[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 29, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2090-S2091]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             CARBON DIOXIDE

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I rise for two reasons: First, I talked 
last night about carbon capture--carbon dioxide capture--injection 
wells in Louisiana. I am not going to regive that speech.
  Carbon dioxide, while a naturally occurring gas that God created--
when you breathe, what you blow out is carbon dioxide. The world 
couldn't exist without carbon dioxide. Plants couldn't conduct 
photosynthesis. But carbon dioxide is also a gas that is heavier than 
air, and it rises. And it is also dispersed throughout our atmosphere.
  And while there are many good things about CO2, as we call 
it, one of the bad things is that carbon dioxide acts as a blanket over 
our world. And what happens when you are in bed, under a blanket? The 
blanket holds in heat. And carbon dioxide acts as this blanket, and it 
holds in the Earth's heat. And that can--that can affect your climate 
and your temperature. That is what all this discussion about carbon 
dioxide is all about.
  A number of years ago, Congress decided to encourage companies that 
produce carbon dioxide. And one of the ways you also produce carbon 
dioxide, I should also add, is by burning fossil fuels. So a 
petrochemical plant, which uses natural gas when it produces the 
chemicals, it also produces CO2, or carbon dioxide, just 
like I have been producing it as I have been breathing while we are 
talking.
  In any event, Congress passed a statute and said: We want to try to 
minimize the production of carbon dioxide, which can affect our climate 
when we burn fossil fuels.
  So Congress came up with this idea of paying companies money to 
capture that carbon dioxide so that it is not released into the 
atmosphere--and, boy, do we pay a bunch of money. It is about $30 
billion in spending every year. We are paying it to private companies 
to capture this carbon dioxide. It will be about $30 billion that we 
are spending by 2030.
  One of the things that companies do when they produce the carbon 
dioxide and they want to capture it--after they capture it, they have 
to do something with it. One of the things that many of you probably 
know is that they drill-well inject it underground. In my State, that 
is very controversial. Some people support it. Some people don't.
  I am not here to debate the merits of carbon capture and what we call 
carbon capture sequestration. All I am saying is that under Louisiana 
law, if you own property and you don't want a company drilling a well 
and putting carbon dioxide under your property, you should have the 
right to say no.
  My legislation--Louisiana passed a statute. I am not saying they were 
right or wrong to do it, just like I am not debating the merits--or 
lack thereof--of carbon capture and sequestration. All I am saying is 
that under my State law, if a company captures this carbon dioxide and 
wants to drill a well and inject it beneath the surface and if they 
want to put it on my property and I don't want them to put it on my 
property, then they come to me and say ``I want to drill a well and 
inject carbon dioxide,'' I am entitled to say ``Yep, you got it. Happy 
to help'' or I am entitled to say ``I don't want you to do it.'' They 
say ``Pretty please?'' and I say ``The short answer is no. The long 
answer is hell no.''
  Under my State law, those private companies can force me to let them 
drill that well. We call it expropriation. Some States call it eminent 
domain. It is just like if a State wants to put a road through your 
property and it can't put it anywhere else, they can take your land, 
but they have to pay you for it. Well, in my State, the legislature 
says they can do the same thing with the drilling of these wells.
  All I am saying is, in the great State of Louisiana, we go about this 
business of debating carbon capture and climate change and that sort of 
thing. If you own property, which, under my State constitution and the 
Federal Constitution, is an inalienable/unalienable right--you have the 
right to own property in America--and if a company wants to drill a 
well on your property and put carbon dioxide down there and you don't 
want them to, then you ought to have a right to say no, and the State 
can't make you, and the companies can't make you. And that is all I am 
saying. That is the only point I was trying to make last night.
  If the powers that be in my State start bullying people--I am not 
saying they will, but if they start bullying people and taking their 
property when they don't want to give it up, in order to inject carbon 
dioxide beneath their

[[Page S2091]]

land without their permission or consent, then I am going to have 
something to say about it because this money that we are paying 
companies to do that is from a Federal statute. It is called, I think, 
a 45Q tax credit. And do you know what? That 45Q tax credit can be 
changed. I can't make the legislature pass or not pass a law, but I 
sure can offer a bill to change that amount of money that we are paying 
companies to do this if they are going to force people and take their 
land in order to put in these wells.
  I wasn't very clear last night. I think I was tired, and it was late, 
and I was also in a hurry to get home to watch ``Wheel of Fortune.''

                          ____________________