{"id":697652,"date":"2022-06-13T10:30:00","date_gmt":"2022-06-13T10:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/grist.org\/?p=572985"},"modified":"2022-06-13T10:30:00","modified_gmt":"2022-06-13T10:30:00","slug":"across-the-midwest-an-unlikely-alliance-forms-to-stop-carbon-pipelines","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/2022\/06\/13\/across-the-midwest-an-unlikely-alliance-forms-to-stop-carbon-pipelines\/","title":{"rendered":"Across the Midwest, an \u2018unlikely alliance\u2019 forms to stop carbon pipelines"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Last fall, a company called Summit Carbon Solutions started holding meetings in towns around the Midwest. Its goal was to introduce residents to a 2,000-mile, $4.5 billion pipeline called the Midwest Carbon Express<\/a>, which would carry carbon dioxide from ethanol refineries in Iowa to North Dakota, where the gas would be injected underground rather than released into the atmosphere. Ultimately, Summit hoped landowners would sign contracts called \u201cvoluntary easements,\u201d allowing the company to bury its pipeline on their property.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While hundreds signed up immediately, others were more cautious, hoping for more information or a better price. Now, those holdouts are facing another prospect: the use of eminent domain, the legal tool that allows the seizure of private land for public good. It\u2019s a tactic that\u2019s long been tapped for other pipeline projects in the Midwest, and Summit has filed preliminary permits<\/a> that could allow the company to request permission to use eminent domain in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That doesn\u2019t sit well with many landowners along the pipeline\u2019s route. In town hall meetings<\/a> and public hearings<\/a> over the past few months, a growing number of people have come out against the proposal and potential legal tactic, complicating Summit\u2019s plans to build the largest carbon dioxide pipeline network in the country. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Opposition to the project \u2013 and other recently proposed carbon pipelines \u2013 is nothing new. Residents and activists have raised concerns about safety hazards<\/a>, a sentiment echoed in May<\/a> by the Biden administration. Environmental groups, meanwhile, have pointed out the dubious climate benefits<\/a> of carbon pipelines and resulting carbon capture and storage, or CCS, saying it will lock in additional fossil fuel use and divert resources from the transition to renewable energy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Iowa
Landowners and activists gather on the steps of the Iowa Statehouse on April 19, calling for passage of legislation to ban eminent domain for carbon pipelines. Courtesy of John Aspray, Food & Water Watch<\/cite><\/figcaption><\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

But eminent domain has become an issue around which an \u201cunlikely alliance\u201d of farmers, ranchers, Indigenous tribes, scientists, and environmentalists have rallied, said Mahmud Fitil, an organizer with the Great Plains Action Society, an Indigenous activist network. The legal tactic was used to complete previous oil pipeline projects like the Dakota Access Pipeline, which \u201cleft a bad taste in a lot of people\u2019s mouths,\u201d Fitil said. Now, rural conservatives and environmental groups are fighting the same battle against carbon pipelines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cYou would never find these groups of people gathering together for any reason,\u201d Fitil told Grist. \u201cAnd they’re coming together in opposition to this carbon pipeline.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Eminent domain is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, allowing governments to seize private property as long as they compensate the owners. In states like Iowa, this right extends to private companies, too. Although it\u2019s historically been used to construct infrastructure like highways<\/a> and natural gas lines, some environmental advocates believe eminent domain could be an important tool<\/a> in the renewable energy transition, allowing electric transmission lines to be built quickly to transport solar, wind, and hydropower energy across the country. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Using it, though, requires utilities and private companies to prove that a project is in the \u201cpublic interest\u201d \u2014 and many people in the Midwest don\u2019t feel that carbon pipelines fit that description, said Don Kass, a farmer and chairman of the Plymouth County Board of Supervisors in northwest Iowa. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI do not consider this to be a public utility \u2026 [just] because somebody’s making money on it, and people see that there’s some advantage,\u201d Kass said. He\u2019s not against pipelines in general, but believes it should be up to each individual landowner to decide whether to sell their land or not for the price that they\u2019re being offered. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although carbon pipelines would cross multiple states, the greatest concerns about eminent domain have so far come from Iowa, where three pipeline companies<\/a> announced projects last year that would collect carbon dioxide from ethanol plants around the state. But strong relationships between politicians, lobbyists, and pipeline companies have made fighting the projects an uphill battle, organizers say. A bill that would have prevented the state from granting eminent domain rights to private projects like carbon pipelines stalled in the Iowa legislature earlier this year, despite bipartisan support<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\n Read Next<\/span>\n
\n \n
\n \"A\n <\/figure>\n
\n
\n CO2 pipelines are coming. A pipeline safety expert says we\u2019re not ready.<\/a>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n
\n Emily Pontecorvo<\/a> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/article>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

In response to these legislative setbacks, organizers have taken a more grassroots approach. According to Food and Water Watch, a national nonprofit that\u2019s organizing against the carbon pipelines, 32 out of 52 counties that would be impacted by the proposed pipeline projects have filed objections with the Iowa Utilities Board. The board will ultimately decide whether to grant Summit and the other companies, Navigator Ventures and Wolf Carbon Solutions, a permit to use eminent domain. (So far, only Summit and Navigator have applied for permits with the board, and none have officially requested to use eminent domain).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The groups rallying behind their opposition to eminent domain all have different reasonings, said Emma Schmit, a senior organizer for the Iowa chapter of Food & Water Watch. Some worry about the pipelines\u2019 impact on climate change and the environment as well as potential safety hazards, and think fighting eminent domain will prevent the projects from being built. Rural conservatives, meanwhile, believe in the right to protect their private property. \u201cThey don’t want to be seeing these private corporations, Wall Street-backed industry, taking our land for their own use,\u201d Schmit said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Landowners in Iowa also remember their previous experiences with the Dakota Access Pipeline. The project was completed in 2017 despite pushback from farmers, who worried about the impact its construction would have on agriculture. Their concerns were validated earlier this year: A study from Iowa State University found that crews building the pipeline compacted the soil so much that crop yields along its route<\/a> dropped by as much as 25 percent. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cDuring our first meeting on this issue, we made a point to say that we’re all affected by this, we all have different reasons for caring about this issue,\u201d Schmit said. \u201cBut no matter what your view on this is, we can all agree that it’s bad, and we have to stop it. And we can only stop it when we come together.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This diversity of viewpoints can sometimes cause friction. The property rights argument can be \u201ccontroversial,\u201d Fitil said, \u201cparticularly amongst Indigenous people, given that all the land is stolen in this nation from the rightful owners, the Indigenous folks that made this land home long before European contact.\u201d But organizers nevertheless felt it was important to have a unified strategy, and have managed to convince some Indigenous leaders to join in their opposition. Schmit said the failure to bring landowners, tribes, and environmentalists together was one of the reasons they lost the fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Ethanol
An ethanol refinery in Chancellor, South Dakota. Proposed carbon pipelines would connect ethanol producers across the Midwest to underground carbon dioxide storage sites in North Dakota.\n AP Photo\/Stephen Groves<\/cite><\/figcaption><\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Proponents of the CO2 pipelines have made the case that the projects will support Iowa\u2019s powerful ethanol industry<\/a>, which buys 57 percent of the state\u2019s corn and produces 27 percent of the country\u2019s ethanol. Companies also have a financial incentive to sequester carbon thanks to federal tax credits like 45Q \u2014 which Mother Jones estimated<\/a> would earn Summit $7.2 billion over 12 years \u2014 and state programs like California\u2019s Low Carbon Fuel Standard, which allows ethanol plants and carbon pipeline companies to sell the carbon they\u2019re saving as credits to polluters. The federal government has also supported carbon capture<\/a> as a way to reduce carbon emissions, while Congress established a low-interest loan program<\/a> for CO2 pipelines last year. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Summit told Grist its priority is getting landowners to sign voluntary easements, rather than using eminent domain. About 30 percent of landowners along the proposed Midwest Carbon Express route have already made deals with the company. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cOpposition groups continue to raise this topic in order to distract from the fact that they want to eliminate the ethanol industry and undermine production agriculture,\u201d Summit said in a statement through a spokesperson. \u201cFundamentally, the Summit Carbon Solutions project comes down to the future of these two industries, which are both so critical to our economy.\u201d The other two pipeline companies with proposed projects in Iowa, Navigator Ventures and Wolf Carbon Solutions, did not respond to requests for comment from Grist. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Schmit said this early in the process, activists are still \u201cthrowing everything possible at the wall\u201d and seeing what sticks. Organizers have hung banners off of freeway overpasses, rallied in front of the Iowa State Capitol, set up billboards in rural areas, and held meetings in communities where pipelines are expected to cross. Reaching residents along the pipeline\u2019s proposed route has been difficult, though, because Summit has sued to stop the Iowa Utilities Board<\/a> from releasing the full list of landowners that will be potentially impacted by the project, said Wally Taylor, an attorney for the Sierra Club in Iowa.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Taylor emphasized that even if eminent domain is granted, landowners can still band together at the county level and demand concessions from the company, including greater compensation \u2014 which might ultimately discourage the pipelines from being built. After the Iowa Utilities Board granted a permit allowing the Dakota Access Pipeline to use eminent domain, he said, many people gave up and granted voluntary easements. Activists said they have learned from that mistake. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThey said, \u2018Well, there\u2019s nothing we could do, we’ll just go ahead and take our money,\u2019\u201d Taylor said. \u201cBut we’re really trying to convince the landowners that if they hold out, they can stop this.\u201d <\/p>\n

This story was originally published by Grist<\/a> with the headline Across the Midwest, an ‘unlikely alliance’ forms to stop carbon pipelines<\/a> on Jun 13, 2022.<\/p>\n

This post was originally published on Grist<\/a>. <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Farmers, tribes, and environmentalists have rallied against the potential use of eminent domain to build the Midwest Carbon Express.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5641,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[109,14,1156],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/697652"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5641"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=697652"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/697652\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":698238,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/697652\/revisions\/698238"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=697652"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=697652"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=697652"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}