Carbon capture projects a bad idea
Carbon capture and sequestration sounds like a great idea for Iowa to help mitigate climate change, but it’s not.
There are three proposed CO2 pipelines for Iowa by Summit Carbon Solutions, Navigator CO2 Ventures and ADM-Wolf that will cover more than 2,000 miles to move the CO2 to be stored underground in North Dakota and Illinois at an estimated cost of at least $7 billion.
How does sequestering CO2 make money? From us, of course. The 45Q carbon credit of $50/ton ($30 if used for enhanced oil recovery). Those credits alone could put $3.9 billon a year of taxpayer money into the pockets of the owners and investors of these three pipelines.
Pipeline companies promise to restore the land they lease, but can they fully repair the damage from compaction, topsoil loss, soil mixing, etc.? History tells a different story. The Dakota Access pipeline still shows the scars, and a Google search will turn up many damage lawsuits filed against pipeline companies in multiple states.
People are also reading…
Are CCS projects successful? Mostly not. Researchers have found that less than 80% of US CCS projects (and most worldwide) have failed (per Ahmed Abduella et. Al. 2021 Environ. Res. Lett. 16 014036). For example, the government financed Archer Daniels Midland's pilot-project in Decatur, Illinois. was supposed to sequester 1 million tons of CO2 per year. However, according to the EPA it only does half that (521,581 tons), and its total emissions to the atmosphere increased from 4.2Mt in 2016 (before CCS) to 4.5Mt in 2020 (https://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/service/facilityDetail/2020?id=1005661&ds=E&et=&popup=true).
Is there a better use of these tax dollars? Yes, keep carbon in the ground. The ability of soil to sequester carbon varies depending on conditions, but at a moderate estimate of .2 tons/acre/year if all of Iowa’s 25 million acres of cropland just used cover crops and no-till, 5Mt of carbon could be added each year for up to 30-50 years. Other soil benefits would be increased water retention, reduced erosion, increased topsoil, reduced need for nitrogen, better water quality, and on and on.
So, instead of projects to send our money to a few rich beneficiaries lets develop the policies and incentives to make it possible economically for farmers to use these and other soil health practices to reduce greenhouse gasses, improve the quality of soil and water, and mitigate and adapt to climate change while preserving Iowa’s greatest resource for generations to come.
Tech bill bad for Iowa, America
As we the new year rolls on, we've also entered another year (the 41st to be exact) with Sen. Chuck Grassley in the U.S. Senate. This year has already kicked off with movement of our senior senator’s anti-tech legislation in the Senate Judiciary Committee, which seeks to significantly disrupt the processes that technology companies use to deliver information to consumers. While regulation of tech companies is a necessity, this bill is an under-informed and misguided attempt at doing so. The negative impact this bill would have on the small businesses that make Iowa, and America, so great could be astronomical.
We must maintain a level of scrutiny for every member of Congress, and every issue they take up, especially when the topics they address are arguably beyond their expertise. With American citizens increasingly leaning on technology in both their personal lives and businesses, we need to entrust the regulation of tech companies to members of Congress with a deep understanding of the impacts they might have. This is not to say that a long-serving member of congress does not bring value, experience is almost always valuable, but at what point does experience become a hinderance?
Sen. Grassley has served in Congress for more than four decades, and while there is no doubt that his interests once aligned with American’s in building a better future, that window has simply passed. We cannot continue to allow a senator who is 88 years old make decisions that will impact the ability of working-class Americans, as well as today’s youth and future generations, to utilize their knowledge and experience with tech to build a brighter future for themselves and this country.
With so many more pressing issues on the table in Washington, now is not the time for our increasingly gray-haired U.S. Senate to advance misguided policies aimed at technology companies who have supported growth here in Iowa and beyond this past year.
Bridge collapse a reflection of Biden's policies
The collapse of the Pittsburgh bridge is an apt reflection of President Biden's policies. Biden's whole political career has been dedicated to protecting financial and corporate wealth while starving the working class of needed resources.
Hallandale Beach, Florida
No need for restrictive voting laws
One hundred and fifty years ago right-minded people, people who supported Republican Abraham Lincoln, pleaded, fought and prayed that the opportunity to vote might be extended to all the residents of this country. It wasn’t until 100 years later that President Lyndon Johnson signed into law the Voting Rights Act of 1965, opening the door for the end of Jim Crow laws and the obstacles that prevented Blacks and others from accessing the ballot box.
Today, fueled by the Big Lie, members of Lincoln’s party are writing and passing restrictive laws that will ultimately turn back the clock and deny people equal access to the vote. Rep. Jim Clyburn of South Carolina has dubbed these efforts 'Jim Crow 2.0."
Sure, there are irregularities in elections -- there are irregularities in any endeavor on such a scale. However, they have proven inconsequential and hardly arguments for making sweeping changes to election procedures, changes which ultimately draw large numbers of people outside of the circles of participation. Even worse, these changes are being made by disingenuous lawmakers who know better.
What a shame that the party of Lincoln, Reagan, and the Bushes is now choosing to win elections, not by persuasion, but by exclusion.
We must reject this pernicious thinking and these pernicious laws.
Gloss