Approval of an amended Brown County ordinance governing most pipelines was tabled to gather more information.
That action was taken during the regular commission meeting on Thursday, April, 6 at the Brown County Courthouse, largely at the request of those who want to see a carbon sequestration pipeline stretch into the county.
The prime issue is whether a proposed setback requirement of 1,500 feet would allow Summit Carbon Solution’s proposed pipeline to reach the Glacial Lakes Ethanol plant on the western edge of Aberdeen given the development and properties it would have to navigate.
MORE:Â 1st reading of Brown County pipeline ordinance OK’d
Commissioners approved first reading of the amended ordinance last week after modest discussion. But they tabled possible final approval until April 25.
Proponents and opponents debated the issue for two hours during Tuesday’s meeting.
Summit has plans to build a 2,000-mile pipeline through the Dakotas, Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska. It would carry carbon dioxide emissions from ethanol plants in those states that would be stored underground in western North Dakota. The estimated cost is $4.5 billion.
Carbon dioxide pipeline critical to future of local ethanol plants
Jim Seuer, chief executive officer of Watertown-Based Glacial Lakes Energy, said that he doesn’t see a way the company’s Aberdeen ethanol plant can be connected to the main part of the carbon dioxide pipeline with 1,500-foot setbacks.
Glacial Lakes needs to be able to meet demands from West Coast states and Canada that require lower carbon intensity scores in ethanol, he said.
That’s where the pipeline comes in. It would capture carbon emissions, thereby lowering the carbon intensity score.
If that doesn’t happen, Seuer said, Glacial Lakes will have to make some difficult and unpopular decisions.
Concerns of Brown County landowners have not subsided
Many Brown County landowners, though, aren’t convinced the pipeline will be safe and/or just don’t want it on their property.
Jerry Streckfuss spoke against the pipeline. He said Summit cannot offer enough compensation to landowners to offset the potential damage the pipeline could do.
“What you’re trying to buy is not for sale,” he said.
Streckfuss also questioned whether the proposed ordinance amounted to Brown County giving up states’ rights.
But Ernest Thompson, Brown County state’s attorney, ended that line of questioning when he said the meeting was not going to turn into constitutional debate.
Proposed pipeline ordinance has been in the works for months
Brown County, particularly planning and zoning officials and members of that board, have been working for months on adjusting the ordinance. They considered setbacks of 500, 1,000 and 1,500 feet before deciding 1,500 was the most reasonable, based on all they had learned.
The proposal covers what Brown County can control and does not extend to items like how deep pipelines need to be buried, for instance, Thompson said. That’s a federal issue.
“If we can’t defend an ordinance (in court), then we wind up with nothing,” said Ross Aldentaler, deputy Brown County state’s attorney.
A court isn’t going to pick and choose which parts of the ordinance are appropriate, it’s just going to strike down the entire thing if it’s problematic, he said.
While pipeline opponents raised concerns about decreased property values and restricted future economic development because of the pipeline, Seuer talked about how important ethanol plants are to Brown County and the need for that to continue into the future.
In the past two and a half years, he said, ethanol plants in the Aberdeen area have spent $2.5 billion buying corn.
Summit Carbon Solutions chimes in
The group catching most of the flack from local landowners is Summit Carbon Solutions, which is working on finding a route into Brown County.
Aaron Eldridge with Summit said homes and businesses are built near natural gas and oil product pipelines and many of the property owners don’t even realize it. Those other types of pipelines have not hindered economic development, he said.
Eldridge echoed Seuer’s concerns about being able to get to the Aberdeen ethanol plant with 1,500-foot setbacks.
Opponents, though, don’t think the county should budge.
Jared Bossley owns land along the proposed pipeline route in Brown County. He said Summit has been awful to deal with. And he doesn’t care about California’s ethanol requirements, he said, because local concerns should take precedence.
The amended ordinance would not affect natural gas or water pipelines.
Pipeline easements in Brown County have been difficult to attain
Gathering voluntary easements in Brown County has been a challenge, Dana Siefkies-Lewis, Summit’s director of public affairs, admitted, adding that the company can do better.
Numbers she shared about the percentage of voluntary easements attained for the line reveal the resistance in Brown and McPherson counties.
- Brown County: 28%
- McPherson County: 28%
- South Dakota: 66%
- Along the entire proposed pipeline route: 68%
Eldridge said Summit looked at different options to get to the Glacial Lake’s plant in Aberdeen. He said about 3,500 route changes have been made across the five states, including 850 in South Dakota.
MORE: PUC allows Navigator pipeline application, sets Nov. 15 for Summit decision
But, he said, sometimes resistance can be so strong, there’s no need to continue negotiations.
Eldridge said he doesn’t think the pipeline is within 250 feet of any home, business or school along the entire route. But when pressed for what would be a reasonable distance, he didn’t have one, which was aggravating to some others at the meeting.
Specificity about pipeline setbacks sought from Summit
Summit just wants an “open book” when it comes to easements so it can run the line wherever it wants, said Craig Schaunaman, who urged the commission to keep the 1,500-foot setbacks.
Commissioner Doug Fjeldheim also asked for some specificity. And Commissioner Mike Gage wondered if there is a ballpark number Summit would be agreeable to for setbacks, but got no answer.
MORE:Â Planned event center seeks Brown County liquor license
Gage also noted that Summit and Glacial Lakes showed up at the last possible moment — for the second reading and possible final approval — of the amended pipeline ordinance when there have been opportunities to attend planning and zoning meetings for months.
Still, he said, if there is more to hear, he is open to that information. Commissioner Mike Wiese echoed that the proposal now is based on the best information the county has, but said there might be more to learn.
Next steps include meetings on April 18, 25
So final approval was tabled, and the topic will be discussed at the next planning and zoning meeting at 7 p.m. April 18 in the basement of the Brown County Courthouse Annex. Possible final approval is set for the commission’s April 25 meeting, which will start at 8:45 a.m.
Commissioners told Summit officials and Seuer to bring any relevant information about adjusting setbacks to the April 18 planning and zoning meeting.
MORE:Â Judge asks for written arguments on whether Summit is a ‘common carrier’
Siefkies-Lewis and Seuer said they would do that, and Seuer apologized for not being involved in the process earlier.
Representatives from Navigator CO2 said they would also be at the April 18 meeting. Navigator is planning a similar project called Heartland Greenway that will run through South Dakota. Hopes are that it will eventually tap into the POET ethanol plant near Groton, but no local route has been set, said a Navigator spokeswoman who was following the meeting on the phone.
The battle between Summit and landowners opposed to the project has been ongoing since the C02 pipeline project was announced and has resulted in lawsuits and countersuits that remain unresolved.
Before any work can be done on the pipeline in the state, it would need the approval of the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission.