Time Is Running Out to Stop Line 3

Enbridge, a multinational pipeline company out of Alberta, Canada, is aggressively constructing the Line 3 pipeline across Minnesota. Crews are working around the clock to complete horizontal drilling and put the pipe in the ground before regulators and public outcry can halt the project. While framed as a replacement line, in reality, Line 3 is a completely new pipeline with a different route than the original. Located in the Land of Lakes, Line 3 will cross 200 water bodies and a slew of sacred Native lands. Opponents of the project contend the permitting process was flawed — and some say it was illegal — and that a new Environmental Impact Study is necessary.

Enbridge is a Canadian company that has voraciously bought influence in local and state governments as well as inundating local communities with well-produced propaganda and financial incentives. The concerns of the Line 3 pipeline spawn from Minnesota’s history with the line, as the previous pipeline ruptured in 1991 and is responsible for the largest inland oil spill in American history. The rupture discharged 1.7 million gallons of oil in the Grand Rapids, Minnesota area. 

Line 3 pictured up close as it creeps up along the Great Lakes. Photo by Steven Gute

Unlike the previous Line 3, which moved crude oil, the new Line 3 pipeline will be built to transport diluted bitumen, or dilbit, a tar-sand slurry, extracted from the Alberta area. Line 3 will move the tar sands through Minnesota, connect with the Enbridge Line 5 in Duluth/Superior, then travel through the Great Lakes in Mackinaw, Michigan, ultimately reaching refineries in Sarnia, Ontario. 

This infrastructure route is basically a shortcut through the Great Lakes. 

This pipeline will not benefit anyone in the region except those who made deals with Enbridge

Minnesota sits on top of three continental divides and because of its unique position, its rivers and streams flow in all directions. An accident with Line 3 would have grave environmental and economic downstream consequences. Given Enbridge’s unpromising safety record, the public should be reticent of their promises. Dilbit is said to have the consistency of peanut butter and is incredibly viscous. Moving large quantities of this substance through pipes at high pressure creates such massive friction that it can erode the inner layer of the pipe much more rapidly than traditional crude/gas transport. Activists speculate that a disaster could occur when the pipeline is first tested and that moving dilbit long distances is inherently unsafe.

The question remains whether this pipeline will benefit anyone in the region except those who made deals with Enbridge and the few hired for temporary jobs that will soon be over. The real economic impacts come when Dilbit is refined into a carbon-rich solid called petroleum coke, or petcoke, and then sold almost exclusively on the international market, primarily by countries like China and India that have fewer environmental regulations than the United States or Canada. Because the process to create petcoke generates air and water pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, it’s considered a dirty fuel in those countries.

Over the past 15 years, Enbridge has been responsible for more than 800 spills. In 2010, a Line 6B incident decimated the Kalamazoo River when an excess of 1.2 million gallons of dilbit flowed into the tributary of Talmadge Creek. Enbridge was responsible for the clean-up effort, with Michigan taxpayers footing the bill. The company has been negligent in the maintenance of their pipeline, often ignoring warning signs of spill, while failing to warn members of the local community who were poisoned by the dirty water about the health threats posed by the dangerous chemicals their pipelines contained. 

Today, it is unsafe to eat the fish in the river and swimming is not recommended. Rocks on the banks of the Kalamazoo are still black, covered with a perpetual layer of tar sand. Despite dredging and other clean-up efforts, the river is still inundated with the legacy of pollution from 2010. Dilbit cannot be cleaned up as easily as traditional oil spills; some argue cleanup is impossible. Line 6B is a perfect case study for what could happen on a larger scale with Line 3.

68 year old Jill Ferguson, known as “Bad Ass Grandma,” locks down an Enbridge pumping station at the headwaters of the Mississippi River. Photo by Steven Gute

In light of the threat to future generations and our water, a group of Indigenous-led water protectors have gathered continuously over the past few weeks at Migizi, Namewag, Shell, and Red Lake Treaty camps throughout Minnesota to try to stop Line 3. They have been on the ground protesting the project for years. Police, private security, and other provocateurs harass and intimidate the camps. Line 3 violates Ojibwe treaty rights and is a continuation of the colonization and broken promises that their people have faced for hundreds of years. More than 700 people have been arrested on the frontlines, including Winona LaDuke of Honor the Earth. This surpasses the number of arrests during the 2016-2017 fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline in Standing Rock, South Dakota.

Enbridge has paid local enforcement agencies over half a million dollars for policing the construction and protest sites, and the “Northern Lights Task Force” has allowed police and sheriffs to operate outside of their normal jurisdiction. The violence against native people has increased and multiple pipeline workers have already been caught in sex trafficking stings. Indigenous women are the primary targets. Wherever the oil and gas industry operates, sexual abuse statistics skyrocket. The construction workers stay in what is referred to as “man camps,” which are associated with excessive drug use and violence. Indigenous women go missing every day and Minnesota is one of the epicenters. In July, a contractor from Texas raped a woman in Bemidji. He was taken into custody and charged. 

The Biden administration has voiced its support for Line 3, a continuation of Trump-era environmental policy. The federal and state governments have no intention of back peddling, leaving bipartisan support for the pipeline. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau regards Line 3 as one of the most important items on his policy agenda working in lockstep with the Biden administration. All this while paying lip service to the grave threats posed by carbon-induced climate change, especially in light of the recent, harrowing UN Report. It will be up to a small collective of front-line warriors to inspire a larger conversation to confront Enbridge to achieve critical mass. 

Representatives from Enbridge and the state of Minnesota have announced they intend to complete Line 3 by the fourth fiscal quarter of this year. Over 80 percent of construction is finished. Originally, Enbridge was permitted to pump 510 million gallons of water for their operations, but the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources increased the request to 5 billion. After usage, the water is then treated to an “acceptable level” and discharged back into the ground and waterways. There already have been multiple oil and chemical sheens seen in the Shell, Mississippi and Red rivers because of Line 3 construction wastewater. Enbridge also has bought additional water from local municipalities. Members of towns including Park Rapids have confronted their city councils and demanded answers, only to be gaslighted by politicians as trucks fill up at city fire hydrants.

Line 3 will significantly exacerbate climate change; its construction and operation being on par with building around 50 new coal-fired power plants. The social carbon cost calculated by the state of Minnesota is estimated to be over $287 billion over the course of the first 30 years of operation. The project will affect the local tribe’s sovereignty and ability to live off the land — animal habitats and wild rice beds will be severely impacted. Endangered freshwater creatures, such as the Higgins’ eye pearly mussel, are already hanging by a thread. A recent discovery has forced the Department of Natural Resources to send divers to look for more Higgins’ eye mussels. Activists wade through the water all day looking for more.

Independent journalists on the ground are working hard to get traction on social media platforms but find it difficult to reach an audience compared to previous pipeline battles such as Standing Rock. Nonetheless, the energy of resistance from Standing Rock burns bright in Northern Minnesota. Members of the Standing Rock Youth Council support the camps to show solidarity. Indigenous leaders plead for support from the general public. This is not a Minnesota issue. This is not a native issue. A disaster with Line 3 could affect everyone. Those on the frontlines wonder when regular people will join them in efforts to stop the pipeline. The Great Lakes contain approximately 20 percent of the world’s freshwater — 5,400 cubic miles. The price of a spill is too big a risk and could jeopardize our entire environment and economy.

On August 13, solidarity actions were held in front of banks  in 35 different U.S. cities that are financing the pipeline. Participants called to defund Line 3 and for the banks to pull all financial support for Enbridge. The Keystone XL pipeline was stopped with an executive order, and this could all be over tomorrow with the stroke of a pen if there were enough public outcry.

FAQs About the Battle Over Line 3

By Angélica Escobar

What is the Line 3 pipeline?

In 2014, Canadian pipeline company Enbridge proposed the Line 3 Pipeline Replacement Project. This is an expansion that would bring millions of barrels of tar sands from Alberta, Canada, to Superior, Wisconsin. Enbridge is the company responsible for the Kalamazoo River oil spill in 2010, the largest non-coastal oil spill in U.S. history. The company plans to build its new pipeline in the pristine marshes near the Mississippi headwaters near Minneapolis–St. Paul, Minnesota into the shore of Lake Superior on the treaty territory of the Ojibwe peoples. 

What effects will Line 3 have on climate change?

Line 3 will contribute more to climate change than to the economy of Minnesota. The Department of Commerce showed that Line 3 does not economically provide to the Indigenous local market, and since oil is not a renewable energy, it will create an unsustainable economy and environment. The pipeline spans through Minnesota, treaty territory and the otherwise untouched wetlands. It also crosses through the Leech Lake and Fond du Lac reservations, and the l855, 1854 and l842 treaty areas in the state.

Line 3 will contribute to global warming. According to the United Nations, if net-zero emissions are not met by 2050, the global economic impact of Covid-19 will pale beside that of the climate crisis. Yet, the environmental impact of building this pipeline is equivalent to building about 50 new coal-fired power plants. The social carbon cost for Line 3 would be equivalent to $287 billion over the first 30 years of the pipeline’s life. (It should be noted that most of the pipelines in Enbridge’s mainline corridor are over 50 years old.)

Protestors gather at the Red Lake Treaty Camp. Photo by Steven Gute

How will Line 3 affect Indigenous rights?

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, adopted in 2007, outlines the protections of Indigenous peoples. Building the pipeline on protected Indigenous land is a violation of tribal sovereignty, or usufructuary rights, which allows tribes to make a living off the land, including the rights to hunt, fish, gather medicinal plants, cultivate wild rice and preserve sacred or culturally significant sites. This Declaration was adopted by the General Assembly and 90 percent of the U.N. countries. Only four countries voted against it, the U.S. included. Ojibwe tribal members’ rights are at stake as the Line 3 pipeline violates their usufructuary rights by not preserving the land and affecting the sustainability of the land’s resources. 

How is the pipeline’s construction contributing to crime?  

The flood of out-of-town workers staying on-site will add to the crime and sex trafficking problem along the Line 3 construction areas. These “man camps,” as they are often referred, house up to 1,000 men at a time who relocate and work on the pipeline until the project is completed. 

Man camps are linked to high rates of sexual violence, sex trafficking and the disappearance of Indigenous women. Yet, men who are charged cannot be tried by tribal leaders because of the 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case Oliphant v. Suquamish, which prevents tribal police from incriminating non-tribal citizens.

With the epidemic of American Indian and Alaska Native women and girls going missing at a significant rate, they are labeled as runaways. This ignores the bigger picture: Minnesota is one of the states that has been hit the hardest by the epidemic of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women (MMIW).

So far, Enbridge has paid the Minnesota law enforcement $500,000 for policing the construction site and the Water Protectors protests, where they have been accused of using extraordinary violence against the predominantly Indigenous protestors. Multiple pipeline employees have also been caught in sex trafficking stings, posing a specific threat against Indigenous women. 

Construction sites drill through the headwaters of the Mississippi River. Photo by Steven Gute

How will local food resources be impacted?

Wild rice beds are the main economic, nutritional and cultural resource for the Indigenous communities living near the pipeline. Line 3 will disturb wild rice water bodies, according to an Environmental Impact Statement. 

The Line 3 route goes through historic and sacred land that has been inhabited for thousands of years. The route cuts through the Heart of Lake and wild rice country, which are traditional trade routes. None of these lands are being protected by the State of Minnesota despite Environmental Protection Agency researchers identifying over 180 significant, already-known areas of traditional cultural use and sacred sites directly within the Line 3 pipeline impact zone in 2016.

What are the other potential environmental impacts?

There is no way to ensure that the pipeline won’t spill, which makes stopping the expansion of the pipeline even more detrimental. Over the past 15 years, Enbridge’s has had over 800 spills, including one of the most horrific spills in U.S. history. In 2010, the Kalamazoo River spilled over 1.2 million gallons of oil, which still has not been cleaned up. The previous Line 3 pipeline, which spilled in Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1991, was one of the biggest spills in American history.

Also, crossing more than 200 waterways, including the Mississippi River twice, Line 3 has the potential to permanently damage 40 percent of America’s waterways. This poses a threat to the already endangered Higgins’ mussel species and to the health of those residing along the waterways.

The original Line 3 Pipeline was built in 1961, though it was recently found to have 900 “structural integrity anomalies.” These anomalies have caused Enbridge to operate the old line at reduced volumes and pressures in recent years to reduce the chance of a catastrophic rupture. Rather than fixing the structure of the pre-existing line, Enbridge’s logic is to build the new Line 3 pipeline and abandon the old one to lower costs despite the environmental impact of construction.

Why are communities of color more adversely and immediately affected by pipelines like Line 3?

Communities surrounding the pipeline are often communities of color. According to the University of Michigan’s Environmental Justice Factsheet, 56 percent of communities of color live by Toxic Release Inventory facilities or pipelines that comprise their overall health. The report also finds that communities that are majority minority are four to five times more likely to have underlying health conditions due to their environment. Chemicals released by the construction and function of oil pipelines like Line 3 are often made into gasoline or other products that are toxic, resulting in higher rates of health problems for communities that live near them.

Water Protectors demonstrators. Photo by Steven Gute

Who is against the expansion of Line 3?

Protests against Line 3 are being led by Indigenous women, notably including Ojibwe activist Winona LaDuke of the White Earth Reservation and her nonprofit Honor the Earth who have been at the center of the opposition to Line 3. Other demonstrators include the “Water Protectors,” who follow a campaign of nonviolent civil disobedience including direct actions.

How is Line 3 similar to Standing Rock in 2016?

As with Standing Rock, Line 3 affects Indigenous peoples. The Dakota Access Pipeline would have transported as many as 570,000 barrels of crude oil daily from Standing Rock Sioux tribe territory in North Dakota to Illinois. This pipeline’s route travels under the Missouri River (which is the primary drinking source for the 10,000 tribe members of Standing Rock Sioux) despite reports of more than 3,300 incidents of leaks and ruptures at oil and gas pipelines since 2010. The Dakota pipeline violates Article II of the Fort Laramie Treaty, which was intended to guarantee the “undisturbed use and occupation” of reservation lands surrounding the proposed location of the pipeline. 

The Dakota pipeline protests have been detrimental to maintaining the rights of the Indigenous communities it affected, not unlike what we have seen at Line 3.