SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — A new law in South Dakota makes it illegal to take land for carbon capture pipelines using eminent domain. This makes people wonder if the planned 2,500-mile (4,023-kilometer) project that would go through five Midwest states can actually happen.
Summit Carbon Solutions, the company behind the $8.9 billion pipeline, said they would keep working on the project even though South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden signed a bill into law Thursday that will make it much harder to route the line. Summit is not allowed by law to force South Dakota residents to let the pipeline go through their land.
As planned, the pipeline will bring greenhouse gas emissions from more than 50 ethanol plants in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota to a location in North Dakota. These emissions will then be stored underground forever.
It is possible to go to court
Summit didn’t say in a statement that they would go to court, but they did say that “all options are on the table” and that the project “moves forward” in other states. The business said it would have more news soon.
Eminent domain is usually used for big pipeline projects. Companies say that even if most landowners agree to let them use their land, a project can fail if a few refuse.
Summit says the business has the go-ahead for routes in Iowa, North Dakota, and Minnesota. They have also secured over 2,700 easements across the area.
Could the line go through Minnesota?
It would be hard to change the planned route to go east through Minnesota since it would go through almost 700 miles (1,126.5 kilometers) of South Dakota before entering North Dakota.
Friday, people asked Summit if the company would think about a new route, but a spokesman did not answer.
The Republican Rep. Karla Lems, who sponsored the bill for South Dakota, said that Summit could either change its plan to build a pipeline through Minnesota and into North Dakota or “negotiate with landowners in South Dakota” to get around opponents.
Gov. Rhoden said that the South Dakota law wasn’t meant to kill the project and suggested that Summit see it as “a chance to start over.”
Minnesota is only a small part of Summit’s project as a whole. One section has been cleared in the state. It goes from an ethanol plant near Fergus Falls to the border with North Dakota and is 28 miles (45 kilometers) long. Summit’s plan also has two parts in southern Minnesota that would connect to Iowa.
No one from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission answered the phone or email.
How important the pipeline is to the ethanol business
Many people thought that the country would switch to electric cars faster than it has, but most people still think that the switch will happen soon.
About 40% of the corn grown in the U.S. is turned into ethanol, which is then mixed into most gasoline sold in the country. Midwest farmers and the ethanol business need new markets because less of the fuel additive is going to power cars.
They think that passenger jet fuel could be a big new market for ethanol. As things stand, though, the process of turning ethanol into airplane fuel would have to put out less carbon dioxide in order to be eligible for tax breaks that are meant to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions.
The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association’s Monte Shaw said that the carbon capture pipeline is a key part of reaching those goals.
In Onida, South Dakota, Walt Wendland runs an ethanol plant. He said that the “ethanol industry is a margin business” and that the new law will hurt ethanol makers in South Dakota.
“Ever since I built a plant, I never wanted an edge; just don’t put me behind,” Wendland said.
Will the pipe be built at some point?
It’s been four years since Summit and two other companies, who later dropped their plans, said they would build the pipeline. It has been a tough process for Summit. They have had to deal with lawsuits in Nebraska and other places, opposition in front of an Iowa regulatory panel, and now the ban on eminent domain in South Dakota.
Summit said it was hopeful about the future in its statement, but it didn’t say how it planned to build a pipeline without South Dakota’s eminent domain power.
The federal government’s response to climate change has also changed a lot since the pipeline was first suggested. In order to slow climate change, Democratic President Joe Biden raised tax breaks under the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. These changes were made to encourage carbon capture.
But Republican President Donald Trump has talked a lot about the need for more coal mining and oil and gas drilling. He has talked a lot less about green energy. Trump has not said if his views will lead to changes in government policy about pipelines that capture carbon.
