- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 3/31/26 at 9:45 pm to Bourbon Bebe
quote:
Jerome Zeringue - District 52
Spent his entire speaking opportunity using bible quotes to support the stance that land rights are inalienable. Then votes in favor of CCS eminent domain.
Listened to most of the 4 hour session. Got about as heated as I've seen a committee hearing.
Basically, the industry reps pinky promised that it would only be used in instances where the land has succession issues and/or an owner can't be found.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 9:58 pm to Commanda
Private entities may not expropriate land in Louisiana due to Constitutional amendment passed in response to SCOTUS decision that federal Constitution did prohibit private expropriation. March 2026 LaSC opinion affirmed that provision.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 10:06 pm to TigeeDaleC
quote:
Private entities may not expropriate land in Louisiana due to Constitutional amendment passed in response to SCOTUS decision that federal Constitution did prohibit private expropriation. March 2026 LaSC opinion affirmed that provision.
Based on what was said in the hearing, pipelines for CCS are exempt/the ruling doesn't apply. (Something to do with CCS pipelines operating as common carriers).
Posted on 3/31/26 at 10:29 pm to Commanda
If it a wild sight to see Left Wing woke NGOs and hard line right wingers both on the same side of the carbon capture debate
Posted on 3/31/26 at 10:30 pm to Bourbon Bebe
They should start with them. Since they have no issues giving up private property.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 10:34 pm to Commanda
quote:Are we calling illegals "carbon"?
Carbon Capture Legislation
Posted on 4/1/26 at 6:20 am to TigerTatorTots
quote:
If it a wild sight to see Left Wing woke NGOs and hard line right wingers both on the same side of the carbon capture debate
It’s more about the corrupt vs. the non-corrupt. Big money in CCS, which goes right into the pockets of lawmakers. The money for wind and solar dried up, so on to carbon capture!
Posted on 4/1/26 at 8:01 am to armytiger96
quote:
Its a scheme created by Global elitist and environmentalist along with our politicians. The oil and gas companies didn't create or push for this market. They're just the only ones that have the resources and assets to take advantage of it.
Biden Administration’s EPA used the momentum from the 2020 election and the way oil & gas had been painted over the past decade prior in the media and public eye (because we were too scared to fight back) to go to O&G and the petrochem industries and threaten to “revoke their license to operate” if industry didn’t start curtailing greenhouse gasses. This is where you saw flaring of gas if the fields get reduced by companies. Some of their own choice to try to appease the enviro crowd and politicians, and in other situations, due to state laws that were passed.
CO2, whether correctly or incorrectly, I’m not a scientist, is something that was classified as a greenhouse gas and industry had the technology to shove it in the ground. It had already been done for decades. So Biden Administration started pressuring industry to implement these projects to reduce CO2 output. Industry said, “Well…we could, but that’ll significantly increase our costs and reduce our ability to keep energy and hydrocarbon bi-products cheap for the American people”, so politicians, who wanted to make sure they could still get re-elected, figured out a ponzi scheme to pay for it with our tax dollars.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 8:04 am to TigerTatorTots
quote:
a wild sight to see Left Wing woke NGOs and hard line right wingers both on the same side of the carbon capture debate
The right hates it because of the waste of tax dollars and potential of eminent domain attached to it. The left hates it because they see it as a way for “dirty” industries to survive…and they type out their rants on their petroleum derived phones, laptops, etc.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 8:51 am to Commanda
Politicians stabbed their constituents in the back to sell out to big corporations? NO WAY! 
Posted on 4/1/26 at 8:54 am to Commanda
I watched most of this shitshow yesterday.
At least Zeringue and Domangue are just puppets for O&G. Their interactions with the bill's supporters were pretty much all bluster and aggression whereas their interactions with the sponsors and those against were professional.
Riser has been hip-deep involved with the big investors in the CCS deal going on up in Caldwell parish. Also, his disagreement on the actual definition of words with Fleming was stunning in its blatant attempt at gaslighting.
No one asked the most salient questions:
-Why should CCS have more rights over access to someone's property than the property owner themselves?
-How is "unitization" fundamentally different than expropriation when it comes to taking land for what is essentially an economic good?
-When taking pore space for warehousing CO2 indefinitely, how is that "land use" different than expropriation? (the pro CCS people did a masterful job in making this about pipelining instead of storage, unfortunately)
-Will project x, y, z, etc. still proceed if 45Q is repealed?
All that said, the defeat of this bill doesn't lose the anti-CCS-on/under-my-land folks anything. The Plaquemines case is still a massive hurdle a lot of these projects will have to clear.
At least Zeringue and Domangue are just puppets for O&G. Their interactions with the bill's supporters were pretty much all bluster and aggression whereas their interactions with the sponsors and those against were professional.
Riser has been hip-deep involved with the big investors in the CCS deal going on up in Caldwell parish. Also, his disagreement on the actual definition of words with Fleming was stunning in its blatant attempt at gaslighting.
No one asked the most salient questions:
-Why should CCS have more rights over access to someone's property than the property owner themselves?
-How is "unitization" fundamentally different than expropriation when it comes to taking land for what is essentially an economic good?
-When taking pore space for warehousing CO2 indefinitely, how is that "land use" different than expropriation? (the pro CCS people did a masterful job in making this about pipelining instead of storage, unfortunately)
-Will project x, y, z, etc. still proceed if 45Q is repealed?
All that said, the defeat of this bill doesn't lose the anti-CCS-on/under-my-land folks anything. The Plaquemines case is still a massive hurdle a lot of these projects will have to clear.
This post was edited on 4/1/26 at 8:58 am
Posted on 4/1/26 at 9:44 am to Commanda
Didn't the Louisiana Supreme Court recently declare that private industry using eminent domain for private industry's benefit unconstitutional?
Posted on 4/1/26 at 11:08 am to Bourbon Bebe
quote:
The following Republican representatives voted to strip LA citizens of their property rights.
Joseph Orgeron - District 54
Paul Sawyer - District 69
Jacob Braud - District 105
Timothy Kerner - District 84
Jeremy LaCombe - District 18
Jacob Landry - District 49
Neil Riser - District 20
Jessica Domangue - District 53
Jerome Zeringue - District 52
frick dem!
Posted on 4/1/26 at 11:35 am to molsusports
quote:Yes, it all a bunch of bullshite
molsusports
Posted on 4/1/26 at 12:00 pm to Bard
quote:
the pro CCS people did a masterful job in making this about pipelining instead of storage, unfortunately
I noticed that too. Seems like the pipeline issue is literally the tip of the iceberg here.
quote:
-Will project x, y, z, etc. still proceed if 45Q is repealed?
I think they did ask this is some form (not directly of course, because we can't have that...)
And the response was mostly crickets, with a sprinkle of "yada yada, marketability in the European market".
This post was edited on 4/1/26 at 12:04 pm
Posted on 4/1/26 at 12:51 pm to Bourbon Bebe
And they will continue to be voted into office. People are stupid.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 3:36 pm to Bayou
quote:
Remove carbon from the equation...just the ability to steal private land is absurd
When it happens to you it shakes your faith in justice in this country.
Posted on 4/1/26 at 3:48 pm to Commanda
quote:
According to current legislation, industry can take your land for carbon sequestration. If you do not agree to their price they can take you to court and a jury will set the price. Typical La politics
It’s typical of politics anywhere. Eminent Domain has been around forever, and that is the ACTUAL taking of land for a price. Isn’t this just taking the underground formation? Or is it actually taking topsoil land?
Posted on 4/1/26 at 3:52 pm to OysterPoBoy
quote:
Don’t we need carbon to exist?
Yes, but does that mean I can hit you in the head with a steel pipe?
I have been a global warming skeptic since before most people heard of it, but just as a hypothetical, if excessive atmospheric CO2 is about to make the earth unlivable we would need to do something about it.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News