Jackson Voss, government affairs and policy coordinator for the Alliance for Affordable Energy
An environmental group and several Louisiana residents are suing to overturn several state laws that in some circumstances allow companies to inject carbon dioxide under private property owners’ land even if they object to such storage projects.
The nonprofit group Save My Louisiana and several residents, including Rapides Parish landowner Mark Guillory, filed the lawsuit on Nov. 20 in the 19th Judicial District Court in East Baton Rouge Parish. Defendants in the case include the secretary of the state Department of Conservation and Energy, Dustin Davidson, and Gov. Jeff Landry.
The plaintiffs say in the legal complaint that more than 30 companies have applied for permits for what are called Class V and Class VI well sites to store carbon dioxide or other substances that exacerbate global warming. Through recent laws passed to facilitate carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) projects, these applicants now have the power to use eminent-domain powers over private property owners’ objections, according to the lawsuit.
The plaintiffs argue that the statutes in question, including House Bill 966 by Rep Brett Geymann (R-Lake Charles), which was signed into law last year, violate property owners’ rights under the state and federal constitutions.
“The statutory scheme requires landowners to suffer the invasion of the land, and the injection of a man-made pollutant under their land, and to store the same for the operator of the well, the owner of the carbon dioxide, or the government, for an unspecified amount of time,” the lawsuit states. “... The statutes subordinate the citizen to the desires of domestic and foreign private persons who act for profit to dispose of waste products created on a national basis, turning the state into a national waste dump site.”
CCS supporters, however, argue that Louisiana’s geography is well-suited to storing carbon dioxide underground and that the state has the energy-industry expertise to successfully manage such projects. They also point out that CCS companies must get 85% of landowners in their project areas to agree to their injection-well plans before holdouts can be forced to accept the terms of storage leases.
The plaintiffs’ attorney did not respond to requests for comment, but Jackson Voss, government affairs and policy coordinator for the Alliance for Affordable Energy in New Orleans, said property-rights issues associated with CCS are a key part of the arguments advanced by opponents of such projects.
“There are a number of good reasons to be concerned about the CCS projects being proposed around the state, and property rights is certainly one of them,” Voss said in an email to the Louisiana Record.
To secure public benefits, such as the construction of roads, public buildings, parks or airports, governments have used eminent domain to acquire private property provided that fair compensation is offered. But Voss said that in the case of CCS projects, the government is acting in service to powerful economic interests and that it’s unclear that Louisiana residents will secure much in the way of economic benefits as a result of CCS projects.
“Taking into account the facts that Louisiana has a terrible track record of monitoring and regulating industry in this state for the purposes of protecting public safety and health – as is continuously demonstrated by news of industrial sites, pipelines and other facilities exploding or producing leaks that go undetected for months or years, not to mention the well-known orphaned and abandoned well crisis we are facing – it is hard to see how the public stands to benefit from companies being allowed to use CCS to inject their waste beneath our feet,” he said.
Save My Louisiana and the other plaintiffs are asking the court to declare the statutes in question unconstitutional and void and to enjoin the Department of Conservation and Energy from further enforcement of the laws governing CCS projects.