State leaders intervene after billion-dollar company's secretive push comes to light: 'Our project moves forward'

According to the Watertown Public Opinion, South Dakota has just passed a bill that stops big corporations from enacting eminent domain to complete carbon dioxide projects.

This issue has been raised to oppose an upcoming pipeline that aims to deliver carbon dioxide from over 50 ethanol plants across five states to an underground storage facility in North Dakota. This $9 billion project is being led by Summit Carbon Solutions, a company that had filed some 80 lawsuits against landowners who refused to cooperate.

Ethanol is a popular fuel made from corn in the United States. It produces roughly 52% less pollution than gasoline and is routinely mixed with gasoline for consumer use. Start-ups have been keen to use ethanol to reduce pollution in trucking and aviation. Capturing and sequestering carbon made during production further improves ethanol's eco-friendliness.

Eminent domain is a legal mechanism by which owners can be forced to sell a portion of their land at fair market value if the land is going to be used in projects that support the public good. One could argue that sequestering carbon is for the public good, making it viable for eminent domain claims.

The new South Dakota law could slow or prevent the development of electrical infrastructure, oil pipelines, and highways. Supporters of the ban suggested the carbon dioxide produced alongside ethanol be used in fracking closer to their source in order to access more fossil fuels.

The state's move could be interpreted as Republican lawmakers hobbling sustainable alternative energy sources under the guise of protecting landowner rights. This would be especially true if exceptions are made to enable new oil and methane pipelines in the future.

Watch now: CEO reveals form of energy that has 'polled across political lines' for over a decade

CEO reveals form of energy that has 'polled across political lines' for over a decade

0 seconds of 1 minute, 29 secondsVolume 0%

00:00

01:29

Some environmentalists are on board, too. They have argued that carbon capture is an ineffective climate solution primarily used to enable fracking and also offered their support to the ban.

Summit remained undeterred from moving forward with its business.

"While this presents obstacles, our project moves forward in states that support investment and innovation, and we will have more news on that soon," it said in response to the law's passing.

Should the government ban gas stoves?

Yes