Supporters and opponents of Enbridge’s Line 3 oil pipeline project fill a hearing room in St. Paul, Minn., on June 27, 2018.STAFF/Reuters
Enbridge Inc.’s plan to thread its Line 3 oil pipeline through Minnesota drew sharp criticism Wednesday from environmentalists and Indigenous tribes ahead of a decision by state regulators on whether the contentious project should proceed.
Calgary-based Enbridge is keen to replace its corroding Alberta-to-Wisconsin Line 3 pipeline, built in the 1960s, with a brand new line to nearly double capacity from current levels to about 760,000 barrels a day.
Construction has started on the Canadian leg of the 1,600-kilometre project, but the company requires final clearances from Minnesota’s Public Utilities Commission (PUC) on the portion of the line that runs through the state. A decision is expected this week.
Enbridge favours a route that deviates from the existing path, but in April, an administrative law judge recommended the company replace the aging line along the current right of way – an option the company opposes on grounds it would require a lengthy shutdown while adding to Line 3’s already-hefty $9-billion price tag.
Commissioners on Wednesday asked pipeline opponents which route alternative is least objectionable, assuming the project is ultimately approved.
“You may find that all of them suck,” said Paul Blackburn, a lawyer for Honor the Earth, an advocacy group opposed to the project.
Lawyers for the Fond du Lac and White Earth bands argued Enbridge has failed to justify a need for the project and that the company’s preferred route endangers waterways and threatens traditional rights to harvest wild rice.
The Sierra Club said several alternatives are equally objectionable and that the existing Line 3 should continue to operate until regulators shut it down.
However, the Leech Lake band endorsed Enbridge’s preferred route and reiterated its opposition to replacing the line on its existing path through the reservation.
Line 3, one of six pipelines that comprise Enbridge’s mainline from Hardisty, Alta., to Superior, Wis., has suffered numerous leaks over the years and currently flows at a little more than half its design capacity.
Enbridge says replacing the line would help ease pipeline congestion that has hampered Minnesota refineries and contributed to bouts of severe price discounts on oil-sands crude, dimming growth prospects in Alberta’s energy sector.
The company has said oil could flow on the expanded Line 3 by late 2019, but it acknowledged Wednesday that approval of a path that substantially deviates from its preferred route could result in a lengthy delay.
“It would be multiple construction seasons,” Enbridge lawyer Christina Brusven said.