• Summit Carbon Solutions is asking Iowa regulators to amend its carbon dioxide pipeline permit to explore sequestration sites in other states.
• Opponents, including landowners and environmental groups, are challenging Summit’s Iowa permit in court.
• A judge is deciding whether to review the existing permit or send the case back to regulators to consider the proposed changes.

With Summit Carbon Solutions’ planned route effectively blocked by South Dakota’s ban on the company’s use of eminent domain, opponents question where it intends to sequester the carbon dioxide a $9 billion pipeline it proposes would collect from Iowa and other Midwestern ethanol plants.

The sequestration site is supposed to be in North Dakota, but reaching that state is problematic without running the pipeline through South Dakota, where Ames-based Summit not only faces the eminent domain ban but has yet to obtain a permit.

Attorneys at a Polk District Court hearing Friday, Oct. 10, puzzled over the pipeline’s route as they debated whether Judge Scott Beattie should move forward with a judicial review of Summit’s Iowa permit for pipeline construction or, as Summit requests, return the case to the Iowa Utilities Commission so the panel can consider the company’s request to amend its permit.

That would make it possible for the company to consider other possible sites for sequestering the carbon emissions.

Bret Dublinske, a Summit attorney, said Friday that North Dakota used to be the only option. But now Tallgrass Energy is capturing carbon with its Trailblazer pipeline through Nebraska and sequestering it in Wyoming, and Colorado and Kansas, along with Nebraska, are seeking federal approval to store carbon, he said.

“We’re asking for permission to explore all options,” Dublinske said.

Iowa regulators made approval of Summit’s permit contingent on it getting a permit to build the pipeline through South Dakota. The state’s regulators have twice rejected the company’s application, most recently, because it lacked a viable route after the ban on allowing it to use eminent domain, which would have enabled it to obtain access to property for the project from unwilling landowners.

Christina Gruenhagen, the Iowa Farm Bureau’s government relations counsel, said the project should go back to the state regulators to determine if it’s viable.

“It’s not clear whether this pipeline is still going to North Dakota, or will go around South Dakota, whether it’s going to stop in Nebraska, go to Wyoming, go to Kanas, we don’t know,” Gruenhagen said.

She said it raises questions about the use of eminent domain in Iowa, which some lawmakers want to strike down, and if the pipeline serves a public purpose.

“At this point, we don’t know whether that pipeline can be completed to achieve the public purpose of sequestering carbon dioxide,” she said.

Here’s what to know about the discussion at Friday’s hearing.

What is Summit saying about its route and sequestration plans?

Summit spokesperson Sabrina Zenor said in a text Friday that the company’s proposed permit amendment “keeps open the option to transport CO2 west through Nebraska or north through South Dakota, which is part of our original permit.”

Summit wants to remove North Dakota as the sequestration location, change the pipeline size in some areas and add a customer.

The U.S. Navy has fired the commanding officer of the USS Wyoming in the latest shakeup under Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.

Commander Robert Moreno was removed by Rear Admiral Bob Wirth, commander of Submarine Group Ten, the Navy said in a statement, indicating that Moreno had been removed because of a loss of confidence in his ability to carry out his duties.

“Navy commanding officers are held to high standards of personal and professional conduct,” the Navy said in the release.

open image in gallery

Advertisement

“They are expected to uphold the highest standards of responsibility, reliability, and leadership, and the Navy holds them accountable when they fall short of those standards.”

No specifics were given about the circumstances that led to Moreno’s dismissal. Still, The Navy Times notes that the service generally uses the phrase “loss of confidence” as a blanket statement when explaining senior dismissals.

Moreno earned his commission in December 2005, spent time aboard the USS Pennsylvania, USS Dallas, and USS North Carolina, and only took over as commanding officer of the Wyoming in May 2024. He has been temporarily reassigned to the Naval Submarine Base at Kings Bay.

The vessel in question is an Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine commissioned in July 1996 and home-ported in Kings Bay, Georgia. According to the Navy, it is currently undergoing maintenance, meaning the change of command will not impact its service.

Captain David Burke, Submarine Squadron 20 deputy for training, has been handed temporary responsibility for the sub in Moreno’s stead.

open image in gallery

Hegseth – who recently delivered an address to America’s top generals and admirals at Quantico, Virginia, on “warrior ethos,” personal appearance and fitness standards, and his mission to purge the U.S. military of “political correctness” – has overseen a massive change in the hierarchy of the Armed Forces this year.

The Navy alone has changed its chief of naval operations, the commanding officer of Navy Information Operations Command Colorado, the commanding officer of Navy Reserve Center Manchester, New Hampshire, and the executive officer for the Program Executive Office for Unmanned and Small Combatants.

Most recently, it has removed a doctor over her social media use, the commanding officer of the USS Santa Barbara, and the Navy chief of staff.