By Scout Nelson
The start of a new legislative session in South Dakota has reignited discussions around landowner rights and carbon pipeline projects. Concerns have been voiced by landowners regarding a proposed large-scale carbon capture initiative by Summit Carbon Solutions. This project aims to transport emissions from ethanol plants across multiple states via a pipeline.
A significant development occurred Monday when a coalition of landowners rallied to urge the Legislature to pass a bill prohibiting the use of eminent domain for such pipeline projects. This legislative push seeks to ensure that landowners have the final say in whether such projects can cross their property, thus protecting their rights without outright stopping the pipeline's construction.
Amanda Radke, a vocal advocate for landowner rights from Mitchell, has been at the forefront of this debate. She argues that while the pipeline itself isn't opposed, the method of securing land for it—particularly through eminent domain—raises significant concerns. Radke’s stance is that landowners should have the power to consent to projects that affect their property.
The issue of eminent domain has been contentious, with the state Supreme Court recently ruling that Summit does not have the authority to forcibly acquire land for the pipeline route. This decision followed a voter repeal last fall of a law that had favored the pipeline project.
Environmental concerns also play a role in the opposition. While Summit promotes the pipeline as a job creator and a means to reduce emissions, skeptics question some of these benefits. Additionally, Radke and other landowner’s express safety concerns about potential hazards, such as leaks or ruptures of the pipeline, which would carry colorless and odorless gases.
Summit has responded by highlighting safety measures, including advanced leak-detection technologies at their control centers. As the debate continues, South Dakota regulators are set to hold public hearings on wednesday to review a new permit application by Summit, following the initial rejection of their proposal.
This ongoing saga reflects a broader tension between economic development initiatives and the preservation of landowner rights, a pivotal issue that continues to shape South Dakota’s legislative and environmental landscape.
Photo Credits:gettyimages-mrdoomits
Categories: South Dakota, Energy, General