To the editor:

Referring to Jared Strong’s article in the Tuesday Feb. 21 Messenger, Monte Shaw indicated all ethanol plants in Iowa will close if the pipelines aren’t built. They probably won’t even be able to sell the inventory that they have on hand. Then we are to assume that all the other ethanol plants in the U.S. are all carbon free. I wonder what the status of the ethanol plant in California is, that Bill Gates invested millions in. Is that plant carbon free? Do the math of the number of ethanol plants divided by the total dollars the three pipelines will invest. Pipeline may sell some of the C02, but what about the 42 billion in government subsidies and tax benefits. Some private companies investing in the pipeline are TPG Climate Fund, Continental Resources, Deere & Co plus others. And we see on Summit’s payroll is Jess Vilsack, son of Department of Ag Secretary. And Terry Branstad, former governor, is Summit’s “chief policy officer.” Why would companies invest millions in the pipeline? Do they expect a return on their investment? I have read where Tyson and Heine’s are having trouble securing C02 to keep their companies in business. Colorado School of Mines and Virginia Tech are doing research to determine the total amount of C02 that can be sequestered into rock formations to increase the mineral yield of copper, nickel, cobalt and other elements . Is China actually using C02 to make methane? Does the pipeline company plan to charge the ethanol companies enough to pay for the pipelines or do they think the premium that the ethanol companies get from California will make the pipeline profitable? So will the premium that the ethanol plants get from selling C02 to California pay for the pipeline?

These are questions still to be answered and we need more research before eminent domain is used to acquire Iowa farm land.

Larry Siefken

Palmer