Midwest CO2 Pipelines Push ahead as Bills Fizzle

April 13, 2023

Print This Article Share it With Friends

by Jeffrey Tomich, Carlos Anchondo, Mike Soraghan (E&E News Energywire) Companies planning carbon capture projects in the Midwest are defeating legislative proposals to add regulations or block them, increasing the likelihood that a sprawling network of planned pipelines to transport the greenhouse gas will move ahead.

The pipeline proposals, which envision moving carbon dioxide from ethanol and fertilizer plants to sequestration sites in Illinois and North Dakota, are viewed by supporters as pivotal for addressing climate change even as they are opposed by some landowners. The legislative debates in the Corn Belt are raising concerns about eminent domain and underground CO2 injection in the region.

Of more than two dozen bills filed in six states this year affecting carbon capture and sequestration projects, none has passed so far. Those measures that did advance later fizzled.

...

Avoiding delays or additional regulations of projects to transport and sequester carbon dioxide is a win for the CO2 pipeline developers, Summit Carbon Solutions, Navigator CO2 Ventures and Wolf Carbon Solutions U.S. Inc., whose projects are spurred by low-carbon fuel standards on the West Coast and federal tax credits. In all, three proposed pipelines would reach more than 3,000 miles across the Dakotas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota and Illinois.

But an unusual mix of opponents, including environmental groups and some conservative politicians and rural landowners, vow to keep pushing to adopt new, tougher regulations for CO2 pipelines and delay or block projects entirely even as state and federal regulators weigh permit applications.

...

In Iowa and the Dakotas, much of lawmakers’ attention revolves around pipeline companies’ use of eminent domain for securing rights of way for pipeline projects — a sore spot for many farmers and rural landowners that’s not limited to CO2 pipelines, but also includes petroleum pipelines and electric transmission lines.

One analyst said whether it’s pipelines or transmission lines, it’s difficult to get 100 percent of a proposed route through voluntary agreements from landowners.

“While no project developer ever wants to utilize eminent domain, it’s kind of there for a particular reason, so I think that we just have to come to a conclusion as to whether these projects are for the public good,” said Matt Fry, a senior policy manager for carbon management at the nonprofit Great Plains Institute. “I think the reality is … they are.”

...

Elizabeth Burns-Thompson, vice president of government and public affairs at Omaha, Neb.-based Navigator CO2, said the legislative discussions across the project’s five-state, 1,300-mile footprint have provided an opportunity to update policymakers on existing laws and regulations.

“There has been a robust amount of discussion related to these projects,” Burns-Thompson said. And through all the proposals, hearings and debates, bills have yet to pass because “there’s an acknowledgment that what we have in place now does provide protections and have worked for many years,” she said.

Burns-Thompson said lawmakers in Iowa brought in a representative from the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to answer lawmakers’ questions directly. “I think that was a valuable conversation and important for just dispelling of misinformation,” she said.

Meanwhile, Summit Carbon, based in Ames, Iowa, in a statement said its project has strong public support in the company’s home state of Iowa as reflected by the fact that it has voluntary easement agreements with landowners representing almost 70 percent of the project’s proposed route in the state. READ MORE

Landowner considerations for carbon pipelines -- Nebraska farm and ag policy organizations weigh in on carbon pipelines and other transmission projects. (Farm Progess/Nebraska Farmer)

Are carbon pipelines the future for ethanol? The companies behind carbon capture pipelines say the projects are necessary to sustain ethanol and the ag economy. But are they? (Echo Press; includes VIDEO)

CARBON PIPELINES’ FATE STILL UNCERTAIN IN IOWA (Successful Farming)

Summit Carbon Solutions announces NuGen as partner ethanol plant in South Dakota (Summit Carbon Solutions/PR Newswire)

Minnehaha County passes rules for carbon pipelines despite opposition from both sides: Tie-breaking commissioner says vote sets ‘rules of the road’ for state’s population center (South Dakota Searchlight)

Doug Sombke: Carbon sequestration remains a pipe dream. Ethanol fuel already has value (Farm Forum)

Study reveals new data on how Summit Carbon, Navigator pipelines would impact SD's economy (Argus Leader)

Poindexter: Ethanol industry can stop abusive pipeline project (Ag Update Neighbor)

Lincoln County advances pipeline ordinance establishing setbacks (Mitchell Republic)

Lincoln County advances pipeline ordinance establishing setbacks (Ground News)

SUMMIT CARBON SOLUTIONS CONTINUES TO BUILD SUPPORT ACROSS SOUTH DAKOTA (Summit Carbon Solutions)

Seven steps

A study done for the Renewable Fuels Association by Informed Sustainability Consulting, looked at ways for ethanol to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. The author of the study, Isaac Emery, said he ranked the action items based on effectiveness (the size of the carbon reduction), cost (carbon reduced per dollar spent), and feasibility (is the intervention on the market now or still in the research stage).

The rankings were:

Renewable energy at plant: Using renewable electricity at 50% of ethanol plants by 2030, up to 90% in 2050.
Fiber fermentation: Corn kernel fiber fermentation at 20% of dry mills by 2030, up to 50% by 2050.
Efficiency: Better-than-business-as-usual industry-wide efficiency improvements and ethanol yields based on the historical trends of industry leading producers.
Renewable energy on farm: Adoption of renewable electricity by 25% of corn suppliers in 2030, up to 90% in 2050.
Carbon capture: Installation of carbon capture and sequestration technology at 40% of ethanol facilities by 2030, up to 90% by 2050.
Manure power: Sourcing of bio-methane from manure biogas at 28% of ethanol facilities in 2030, up to 78% by 2050.
Reduced tillage: Expanding reduced tillage practices to an additional 7.5% of corn farmers in 2030, 30% by 2050.

In an interview with Agweek, Emery explained that using a renewable resource like corn is good, but carbon capture makes it better.

...

“We see a tremendous amount of innovation and new technology coming around nutrient management and fertilizer application and reducing nitrous oxide emissions and other greenhouse gas emissions at the farm level. You tie all those things together and pretty soon you've got a low carbon corn or low carbon soybeans going to these facilities for further processing, and you end up with a renewable fuel that's got a very low or zero carbon footprint,” Cooper said.

...

One plant that has been able to implement carbon capture on its own is Red Trail Energy at Richardton, North Dakota. Its location in oil country is an advantage.

100421.AG.EthanalDroughtCountermovesA04.jpg — Gerald Bachmeier, chief executive officer of Red Trail Energy LLC of Richardton, North Dakota, stands next to the well-head for injecting liquefied carbon dioxide a mile into the earth, protecting the environment, on Sept. 27, 2021.

“Sometimes it's good to be lucky,” Gerald Bachmeier, CEO of Red Trail Energy, said during a tour of the plant after it started pumping CO2 underground in 2022. “If you threw a dart on a map and were looking for a place to do carbon sequestration, you couldn't find a better place.”

...

“The driver is California state policy,” said David Ripplinger, associate professor at North Dakota State University, who focuses on energy.

While other states and Canada have started following California’s lead on low-carbon fuels, Ripplinger said there are opportunities for traditional ethanol elsewhere.

“Many other markets have significant opportunities,” Ripplinger said. He said that includes jet fuel.

Colorado-based Gevo is building a sustainable aviation fuel plant at Lake Preston, South Dakota. Gevo plans to use renewable energy and be net-zero on carbon emissions.

...

Brendan Jordan, vice president of transportation fuels at the Grain Plains Institute, said while the focus is on carbon capture for ethanol now, it’s needed for other industries, too.

He used concrete production as an example. READ MORE

Excerpt from Successful Farming: An Iowa House bill that would restrict the use of eminent domain for carbon capture pipelines in the state is effectively dead until the next session, in 2024, after the Senate late last month failed to advance it ahead of a legislative deadline. That leaves the issue for now with the Iowa Utilities Board, which can rule on eminent domain requests.

The proposed bill would have banned the use of eminent domain unless access to 90% of the planned pipeline route was first obtained from owners voluntarily. It would have also offered protections to owners if their land or property was damaged by a pipeline. But senators generally opposed any use of eminent domain to obtain land for the projects.

...

Construction has yet to begin on any of the pipelines, and safety is a major concern for farmers and landowners. Many worry about proper restoration of their land following pipeline construction and the long-term effects on soil health, while others have raised the issue of potential ruptures. A group of farmers traveled to the Iowa capitol earlier this year to voice their concerns to senators, ultimately asking for their rights to be respected.

In response to concerns about safety, Summit said that these types of pipelines have existed for over 20 years in North Dakota, and have been transferring carbon to Canada. In a statement, the company said, “Pipelines are significantly safer and less intrusive when transporting commodities like CO2,” adding that they are “extensively regulated.” Summit has filed suit to overturn local ordinances that restrict the pipelines because of public safety concerns.

Wolf has said the company doesn’t intend to use eminent domain for any parcel of land in Iowa, but Summit and Navigator are willing to rely on it to complete their projects. Because the Iowa Senate signaled that it will not be taking on this issue until the next session, starting in January 2024, the companies have indicated they will be looking to the Iowa Utilities Board to grant them permission.

The three-member board, which is appointed by Gov. Kim Reynolds, now holds the power to approve or reject the pipelines companies’ request to use eminent domain starting as early as this year. Gov. Reynolds has not taken a public stance on the use of eminent domain, but when asked about the proposed bill, she told Iowa Public Radio that the current law lays out how eminent domain can be used and that there are possible ways to improve it.

The board will hear arguments about the pipelines’ safety, job creation, crop yields, and environmental impacts. Since 2000, it has granted the power of eminent domain for two pipeline projects and five electric transmission lines; it also denied its use for one electric transmission line. There is no official date for when the board will begin its review process, but for now the power is in its hands. READ MORE

Excerpt from Mitchell Republic: In a 3-2 vote, the Planning and Zoning Commission advanced a pipeline ordinance with amendments that, among other changes, increased the setback distance to one mile from municipalities.

Lincoln County planning officials have advanced a pipeline ordinance that creates larger-than-expected setbacks from municipalities.

...

As Summit Carbon Solutions and Navigator CO2 Ventures are both planning to construct carbon pipelines through the state, the original citizen-initiated amendment called for varying setbacks based on a multitude of criteria, specifically requiring that pipelines be set back at least:

2,000 feet from dwellings, churches, businesses and eligible sites;
A half-mile from public parks, schools and health care facilities;
A half-mile from municipalities of 500 or fewer population;
Three-quarters of a mile from municipalities between 500 and 5,000 population;
One mile from municipalities of 5,000 or more population.

The Planning Commission, however, revised those setbacks, significantly decreasing the distance from dwellings, churches and businesses to 750 feet but sharply increasing the distance from cities and towns to one mile, regardless of size.

The discussion came as Fairview resident Scott Montgomery provided the commission with statistics on the number of pipeline incidents in the United States and the damages they’ve caused.

...

Commission Chair Wendi Hogan, however, wondered if the larger setbacks would leave any pipeline companies room to build.

“[The pipelines] are going to go in the more rural areas, any of them are,” she said, “and if you start with all these larger setbacks, are they going to have a route?”

...

Another issue with the amendment to the ordinance, according to planners, is that it might not solely affect pipelines still in the works. It could also apply to existing “transmission lines,” such as overhead power lines, that are already in place. Lincoln County Planning Director Toby Brown said the amendments would make those existing transmission lines non-conforming.

...

“There are several existing transmission lines, [Dakota Access Pipeline] being one,” he said. “The proposed text amendments could make existing transmission lines in county non-conforming uses.”

The commission considered including a revision to grandfather existing transmission lines, but after speaking with legal counsel, Brown said it would take “some fine tuning” of the language to ensure Navigator or Summit pipelines are not accidentally grandfathered in, too.

...

Planning commission members Scott Green and (Collin) Enstead both voted no on the proposal, noting their desire to see a map created with the setbacks overlaid before they can be comfortable advancing it.

The Lincoln County Commission will meet next on Tuesday, June 27. It is unclear if the authority will take up the issue immediately, or if it will be postponed until a meeting at a later date. READ MORE