FILE - Gaylen Dewing, left, and Marvin Abraham affix a sign to a roadside fence east of Bismarck, N.D., Tuesday, Aug. 15, 2023, in opposition to Summit Carbon Solutions' proposed five-state, 2,000-mile pipeline network to carry carbon dioxide emissions from dozens of Midwestern ethanol plants to North Dakota for permanent storage deep underground. (AP Photo/Jack Dura, File)
North Dakota Republican Gov. Doug Burgum, right, and Republican state Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring, left, prepare before a meeting of the state Industrial Commission on Thursday, Dec. 12, 2024, at the state Capitol in Bismarck, N.D. (AP Photo/Jack Dura)
FILE - Gaylen Dewing, left, and Marvin Abraham affix a sign to a roadside fence east of Bismarck, N.D., Tuesday, Aug. 15, 2023, in opposition to Summit Carbon Solutions' proposed five-state, 2,000-mile pipeline network to carry carbon dioxide emissions from dozens of Midwestern ethanol plants to North Dakota for permanent storage deep underground. (AP Photo/Jack Dura, File)
North Dakota Republican Gov. Doug Burgum, right, and Republican state Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring, left, prepare before a meeting of the state Industrial Commission on Thursday, Dec. 12, 2024, at the state Capitol in Bismarck, N.D. (AP Photo/Jack Dura)
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — North Dakota regulators approved permits Thursday for underground storage of carbon dioxide delivered through a massive pipeline proposed for the Midwest, marking another victory for a project that has drawn fierce opposition from landowners.
The governor-led Industrial Commission voted unanimously to approve permits for Summit Carbon Solutions’ three proposed storage sites in central North Dakota. Summit says construction of the project would begin in 2026 with operations beginning in 2027, but it’s expected that resistant landowners will file lawsuits seeking to block the storage plans.
“With these permits, we’re one step closer to providing vital infrastructure that benefits farmers, ethanol producers, and communities across the Midwest," Summit Executive VP Wade Boeshans said in a statement.
Summit’s proposed 2,500-mile (4,023-kilometer), $8 billion pipeline planet-warming CO2 emissions from 57 ethanol plants in North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Minnesota and Nebraska for underground storage. Carbon dioxide would move through the pipeline in a pressurized form to be injected deep underground into a rock formation.
The company has permits for its route in North Dakota and Iowa but can’t yet begin construction. Also on Thursday, Minnesota regulators approved a permit for a in western Minnesota.
Summit also recently applied in South Dakota, where regulators last year.
Last month, the company gained , and Iowa regulators also have
Summit faces several lawsuits related to the project, including a North Dakota Supreme Court appeal over a property rights law related to the underground storage plan. Further court challenges are likely.
North Dakota Republican Gov. who chairs the Industrial Commission, is President-elect Donald Trump's and to lead a new Burgum has frequently touted North Dakota's underground carbon dioxide storage as a “geologic jackpot.” In 2021, he set a goal for the No. 3 oil-producing state to be carbon-neutral by 2030. His term ends Saturday.
Summit's storage facilities would hold an estimated maximum of 352 million metric tons of CO2 over 20 years. The pipeline would carry up to 18 million metric tons of CO2 per year to be injected about 1 mile (1.6 kilometers) underground, according to an application fact sheet.
Jessie Stolark, who leads a group that supports the project and includes Summit, said the oil industry has long used similar technology.
“We know that this can be done safely in a manner that is protective of human health and underground sources of drinking water,” said Stolark, executive director of the Carbon Capture Coalition.
has drawn the ire of around the region. They oppose the potential taking of their property for the pipeline and fear a releasing a cloud of heavy, gas over the land.
A North Dakota landowners group is challenging a property rights law related to the underground storage, and attorney Derrick Braaten said they likely would challenge the granting of permits.
“The landowners that I'm working with aren't necessarily opposed to carbon sequestration itself,” Braaten said. “They're opposed to the idea that a private company can come in and use their property without having to negotiate with them or pay them just compensation for taking their private property and using it.”
Carbon capture projects such as Summit's are eligible for lucrative federal tax credits intended to encourage cleaner-burning ethanol and potentially result in corn-based ethanol being
Some opponents argue the amount of greenhouse gases sequestered through the process would make little difference and could lead farmers to grow more corn despite environmental concerns about the crop.
In Minnesota, regulators granted a route permit that would connect an ethanol plant in Fergus Falls to Summit’s broader network. They attached several conditions, including requirements that Summit first begin construction in North Dakota.
An administrative law judge who conducted hearings concluded in November that the environmental impacts from the Minnesota segment would be minimal and noted that Summit has secured agreements from landowners along most of the recommended route.
Environmental groups that oppose the project disputed the judge’s finding that the project would have a net benefit for the environment.
Iowa regulators required Summit to obtain approvals for routes in the Dakotas and underground storage in North Dakota before it can begin construction in Iowa. The Iowa Utilities Commission's approval sparked lawsuits related to the project.
In Nebraska, where there is no state regulatory process for CO2 pipelines, Summit is working with individual counties to advance its project. At least one county has denied a permit.
