MANSFIELD, S.D. — A proposed pipeline project meant to transport carbon dioxide emissions from ethanol plants across five Midwest states to underground storage in North Dakota has sparked significant legal and political controversy. The undertaking, spearheaded by Summit Carbon Solutions, has entailed numerous lawsuits against landowners, particularly in South Dakota, where resistance has escalated to government action to restrict the company’s legal recourse.
The heart of the issue lies in the method of acquiring land for the project through eminent domain, a legal principle that allows for the appropriation of private property, albeit with compensation. This method has proved contentious, prompting an investigation into hundreds of court cases. The findings revealed that Summit Carbon Solutions engaged in some 232 lawsuits in states including South Dakota, North Dakota, and Iowa, to secure land access rights, predominantly through voluntary agreements. However, in South Dakota alone, 156 eminent domain lawsuits were filed by the company.
The major spike in legal actions occurred in late April 2023 when Summit filed 83 eminent domain claims in just two days across South Dakota. This aggressive legal strategy continued until August 2023; however, shifts in regulatory and public sentiment led to a suspension of these actions after the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission denied Summit’s permit application in September 2023.
This pipeline is not just an infrastructure project but is also seen by many in the ethanol industry as essential for future viability. Ethanol, primarily derived from corn, is a significant component of gasoline in the U.S., but as the automotive industry slowly transitions to electric vehicles, demand could wane. Thus, converting ethanol to jet fuel, which requires lower carbon emissions to qualify for certain tax breaks, has emerged as a promising alternative, bolstered by the potential of carbon capture technologies to meet environmental standards.
The local opposition in South Dakota grew vigorous, in part due to incidents like those involving farmer Jared Bossly of Brown County. Bossly’s confrontations with Summit over land surveys escalated to a legal and public relations battle, exacerbating the pipeline opposition. His experiences resonated widely, turning him into a somewhat reluctant figurehead of the resistance.
Political ramifications of the outcry became evident in 2024, as reflected in South Dakota’s state elections where several pro-pipeline lawmakers were ousted. This legislative turnover greatly contributed to the passage of the bill that prohibited the use of eminent domain for constructing carbon dioxide pipelines in the state.
As for the future of Summit’s project in South Dakota, the company remains hopeful despite the setbacks. They are exploring opportunities in other supportive states while still trying to find a viable path forward in South Dakota, underscoring an ongoing commitment to the project amid fluctuating regulatory and public landscapes.
This story highlights the complex intersection of agricultural industry needs, environmental considerations, and landowner rights, blending them into a potent narrative of modern energy infrastructure challenges.
Note: This article was automatically developed by Open AI and may contain inaccurate facts or representations regarding people, events, and circumstances. For concerns or corrections, please reach out to [email protected].