Protesters rally as Minnesota regulators reaffirm approval for Enbridge’s Line 3 pipeline project

Opponents of Enbridge's proposed Line 3 crude oil pipeline line up for a Minnesota Public Utilities Commission hearing on the project on Monday, Nov. 19, 2018, in St. Paul, Minn. (AP Photo/Steve Karnowski)

Minnesota regulators reaffirmed their support Monday for Enbridge’s proposal to replace its aging Line 3 crude oil pipeline across the northern part of the state, while dozens of protesters walked out of the overflow hearing to make a point about climate change.

The Public Utilities Commission unanimously rejected a motion by opponents to reconsider its previous decision to grant a certificate of need for the project. And the commissioners agreed that Calgary-based Enbridge has met several conditions that they imposed when they approved the plan in June.

READ MORE: Environmentalists ask Minnesota regulators to reconsider Enbridge’s proposed Line 3 pipeline replacement project

“Line 3 is a climate change disaster so we will stop Line 3,” several protesters in the main hearing room chanted early during the proceedings.

Other opponents watching from an overflow room took up the chant and marched across the street to the Capitol, where they presented governor-elect Tim Walz’s staff with a recent gloomy UN report on climate change.

Story continues below advertisement

But the hearing continued, unlike a previous PUC hearing on the same issues in September that commissioners postponed until Monday after protesters disrupted it. Monday’s hearing was held in the Minnesota Senate Building, which has larger hearing rooms than the PUC’s headquarters, and it’s secured by state troopers, who were out in force.

The existing Line 3 was built in the 1960s and carries crude from Alberta to Enbridge’s terminal in Superior, Wis., clipping a corner of North Dakota along the way. It currently runs at about half its original capacity because it’s increasingly subject to corrosion and cracking. Enbridge says the replacement, which would follow a partly different route across Minnesota, will restore that capacity and ensure reliable deliveries of crude to Midwestern refineries.

Financial news and insights delivered to your email every Saturday.

READ MORE: What you need to know about Enbridge’s Line 3 pipeline proposal

Watch below: In August 2017, Kent Morrison filed this report about the Line 3 replacement project and the optimism it is generating in Alberta.

Click to play video: 'Optimism growing in Alberta town over Enbridge’s Line 3 project'
Optimism growing in Alberta town over Enbridge’s Line 3 project

The approval is “good news for Alberta’s energy sector,” Premier Rachel Notley said in a Facebook post Monday.

Story continues below advertisement

She said replacing the pipeline will “make it safer, more reliable and able to operate at full capacity.”

“Construction on Line 3 is already complete in Wisconsin and has picked up in Canada — the section from Hardisty, Alta., to Kerrobert, Sask., is now almost 95 per cent complete, compared to 85 per cent on Oct. 1, 2018,” she said. “Two sections in Saskatchewan are already finished.”

Notley added that Enbridge expects Line 3 to being operating in the second half of 2019.

Environmental and Indigenous groups say the project would aggravate climate change, because crude from oilsands generates more carbon dioxide emissions, and that it would endanger pristine waters in northern Minnesota where Indigenous people harvest wild rice and claim treaty rights.

READ MORE: Protests prompt Minnesota regulators to postpone Line 3 meeting

On a series of 5-0 votes, the commissioners agreed that Enbridge has largely met the conditions they attached to their earlier approval, including requirements for insurance coverage against spills and financial assurances for covering the costs of removing the pipeline at the end of its life. Enbridge agreed to secure $940 million USD in insurance coverage and cover any additional cleanup costs itself. The company estimates the clean-up costs of a worst-case-scenario rupture at $1.4 billion USD.

The state Department of Commerce, which tried unsuccessfully to persuade the commission this summer that the project isn’t necessary, argued that Enbridge’s financial guarantees are inadequate, especially if the company should have to deal with more than one spill on its system at the same time. The rupture of a different Enbridge pipeline into the Kalamazoo River in Michigan in 2010 cost the company about $1.2 billion to clean up.

Story continues below advertisement

“Enbridge has demonstrated its… capacity to have extraordinary losses anywhere on its system that could wipe out all insurance for its entire operations,” said Julia Anderson, an attorney for the department.

Enbridge supporters, many of whom wore blue “Minnesotans for Line 3” winter caps, arrived early and outnumbered the opponents, who mostly had to settle for seats in the overflow room.

Afterward, Nancy Noor, chairwoman of the Jobs for Minnesotans business-labour-community coalition, praised the commission for standing firm on its approval and letting the project move forward.

Winona LaDuke, executive director of Honor the Earth, and other opponents vowed to press forward with appeals and protests.

READ MORE: Enbridge reaches deal on Line 3 pipeline project with Indigenous group in Minnesota

Sponsored content