Floyd County supervisors consider weighing in on carbon dioxide pipelines

By Bob Steenson, bsteenson@charlescitypress.com

Floyd County supervisors appear likely to join more than two dozen other Iowa counties in expressing concerns about proposed carbon capture and transfer pipelines that have been proposed for the state.

The Board of Supervisors discussed a proposal to send a letter to the Iowa Utilities Board regarding both the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline, which has officially filed for a permit, and the Navigator CO2 Ventures pipeline, which has yet to file.

A report this week by the Iowa Chapter of the Sierra Club says that 26 out of the 50 Iowa counties that are impacted by one or both of the pipelines have sent letters to the Iowa Utilities Board objecting to the projects.

Several people attending the Board of Supervisors meeting urged the board to take a stand against the pipeline proposals, but the item was on the agenda for discussion only and no action was taken at the meeting this week.

Floyd County is one of a few counties in the state that would have both pipelines pass through it.

Supervisor Linda Tjaden said she had been working with Assistant County Attorney Randall Tilton on a draft of a letter that would be sent to the Iowa Utilities Board regarding each pipeline, and she read what they had come up with so far:

“This letter is to inform you of our concerns regarding the proposed pipeline. Our concerns include impacts to public drainage infrastructure and private farm tile and use of eminent domain for the purpose of private benefit,” the letter states.

“The Board and private landowners act as trustees to drainage districts within our county. We have concerns regarding potential damage to drainage district infrastructure as well as drainage tiles. Damage to this infrastructure could result in both public and private cost as a result of this project.

“We also have concern about the use of eminent domain for this type of project. We question the appropriateness of eminent domain for the benefit of a private company. This type of project does not appear to have public benefit, such as a utility might.

“The Floyd County Board of Supervisors respectfully requests that the Iowa Utilities Board consider our concerns regarding this request.”

Supervisors Doug Kamm and Roy Schwickerath both said they agreed that it is up to the Iowa Utilities Board to prove the projects are in the public interest if that board is going to allow eminent domain to be used to force property owners to accept easements where they can’t be negotiated voluntarily.

George Cummins, a landowner and retired ISU Extension crop specialist who has been a vocal and steadfast opponent of the pipeline proposals since soon after the were announced, said 98% of the comments that have been filed with the Iowa Utilities Board regarding the projects have been against the projects.

He also urged the board to include concerns about the safety of the pipelines in their letters.

Cummins and Scott Heinz mentioned a carbon pipeline leak in Satartia, Mississippi, in 2020 that caused many people to feel sick. The incident was reported in an investigative article by huffpost.com and widely circulated, especially among carbon dioxide pipeline opponents.

The proposed Summit pipeline would cross through the southern part of Charles City, mostly along an existing easement for a Northern Natural Gas pipeline.

Heinz noted the huffpost report said that in a major leak the CO2 gas can spread up to 2 miles from the pipe, and settles in low places. That would endanger residents, the hospital and nursing homes all along that area, he said.

Carbon dioxide isn’t toxic. In other words it doesn’t directly harm the lungs or other bodily tissues. But it does displace oxygen and can lead to suffocation. In the Missouri incident vehicles stalled because they couldn’t get enough oxygen.

“So it that would happen, if your cars quit, how are you going to transport people out of that danger zone?” Heinz asked. “I don’t know if you could evacuate that many people in a small community that fast and give them a safe haven.”

Michelle Krumwiede said she and her husband have six tracts of land that would be affected by the Summit Pipeline and one tract that would be affected by the Navigator plan.

“We are against it because of the eminent domain,” she said. “Being a grandma, I am against it for safety. I don’t want it anywhere near my grandchildren.”

Cummins said he was also concerned about the impact of the pipeline construction on the land and crop yields.

He said he was talking with someone involved in a pipeline construction crew and asked what would happen if there was an extended rainy period and the soil was too wet to work. Cummins said that person told him they could work in just about any conditions.

Kamm said an inspector required to be hired by the county to make sure the land is returned to the condition it was before construction also has the authority to stop work if the conditions aren’t right. The costs of the inspector would be reimbursed to the county by the pipeline company.

Kamm said the other side of the argument is that underground pipelines exist already, especially for natural gas.

“I’m not protecting them, but I’m just stating a fact,” he said. “There are very few of us in Floyd County that don’t drive over or live over a pipeline every single day. You go down to my folks’ place you cross over four of them, and you’ve got them within a couple hundred feet of your house. They’re there. They have a safety record.”

Kamm also said he has been told that Floyd County will potentially receive up to $1 million a year in utility taxes if both pipelines go through.

Supervisor Tjaden said she had been listening to the comments and taking notes, and would get back with Tilton for some revisions to the letters, which would likely be on a future agenda for more discussion and possible approval.