S-N Editorial

Property owners in northwest Iowa have been subjected to a tsunami of information this fall about a "new" kind of pipeline that would cut through many miles of farmland in the region. While these carbon dioxide pipelines have been around for a while, they're certainly new to us here and pose many questions.

Two have been proposed so far. Both Summit Carbon Solutions' project and Navigator CO2 Ventures' pipeline would cut through O'Brien and Clay counties, with Navigator's intersecting with itself near Hartley. In all, O'Brien County would have 97.05 miles of pipe running through it while Clay County would have 76.21. Both projects are hoping to break ground within a year or two.

Many folks may wonder what the heck a pipeline like this even does. In these two cases, the infrastructure will transport liquid CO2 to North Dakota and Illinois for underground storage. CO2 will be captured at participating ethanol and fertilizer plants, compressed into liquid form and placed on the line. Once at the sequestration sites in North Dakota and Illinois, it will be piped underground. Unique geologic formations there will allow the CO2 to be stored for generations and eventually solidify.

The overall goal of these pipelines is to make participating facilities more "green." CO2 is a greenhouse gas and significantly contributes to global warming. By slashing emissions, ethanol and fertilizer plants would lessen their impact on the climate and make their products more sustainable longterm. Representatives pushing these pipelines will tell you this benefits farmers – the infrastructure is an investment in the future viability of ethanol because it will make it a more a marketable alternative product as the world shifts away from fossil fuels. In short, these pipelines will help create a stable ethanol market that will benefit corn growers for decades to come.

This all sounds swell, but like anything, these pipelines aren't perfect.

For starters, both Navigator and Summit will need land use easements from property owners along the route. Beyond that, eminent domain procedures would be utilized if the Iowa Utilities Board grants the projects public use status. Construction will result in soil compaction, crop yield loss and tile damage. While the ground above the buried pipeline can still be used to grow crops and graze cattle, future land development will be prohibited. Sure, the companies will compensate property owners for yield loss and tile damage over a set period of time, but what about issues that extend beyond that?

It was noted at a meeting in O'Brien County that recent dry spells have rendered some field tiles unused during the growing season. If damage were to occur during construction of a pipeline, the farmer may not know about it until two or three years later when precipitation picks up. Are the companies still on the hook to repair it then? Answers were vague and amounted to, "We'll work with you." To many in attendance, that meant, "Get a good lawyer."

Safety is also a monumental concern with these pipelines. Carbon dioxide is an asphyxiant. If a line, which is transporting liquid CO2 under immense pressure, were to burst near a farmhouse or populated area, the immediate repercussions could be immense. Conversely, the longterm environmental consequences of such an incident would be marginal – all CO2 that escapes the pipeline would dissipate into the atmosphere. The land would still be farmable and cleanup would be slim to none. The companies have said they plan to go above and beyond existing safety thresholds with redundancies and monitoring, and those who reside close to the route can only hope that's the case.

Large-scale infrastructure projects like these are never grand slams. They come at a cost, whether that's dollars and cents to the companies building them or long-term damage and decreased land values for the affected property owner. As it stands, these pipelines could seemingly benefit farmers via future ethanol market stability, but it remains to be seen if the long-term gain is worth the short-term pain. Certainly, more thorough answers, revised routes and stronger guarantees from the companies behind these projects are needed to quell fears and soothe tensions. After all, this land is peoples' livelihoods.