The Iowa Utilities Board says Summit Carbon Solutions must share information about the areas it has determined are at highest risk if there is a CO2 release from its proposed pipeline.
The decision came as the IUB continues a weeks-long hearing in Fort Dodge that will decide the fate of Summit’s carbon capture pipeline. The hearing entered a new phase Tuesday with the company presenting its own witnesses to testify in support of the project.
Chief Operating Officer Jimmy Powell was the first to take the witness stand where he was repeatedly asked about dispersion modeling — analysis the company has done to determine where carbon dioxide would go if the pipeline breaks.
Powell said Summit has studied the entire length of the pipeline’s proposed route, as required by federal safety regulators with the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. The study, he said, accounts for the size of the pipeline in each area and changes in landscape and soil structure.
“We take that dispersion modeling, we take the outputs, and we put them in a risk assessment. That determines the probability and potential severity of any impact,” Powell said. “Of the 686 miles of pipeline proposed, there are 1.13 miles of direct impact to high consequence areas in a worst case scenario.”
High consequence areas could include places that are more densely populated or that are ecologically sensitive.
The IUB decided Tuesday that the results of Summit’s analysis must at least be shared with attorneys involved in the hearing as part of the discovery process, although it will not be made public.
The board has not decided whether the information shall be entered as evidence regarding Summit’s permit application. The company has claimed that the authority of federal regulators over the safe operation of pipelines preempts the state’s interest in the modeling results.
The IUB had scheduled four witnesses from Summit to testify on Tuesday, but Powell was the only one to complete cross-examination.
Powell was asked about the company’s plans to share the safety information with county officials and local first responders. He said the company has held preliminary meetings with emergency management officials in each of the 29 counties the pipeline would pass through, but he said it’s premature to share specific information about Summit’s risk analysis.
“However, we will present that and tactical response documents — and perform desktop drills with them — before the pipeline is placed into operation,” Powell said. “In time we will provide the information and that will be in plenty of time to provide any additional resources they may need.”
Those additional resources may include safety equipment for first responders such as air tanks or electric vehicles that would not stall in an area overcome by CO2, Powell said.
Brian Jorde, an attorney for landowners opposing the carbon pipeline project, asked why the dispersion analysis would not be shown to people living along the proposed route.
“Do you think a community might find value in knowing how hazardous and dangerous a potential leak or rupture might be to them and would want to know how far they are located form your proposed route?” Jorde asked.
Powell replied that PHMSA recommends keeping the information confidential in order to guard against potential sabotage.
“PHMSA and the federal government don’t think it’s a good idea to release that information and someone with criminal intent could use it to impact public safety,” Powell said.
“And so we can take from that that these pipelines are so dangerous they are a threat to national security and they have no place in the state of Iowa?” Jorde said.
“No, I just said that they can potentially be a threat to public safety,” Powell replied.
Summit has reached agreements with 12 Iowa ethanol plants to capture carbon dioxide from the production of the corn-based biofuel and to transport it to North Dakota, where it would be pumped into underground storage wells.
That would lower the carbon intensity of the ethanol so that more of it could be sold in states like California and Washington that are adopting low-carbon fuel standards, according to Chad Kuhlers, CEO of Golden Grain Energy in Mason City.
“This pipeline would reduce our carbon intensity by about 60%, so it would allow us to have access to additional opportunity to sell into those markets,” Kuhlers said.
Attorney Brian Jorde asked COO Jimmy Powell whether all of the CO2 gas shipped on Summit’s pipeline would be sequestered, or whether some may be used to recharge oil wells in North Dakota.
Powell said carbon dioxide from the ethanol plants would not be used to extract more oil from slowing wells because that would compromise the low carbon profile of the biofuel. But, he said, another customer could ship carbon dioxide on the same pipeline for a different use.
“If another carrier decided to ask us to transport CO2 for another purpose — that’s possible, but it would be segregated,” Powell said.
Easements have been signed with landowners accounting for 73% of the pipeline’s route through Iowa. That leaves approximately 183 miles of the route where landowners have not signed on with the project. The hearing will also determine where Summit is granted eminent domain.
