Over the last month, Minnesotans have spoken out at public hearings around their state in opposition to Enbridge’s proposed Line 3 tar sands pipeline, making a powerful case against the project.
In case you haven’t been following the fight over Line 3, a little background: Enbridge, the Canadian company behind the biggest onshore oil spill in U.S. history, is proposing the abandonment of its existing Line 3 tar sands pipeline and the construction of a brand new tar sands pipeline it would also call Line 3. Enbridge is calling this a replacement project, but in fact, they would be building a new, bigger pipeline along a mostly different route. If the company gets its way, they would be able to transport twice as much dirty tar sands through the state of Minnesota while leaving their old, corroding Line 3 in the ground without adequate consultation with local Tribes and landowners. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) is tasked with weighing the risks associated with the project and determining if it’s needed in Minnesota.
There’s a lot at stake here. The tar sands that would run through the new Line 3 is some of the dirtiest oil in the world and the most difficult to clean up when it spills. The pipeline would run near important water resources, including the Mississippi River headwaters region and the pristine lake country of northern Minnesota where Native Americans harvest wild rice and hold treaty rights. The state’s environmental impact analysis even recognized these environmental justice issues, noting that the project would “add to the negative mental, spiritual, and physical health impacts already disproportionately suffered by American Indian populations.” And the effects wouldn’t just be felt in Minnesota. Tar sands is the most climate-polluting fuel on the planet, and increasing the industry’s ability to ship more tar sands to market is a step in the wrong direction in addressing the climate crisis.
These public hearings were an opportunity for the public to weigh in on the two key permits Enbridge needs to start construction, and Minnesotans came out in full force. During the first week of the hearings, nearly 1,000 people showed up in St. Paul to speak at the hearing and to rally outside the State Capitol to call on Governor Mark Dayton to oppose the project and on the PUC to reject it.
At the rest of the hearings around the state, Minnesotans showed up at each one to voice their concerns about the pipeline’s potential impacts on Minnesota’s lands, water, wildlife, and Indigenous treaty-protected rights, as well as on the climate. These meetings have sometimes been tense, but Minnesotans and local Indigenous Communities have refused to back down. Even when pipeline supporters have tried to intimidate them, or when security has shown disregard for Indigenous culture, pipeline fighters have continued to show up and testify to make their case against this dangerous project.
Minnesotans were also joined by the state’s Department of Commerce (DoC) in their opposition to the project. In testimony submitted last month, DoC concluded that that there is no need for the project, and that the risks outweigh any limited benefits, noting, “it is reasonable to conclude that Minnesota would be better off if Enbridge proposed to cease operations of the existing Line 3, without any new pipeline being built.” They confirmed this finding last week, in spite of pressure from Enbridge to change it. DoC is the expert agency charged with analyzing and advising the PUC on whether or not to grant this permit, so their opposition to the project is a major setback.
The next round of hearings - evidentiary hearings where expert witnesses from both sides will testify before Administrative Law Judge Ann O’Reilly - begin today and will continue over the next three weeks. Witnesses will discuss the effects the pipeline would have on tribes and local communities, water and wild rice, and the climate. The Youth Climate Intervenors, young people who have been given standing to intervene in the proceedings on the basis that they will be disproportionately affected by the climate impacts of the pipeline, will also have the opportunity to cross-examine Enbridge’s witnesses.
As these hearings continue, it’s up to us to keep the pressure up. The PUC will be accepting public comments until November 22 and is expected to make a decision next spring. There’s still time to add your voice and tell the PUC that Line 3 is not in the best interest of Minnesota or the country. Act now.