A sign lists the names of South Dakota’s three elected public utility commissioners outside their offices in Pierre in January 2023. (Photo by Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight)
A company proposing a carbon dioxide pipeline must impose conditions on its potential permit after failing to address concerns about crossings with a crude oil pipeline, the company operating the oil pipeline said.
Dakota Access LLC, which is controlled by Energy Transfer, operates the Dakota Access Pipeline. It transports crude oil 1,100 miles (1,872 kilometers) from North Dakota to Illinois.
Summit Carbon Solutions plans a 2,500-mile pipeline to capture carbon dioxide from 57 ethanol plants in five states and transport it to North Dakota for underground storage. The project would capitalize on federal tax credits that incentivize the prevention of heat-trapping carbon emissions.
The routes of the existing and proposed pipeline cross eastern South Dakota. Summit recently reapplied for a permit after being denied by the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission last year.
In a new filing with the commission, Dakota Access said Summit has not provided sufficient details — such as maps, depths and safety measures — about the proposed crossings of the Dakota Access Pipeline, known by the acronym DAPL.
“Summit has largely refused to engage with Dakota Access regarding pipeline crossing agreements and necessary mitigation measures to prevent damage to DAPL,” Dakota Access attorneys wrote.
To address concerns, Dakota Access asked for 12 conditions if Summit is granted a permit. The conditions include banning heavy equipment or vehicles from operating directly on DAPL’s right-of-way without protective measures, requiring an abrasion-resistant coating to be applied to the carbon pipeline at intersections, and requiring Summit to inspect all intersection locations in the monitors and informs Dakota Access. at least 48 hours prior to any construction activity near DAPL’s right-of-way in South Dakota.
Alternatively, Dakota Access has asked state regulators to delay Summit’s permitting process until mutual terms are agreed upon.
Summit Carbon Solutions did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Brian Jorde, an attorney for landowners opposing the carbon pipeline, said in a news release that Summit’s inability to work with Dakota Access is problematic.
“The theme is clear in South Dakota and across the region – Summit doesn’t respect the law, they don’t respect the will of the people, and they think they can impose themselves in and through South Dakota,” Jorde said.
Summit already has permits in Iowa and North Dakota. A decision is pending in Minnesota, and Nebraska does not have a state that would allow carbon pipeline processing.
This story was originally published by South Dakota Searchlight, part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. South Dakota Searchlight maintains editorial independence. If you have any questions, please contact editor Seth Tupper: info@southdakotasearchlight.com. Follow South Dakota Searchlight on Facebook and X.
