South Dakota panel rejects permit for an $8.9 billion carbon capture Midwest pipeline

A wagon covered in signs protesting the installation of a Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline stands on a farm in Lake County, S.D., on Monday, March 10, 2025, in one of the counties that the pipeline would cut through. Photo by Nicole Neri /AP

Article content

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) — The massive carbon capture pipeline in the Midwest has been thrown into uncertainty after South Dakota’s Public Utility Commission denied its route permit application Tuesday.

Article content

Article content

The commission voted 2-1 to deny the application by Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions, with Commissioner Kristie Fiegen saying it was “incomplete” and lacked “the form and content required.”

Article content

Article content

South Dakota lawmakers passed an eminent domain ban for carbon capture pipelines in March that makes Summit’s planned route difficult, commissioners agreed. Summit said it will refile its application with a reduced route in South Dakota to satisfy landowners and plant partners.

Article content

Article content

“While we are disappointed in today’s decision, we remain committed to South Dakota as without it the ethanol industry, farmers, and land values in the state will all suffer,” the company said in a statement.

Article content

South Dakota is a crucial part of the 2,500-mile pipeline, which would transport carbon emissions from ethanol plants in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota to be stored underground permanently in North Dakota.

Article content

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. AP’s earlier story follows below.

Article content

The company behind a planned $8.9 billion carbon capture pipeline in the Midwest has proposed reducing its route through South Dakota to secure the necessary permitting.

Article content

In a filing with the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission on Friday, Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions requested a timeline extension on its permit application to rework its route in a way that would satisfy landowners. The commission is expected to decide on this extension request during its meeting Tuesday afternoon.

Article content

Article content

Questions about the pipeline arose after South Dakota lawmakers approved a ban on eminent domain for carbon capture projects, in which the government can seize private property with compensation. Without that power, Summit would need to secure voluntary agreements with landowners along the South Dakota route.

Article content

Instead of pursuing legal action against the state, Summit said in its filing that additional time would allow it to “roll out new offers to landowners” and identify which branches to ethanol plants it can eliminate that face significant landowner opposition.

Article content

“The Applicant believes threatening legal action is counter-productive to attempting to do good-faith business with the state,” Summit attorney Brett Koenecke wrote in the filing. “Instead, the Applicant intends to make significant efforts and undertake several tasks in the coming weeks and months to advance the project and prepare to proceed with a new scheduling order.”

Article content

South Dakota is a crucial part of the 2,500-mile pipeline, which would carry carbon emissions from ethanol plants in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota to be stored underground permanently in North Dakota. The project already has approvals in Iowa, Minnesota and North Dakota, and Summit has invested more than $150 million into its route in South Dakota.

Article content

The ethanol industry is concentrated in the Midwest, with nearly 40% of the nation’s corn used to brew ethanol. Summit’s pipeline promises to lower the carbon intensity of ethanol to make it more competitive as a sustainable product.

Article content