By Sarah Raza
Sioux Falls, SD (AP) – The massive carbon capture pipeline in the Midwest was thrown into uncertainty on Tuesday after the Southern Dakota Public Services Commission refused its request for a route.
The Commission voted 2-1 to refuse the request by Summit Carbon Solutions, based at Iowa, Commissioner Kristie Fiegen saying that she was “not ready to move forward” and lacked “the form and the content required”.
“The duty of the PUC is to make a decision on the basis of an itinerary – a way,” said Fiegen, who launched the request to Deny. “The current road, in my opinion, is not viable.”
Southern Dakota legislators adopted an eminent domain ban for carbon capture pipelines in March who made the Summit Summit road, agreed. After Tuesday’s decision, Summit said that he will pass on his request with a reduced route in southern Dakota to satisfy land owners and ethanol factories.
“Although we are disappointed with today’s decision, we remain attached in the southern Dakota because without it, the ethanol industry, farmers and land values will all suffer,” said society in a statement.
Southern Dakota is a crucial 2,500 mile pipeline part, estimated at $ 8.9 billion. The pipeline would carry the carbon emissions from the Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northern Dakota and South Dakota Factors to be stored under the dakota of the North. The project already has approvals in Iowa, Minnesota and Northern Dakota, and Summit has invested more than $ 150 million in its itinerary in the South Dakota.
The landowners have delighted on Tuesday’s decision.
“Today is a victory for the landowners of the southern Dakota and local control,” said Edchbach, a member of the Dakota Rural Action Council, in a statement. “We are grateful that the PUC has made this joint decision and released the landowners to continue their lives and their businesses.”
Summit had previously requested an extension of a calendar on his request for a license to rework his route in a way that would satisfy the landowners.
Questions about the pipeline appeared after the South Dakota legislators approved a ban on the eminent domain for carbon capture projects, in which the government can seize private property with compensation. Without this power, Summit should obtain voluntary agreements with the landowners along the Southern Dakota road.
In his deposit of an extension, Summit said that he would work with landowners and the state of “good faith” rather than challenging the eminent prohibition in the field. This declaration convinced the commissioners that there was no way to the term for Summit given the amount of the opposition of the landowners along the current road.
Instead of continuing a legal action against the State, Summit said in its deposit that the additional time would allow it to “deploy new offers to landowners” and identify branches with ethanol factories, it can eliminate who faces a large opposition from landowners.
The ethanol industry is concentrated in the Midwest, with almost 40% of the country’s corn used to brew ethanol. By kidnapping carbon in northern Dakota, the Summit pipeline promises to reduce the intensity of ethanol carbon and make it more competitive as a lasting product.
Originally published:
California Daily Newspapers
