A South Dakota House committee is advancing a bill to ban the use of eminent domain for liquid carbon dioxide pipelines.
The bill is one sentence long and has a lot of support behind it.
Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, a person may not exercise the right of eminent domain to acquire right-of-way for, construct, or operate a pipeline for the preponderant purpose of transporting carbon oxide.
The South Dakota Supreme Court has ruled liquid carbon pipeline companies have not proved they are a common carrier — which is required to secure eminent domain.
Rep. Karla Lems, R-Canton, is the primary backer of the legislation. She said the state Legislature is using its authority to say who can use eminent domain.
“Over 160 landowners in the state have been sued for something that many, many people realize this is not a public use and should not have eminent domain in the state," Lems said after the bill hearing. "So, we’re just enshrining that today and hopefully it will get to become law and we’re protecting the people of South Dakota.”
A similar bill died last session in the Republican-controlled Legislature. Lawmakers passed a contentious bill last year regulating pipeline permitting. Several who voted for the law were primaried and lost their legislative seat. Then, in November, voters rejected the law.
Opponents worry it could negatively affect future economic growth and corn prices.
Two-thirds of the state’s corn goes to ethanol. About ninety percent of the ethanol produced in South Dakota is exported.
Some view the liquid carbon dioxide pipeline as crucial to securing low carbon scores — ensuring ethanol’s viability into the future.
Summit has reapplied for its permit to transport liquid carbon dioxide across the state. The company testified against the bill, but officials with the company did not immediately respond to whether this would affect its new proposed route.
The bill passed 10 to 3. The eminent domain prohibition now heads to the House floor.
