Farmers and ethanol industry leaders are calling on Gov. Kim Reynolds to reject a bill that would place new restrictions on carbon sequestration pipelines, arguing it would harm Iowa’s economy and energy future, reports Southernminn.com.
At a press conference Thursday, advocates said the bill — House File 639 — poses serious risks to biofuel production, agriculture, and future energy projects in the state. They asked Reynolds to veto the measure, which passed the Iowa Senate on May 12 and is now on her desk.
The bill would redefine what qualifies as a “common carrier” pipeline and raise insurance requirements for companies transporting liquid carbon dioxide. It would also add new rules for the Iowa Utilities Board and expand who can take part in regulatory proceedings.
Supporters of the bill say it is aimed at preventing private companies from using eminent domain to build pipelines, such as the one proposed by Summit Carbon Solutions. The Summit project would move captured carbon dioxide from ethanol plants in Iowa and nearby states to an underground site in North Dakota.
Monte Shaw, director of the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, said the legislation unfairly targets carbon capture efforts.
“This bill isn’t about protecting landowners. It’s about picking winners and losers,” Shaw said.
Mike Jerke, CEO of Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy in Council Bluffs, said the bill could block his company from connecting to the Tallgrass Trailblazer pipeline in Nebraska. His project has secured all necessary land agreements voluntarily and does not plan to use eminent domain.
Even so, Jerke said the bill’s insurance requirements would be nearly impossible to meet, and the 25-year cap on pipeline permits would make long-term investments unfeasible.
“We’re talking about spending over $45 million on equipment to capture carbon dioxide,” Jerke said. “If this bill becomes law, we may only be allowed to operate for 25 years — no chance to extend or renew. Who would invest under those conditions?”
He said the law could also limit the ability of other ethanol producers in Iowa to remain competitive, particularly as neighboring states advance similar projects.
“If Nebraska can sequester carbon and we can’t, they’ll become the most profitable place in the world to make ethanol,” Shaw added.
Shaw warned that without carbon capture, Iowa plants could face closures, and future projects may be scrapped altogether.
Fayette County farmer Vic Miller, a member of the Iowa Corn Growers Association, said the bill threatens corn growers as well.
This year, corn production is expected to reach 16 billion bushels — a record level. But unless markets expand, such as through sustainable aviation fuel that requires low-carbon ethanol, prices may drop due to oversupply.
“If we don’t find new markets, we’re going to be in trouble,” Miller said. “This bill puts that at risk.”
At the federal level, pipeline opponents were recently alarmed by draft legislation that would have allowed pipeline companies to bypass state laws like HF 639. That language was removed before the bill passed the U.S. House earlier this week.
Groups that support HF 639, including the Sierra Club and Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, have praised its passage. In a joint statement, several organizations said the bill provides stronger protections for landowners, though it stops short of banning eminent domain entirely.
“We still need to ban eminent domain for these projects,” said Jess Mazour of the Sierra Club. “We’ll be back in 2026 to push for that. This will be a major election issue.”
The Free Soil Foundation urged Iowans to contact the governor’s office in support of the bill, calling it “a big step forward for landowners and property rights.”
Meanwhile, the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association is encouraging members to reach out to Reynolds as well — but to ask her to reject the bill.
“We’re not giving up,” Shaw said. “This legislation would hurt energy, economic development, and investment across the state. We need Iowans to speak up before it’s too late.”
