The Next Big Climate Fight is Occurring in Minnesota

Read in your language:

Protesters at several sites along the Line 3 Pipeline in Minnesota route have mounted direct action against the company building it, seeking to delay construction themselves.

Earlier this month, two courts denied separate challenges from opponents that sought to halt the Line 3 Pipeline construction.

Construction officially began Dec. 1.

The Line 3 Pipeline would bring a million barrels of tar sands a day through untouched wetland and Indigenous land.

“Part of national security is not investing in more bad management and in aging infrastructure, but investing in healthier change as value-addition for well being,” says an environmental professional.

Here’s one reason he says, and shares photos on the effects of Tarsands:


Opponents say the pipeline violates Indigenous treaty rights, risks the chance of an oil spill and deepens reliance on fossil fuels.

The company building it, Enbridge Energy, is responsible for the biggest inland oil spill in the United States.

Enbridge President and CEO Al Monaco told investors this week regulatory delays, winter construction, additional environmental measures and COVID-19 protocols have forced costs to build the U.S. segment — 93% of which is in Minnesota — to jump from $2.9 billion to $4 billion.

Once complete, the pipeline will replace the existing, aging Line 3 and ferry 760,000 barrels of oil (31.92 million gallons) per day from Alberta, Canada, to Enbridge’s terminal in Superior, Wis., following a partially new 334-mile route through much of northern Minnesota.