Carbon capture projects raise questions about CO2 pipeline regulation

Recent efforts to develop carbon capture and storage technology in the U.S. call for thousands of miles of carbon dioxide pipelines, driving more regulatory scrutiny of liquefied CO2 transportation at the state and federal level.

On May 19, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or MPUC, became the latest to assert its authority over the permitting of CO2 pipelines, ruling that "carbon dioxide is a toxic or corrosive gas, therefore subject to the [MPUC]'s existing regulatory authority."

At stake are two interstate pipeline networks under development in the U.S. Midwest. One, led by Summit Carbon Solutions LLC, aims to capture emissions from more than 30 ethanol plants across five states, including Minnesota, channeling the emissions to deep geologic storage locations in North Dakota. Another interstate project, the Heartland Greenway, plans to pipe emissions from biofuel and industrial customers to an underground storage site more than a mile underground in central Illinois' Mt. Simon sandstone formation.

The MPUC is not the first state utility regulator to require permits for CO2 pipelines, but for interstate projects, the requirements are patchwork. In the case of the Summit pipeline's intended route, Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota and now Minnesota require permits from their respective commissions, but Nebraska does not.

Ahead of the MPUC's May 19 decision, both Summit and Navigator CO2 Ventures LLC, the developer behind the Heartland Greenway, disputed that the commission held permitting authority over such infrastructure. In comments filed with the commission, Navigator CO2 wrote that its project already required a construction stormwater permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and a federal wetlands permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in addition to county permits.

"Time is of the essence if we are going to meet environmental benchmarks for reduced emissions, and that requires process and regulatory certainty for decarbonization projects like carbon capture," Navigator CO2 spokesperson Andy Bates said in a May 23 email. However, the previous week's decision "did provide additional clarity about the permitting process that we will navigate in Minnesota, and we look forward to reviewing the rulemaking order when it is released," Bates said.

Summit Carbon Solutions said in an emailed statement that it had worked closely with federal, state and local regulators and stakeholders in the past year. "We look forward to continuing to maintain that commitment," the statement read.

Regulatory framework

The U.S. has more than 5,000 miles of carbon dioxide pipelines, the majority of which are used in enhanced oil recovery. But pipeline need is likely to expand thanks to a recent spate of carbon capture project proposals, driven by the federal 45Q carbon capture tax credit program.

If carbon dioxide pipelines are built as projected, "the CO2 pipeline network could soon rival the existing oil and natural gas pipeline networks in size and complexity," according to a recent report commissioned by the Pipeline Safety Trust. The report, prepared by research firm Accufacts Inc., goes on to warn that regulators "would be faced with the greatest and fastest pipeline expansion in the history of the U.S. pipeline industry, and many of these pipelines could threaten the safety of countless individuals and communities."

Indeed, environmentalists and affected landowners have rallied against such project proposals, pointing to a February 2020 CO2 pipeline rupture near Satartia, Miss., that released a cloud of noxious gas and sent 49 residents to the hospital. Earlier this year, the Sierra Club Iowa Chapter organized a protest of planned carbon dioxide pipelines in the Midwest, including the Summit and Navigator CO2 projects, calling them "greenwashing schemes."

However, CO2 pipelines have yet to produce a fatality in the U.S., said John Thompson, technology and markets director at Clean Air Task Force, adding that the existing network will have to expand by 20,000 to 30,000 miles for full decarbonization by 2050.

"These pipelines have been around, they move a lot of stuff and have really an impeccable safety record, probably far safer than pipelines that carry natural gas or oil," Thompson said during a May 24 press briefing hosted by the Carbon Capture Coalition. "It's not as though there haven't been problems with pipelines. But we have this amazing safety record to build on."

Unlike natural gas pipelines, CO2 pipelines are not subject to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's authority, leaving the U.S. Transportation Department's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration as the main federal regulator. Deep underground storage sites, or Class VI wells, are further permitted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's underground injection control division.

According to the Accufacts report, at the time most CO2 pipeline regulations were crafted, anticipated usage was still small-scale, and "as a result, many of [the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's] regulations no longer are adequate to protect public safety."

Thompson, though optimistic about safety compared to other industrial infrastructure, suggested a review of federal regulation and additional local emergency preparedness training in the presentation.

S&P Global Commodity Insights produces content for distribution on S&P Capital IQ Pro.