Enbridge facing obstacles on Line 3

Upgrades require state approval

As a federal decision looms over Enbridge Inc.’s proposal to replace one of its aging oil pipelines, resistance to the project is mounting along the final U.S. section of the proposed route.

Proponents say Enbridge’s plan to replace its aging Line 3 pipeline, which ships mostly light and synthetic crude from Alberta to Wisconsin, would bring much-needed capacity to Canada’s pipeline constrained oil market. But the company still has to meet state-level permits in the U.S. before construction can begin.

The proposal was recommended for approval by Canada’s National Energy Board in April 2016, and a final decision from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s cabinet is expected soon. The federal minister of natural resources on Wednesday told reporters that a decision was still expected before the deadline this Friday, but a public announcement of that decision could be delayed until shortly thereafter.

The replacement pipeline will parallel the existing line for the majority of the route, except for the final 300 kilometres, between Clearbrook, Minn. and Superior, Wisc., where it will instead go through an existing right-of-way for power lines. Some regional environmental organizations and aboriginal groups oppose the proposed route due to concerns over risks to water bodies.

“It would cross the Mississippi, it would cross sensitive water resources, and create new pipeline corridor where one currently doesn’t exist,” says Kevin Lee, the lead attorney on the Line 3 proposal at the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, a local group who opposes the project.

The opposition to Line 3 comes as Canada’s midstream companies struggle to construct major new conduits such as Enbridge’s Northern Gateway and TransCanada Corp.’s Keystone XL.

Calgary-based firms have instead been buying existing pipelines as a way to grow capacity, often through purchases of major U.S. pipeline networks. Resistance to the Line 3 replacement underscores how even attempts to improve leakprone infrastructure can raise concerns among local people.

Line 3 is unlike other major pipeline proposals in that it will replace the aging pipeline along the route, which is 50 years old, rather than build new pipeline capacity into the U.S. Unlike Keystone XL, the Line 3 replacement does not require presidential approval.