The list of North Dakota counties voicing concerns about a proposed carbon-emissions pipeline is growing longer. Several are now on record opposing the possibility of using eminent domain against property owners.

Summit Carbon Solutions wants to construct a multi-state pipeline to capture carbon emissions from ethanol plants and store it underground in North Dakota. The company is trying to get landowners' permission to build.

But Richland County's Todd McMichael is leading a movement in case eminent domain is used. His county has adopted a resolution opposing such action.

He acknowledged it's non-binding, but said it could influence state regulators.

"What the resolution does, and what we have seen from the past," said McMichael, "is that the Public Service Commission will really study what's going on out there."

McMichael, who owns a farm along the proposed route, said landowners shouldn't be legally forced to surrender property for a project he feels is motivated by corporate profit.

Five counties in the state have approved these resolutions. Summit argues it remains focused on voluntary contracts with residents, and that its project will drastically cut emissions from the ethanol industry.

McMichael said even if the company touts open communication with landowners, he worries that approach won't last unless more residents make their feelings known about the project.

"I do feel that eminent domain could be a plausible action," said McMichael, "if either I don't agree to their dollar amounts, or I just continue to say no."

Eliot Huggins, field organizer with the Dakota Resource Council, said his group isn't opposed to all aspects of carbon sequestration. But he said he thinks the company is rushing an unproven approach in areas not ready to embrace it.

"Climate solutions should be solutions that benefit, you know, all communities," said Huggins. "In rural America, urban America, everywhere. And so, we don't really think a climate solution should be taking landowners' land without them consenting to it."

There's mixed research on the effectiveness of carbon storage.

And while some experts say it does show promise, there are lingering safety concerns. Local opponents point to the rupture of an underground pipeline in Mississippi in 2020.

Massachusetts will benefit from more than $100 million in new federal funding for various transportation projects.

Neighborhoods divided by busy roadways in Somerville, Mattapan and Pittsfield will be reconnected with new street-level pathways while more than 400 new electric-vehicle charging ports will be installed statewide.

Quentin Palfrey, director of federal funds and infrastructure for the Massachusetts Executive Office for Administration and Finance, said funds will also improve more than 50 high-risk rail crossings.

"Some of these new resources are going to help us to expand rail and transit, move forward West-East rail and also improve the safety of our transit system," Palfrey outlined.

Palfrey noted the goal is to create a more accessible and climate-resilient transit system. The state has secured more than $9 billion in federal funds over the past two years, including nearly $2 billion to replace the Cape Cod Bridges.

The funding stems from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the largest federal investment in public transportation in the nation's history. In addition to upgrading existing structures, projects are also improving access to natural resources.

Palfrey pointed out more than $17 million will support expansion of the Ashuwillticook Trail, creating a network of paths from Adams to Williamstown.

"It's a major priority across our transportation system," Palfrey emphasized. "This is going to be a really big step forward for Berkshire County's efforts in that regard."

Palfrey added state officials are building a transit network to serve everyone no matter how they travel, while helping to meet the state's ambitious climate goal of net-zero emissions by 2050.


get more stories like this via email

A leading consumer publication says electric vehicles are gaining ground on gas-powered cars when it comes to feelings about reliability.

However, an EV enthusiast and Nebraska electrical engineering professor and said there's an information gap, while also highlighting improved technology.

The new reliability survey from Consumer Reports found that EV owners reported 42% more problems than gas-only cars.

That compares to nearly 80% from the previous survey, indicating a major improvement.

Retired University of Nebraska professor Don Cox said the batteries in most EVs are much better than they used to be, potentially easing concerns about them performing in colder climates.

"Batteries have improved a lot over the last 10, 15 years," said Cox. "A huge amount. They are continuing to improve."

However, he said EV batteries will always need a little time to warm up when it's cold, impacting their range in the winter.

Even though that perfection might never be achieved, Cox and other researchers say EVs are proving to be more efficient than gas models, overall.

He said he disagrees with how Consumer Reports puts together its evaluations, and added there isn't enough widely circulated ratings for buyers to lean on.

Dissecting issues such as reliability often coincides with measuring sales of electric vehicles. Cox was one of the first EV owners in Nebraska, which still lags other states for these purchases.

But with the help of federal investments, he said more chargers are being added, including near interstates to accommodate longer trips.

And the median range has increased from 80 miles in 2010 to roughly 250 miles today.

"I think that as people understand more about electric cars," said Cox, "that they're going to be more useful almost everywhere."

Nationally, researchers say issues still have to be sorted out in building up a strong charging network.

That includes drivers encountering broken charging equipment and the need for these sites to be maintained.



get more stories like this via email

The number of pedestrians and bicyclists killed on roadways in the U.S. has nearly doubled in the past 12 years and a New Mexico researcher wants to know why.

Nick Ferenchak, associate professor of civil, construction and environmental engineering at the University of New Mexico, said if you're in a car, you are safer than you have ever been. But it is not true for what the engineering world calls "VRUs," vulnerable road users. Although pedestrian deaths in 2022 were about the same as in 1975, he noted they have increased 83% since reaching their lowest point in 2009.

"Pedestrians and bicyclists are about a quarter of the people killed on our roadways in America," Ferenchak reported. "To put that in context, I think about 400 New Mexicans are killed every year on roads, about 100 of them are pedestrians and about 10 are on bikes."

Nationwide, about 45,000 Americans lose their lives on roadways each year, including 6,000 pedestrians. Another 76,000 pedestrians are injured. Ferenchak leads the newly-formed Center for Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety, which is studying why the increase has occurred among VRUs and helping to identify engineering solutions for city and county planners.

Ferenchak pointed out cyclists tend to raise safety issues and demand roadway improvements, while pedestrians do not have strong advocacy networks. In Albuquerque, he added, many pedestrian deaths occur on dark, arterial roads.

"It doesn't make the problem easier to solve but a lot of the issue is actually at night, which is kind of surprising," Ferenchak observed. "You'd think most people are out walking and biking during the day but a lot of the issues are happening at night."

He emphasized while about 95% of people in Albuquerque drive to work, similar to other cities, but everyone is a pedestrian at some point and higher fatality rates need to be understood and addressed.


get more stories like this via email