Line 3 101

 

Enbridge’s controversial Line 3 pipeline expansion project was recently completed and started running Canadian tar sands oil, among the world’s dirtiest extreme fossil fuels. Violating Anishinaabe treaty territories in Minnesota, the new stretch of Line 3 was approved without full consent or proper impact studies, threatening safe water sources for millions. It carries the carbon equivalent of 50 coal plants. More than 68,000 Minnesotans testified against this plan. 

Over 1 million people signed petitions asking decision makers to stop it. Banks were implored to decline funding it. A stream of letters and petitions were delivered to state and federal decision makers by Indigenous leaders and allied activists, major environmental organizations, federal and state politicians, health professionals, celebrities, donors and other influencers, requesting the project be halted due to treaty violations, historic drought, climate emergency, global pandemic, absence of full environmental review. And over 1,000 arrests of peaceful protesters were made during Line 3 construction. Yet the black snake persisted, defying our treaties, to poison sacred water and wild rice, land and air. 

Every day, the expanded 1,031-mile Line 3 pipeline carries 760,000 barrels of crude oil from Alberta, Canada, through hundreds of previously untouched wetlands, the Mississippi River headwaters and over 200 water bodies, to the shore of Lake Superior in Wisconsin for refining. From there, Line 5 carries oil back into Canada for export. Enbridge is the Canadian pipeline company responsible for the largest inland oil spill in US history. Tar sands oil is nearly impossible to clean up because it sinks to the bottom of waterways.

According to Enbridge, the purpose of this project was “to address pipeline integrity and safety concerns related to the existing Line 3 and to restore the throughput of the line to its original operating capacity of 760,000 barrels per day.” Regulators had to choose between keeping the old unsafe line or approving a new unsafe line.

BEYOND THE ABSENCE OF A FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, egregious issues with the newly expanded Line 3 include: