2024-04-23 02:16:22
By JEFF BEACH (North Dakota Monitor)
Summit Executive Vice President Wade Boeshans mentioned that Summit Carbon Solutions pays more than $14 million annually for electricity to operate its carbon capture and storage project as an economic benefit to North Dakota, but SuAnn Olson has a had a different reaction.
“Where is this power going to come from?” asked Olson, a state representative who lives near the carbon pipeline route north of Bismarck. “We are very quickly getting to a time when the power supply is not going to keep up.”
Witnesses testifying on Earth Day advocating the Summit Carbon Solutions carbon capture pipeline emphasized economic benefits to North Dakota, and made little mention of environmental benefits as a second round of Public Service Commission hearings on the pipeline began Monday in Mandan .
The PSC denied Summit a pipeline route permit last year. The three-person PSC agreed to allow a rehearing of Summit’s application, giving Summit the chance to address deficiencies cited in the permit denial – including changing the route around Bismarck.
To open the hearing, Administrative Law Judge Hope Hogan outlined that the hearings must show that the project will have minimal adverse effects on the environment and people of North Dakota and be a good use of resources.
The summit discussion began with Dan Pickering of Pickering Energy Partners in Houston touting the potential economic benefits for North Dakota.
“There is a potential to at least support, if not increase, the price of corn, which will then trickle down to farmers here in the state of North Dakota,” Pickering said.
Tharaldson Ethanol is so far the only North Dakota ethanol plant signed on to the project, which will capture carbon emissions from 57 ethanol plants in five states.
Boeshans van Bismarck noted that about half of the corn in North Dakota is sold to ethanol plants. Tharaldson Ethanol, near Casselton, buys 15% to 20% of the crop, he said.
Summit’s plan is to store the carbon underground northwest of Bismarck, but Pickering testified about potential industrial uses of carbon dioxide, including enhanced oil recovery in North Dakota, the nation’s No. 3 oil-producing state.
“With a carbon infrastructure potentially developing in North Dakota, more carbon coming into the state creates more opportunities for the energy business to improve their recovery,” Pickering said.
Bismarck area landowners
Summit shifted its route to give a wider berth to the city of Bismarck. The original route drew objections from property developers and others because it was too close to the city.
As public testimony began, residents near Baldwin, north of Bismarck, testified that they were concerned about the pipeline running near, but not across, their property.
“I see nothing but cost to North Dakota,” Lynette Dunbar said.
She cited the potential for rising electric rates and how a leak or rupture could affect her family and livestock.
Karl Rakow of Bismarck noted the 2022 rupture of a CO2 pipeline in Satartia, Mississippi, which sickened dozens of people. He said the plume from the rupture drifted 16 miles and the pipeline is about nine miles north of Bismarck.
Council members said in written testimony that they are considering allowing the pipeline to cross the Missouri River south of Bismarck on its way to a carbon storage area northwest of Bismarck.
No southern route
Chief Operating Office Jimmy Powell said possible routes include the Dakota Access pipeline corridor, but he said the company could not find a viable route.
Powell noted environmental and cultural constraints on a southern route and “the impact on tribal lands in the area south of Bismarck.”
Added in miles north of Bismarck, Powell said about 42% of the trail was acquired through voluntary service delivery.
Overall in North Dakota, 81% of the pipeline miles were acquired through voluntary service delivery and 79% of the landowners agreed to allow the pipeline through their land.
Without a voluntary easement, Summit can use eminent domain, a legal process to force landowners to provide rights-of-way. Potential use of eminent domain has been a major point of protest for pipeline opponents.
Economy, safety
State Rep. Mike Brandenburg, R-Edgeley, said there are about 113 miles of pipeline that will run through his district. He is also a corn farmer and said he has become convinced that North Dakota agriculture needs the pipeline.
Brandenburg noted that Canada, a major export market for U.S. ethanol, has adopted a low-carbon fuel standard that will make it difficult for North Dakota ethanol producers to sell into that market.
“Some people want nothing to do with it and that’s their right,” Brandenburg said.
Ken Huber of Bismarck replied to Brandenburg, “We are not willing to give up our safety for the price of corn.”
The PSC has reserved a room at the Baymont Inn in Mandan for the entire week, but it appears that will be sold out in one day.
There will also be hearings May 24 in Wahpeton and June 4 in Linton.
1713840878
#Summit #highlights #economic #benefits #carbon #pipeline #secondchance #permit