DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — A proposed carbon-capture pipeline that would traverse through several Midwestern states could face more hurdles in Iowa as a dozen Republican state senators try to force the issue to a vote.
Summit Carbon Solutions already will likely have to readjust plans for their estimated $8.9 billion, 2,500-mile (4,023-kilometer) project after South Dakota’s governor signed a ban on the use of eminent domain — the government seizure of private property with compensation — to acquire land for carbon dioxide pipelines.
Now, after several proposals advanced through the Republican-controlled Iowa House, 12 GOP state senators have told their Republican leaders that they will not vote on any budget, which the Legislature is constitutionally required to approve, until they bring a pipeline bill to the floor.
“The people of South Dakota emphatically stated that eminent domain will never be granted for this pipeline to cross South Dakota, and it is past time for lowa to do the same,” the senators wrote in a joint letter, saying they believe “addressing eminent domain is more important than the budget or any other priority for the 2025 session.”
It’s unclear if the demands will be met or what a measure that passes the full chamber would look like, given the wide range of views on the issue among the 34 Senate Republicans, who hold a supermajority in the chamber.
The proposed 2,500-mile pipeline would carry carbon emissions from ethanol plants in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota to be stored underground permanently in North Dakota.
By lowering carbon emissions from the plants, the pipeline would lower their carbon intensity scores and make them more competitive in the renewable fuels market. The project would also allow ethanol producers and Summit to tap into federal tax credits.
The project received permit approvals in Iowa, Minnesota and North Dakota, but it does face various court challenges, and its application was rejected in South Dakota last month.
“Summit Carbon Solutions has invested four years and nearly $175 million on voluntary agreements in Iowa, signing agreements with more than 1,300 landowners and securing 75% of the Phase One route,” Summit spokesperson Sabrina Zenor said in a statement. “We are committed to building this project, committed to Iowa, and remain focused on working with legislators — including those with concerns.”
Some Midwest farmers, despite loyalty to the ethanol industry, have voiced strong opposition to the pipeline since its inception, objecting to its presence on or near their land and questioning the safety of having the pipeline in their backyards.
Then, a slew of eminent domain legal actions in South Dakota to obtain land provoked a groundswell of opposition in the state, sending the issue to the governor’s desk. Lee Enterprises and The Associated Press reviewed hundreds of cases, revealing the great legal lengths the company went to get the project built.
Iowa state Sen. Kevin Alons said the senators who are forcing the issue want an amendment to the bill that mimics South Dakota’s new law, but it remains to be seen what provisions, if any, would be included in a final version or whether Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds would give it her signature.
“A number of Republican Senators are working on policy surrounding eminent domain and pipeline issues and I am optimistic we will find a legislative solution,” Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver said in a statement.
The Iowa House has sent several proposals to the Senate. During debate on the House floor, state Rep. Steven Holt expressed plenty of disappointment that the Senate had not taken up the issue in the past.
“Regardless of whether the Senate’s gonna pass it or not, we’re going to fight for it here because it’s the right thing to do,” Holt said.
“You chose to try to trample on the rights of citizens of Iowa and South Dakota,” he added of Summit, “and now the chickens are coming home to roost.”
___
Associated Press reporters Jack Dura in Bismarck, North Dakota, and Sarah Raza in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, contributed to this report.
