A Win for Private Property Rights, Voters Reject Carbon Pipeline Measure in South Dakota - AgWeb

Nov 09, 2024

A key state ballot issue in South Dakota is poised to go against carbon pipelines, according to Farm Journal Washington Correspondent Jim Wiesemeyer. The referendum let voters decide whether to uphold a pipeline bill that was passed by legislators.

90% of votes were in as of mid-morning Wednesday, and 60% voted no and 40% voted yes. A “no” vote means the state law in question would be rejected, and that raises fresh questions about the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline and similar projects.

Proponents of the law argued it would create a revenue stream for counties with a a $1-per-foot surcharge of pipeline projects. They also argued it would serve as a compromise between landowners and pipeline companies.

However, landowners didn’t agree and fought against he bill saying the law would take power out of the hands of the counties and infringe on personal property rights.

A post shared by Amanda Radke | Rancher, Speaker, Author (@amandaradke)

Carbon Pipeline Plans

The vote could have a direct impact on Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline. The company’s planned Midwest Carbon Express pipeline would be the largest in the country, spanning across 2,500 miles. It would cover several hundred miles in eastern South Dakota and is estimated to cost $8 billion.

The company said the goal is to remove carbon dioxide (CO2) from the exhaust stream of 57 ethanol plants in a five-state region in Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota and Nebraska, according to Jimmy Powell, chief operating officer for the Ames, Iowa-based company.

On June 25, the Iowa Utilities Board approved the permit for the pipeline. For construction on the pipeline to begin, permits must be secured in North Dakota and South Dakota.

Referred Law 21 was originally passed by legislators and signed by Gov. Kristi Noem (R). The law was meant to ease the path of carbon dioxide pipeline construction. But after garnering enough signatures, the law was put on the November ballot.

According to legal expert John Dillard, state governments have the primary authority to approve the siting and construction of CO2 pipelines as well as the eminent domain authority of the pipeline companies. These laws vary state-to-state, but they generally require pipeline companies to address safety and environmental concerns, provide notice to potentially impacted landowners, and minimize damage to landowner property. Some states preempt or restrict the authority of local governments to restrict pipelines while others allow zoning laws that would make construction difficult or impossible.

Your Next Reads:

Buoyed by Stronger Support from Rural America than 2016, Trump Wins Second Term as President

Denver Voters Reject Slaughterhouse Ban: Win for Animal Ag

Grains Rally on a Bullish WASDE Report