(From Todd Epp, Northern Plains News)
South Dakota is at the center of a growing national clash over carbon dioxide pipelines, with state officials taking aggressive action even as the federal government—and former President Donald Trump—remain publicly disengaged from the specific pipeline disputes.
In March 2025, Gov. Larry Rhoden signed House Bill 1052 into law, banning the use of eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines.
“This legislation is about protecting landowners and property rights,” Rhoden said during the signing at the Capitol. “This does not end the debate, but it ensures South Dakotans—not out-of-state developers or federal regulators—decide what happens to our land.”
The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission denied permit applications from Summit Carbon Solutions in 2023 and again in April 2025. Regulators cited unresolved conflicts with local zoning ordinances, continuing landowner objections, and legal uncertainty created by the new eminent domain statute. These findings are documented in PUC Docket HP22-001.
In February, the Legislature passed House Concurrent Resolution 6004, which urged federal authorities—including the President—not to override state pipeline decisions through federal eminent domain authority. The resolution is recorded in the South Dakota Legislature’s 2025 session archives.
Federal Override Proposal Withdrawn After Pushback
A proposed federal measure that would have allowed interstate carbon and natural gas pipelines to bypass state restrictions was removed from the House’s budget reconciliation package before the bill’s passage on May 22, 2025. Though the exact language was not debated in open session, multiple landowner and agricultural groups submitted written objections to Congressional offices, citing state sovereignty and property rights.
While the override language was removed, other federal incentives remain. Section 45Q of the Internal Revenue Code continues to offer tax credits of up to $50 per metric ton of stored carbon dioxide. The IRS administers the credit, which remains a key funding mechanism for carbon capture and sequestration projects, such as Summit’s.
Another provision in current federal law allows natural gas pipeline developers to pay a $10 million fee to receive an expedited environmental review within one year. While this provision does not apply to Summit’s project, which targets carbon dioxide pipelines and ethanol plants, it indicates continued federal efforts to streamline pipeline permitting.
Recent Regional Actions: Reynolds Vetoes Anti-Carbon Bill, Thune Reassures South Dakota Legislators
Yet, despite mounting regional tension and calls for clarity, former President Donald Trump remains publicly silent on Summit’s pipeline project and South Dakota’s legal pushback. While his administration has endorsed carbon capture in broad strokes, Trump has made no public statement on the state-level opposition—or on whether he would support federal preemption. This silence stands in contrast to his vocal backing of oil and gas pipelines during his first term.
Meanwhile, U.S. Sen. John Thune reportedly assured anti-pipeline legislators in South Dakota that the federal government is unlikely to override the state’s eminent domain restrictions. According to The Dakota Scout, Thune emphasized that Washington had ‘little appetite’ for federal intervention in South Dakota’s ongoing disputes.
In contrast to South Dakota’s firm stance against eminent domain for carbon pipelines, Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds vetoed similar legislation—House File 639—on June 11, 2025.
Reynolds said the bill ‘goes much further than simply protecting landowners’ and ‘sets a troubling precedent that threatens Iowa’s energy reliability, economy, and reputation as a place where businesses can invest with confidence.’
Summit Carbon Solutions and agricultural groups in Iowa praised the veto, citing benefits for ethanol and carbon markets.
Trump’s Record: Oil Support, Mixed CO₂ Signals
During his presidency, Donald Trump prioritized oil and gas infrastructure. On January 24, 2017, he signed memoranda advancing the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines, followed by Executive Order 13766 directing agencies to fast-track high-priority infrastructure projects. None of those actions mentioned carbon capture or CO₂ pipelines. These orders are archived in the Federal Register and White House records.
In its fiscal year 2019 Congressional Budget Request, the U.S. Department of Energy proposed cutting funding for carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) programs by more than half. A 2020 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO-20-490) noted that DOE had failed to implement key project management practices in its CCUS portfolio, limiting effectiveness—but it also recognized DOE’s role in initiating several large-scale demonstration projects.
His current administration has declared an energy ’emergency’ and accelerated carbon capture permitting, with EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum broadly supporting CCS initiatives. However, neither official has publicly commented on the Summit Carbon Solutions project or South Dakota’s legal standoff specifically.
Trump never issued formal statements about the Summit Carbon Solutions project, and no public remarks from him address South Dakota’s carbon pipeline disputes directly. Some supporters argue his broader support for energy infrastructure signals implied backing, while critics point to his first-term budget proposals and regulatory withdrawals—such as the 2020 suspension of a proposed CO₂ pipeline safety rule—as signs of inconsistent commitment to carbon capture technology.
For now, South Dakota continues to shape its own energy policy—blocking eminent domain use, denying permits, and urging federal restraint—all without clear direction from Washington on this specific issue.
