While some Minnesotans are swooning about supposedly low-carbon synthetic fuel, folks in the Dakotas aren't being so nice.
From the North Dakota Monitor.
2 lawsuits against Summit allowed to advance; a third case is pending
by Jeff BeachTwo North Dakota judges have ruled that lawsuits filed by landowners against carbon pipeline company Summit Carbon Solutions can proceed over objections about court procedures.
Several landowners are suing Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions, which is attempting to build a network of pipelines across five states. The pipelines would take carbon dioxide emissions captured at ethanol plants to sites in western North Dakota for permanent underground storage.
Attorneys for Summit had filed motions to dismiss the lawsuits, arguing that not all parties involved were properly notified and that the cases were not filed in the proper court.
South Central Judicial District Court Judge Pam Nesvig issued her ruling Friday rejecting Summit’s arguments in one case in which landowners are suing Summit and the North Dakota Public Service Commission.
South Central Judicial District Court Judge Jackson Lofgren filed a similar ruling Tuesday in another case in which landowners are suing Summit entities and the North Dakota Industrial Commission.
The Public Service Commission in November granted Summit a permit for its pipeline route, about 333 miles through southeast and south-central North Dakota.
The Industrial Commission in December granted permits for underground permanent storage of carbon dioxide in Oliver, Mercer and Morton counties.
South Central Judicial District Court Judge David Reich has yet to rule on a motion to dismiss in another case where Burleigh County is suing the North Dakota Public Service Commission and Summit Carbon Solutions.
Among the issues raised in the PSC cases is that the agency did not give enough consideration to the safety of residents along the pipeline route. The lawsuit also challenges the PSC’s ruling that state zoning rules trump county zoning ordinances on pipelines.
The PSC ruled last year that a 2019 state law gives the state the upper hand on pipeline setbacks – such as how far away the pipeline must be from a residence – after Summit said Emmons and Burleigh had passed unreasonable set ordinances.
In the Industrial Commission case, landowners contend the state Department of Mineral Resources withheld information about Summit’s models that would predict where the carbon dioxide would move when the gas is pumped underground. The Industrial Commission oversees the Department of Mineral Resources, which recommended approving the storage permits. About 92% of landowners have voluntarily agreed to participate in the storage facility.
In yet another case, the North Dakota Supreme Court heard arguments last month in a challenge to a state law related to underground storage of CO2.
The Northwest Landowners Association and other landowners contend a state law that can force landowners to take part in an underground CO2 storage project through a process called amalgamation is unconstitutional. Summit Carbon Solutions is taking part in the defense of that law along with the state of North Dakota and the Industrial Commission. An attorney for Minnkota Power, who joined the Industrial Commission in arguing to the Supreme Court, said a small percentage of property owners should not be able to deny a majority the right to develop their property.
Summit’s pipelines are planned to connect 57 ethanol plants, including Tharaldson Ethanol at Casselton, to the underground carbon storage sites.
Summit so far has been denied a permit in South Dakota. It has obtained permits in Iowa and for part of its Minnesota route. Nebraska has no state permitting for carbon pipelines.
Supporters of the Summit project say it would support the ethanol industry by lowering the carbon intensity score of the ethanol plants, opening up potential sales in low-carbon fuel markets.
The project would take advantage of federal tax credits promoting carbon sequestration to combat greenhouse gas emissions.
Photo: Lenora Kenner, center, of Bismarck, talks with attendees of an anti-CO2 pipeline protest at the Capitol in Bismarck on July 27, 2024. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor).
This North Dakota Monitor article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
Related posts
- Iowa Senate passes bill restricting eminent domain for ethanol carbon pipelines
- Missing in MNReformer coverage of sustainable aviation fuel: industry groups & fuel stocks
- Why hasn’t a carbon pipeline bill come to Iowa's Senate floor? Lawmakers blame opposing parties
- South Dakota regulators deny ethanol carbon pipeline permit again; company vows to reapply
- CO2 storage law challenged in North Dakota Supreme Court hearing
- South Dakota Public Utilities Commission says ethanol carbon pipeline company must show a path forward to keep permit application active
- Carbon pipeline company files for pause or dismissal of legal fights in South Dakota
- Ethanol carbon pipeline company seeks dismissals of North Dakota court challenges
- CURE wants 45Q tax credit gone; Iowa state representative calls on Summit Carbon Solutions to pull ethanol carbon pipeline application
- Ethanol leaders see irony in Governor Larry Rhoden's ‘Open for Opportunity’ visit after eminent domain ban for carbon pipelines
- Iowa opponents push for a ban on eminent domain for ethanol carbon pipelines
- South Dakota Governor Larry Rhoden signed eminent domain ban on carbon pipelines
- South Dakota Legislature passes eminent domain ban for carbon pipelines
- Carbon pipeline eminent domain ban advances to South Dakota House; ‘compromise’ bill gutted
- SD House: carbon capture pipeline moratorium and land-agent regulations advance, while environmental analysis bill fails
- SD lawmakers endorse hurdles for eminent domain, enviro studies for carbon pipelines
- 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