Summit info meeting in Floyd County shows concerns about CO2 pipeline project

By Bob Steenson, bsteenson@charlescitypress.com

Three years ago, in September 2021, a group of Floyd County landowners and others met at the Floyd Community Center with representatives of Summit Carbon Solutions and the Iowa Utilities Board, regarding a proposal by Summit to build a pipeline through five Midwest states including Iowa and including going through Floyd County.

The project was designed to capture carbon dioxide that would have been emitted from ethanol plants, then transport it through the pipeline to North Dakota where it would be sequestered permanently in deep underground geological formations.

The purpose was to reduce the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere by the production of ethanol, thereby lowering that ethanol’s carbon intensity score and allowing it to be sold at a higher price and in states and countries that required fuel to have a low carbon intensity rating.

What also makes such projects possible is billions of dollars in federal energy tax credits available for reducing the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere.

At that 2021 meeting, most of the landowner’s questions were about how they would be compensated if they granted easements to Summit to bury the pipeline in their land, and how they would be protected from potential crop losses or potential damage to their topsoil or their drainage systems.

Only a few questions at that 2021 meeting were about pipeline safety.

On Wednesday evening this week, Sept. 11, a landowner informational meeting was held at the Floyd County Fairgrounds to discuss a proposal by Summit to enlarge its CO2 capture and sequestration project to include pipeline routes that had been proposed by a different company that later bowed out, including 14 additional miles in Floyd County.

The tones of the 2021 and the 2024 meetings were markedly different, and showed how organized the opposition to the pipeline projects has become.

Only one question was raised Wednesday evening regarding compensation for easements.

One other person, who is involved in the ethanol industry, spoke in support of the projects and their importance to the ethanol industry and Iowa agriculture, and concluded by saying, “I think the people here are the vocal minority that are against everything.”

The majority of the questions and comments from the audience showed concerns about safety, with many of the speakers referencing a CO2 pipeline rupture in Sartartia, Mississippi, in February 2020 that caused 45 people to seek medical care.

Another common concern was about the use of eminent domain – the ability of what is now known as the Iowa Utilities Commission (IUC) to grant Summit the right to force easements on property where the landowners will not sign a voluntary easement. The landowners would still have to be compensated for that use.

Eminent domain has been granted for the first phase of the project, although that ruling is being challenged in state and federal court, and the IUC set several conditions that must be met before construction could begin in Iowa, including approval in other states.

The meeting Wednesday began with an IUC representative explaining the purpose and process for the meeting, then Summit representatives explaining the project.

The IUC representative said the meeting was required by Iowa Code and the IUC for landowners who would potentially be affected by the project to get information about the project from Summit representatives and to ask questions about the project.

The meeting was not being recorded and none of the questions or statements made at the meeting would be considered by the Iowa Utilities Commission when that body went through the actual hearing process of deciding whether to approve Summit’s application for a permit, the IUC representative said.

Only written comments filed on the IUC docket regarding the application, and testimony and evidence given at the eventual IUC hearing, would be considered by the commission in making its decision.

Other concerns and questions raised at the meeting Wednesday evening included:

• The millions of gallons of water needed to cool CO2 to the liquid phase needed to transport it through the pipeline. A Summit representative said the ethanol industry currently uses about 1% of the total water use in the state, and the carbon capture project would increase that to 1.1% – less than a 10% increase at each plant.
• The availability of insurance to cover potential landowner liability for pipeline accidents on their property. Summit said part of the easement agreement indemnifies the landowner from any liability caused by the pipeline, and the IUC in its ruling on Phase 1 of the project required the company to carry $100 million in liability insurance.
• Whether the carbon rating reduction can be achieved by growing corn with low-carbon farming methods. Summit said that is part of the solution and will help lower the carbon rating even more, but isn’t enough to maintain the market on its own.
• Pipeline easements last forever and can be sold to other companies. Summit said in Iowa an easement is for 25 years and can be renewed in additional 25-year increments as long as it’s being used for the purpose for which the easement was granted. If the system is ever not operational for five years it reverts to the landowner. The pipeline can only be used for the purposes identified in the easement agreement.
• The captured CO2 could be used for enhanced oil extraction, known as fracking. Summit said there are no plans to use the CO2 for oil extraction, and the places where the pipeline would go in North Dakota for sequestration is not near the oil fields.
• Several people repeated concerns that eminent domain should not be used to force easements to benefit a private company.

Sen. Sandy Salmon, R-Janesville, who represents Iowa Senate District 29 which includes most of Floyd County, said she supports business projects and agricultural projects, but they shouldn’t use eminent domain, and she called the IUC decision on the first phase of the Summit project “shameless, brazen and outrageous.”

Salmon is part of a group of legislators led by Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, and others, who filed suit in state and federal court on Tuesday asking for judicial review of the IUC decision, especially granting the use of eminent domain.

The Summit representatives started the meeting by describing the Phase 2 project, but much of the information was for the entire project, including the parts that were first introduced in 2021 and have been modified over the years.

The original project would have crossed Floyd County from east to west including going through Charles City. The expansion route would add pipeline going north from the Rudd area into Minnesota, north to the Valero Renewables plant between Charles City and Floyd, and south into Butler County.

According To Summit, the project includes:

• 57 Midwest ethanol plants in five states.
• 2,500 total miles of pipeline, including 1,019 miles in Iowa.
• Potential to increase corn prices and ethanol demand.
• Potential for U.S. ethanol to become a major part of the aviation fuel market.
• $2.3 million in property taxes paid to Floyd County each year, of which $1.1 million would go to schools, $1.1 million to the county, $110,000 to community colleges and $69,000 to townships and cities.
• $4.5 billion construction in Iowa and $8.9 billion total project.

The informational meetings are being held in every county that has landowners potentially affected by the new Phase 2 part of the Summit project.