The House State Affairs committee listens to testimony against HB 1052. (Austin Goss/The Dakota Scout)

CO2 pipelines in South Dakota: A Sequel

PIERRE, S.D. — A lot can change in a year.

That was evident Friday, in the same state Capitol committee room where the 2023 Legislature first approved a bill that gave carbon pipelines companies room to do business in South Dakota. That bill, Senate Bill 201, was referred to voters, who rejected the Legislature’s work.

Fast forward to this year, and a new legislative committee passed what supporters and opponents portrayed as the anti-SB 201 bill by a 10-3 vote.

“The people of this state spoke loud and clear,” said Speaker Pro Tempore Karla Lems, the prime sponsor of House Bill 1052, told members of the House State Affairs Committee. “This is the people’s bill, they asked for it.”

“The people’s bill,” as Lems called it, would strip eminent domain powers from pipelines being used to transport carbon dioxide. And in all likelihood, that would bring an end to Summit Carbon Solutions’ bid to build hundreds of miles of a carbon capture pipeline across eastern South Dakota.

Though the bill could have the impact of bringing a close to the project that has loomed over the state for three years, the Canton Republican was quick to point out that her proposal was skinny in comparison to previous unsuccessful attempts to neuter Summit. Previous legislative efforts aimed at carbon pipelines and eminent domain reform faced questions about how they could impact other utilities eligible for the power — such as electricity and water — if passed, prompting lobbyists representing those entities to oppose the efforts. Alternatively, HB 1052 is narrowly tailored to only target carbon capture pipelines.

No such opposition from utility providers came forward Friday.

“This is a simple bill,” Lems said. “Eminent domain is a power that can be easily abused.”

Supporters of Summit’s project said that HB 1052 would likely doom the project in South Dakota. Opponents to Lem’s effort came from faces familiar to the fight — ethanol plants that intend to capture carbon and transport it to underground storage in North Dakota. Both chambers of commerce from Sioux Falls and the state opposed HB 1052, as did Summit.

“Eminent domain pulls people to the table so that we can engage in the type of conversations that result in success,” Brett Koenecke, an attorney for Summit, said. He read from a letter where one landowner was offered nearly $500k to allow the pipeline to cross his land. “I don’t know how we are going to go forward without, perhaps we will find out if that is the case.”

While the bill’s narrow focus on carbon pipelines might seem like a more straightforward approach, the South Dakota Chamber of Commerce and Industry challenged it. If eminent domain is truly the issue, then the legislation should be addressed more broadly, with potential reforms extending to other utilities that also rely on the power of eminent domain.

“If this is truly about property rights, and only about property rights, it doesn’t seem to make sense to me that it is only about CO2,” said Chamber President David Owen. “Why doesn’t it apply to all pipelines? Why doesn’t it apply to electric power lines?”

His argument seemed to resonate with at least one of the three dissenters. Sioux Falls Rep. Greg Jamison expressed empathy for the dozens of proponent landowners who packed the room, but said the bill did not do enough to address the issue at hand.

“The bill in front of us is eliminating use by these carbon pipeline people,” Jamison said. “To me, the primary issue is that of eminent domain… Either way, they (companies) are going to have these same rules and authority.” He joined Reps. Tim Reisch and Erin Healy in opposing passage.

But it wasn’t enough to stop the storm that has been building against the carbon pipeline since Gov. Kristi Noem put her pen to SB 201 last year. In that year, a wave of new lawmakers rode anti-pipeline sentiments to power and, ultimately, an overthrow of pro-pipeline leadership.

state Supreme Court decision, meanwhile, challenged the common carrier status of carbon pipelines, and 65 of 66 counties voted to overturn SB 201 when they saw it on the November ballot as Referred Law 21.

And though the House committee’s vote felt pre-ordained – it’s the easiest of the legislative hurdles HB 1052 will face on its journey to become a law – it was the break through activists had waited for. The adjournment of the committee was greeted by applause from a largely carbon capture skeptical audience.

“You have a mandate from the people, they have spoken definitively,” said landowner and anti-pipeline activist Amanda Radke. “Enough is enough.”

People are also reading...

Weather

loader-image
Rapid City, US
10:05 pm, February 10, 2025
temperature icon -4°F
few clouds
Humidity 67 %
Pressure 1042 mb
Wind 13 mph
Wind Gust: 0 mph
Visibility: 10 km
Sunrise: 6:59 am
Sunset: 5:15 pm
Brooklynn Baird

Market News

Share via
Copy link