BATON ROUGE – A flurry of bills that would have given broader local control to carbon-capture projects failed Tuesday in a House committee.
The House Natural Resources and Environment Committee heard more than a dozen bills and almost five hours of debate and testimony on Tuesday regarding local government’s concern for carbon-capture sequestration and storage.
The failure of these bills could mark the end of this year’s battle for local control in carbon-capture projects as the end of the session looms, but the push will likely revive during next year’s session, as it has in previous years.
Several bills brought by representatives such as Speaker Pro Tempore Mike Johnson, R- Pineville, Rep. Robby Carter, D-Greensburg and Rep. Rodney Schamerhorn, R-Hornbeck, sought to grant parishes more control in authorizing or prohibiting carbon capture.
“When a project affects an entire community, the community deserves a voice. The people of that community deserve a voice,” Johnson said. “This is not anti-business, it’s not anti-property rights, it’s just about respecting local self-government and allowing communities to share and to shape their own future.”
Carbon-capture sequestration and storage is a process in which carbon dioxide is trapped from the atmosphere and injected into the ground for permanent storage option to reduce emissions in the environment.
These bills were filed in response to more than 60 carbon-capture projects planned in Louisiana in the next few years, a prospect that has been a hot topic during the legislative session as lawmakers debate whether or not this is the best option for lowering emissions, while landowners express concerns for the health of their land.
After several hours of debating the bills, each was killed with the sentiment that carbon-capture projects and similar investments were for the betterment of the community and business in Louisiana.
“For the first time ever in rural northeast Louisiana, folks are completely ecstatic,” said Rep. Travis Johnson, D-Vidalia. “They have never seen these types of investments in their communities since I’ve been born.”
However, dozens of community members spoke in support of the local-control bills, wanting a part in deciding where carbon capture wells can be built or prohibited.
“It’s our home, and if (carbon-capture sequestration) is such a great program, such a great industry, well then educate us all about it, and you shouldn’t have anything to worry about,” Pineville resident Mark Guillory said. “We are getting educated, and that’s why we’re here opposing it, because the more we learn, the more we find out. This is not a good thing, and we cannot allow the Legislature to continue to force this on us.”
A resolution presented by Rep. Charles Owen, R-Rosepine, which requests the Board of Regents to provide a peer-reviewed study on the effects of carbon capture on the water supply and ecological environment, did advance to the House floor.
These bills follow a failed effort from earlier in the session by Johnson to prohibit seizure of property through eminent domain by the state government in carbon-capture projects, something he believed to be unconstitutional and against the Ten Commandments.
“The government and someone that’s given the authority can use that law, can go to court, force the sale or use of the land for something you did not agree to and didn’t support it,” Johnson said. “That could be your land. That could be your mother’s land. That could be your grandparent’s land.”
State Senate President Cameron Henry and House Speaker Phillip DeVillier, both Republicans, expressed concern earlier this year about letting local interests block projects that could provide economic benefits for multiple parishes or the state as a whole.
