Advanced BioFuels USA

by Jeff Beach (InForUm) Summit Carbon Solutions says its $4.5 billion pipeline project will help ethanol plants and corn growers but has been met with resistance from landowners. — The controversial Summit Carbon Solutions carbon capture pipeline has spawned at least eight bills in the North Dakota Legislature.

Two of the eight bills are directly related to the percentage of voluntary easements from property owners that would be required to obtain a pipeline permit in North Dakota.

Others are related to private property access by surveyors and underground storage space.

…

The bills are:

• SB 2209: Requires 85% of landowners to provide a voluntary easement to obtain right of eminent domain. Counties could set a higher standard.
• SB 2212 : Removes carbon capture pipelines from being granted the right of eminent domain even if granted common carrier status.
• SB 2228: Requires 100% consent for underground carbon dioxide storage from the owners of the pore space, eliminating eminent domain.
• SB 2251 : Survey crews must obtain written permission from property owners. (There are currently multiple lawsuits involving Summit and surveyor access.)
• SB 2310 : If a person prevails against the state in a court hearing, (as in a surveyor access case) they are entitled to be reimbursed for court costs.
• SB 2313 : If property is taken by eminent domain, a court must increase the award by 33%.
• SB 2314: Requires a public hearing in each county where the pipeline company is seeking common carrier status.
• SB 2317 : Requires 85% of landowners to consent to underground storage space. Counties could set a higher standard.

…

The pipeline route must be approved by the state Public Service Commission. The storage permit must be approved by the state’s Industrial Commission, which includes Gov. Doug Burgum, a vocal advocate for carbon capture and storage.  READ MORE

N Dakota CO2 bills challenge to oil producers  (Argus Media)

Carbon capture pipeline prepares ethanol industry for the future: Dana Siefkes-Lewis (Aberdeen News)

Excerpt from Argus Media: Several proposed North Dakota laws set for debate today could bolster rights for property owners but challenge the state oil industry’s plans to use carbon dioxide (CO2) to boost future production.

Companies building pipelines to carry CO2 in North Dakota would need consent from as much as 85pc of landowners on the pipeline right of way to proceed under a draft of Senate Bill 2209 (SB2209) that will be discussed in the state senate’s energy and natural resources committee hearing today. The right of eminent domain would also be stripped from CO2 projects — but not oil and gas projects — even if they are considered common carrier pipelines, under another bill, SB2212.

…

The project has attracted the ire of environmental groups throughout the states who label it an attempt at greenwashing biofuel production and the oil and gas business as a whole. Indigenous groups and other landowners along the planned pipeline route have also joined in on the opposition in many states, suggestion measures similar to the ones in North Dakota.

While the Midwest Carbon Express pipeline project is aimed at eventual carbon sequestration, injecting CO2 into oil wells to mobilize otherwise stranded oil volumes is one form of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) being pursued in North Dakota, the US’ third-largest oil producing state. The technique has been used for years in other fields, including the Permian basin in Texas and New Mexico, which is served by several pipelines that carry CO2. But sourcing enough CO2 for new projects in North Dakota could be a challenge, making pipelines critical for future projects.

The proposed legislation aimed at CO2 projects “would really tie the hands of the oil and gas industry,” according to Lynn Helms, the head of North Dakota’s Department of Mineral Resources (DMR), as operators explore other methods to sustain production in the mature but prolific Bakken field. “[Bills 2209 and 2212] would both make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to build carbon dioxide pipelines in the state.”

North Dakota would likely “sacrifice many billions of barrels of oil” that would otherwise be unreachable without CO2 injections, said Helms.  READ MORE