If you are not aware, there are two pipelines that want to cross our state, each project touching five states. These pipeline companies are owned, respectively, by Summit Carbon Solutions and Heartland Navigator Greenway. The stated purpose is to capture CO2 from the ethanol plants to reduce the carbon footprint. This waste product would then be converted from gas form to supercritical form, highly pressurized at up to 2200 psi, and sent to an underground site for permanent sequestration. One of the lines runs to North Dakota and one to Illinois. The companies involved in this would receive ‘carbon credits’ for their participation in lowering the carbon footprint. The ethanol plants have said it is essential for their survival to link up to the pipeline. They would be able to sell their product to states that have emission requirements, like California, for a premium. The pipeline companies would qualify for 45Q federal tax credits (your tax dollars) of $85 per ton of permanently stored CO2 and $60 per ton of CO2 used for enhanced oil recovery or other industrial use. Ethanol producers would benefit from a federal tax credit of $50 per ton of sequestered carbon dioxide.
Presently our SD law states that if a pipeline company is under consideration for a siting permit with the SD Public Utilities Commission, (SDCL 21-35-31) they are allowed to conduct land surveys without needing the express permission of landowners. Current law also states that “all pipelines holding themselves out to the general public as engaged in the business of transporting commodities for hire by pipeline” are common carriers. The law also says common carriers may use eminent domain. The bills that I brought forward in this past legislative session would have given landowners more protection. HB 1133 would have excluded CO2 captured for permanent sequestration from the definition of a commodity. If passed, these companies could not use eminent domain. This topic was not business as usual. Landowners all across the state showed up in favor of this bill. Similar efforts have been tried in other states with similar results.
Landowners NEED protections. There are roadblocks at every turn. Ask the Senate Commerce and Energy Committee why each one of them voted no when a majority on the House floor voted yes. I haven’t even touched on the safety aspects, insurance concerns, and land values that will be affected. Did you know that CO2 is an asphyxiant? Did you know that there is foreign ownership in these projects? SO MANY ISSUES!
I know this is getting long to read, but I need you all as citizens to understand this is being pushed through in six states. Landowners are showing up in meetings from Planning and Zoning, to County Commissions, and to State Legislatures. They are making calls and sending out petitions. In the meetings I have attended, if you ask the question, “How many of you in this room want this project?” barely a hand goes up outside of the pipeline companies and the ethanol industry representatives. I have heard from people concerned about this project from across this state, including former legislators, county commissioners, other elected officials, and the landowners themselves. Presently Edmunds, Brown, Spink, and McPherson counties are being sued by Summit Carbon Solutions. These counties are trying to put in safeguards for the citizens they represent. Two judges in the northern part of the state have ruled in favor of the pipeline companies. Also, over 200 landowners have received a letter threatening condemnation as of this month. At least 88 lawsuits have been filed. There will be a PUC hearing in Pierre in late July/early August regarding Navigator’s line, and another in September for Summit. There are over 500 intervenors so far.
My very real concern is that—if allowed-- this will not be the last project of this kind. More carbon pipelines are being proposed, and right behind them we have solar and wind projects that will be pushed for ‘the common good.’ If eminent domain is allowed for the carbon pipelines, we have just set the standard for more of this to occur.
There is a lot of politics and $$$$$$ behind these projects. Many, even farmers heavily tied to ethanol, question the narrative of this whole issue. Let me stress, the landowners I have met are not anti-ethanol. Many of them sell their corn to ethanol plants and some are investors in the ethanol companies. The issue is property rights.
Please read the letter that was sent to Governor Noem on April 17, 2023. Call her office and ask her to use her voice and her office to stand up for landowners. Contact your local officials and ask them to support property rights. Go to SDPropertyRights and sign the petition. Listen to the radio show posted on the site to get an even better grasp of this issue.
This IS a non-partisan issue. This IS an American issue. This IS a Constitutional issue. If we do not begin to raise our voices against this attack, we will see our rights not only slip slowly away, but ripped right out from underneath us.
-Sincerely,
Representative Karla Lems
District 16
