Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Puddy my Buddy's avatar

Carbon capture is not necessary for ethanol plants to survive. Plants need Co2 to thrive.

It's all about money. If there were no Q45 tax credits attached to carbon sequester NO ONE would be supporting it.

It's all about money at the expense of landowners.

Shame on everyone who is trying to spin the facts to make people believe the Co2 pipeline is necessary for ethanol plants to continue operations. That IS NOT the case and Walt surely knows it as well.

Expand full comment
SD Farm Girl's avatar

Let's dive into a few more facts:

Gov. Noem's son-in-law, Kyle Peters, is a registered lobbyist for Gevo Inc. Gevo plans to partner with Summit Carbon Solutions for Sustainable Aviation Fuel. Cozy!

In November, GEVO stock was listed as an "energy stock to sell," with their stock worth less than a dollar. They have a very complicated ownership structure with layers of nested companies - who's watching to make sure we are not inviting foreign ownership of this plant?

Every ethanol plant will need 21 to 27 million gallons a year for the CO2 sequestration process, and additional energy will be needed to prepare and compress CO2 to a supercritical state. If all 13 ethanol plants participated, they would need 273,000,000 - 351,000,000 gallons of water every year. The Legislature just passed a joint resolution asking for 19,121 acre feet from the Missouri: Elk Point Aquifer. That equals 6,230,605,229 gallons a year to serve Clay, Lake, Lincoln, McCook, Minnehaha, Turner, and Union in the Iowa counties of Lyon, O'Brien, Osceola, and Sioux and in the Minnesota counties of Nobles and Rock. Should we use millions of gallons of water to compress CO2 into waste when we cannot even keep enough water for our communities?

Why do we think driving demand for temporary construction jobs is a plus when we are paying millions of dollars in advertising to recruit workers to fill the existing construction jobs?

Summit's economic study, done by Ernst & Young, states on pages 16 and 17 that Summit provided data to them and that they used double counting. Further, it says: Any third parties reading the report should be aware that the report is subject to limitations, and the report's scope was not designed for use or reliance by third parties for investment purposes or any other purpose.

The only major economic victory is for Summit's investors, who will undoubtedly sequester all the profits.

Expand full comment
5 more comments...

No posts