Skip to main content

Not unsurprisingly, my recent report on ‘CO2 Pipeline Project Differences’ rankled the public relations department at Navigator with what they described as an “incredibly inaccurate mischaracterization of our project.” They are not going to like this one either. That report was a loop of information stemming from conversations with subscribers and farmers dealing with the CO2 pipelines. In a subsequent conference call with Navigator, we sorted through all of the line items and at the end of the conversation my conclusion was that I got it right. It cannot be an easy job of being given the task of spinning a silk purse from the proverbial sow’s ear and I have empathy for those whose job that it is to accomplish that. Probably the biggest point of contention was my word “paid”, saying that Navigator’s model pays ethanol plants more than Summit. Technically, Navigator says that they do not pay ethanol plants anything. Summit makes the investment for their ethanol plants for the carbon capture infrastructure, which can be $25 million per plant, and splits the revenue with them. Most plants tied up with Navigator cover the cost of the carbon capture infrastructure themselves and then pay Navigator to transport…

This content is for members only.
Log In Register

Sign Up For The Commstock Report

Sign Up Now to Improve Your Marketing and Protect Your Profits


Already a Subscriber?
Sign In