After a 2½-year process filled with controversy, the Iowa Utilities Board on Tuesday approved Summit Carbon Solutions’ request to build a carbon capture pipeline across Iowa.
In perhaps the most controversial part of its decision, the board said Summit will be able to use eminent domain to acquire land from owners unwilling to sell it access. The board said it had examined each of the parcels subject to a request for eminent domain “to determine, based upon the record, whether to approve, deny, or modify each request.” The report showed it ended up denying only four, and two valve placements, out of more than 90 cases.
Opponents vowed immediately to appeal.
Following the approval, Summit said it would begin construction of the pipeline in 2025, with operation expected to begin in 2026. The pipeline will transport carbon dioxide, liquefied under pressure, from ethanol plants across Iowa and neighboring states to a deep underground sequestration site in North Dakota ― pending a decision in that state on reconsideration of a permit it previously turned down.
Summit also needs to seek reconsideration of its application for a permit in South Dakota, which Lee Blank, the Ames-based company’s CEO, said in a news release is in the works.
“The momentum will continue as we prepare to file our South Dakota permit application in early July,” Blank said. “We look forward to engaging with the state throughout this process and are confident in a successful outcome.”
The pipeline will move up to 12 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually, and will qualify for millions of dollars in federal tax credits aimed at fighting climate change by encouraging a reduction in the carbon footprint of ethanol.
Iowa is the nation’s No. 1 producer of both ethanol and the corn primarily used to make it. Supporters say the pipeline will help ensure the future of the market for the alternative fuel, which is blended into much of the gasoline sold in the United States.
Iowa Utilities Board puts conditions on pipeline construction
Summit Carbon Solutions is partnering with 57 ethanol plants across five states, including Iowa, and said it has signed voluntary easement agreements with 75% of Iowa landowners along the route.
More:Carbon pipeline foes say it would use billions of gallons of Iowa water resources annually
In addition to eminent domain, safety also was a major issue during the monthslong hearing the board held on Summit’s application in 2023, with property owners, residents and city and county officials expressing concern about potential leaks. Colorless, odorless carbon dioxide is an asphyxiant, and can sicken or even kill people exposed to it.
The board said Summit will be required to:
- Conduct X-ray inspections of all welds, test pipeline coatings and test the line at high pressure.
- Use thicker-walled pipe and fracture arrestors “where appropriate.”
- Provide carbon dioxide monitors for every emergency truck, fire truck, law enforcement vehicle and ambulance in communities the pipeline crosses.
- Provide grants to cities and counties to purchase the equipment they would need to deal with a pipeline-related incident.
- Equip each county on the pipeline route with an alarm system that would notify authorities of leaks.
In addition, the board said that before it grants construction permits, Summit must obtain a $100 million liability insurance policy. It also will have to ensure landowners and tenants are compensated for damages “that may result from the construction” of the pipeline. Farmers objecting to the pipeline have said they worry the construction will damage underground tiles that drain their fields.
Another condition for the company is that it make sure landowners and their tenant farmers have access through gates and fences to their property.
More:Summit says power supply, blackouts not a concern for carbon capture pipeline
Despite dissents, board unanimous in approval
Two of the three board members filed dissents in connection with the order.
Board chair Erik Helland objected to sections delaying construction of some sections of the pipeline until Summit has obtained permits to build connecting pipelines in neighboring states ― South Dakota, Minnesota and Nebraska ― and to the sequestration site in North Dakota. Helland said doing so delegates “the statutory authority of the Board to the public utility commissions of other states.”
“When an agency makes an approval or disapproval contingent upon decisions made by another agency or another state, it gives away duties that have been assigned to it by the Iowa Legislature,” he wrote.
Board member Joshua Byrnes objected to approval of a section of the pipeline he thought imposed more burden than benefit.
“The North-South lateral runs approximately 123 miles through seven counties and impacts 118 eminent domain parcels — all of which are necessary to serve only one ethanol facility,” Byrnes wrote.
But both Helland and Byrnes and fellow member Sarah Martz, according to an IUB summary, found that overall, “the proposed service provided by Summit Carbon is in the public convenience and necessity,” and that the project should be approved.
Opponents vow appeal, say battle has a long way to go
Wally Taylor, attorney for the Iowa Chapter of the Sierra Club, was still reading through the IUB’s 507-page decision late Tuesday morning, but said an appeal will be filed to district court.
Asked if he was surprised by Tuesday’s announcement, Taylor replied, “No, not at all. These board members were appointed by the governor specifically to approve this permit, and I expected what they would do is this.”
The Sierra Club has objected to the project from the beginning. Taylor said it does nothing to address climate change, despite the claims of its supporters.
One likely challenge to the IUB’s decision will involve the granting of eminent domain to Summit, which Taylor argued does not qualify because the pipeline would be solely for its use ― not a so-called “common carrier” available to a variety of users.
“Our position is that the Iowa Supreme Court made it clear that they can’t get eminent domain unless they are a common carrier, and the evidence was absolutely clear to us that somebody is not a common carrier if it’s only for them,” he said. “They’re carrying their own product, they own the capture facilities and they are determining who can get on their line and who can’t.”
Food & Water Watch Policy Director Jim Walsh issued a statement echoing the Sierra Club’s position that the fight is not over.
“Summit’s massive carbon pipeline scam is nothing but a gift to Big Ag and the polluting ethanol industry. The pipeline poses substantial risks to public safety and will do little to nothing to reduce climate pollution,” Walsh said in a news release. “Governor (Kim) Reynolds’s administration is at the center of this decision, and the whole project is made possible by massive federal tax credits and subsidies for the dangerous and unnecessary carbon capture industry. While Summit stands to make billions, it is our climate and communities that lose out. “
Ames-based Summit is owned by politically influential agribusiness millionaire Bruce Rastetter, a Reynolds donor.
“While the company has won this round in Iowa, this is not the end of the line,” Walsh added in his statement. “There are still decisions at the federal and state levels that will determine whether this dangerous pipeline is ever built. The IUB’s approval of this dangerous project underscores the urgent need for the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) to update the outdated regulations for carbon dioxide pipelines before any other authorizations are issued.”
Speaking at a news conference on the decision, attorney Brian Jorde, who represents a large number of landowners opposing the pipeline, said he believes Summit ultimately will not prevail.
“From my standpoint, this is a big who cares?” Jorde said. “I mean, we knew this was going to happen, and it’s like I said, it’s just one small thing in a maze, in a track-and-field event, full of hurdles that they have to get over. So we’re just going to keep our heads down and move forward as we always planned.”
Supporters of the project ready to move forward
Like opponents to the project, Monte Shaw, executive director of the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, said he was not surprised by Tuesday’s ruling, but for a different reason.
“The law is very clear, and I don’t see how the utilities board could have come to any other conclusion,” Shaw said. “But you know, the Iowa Utilities Board certainly did their due diligence. I mean, almost three years (it’s been on the) docket, the longest hearing in the history of the agency, but they ultimately came to the conclusion that, you know, they really needed to (approve the application) from a legal standpoint.”
He said the pipeline offers new opportunities for agriculture and biofuels in a marketplace looking for ways to reduce carbon emissions.
“Ethanol is already a low-carbon biofuel, but if we can get it to become a super-low-carbon fuel, it is going to open up a lot of opportunity in our current markets that are demanding lower-carbon fuels, for vehicles, but it’s also going to open up a lot of new possibilities, whether that’s sustainable aviation fuel, marine vessels, whether that’s electric generation, whether that’s even replacements and heavy-duty engines,” he said.
While acknowledging the vocal opposition to the project, Shaw said it came from what he called a “super minority” and noted the three-quarters of landowners along the pipeline path who have signed voluntary easements.
Capturing carbon via the pipeline comes amid increasing focus on decarbonizing the atmosphere, said another supporter, Kelly Nieuwenhuis of Primghar, a farmer and former president of Siouxland Ethanol.
“It’s a new era. Twenty years ago you weren’t thinking about transporting CO2, and now the way the world is focusing on it, it’s just going to be part of our industries, and carbon has become a commodity. We’ve watched that happen over the last decade,” Nieuwenhuis said.
Over 30 Republican legislators condemn board’s approval
Opponents to Summit may have found unlikely allies in continuing the fight against the pipeline in the form of 31 Republicans in the Iowa House and Senate who released a statement late Tuesday condemning the IUB’s decision and pledging to “oppose this proposal at every step.”
“Today is a dark day for anyone who owns property in Iowa,” the legislators’ news release said. “Indeed, it’s a dark day for our Constitution and potentially for the Iowa way-of-life. We could not be more disappointed that the Iowa Utilities Board, despite overwhelming compelling evidence to the contrary, found that the Summit carbon dioxide pipeline scheme is somehow in the ‘public interest and necessity.’”
The release, written by Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, called the IUB’s actions “lawfare being waged against ordinary Iowans.”
The statement also said, “In today’s action, the IUB departs from important Constitutional norms in a way that threatens every farm, every house and every person in our state. A line has been crossed.
“We are carefully reviewing today’s decision in light of the docket, Iowa statutes, and the state and Federal Constitutions to develop the next steps in the courts and in the General Assembly in response to today’s developments. Iowans can be assured this is not the final word on this issue.”
Legislators signing the release were Sens. Kevin Alons, Lynn Evans, Dennis Guth, David Rowley, Sandy Salmon, Jeff Taylor and Cherielynn Westrich, and Reps. Eddie Andrews, Brooke Boden, Steven Bradley, Ken Carlson, Mark Cisneros, Zach Dieken, Dean Fisher, Dan Gehlbach, Thomas Gerhold, Cindy Golding, Helena Hayes, Bob Henderson, Steven Holt, Heather Hora, Thomas Jeneary, Bobby Kaufmann, Anne Osmundson, Bradley Sherman, Jeff Shipley, Luana Stoltenberg, Henry Stone, Mark Thompson, Charley Thomson and Skyler Wheeler.
Pipeline approval process was long, complex
The pipeline will pass through 29 counties in Iowa: Boone, Cerro Gordo, Cherokee, Chickasaw, Clay, Crawford, Dickinson, Emmet, Floyd, Franklin, Fremont, Greene, Hancock, Hardin, Ida, Kossuth, Lyon, Montgomery, O’Brien, Page, Palo Alto, Plymouth, Pottawattamie, Shelby, Sioux, Story, Webster, Woodbury and Wright. As a result, the process of considering the case was sprawling and massive.
The IUB’s hearing on the pipeline lasted from August to November 2023 and involved 219 parties. The board received testimony from 200 witnesses and more than 4,000 written comments and letters.
Donnelle Eller contributed to this report.
Kevin Baskins covers jobs and the economy for the Des Moines Register. Reach him at kbaskins@registermedia.com.
