings.
The bill failed last week in a close vote with two members absent, and then passed Monday when it was reconsidered and will head to the House next. It is sponsored by Sen. Jim Mehlhaff, R-Pierre. He said the measure strengthens landowner rights in condemnation proceedings.
“What it simply does is it requires a developer to go through that process and get a permit prior to gaining the privilege to use eminent domain,” Mehlhaff said.
Opponents said mediation could serve as a tool to force landowners into talks they don’t want to have.
“If a landowner said no thank you, their wishes should be respected,” said Sen. Joy Hohn, R-Sioux Falls.
Some senators also hope to pass the ban on eminent domain for carbon pipelines rather than merely imposing new eminent domain restrictions.
Environmental impact statements
The House Commerce and Energy Committee voted 9-4 to send a bill to the House floor that would require an environmental impact statement for carbon dioxide pipelines.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. John Hughes, R-Sioux Falls, mandates state utility regulators to prepare or require the preparation of the statements before approving a carbon pipeline permit. The statements are detailed documents required at the federal level to assess the potential environmental effects of some projects.
“This is not an anti-pipeline bill,” Hughes said. “This is a public safety bill and it’s a bill that protects our resources.”
Opponents, including representatives from the South Dakota Chamber of Commerce & Industry, utilities, and Summit argued that the bill would add an unnecessary regulatory burden.
“It’s hard not to see this bill as directed at Summit Carbon Solutions,” said Brett Koenecke, a lobbyist for the project.
Opponents also said the regulators serving on the Public Utilities Commission already conduct a rigorous permitting process.
“What we’re doing is so much more robust than this process,” Koenecke said. “We are doing the things that the sponsor wants us to do already.”
The Summit pipeline would capture some of the carbon dioxide emitted by 57 ethanol plants and transport it for underground storage in North Dakota. The project has received permits in Iowa, Minnesota and North Dakota, while its application is pending in South Dakota. Nebraska does not have a permitting process.
The project would be eligible for federal tax credits incentivizing the capture of heat-trapping greenhouse gases to mitigate climate change. Hughes said other states, including Minnesota, mandate extensive environmental reviews.
“This project, when completed, will generate over $1.5 billion in federal tax credits,” Hughes said. “We’ve got to get this right.”
Other carbon pipeline bills
Among other pending carbon pipeline bills this legislative session is one that would put a moratorium on carbon pipelines until new federal safety rules are finalized, and another empowering landowners to sue pipeline companies for the alleged abuses of their land agents.
Photo: Sen. Jim Mehlhaff, R-Pierre, speaks on the South Dakota Senate floor on Jan. 21, 2025. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight).
This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
Related posts
- CURE action alert: carbon pipelines & CCS not Minnesota's answer to a carbon free future
- Ethanol carbon capture pipeline news digest: stories from South Dakota--and The Atlantic
- Bill supports ND landowners caught in costly legal battles over eminent domain & easements
- State lawmakers vote down six bills to limit carbon capture in North Dakota
- Bill to kill carbon pipeline property tax exemption in North Dakota fails in state senate
- Iowa House GOP lawmakers introduce suite of pipeline bills on IUC, eminent domain issues
- Iowa House subcommittee advances bill to remove climate change language; aimed at stopping ethanol carbon pipeline
- 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