South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden recently signed a bill that prohibits the use of eminent domain by companies seeking to build carbon pipelines, targeting the Midwest Carbon Express project by Summit Carbon Solutions. While South Dakota has passed this anti-eminent domain bill, similar legislation in North Dakota failed to advance in the House and Senate.
Despite anti-pipeline activists viewing this legislation as a blow to Summit’s project, the company already had 85% of the pipeline route secured through voluntary easements. South Dakota has seen a rise in anti-carbon pipeline sentiment, influenced by a populist insurgency that impacted incumbent Republican lawmakers in the state’s primaries.
In contrast, North Dakota, being a significant oil and gas producer with an extensive pipeline network, has deeper economic interests in carbon capture and infrastructure. The state’s familiarity and economic reliance on pipelines make it less susceptible to anti-carbon capture sentiment compared to South Dakota.
The differences in pipeline sentiments between the two states can be attributed to electoral politics, economic factors, and cultural familiarity with pipelines. While South Dakota can afford to indulge in anti-carbon capture sentiment due to its less significant reliance on oil, gas, and coal industries, North Dakota’s economic interests push it in the opposite direction. Time will tell how this divergence in pipeline politics continues to shape the Midwest region.
Note: The image is for illustrative purposes only and is not the original image associated with the presented article. Due to copyright reasons, we are unable to use the original images. However, you can still enjoy the accurate and up-to-date content and information provided.
