

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The Big Oil powers that be have a Keystone XL obsession that just won’t die. Opponents are just as adamant that it won’t be built.
Here we go again.
The Big Oil powers that be have a Keystone XL obsession that just won’t die. Opponents are just as adamant that it won’t be built. The latest industry brainstorm is to bring a whole bunch of dirty tar sands oil from Canada to Guernsey, Wyoming, and then… well, “some future company” would need to build an additional pipeline, in order to get that oil down to refineries on the Gulf Coast. That’s a risky plan for a pipeline investor.
To review: The pipeline company TransCanada, which later became TC Energy and then recently spun off into new corporate entity “South Bow,” first proposed building the Alberta to Texas tar sands pipeline in 2008. As a trans-boundary pipeline, it required not only state permits and land acquisition from farmers and ranchers along the route, but also a Presidential Permit determining it to be in the national interest.
It was sailing along its permitting process despite opposition from First Nations in Canada, when climate scientist James Hansen pointed out that if the super-dirty high-carbon Alberta tar sands were fully developed it would be “game over” for the climate. At the same time, farmers and ranchers in Nebraska noticed that the route went through the fragile Sand Hills region and threatened the Ogallala aquifer. A battle royale ensued, with an unlikely alliance of farmers and ranchers, students, tribal nations, grassroots climate activists, and environmental nonprofits joining together against KXL supporters, which included the Alberta government, the Canadian government, the Republican Party, about half of the Democratic Party, and the entire oil industry.
To call this plan half-baked would be an insult to baking.
Remarkably, the unlikely alliance won. Barack Obama denied the Presidential Permit in 2015. Donald Trump approved it on the first day of his first term, but litigation prevented it from moving forward for the next four years. Joe Biden re-cancelled it on the first day of his presidency, and KXL was not built.
Now, however, there is an inkling of a plan to sort of revive KXL, although “plan” is an exaggeration. A company called Bridger is testing the waters by proposing to take bitumen, the technical term for the thick gooey hydrocarbon also known as tar sands or oil sands, from Alberta and pipe it through Montana to Guernsey, Wyoming. From there, according to press reports, “spurs” would be “bolted on” to take it to refining hubs and to the Gulf Coast for export. But it’s over 700 miles from Guernsey to the hub in Cushing, Olahoma, and over 400 miles to Steele City, Nebraska, where it could connect to existing underutilized pipelines.
Four hundred (400) miles is not exactly a “spur” that you “bolt on.” In fact, that route would require a state permit from the Nebraska Public Service Commission, and the acquisition of land—through eminent domain if necessary—from hundreds of Nebraskans. The process would take years, and generate the same controversy it did back in the early 2010’s. And if South Bow fails to get the full route built before the militantly pro-oil US president is out of office, the cross-border Presidential Permit could be denied—again. That “spur,” potentially cutting across the entire state of Nebraska, is the part that “some future company” would be responsible for. To call this plan half-baked would be an insult to baking.
The current war in Iran is making oil and energy markets more volatile than anytime since the 1970’s, with oil prices over $100. That might make it seem that tar sands oil, which is not only the dirtiest but most expensive oil to produce, could still make money. But in the long run, oil will probably settle somewhere under $100, because that’s where Saudi Arabia, OPEC, and the US producers want it—high enough to generate high profits, but not high enough to provoke recession. And in the even longer run, the world will inevitably electrify transportation, because this dependence on oil, with its wars and spills and price spikes and insecurity and pollution and global warming, is just too crazy.
Let’s add up the risks:
Let’s add up the rewards:
The risks far outweigh the rewards. Which is why this pipeline should not be built.
The US Bureau of Land Management and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality are now jointly accepting public comments on permit applications for the project through May 1, and holding several public meetings in Montana.
Bold Nebraska, the group that helped lead the original fight against Keystone XL by organizing farmers and ranchers along the route into an unlikely alliance with Tribal Nations, grassroots advocates, and national environmental groups, is collecting comments from citizens for the docket that it will deliver by mail on the May 1 deadline. Click here to use Bold’s form to submit a public comment to oppose the new “Keystone Light” pipeline project.
“We will use every tool in our toolbox to ensure that this pipeline does not go ahead,” said one First Nations leader after the deal struck between Prime Minister Mark Carney and the Conservative premier of Alberta.
First Nations groups backed by environmental and conservationist allies in Canada are denouncing a pipeline and tanker infrastructure agreement announced Thursday between Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney and Conservative Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, calling it a betrayal and promising to fight its implementation tooth and nail.
“We will use every tool in our toolbox to ensure that this pipeline does not go ahead,” said Heiltsuk Nation Chief Marilyn Slett in response to the Carney-Smith deal that would bring tens of millions of barrels of tar sands oil from Alberta to the coast of British Columbia for export by building new pipeline and lifting a moratorium against oil tankers operating in fragile British Columbia coastal water.
While Carney, who argues that the pipeline is in Canada's economic interest, had vowed to secure the support of First Nations before finalizing any agreement with Alberta, furious reactions to the deal made it clear that promise was not met.
Xhaaidlagha Gwaayaai, the president of the Haida nation, was emphatic: "This project is not going to happen."
The agreement, according to the New York Times, is part of Carney’s "plan to curb Canada’s trade dependence on the United States, swings Canadian policy away from measures meant to fight climate change to focus instead on growing the oil and gas industry."
In a statement, the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs (UBCIC) "loudly" voiced its opposition to the memorandum of understanding signed by Carney and Smith.
"This MOU is nothing less than a high-risk and deeply irresponsible agreement that sacrifices Indigenous peoples, coastal communities, and the environment for political convenience," said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the UBCIC. "By explicitly endorsing a new bitumen pipeline to BC's coast and promising to rewrite the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act, the federal government is resurrecting one of the most deeply flawed and divisive ideas in Canadian energy politics."
Slett, who serves as secretary-treasurer of the UBCIC, said the agreement "was negotiated without the involvement of the very Nations who would shoulder those risks, and to suggest ‘Indigenous co-ownership’ of a pipeline while ignoring the clear opposition of Coastal First Nations is unacceptable."
Avi Lewis, running for the leadership of the progressive New Democratic Party (NDP) in the upcoming elections, decried the agreement as a failure of historic proportions.
"Carney’s deal with Danielle Smith is the sellout of the century: scrapping climate legislation for a pipeline that will never be built," said Lewis, a veteran journalist and climate activist. "We need power lines, not pipelines. Our path is through climate leadership and building good jobs in the clean economy."
Carney’s deal with Danielle Smith is the sellout of the century: scrapping climate legislation for a pipeline that will never be built.We need powerlines, not pipelines. Our path is through climate leadership & building good jobs in the clean economy.
[image or embed]
— Avi Lewis (@avilewis.ca) November 28, 2025 at 12:05 AM
In response to the deal, the minister of Canadian culture, Steven Guilbeault, who formerly served as environment minister under the previous Liberal administration, resigned in protest.
“Despite this difficult economic context, I remain one of those for whom environmental issues must remain front and center,” Guilbeault said in a statement.
"Over the past few months, several elements of the climate action plan I worked on as Minister of the Environment have been, or are about to be, dismantled,” he said. “In my view, these measures remain essential to our climate action plan.”
David Eby, the premier of British Columbia who opposes the new pipeline into his province and was not included in the discussions between Carney and Smith, echoed those who said the project is more dead than alive, despite the MOU, calling it a potential "energy vampire" that would distracts from better energy solutions that don't carry all the baggage of this proposed project.
“With all of the variables that have yet to be fulfilled—no proponent, no route, no money, no First Nations support—that it cannot draw limited federal resources, limited Indigenous governance resources, limited provincial resources away from the real projects that will employ people,” Eby added.
Keith Brooks, the program director at Environmental Defence, decried the deal as "worse than we had anticipated" and "a gift to the oil industry and Alberta Premier Smith, at the expense of practically everyone else."
"Filling this pipeline and expansion would require more oil sands mining, leading to more carbon pollution, more tailings, and worse impacts for communities near the tar sands," warned Brooks. "The pipeline to BC would have to cross some of the most challenging terrain in Canada. The impacts of construction would be severe, and the impacts of a spill, devastating."
Jessica Green, a professor at the University of Toronto focused on environmental politics, equated the "reckless" deal to a "climate dumpster fire" and called the push for more tar sands pipelines in Canada "the energy equivalent [of] investing in VHS tapes in 2025."
At least the United States under President Donald Trump, she added, "has the cojones to say it doesn’t give a shit about climate" while Carney, despite the contents of the deal with Alberta, "is still pretending that Canada does."
President Donald Trump wants to revive Keystone XL, a highly controversial extension of the tar sands pipeline system, despite three massive leaks over the past eight years.
This is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates...
The Keystone pipeline—which carries hundreds of thousands of barrels of crude oil nearly 2,700 miles from the Alberta tar sands to refineries in Illinois and Oklahoma daily—was abruptly shut down Tuesday morning following a rupture in North Dakota, marking yet another accident along what proponents have called the "safest pipeline in the world."
South Bow, the Canadian company that manages the Keystone system, said it shut down the pipeline—which transports an average of around 624,000 barrels of crude oil per day—after detection systems sounded the alarm on a pressure drop. The company said the spill is confined to an agricultural field about 60 miles southwest of Fargo.
"The affected segment has been isolated, and operations and containment resources have been mobilized to site," the company said, according to The Associated Press. "Our primary focus right now is the safety of onsite personnel and mitigating risk to the environment."
As the AP reported:
It wasn't clear what caused the rupture of the underground pipeline or the amount of crude oil released into the field. An employee working at the site near Fort Ransom heard a "mechanical bang" and shut down the pipeline within about two minutes, said Bill Suess, spill investigation program manager with the North Dakota Department of Environmental Quality. Oil surfaced about 300 yards (274 meters) south of the pump station in a field and emergency personnel responded, Suess said.
A proposed extension known as Keystone XL would have carried more tar sands oil—widely considered the world's dirtiest fuel—to refineries along the Gulf of Mexico. Opponents warned of the danger of leaks, with a 2021 report from the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office noting that there were 22 accidents along the conduit between 2010 and 2020. These include leaks of more than 100,000 gallons per spill in 2017, 2019, and 2022.
"Keystone's incident history illustrates the problematic pipeline's systemic issues," Bill Caram, executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust, said in a statement Tuesday. "The Keystone pipeline appears to be on track to hit its average of about a significant failure every year. It's time to address this pipeline's shortcomings."
Following more than a decade of pressure from climate, environmental, Indigenous, and other groups, then-President Joe Biden revoked Keystone XL's permit on his first day in office in January 2021. President Donald Trump, who campaigned on a "drill, baby, drill" platform, now wants to revive Keystone XL.
The only real hope of avoiding climate disaster lies in dramatically ramping up the transition to clean energy by building new wind and solar farms at breakneck speed.
The opening of the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion this month—widely celebrated in the media—reminds us that Canada is still very much in the grip of Big Oil.
That $34 billion expansion was financed by Ottawa, and it amounts to a massive public subsidy for the oil industry—at a time when we should urgently be financing renewable energy, not fossil fuels.
The renowned U.S. climatologist James Hansen famously said the oilsands were such a “dirty, carbon-intensive” oil that if they were to be fully exploited, it would be “game over” for the planet.
Over the past four years, Ottawa has provided $65 billion in financial support for oil and gas, but only a fraction as much for renewable energy.
Yet here we are, applauding the tripling of the pipeline’s capacity to carry oil from the oilsands, even as that moves us closer to “game over.”
A report this month revealed that the world’s top climate scientists believe the world is headed in a frightening direction—toward more than 2.5°C degrees of warming, charging past the international target of 1.5°C, beyond which fires, floods, and heatwaves become seriously unpredictable.
Today, we’re at just 1.2°C of warming, and look at the mess we’re in. Already this season, wildfires are burning out of control in B.C. and Alberta.
Climate scientists have been clear: The only real hope of avoiding climate disaster lies in dramatically ramping up the transition to clean energy by building new wind and solar farms at breakneck speed.
But this isn’t happening, even though the price of wind and solar power has become very competitive. That was supposed to be the trigger point at which the market would begin working in our favour, with renewables cheaper than fossil fuels, facilitating the transition to clean energy.
Renewables keep getting cheaper. The price of solar power has plunged by 90%, yet Big Oil remains dominant.
That’s because, with its long-established monopoly and extensive government support, Big Oil is far more profitable—and therefore more attractive—to major financial investors than the struggling, competitive firms that make up the budding renewable sector, notes Brett Christophers, a political economist at Uppsala University in Sweden.
Clearly, given the climate emergency, we can’t just leave the vital task of transitioning to renewables up to the whims of financial investors, whose only interest is maximizing their returns.
Governments must become a lot more involved, and they have to switch their loyalty from Big Oil to renewables.
The Biden administration has moved in this direction, with sweeping measures aimed at doubling renewable capacity in the U.S. over the next decade. Meanwhile, the Trudeau government is locked into serving the immensely powerful oil industry.
Over the past four years, Ottawa has provided $65 billion in financial support for oil and gas, but only a fraction as much for renewable energy. Its main program for subsidizing renewables provides less than $1 billion a year, says Julia Levin, an associate director with Environmental Defence.
The extent of Ottawa’s willingness to accommodate Big Oil became clear in 2018 when it took over the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion, rather than let the project collapse after its original backers threatened to pull out amid intense environmental opposition.
Now Ottawa is planning to spend $10 billion, possibly much more, subsidizing Big Oil’s futile but costly efforts to reduce its carbon emissions through “carbon capture and storage”—despite ample evidence the technology is highly ineffective at reducing such emissions.
This enables Big Oil to pretend it’s serious about reducing emissions, lulling Canadians into believing we’re making progress on climate, when we’re really just spinning our wheels and wasting a lot of public money in the process.
For years, there was the comforting thought that, when the horrors of climate change truly became clear, humans would be smart enough to figure out a solution. That turned out to be true. It’s just that we haven’t figured out how to override the powerful so we can implement the solution.
"In quantifying the astonishing and largely unreported levels," said a Greenpeace campaigner, "these scientists have validated what downwind Indigenous communities have been saying for decades."
Aircraft measurements of pollutants over the Athabasca tar sands in Alberta, Canada show levels exceeding industry reports by 1,900% to more than 6,300%, scientists revealed Thursday, underscoring the need for humanity to rapidly phase out fossil fuels.
While the Canadian government requires air quality monitoring around oil sands operations, industry figures focus on certain compounds. For this research, published Thursday in the journal Science, experts from Yale University and Environment and Climate Change Canada, a department of the Canadian government, accounted for a wider range of emissions.
After collecting data from 30 flights around 17 tar sands operations in 2018, "what we saw were very large emissions of total gas-phase organic carbon from these facilities," said co-author and Yale professor Drew Gentner in a statement. "On average, the majority of the total gas-phase organic carbon was from often overlooked compounds, which are typically outside of the scope of routine monitoring."
"This report backs up what the communities living in these areas experience—it is so bad they cannot open their windows because it hurts their lungs to breathe—especially at night."
Co-author John Liggio of Environment and Climate Change Canada noted that "the magnitude of the observed emissions from oil sands operations was larger than expected, considering that it was roughly equivalent to the sum of all other anthropogenic sources across Canada when including all the motor vehicles, all the solvents, all the other oil and gas sources, and everything else reported to the inventory."
Nadine Borduas-Dedekind, a University of British Columbia atmospheric chemist who has worked with Liggio but was not involved with this study, told Nature that "I'm concerned by how big this number is."
"You want to be measuring all this carbon. For air quality, for health, but also for climate," she said, explaining that some of the molecules are oxidized to planet-heating carbon dioxide.
Thanks to the tar sands deposits across northern Alberta, which are estimated to contain 1.7-2.5 trillion barrels of oil, Canada trails only Saudi Arabia and Venezuela in terms of total known reserves.
As Inside Climate News detailed Thursday:
The deposits do not technically hold crude oil, but instead a heavier hydrocarbon called bitumen, which must be heated and treated in order to form a liquid that can be piped and refined like oil. That process requires sprawling industrial operations of open pit mines, ever-growing waste ponds, and refinery-like "upgraders." The waste ponds have leached toxic chemicals into groundwater, and a heavy, sulfurous stench often settles over the region. The mines have stripped away an area larger than New York City, lands that had long been occupied by people from several Indigenous First Nations. One of those First Nations, Fort McKay, is now surrounded by mines.
Jean L'Hommecourt, an enrolled member of the Fort McKay First Nation, told Inside Climate News she wasn't shocked by the new findings.
"I was just like, eh, I knew all along," said L'Hommecourt, who has worked to clean up nearby operations. "We feel the physical effects here."
Jesse Cardinal of the Indigenous-led group Keepers of the Water similarly said to The Guardian, "We are told this is all within the limits and OK but this report backs up what the communities living in these areas experience—it is so bad they cannot open their windows because it hurts their lungs to breathe—especially at night."
Asked to comment on the research, Keith Stewart, a senior energy strategist for Greenpeace Canada, wrote in an email to The Independent, "I suppose 'Holy s***' isn't printable."
"In quantifying the astonishing and largely unreported levels of health-damaging air pollution coming out of oil sands operations, these scientists have validated what downwind Indigenous communities have been saying for decades," Stewart added. "This is making people sick, so our governments can and should require these companies to use some of their record-breaking profits to clean up the mess they've made."
For any other jurisdiction, diversifying the economy away from fossil fuels while building a thriving renewables sector would be a good news story to celebrate and accelerate—not pause.
In western Canada, the province of Alberta is poised to become a renewable energy superpower. Sadly, Alberta’s leadership wants to destroy that prospect, threatening billions in renewable energy projects currently in development.
Without consulting the renewables sector, Alberta announced a pause of new approvals of renewable projects over one megawatt for the next six months.
Criticism of the moratorium was swift and ongoing. It’s not just Canadian companies impacted. U.S. investors are taking a hit. Texas-based Proteus Power Developments LLC has spent millions on plans to build three solar farms in the province. Like other leaders in the renewable sector, its CEO was given no warning about the moratorium. “We got screwed,” he told reporters. Other U.S. companies with projects at risk include a subsidiary of Florida-based NextEra Energy Resources LLC and EDP Renewables, a firm with headquarters in Texas and Spain.
Alberta Minister of Affordability and Utilities Nathan Neudorf claims that the moratorium is motivated by complaints from rural communities and the need for policies for “land reclamation” and stability in the grid. The requirements for renewable developers could include mandatory security bonds, as well as paying for clean up of projects at the end of their life cycle. As the controversy continued, the Alberta Premier Danielle Smith blamed energy regulators for asking for the moratorium in letters—yet letters show no moratorium mentioned.
Where were these stringent requirements when oil sands tailings ponds were leaking chemicals into nearby Indigenous communities, causing damage to people’s health, the land, air, and water?
The provincial leadership’s sudden interest in checks and balances from the energy sector is curious at best, but reeks of hypocrisy. Where were these stringent requirements when oil sands tailings ponds were leaking chemicals into nearby Indigenous communities, causing damage to people’s health, the land, air, and water? Where is the concern that oil sands companies massively underpay for end of life cleanup, despite the frequency of oil spills? Internal documents from the Alberta Energy Regulator suggest cleanup of the tailings ponds alone would reach $130 billion. The regulator has only collected $1.6 billion for liabilities.
Once infamously known for its polluting oil sands industry, Alberta is now home to the fastest growth of solar and wind electricity generation in Canada. Last year, 17% of Alberta’s power came from wind and solar—exceeding the province’s 15% goal—and there are another 15 renewable energy projects before the Alberta Utilities Commission, representing hundreds of millions of dollars in investment. A Clean Energy Canada analysis found in a net-zero 2050 Canada, jobs in Alberta’s clean energy sector would grow 10% a year out to net-zero 2050—the fastest of any province or territory—significantly more than the job decline expected in fossil fuels. For any other jurisdiction, diversifying the economy away from fossil fuels while building a booming clean energy sector would be a good news story to celebrate and accelerate—not pause.
Why is Alberta’s leadership so keen to shut this booming industry down when the moratorium is at odds with conservative free-market principles that are strongly upheld in the region? Even usual supporters of Alberta’s United Conservative Party are scratching their heads. Could the government be more interested in pursuing the ideologies of its leadership and scoring political points instead of lowering Albertans’ energy bills? Perhaps it also has something to do with the power of the oil and gas sector and their relentless lobby to ensure continued expansion of fossil fuel production. They are threatened by wind and solar being cheaper at scale now than fossil fuels and the simple fact that no one owns the sun and the wind. That means no long-term dependency on their products, no fear of scarcity to milk while they jack the price and reap record profits. Power (in every sense of the word) will be redistributed. Heaven forbid.
As we emerge from the hottest July ever recorded on this planet, every headline, TV, and radio soundbyte has a climate expert urging governments to act urgently. For countries like Canada that have never met a climate target, this is largely due to the oil and gas sector being the biggest and fastest growing source of emissions in the country. Unless the world collectively cuts emissions faster and deeper, scientists say Canada can expect more climate impacts, including more frequent wildfires and floods.
While these headlines feel ominous, they fail to demonstrate that all hope isn’t lost. A poll released in July 2023 finds a strong majority of Canadians support the federal government introducing Clean Electricity Regulations, including 64% support in Alberta. Meanwhile, nearly 9 out of 10 Canadians want the federal government to match or give more financial support to the renewable energy sector than the oil and gas sector.
Instead of making headlines worldwide for out of control wildfires blanketing skies in smoke from Washington to New York City, Canada could be known as a clean energy powerhouse. Alberta could help lead the way—but only if the province’s leadership doesn’t let rhetoric win over economics and our safety.
If Alberta’s leadership were truly credible, polluters would have to follow the same rules to ensure communities are safeguarded from all energy projects. Now is the time to uplift energy solutions that work for our economy and climate instead of doubling down on the volatile boom-and-bust cycle of the fossil fuel industry.
"Everybody warned Prime Minister Justin Trudeau if he bought this white elephant pipeline it would turn into a financial and political boondoggle," said one climate campaigner.
Climate, environmental, and Indigenous advocates in recent days condemned the skyrocketing cost of expanding the Canadian government-owned Trans Mountain oil pipeline, which is now expected to carry a CA$30.9 billion price tag—44% higher than last year's estimate and nearly a six-fold increase from the original appraisal.
Trans Mountain Corporation said Friday that the project—which will add more than 600 miles of new pipeline and will nearly triple existing capacity from 300,000 to 890,000 barrels per day—is currently close to 80% finished and should be completed by the end of the year. The company blamed the project's soaring cost on numerous factors, including floods in British Columbia, supply chain difficulties, inflation, and the discovery of major Indigenous archaeological sites along the pipeline route.
"Everybody warned Prime Minister Justin Trudeau if he bought this white elephant pipeline it would turn into a financial and political boondoggle," Peter McCartney, a climate campaigner at the Wilderness Committee, said in a statement Friday.
"I don't want to hear from any federal official that bold, transformative climate action is too expensive ever again."
In what critics called a betrayal of his purported commitment to tackling the climate emergency, Trudeau's government bought the pipeline from Houston-based Kinder Morgan in 2018 for $4.5 billion.
"Honestly, I really hate to say we told them so because there are far better things we should be doing with over $30 billion than exporting a polluting product the world has agreed to abandon as fast as possible," said McCartney.
"In the last year alone, the price tag for this pipeline—already the most expensive industrial project in Canadian history—has gone up almost $10 billion," McCartney added. "If the Liberal government doesn't abandon this pointless albatross now, how do we know taxpayers won't be looking at even more cost overruns and further delays a year from now?"
Keith Stewart, a senior energy strategist with Greenpeace Canada, told Reuters that the pipeline was "always a disaster from a climate change perspective."
"But this is now an economic crime that has stolen $30 billion of public funds from real climate solutions," he added.
According to the Wilderness Committee:
When Trans Mountain first proposed its expansion in 2012, American company Kinder Morgan estimated the construction costs at $5.4 billion. In 2018, when the federal government bought the pipeline it had a forecast price tag of $9.6 billion, on top of the $4.5 billion purchase. Last year, the company announced costs had risen to $21.4 billion, and now it predicts it will cost $30.9 billion in total to finish the project with about a year left to go. That means the price of this pipeline has ballooned almost six times.
"How deeply ironic it is for this fossil fuel company that climate disasters have led construction costs to spiral out of control," McCartney said. "I don't want to hear from any federal official that bold, transformative climate action is too expensive ever again."
According to the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, at least 58 Indigenous sites—including former villages and burial grounds—were destroyed during the pipeline's construction in the early 1950s.
Completed in 1953, the Trans Mountain Pipeline carries crude tar sands oil, often called the world's dirtiest, over 700 miles from Alberta to the British Columbian coast. Activists have urged the Canadian government to cancel the expansion, arguing that it will further fuel the climate emergency, threaten the environment, and desecrate sacred Indigenous lands. Additionally, pipeline workers sometimes murder, rape, traffic, and perpetrate other crimes against First Nations women, girls, and two-spirit people.
On the same day Trans Mountain Corporation announced the revised estimate for the pipeline's cost, Calí Tzay, the United Nations special rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous peoples, ended a 10-day visit to Canada and published a report linking the project to human rights abuses.
"A large number of megaprojects in Indigenous territories proceed without good faith consultation and in the absence of obtaining Indigenous peoples' free, prior, and informed consent as, in the case of Trans Mountain Pipeline," Tzay wrote. "I am also concerned about the ongoing militarization of Indigenous lands and the criminalization of Indigenous human rights defenders resisting the Trans Mountain and Coastal GasLink pipelines in British Columbia."
"I urge the government of Canada to end these violations," Tzay added, "and to adopt adequate measures to guarantee Indigenous peoples' right to consultation and free, prior, and informed consent, and their rights to lands, territories, and resources."
From pizza and “Pipeline Punch” energy drinks, to porta potties, riot suits, zip ties, and salaries, Enbridge poured a total of $8.6 million into 97 public agencies across the state amid opposition to Line 3 tar sands project.
The morning of June 7, 2021, Sheriff’s Deputy Chuck Nelson of Beltrami County, Minnesota, bought water and refreshments, packed his gear, and prepared for what would be, in his own words, “a long day.” For over six months, Indigenous-led opponents of the Line 3 tar sands oil pipeline had been participating in acts of civil disobedience to disrupt its construction, arguing that it would pollute water, exacerbate the climate crisis, and violate treaties with the Anishinaabe people. Officers like Nelson were stuck in the middle of a conflict, sworn to protect the rights of both Enbridge, Inc., the giant multinational company expanding the pipeline across northern Minnesota, and its opponents.
Nelson drove 30 minutes to Hubbard County, where he and officers from 14 different police and sheriff’s departments confronted around 500 protesters, known as water protectors, occupying a pipeline pump station. The deputy spent his day detaching people who had locked themselves to equipment as fire departments and ambulances stood by. A U.S. Customs and Border Protection helicopter swooped low, kicking dust over the demonstrators, and officers deployed a sound cannon known as a Long Range Acoustic Device in attempts to disperse the crowd.
By the end of the day, 186 people had been detained in the largest mass-arrest of the opposition movement. Some officers stuck around to process arrests, while others stopped for snacks at a gas station or ordered Chinese takeout before crashing at a nearby motel.
These latter details might be considered irrelevant, except for the fact that the police and emergency workers’ takeout, motel rooms, riot gear, gas, wages, and trainings were paid for by one side of the dispute — Enbridge, which spent more than $79,000 on policing that day alone.
When the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission gave Enbridge permission in 2020 to replace its corroded Line 3 pipeline and double its capacity, it included an unusual condition in the permit: Enbridge would pay the police as they responded to the acts of civil disobedience that the project would surely spark. The pipeline company’s money would be funneled to law enforcement and other government agencies via a Public Safety Escrow Account managed by the state.
By the time construction finished in fall 2021, prosecutors had filed 967 criminal cases related to pipeline protests, and police had submitted hundreds of receipts and invoices to the Enbridge-funded escrow account, seeking reimbursement. Through a public records request, Grist and the Center for Media and Democracy have obtained and reviewed every one of those invoices, providing the most complete picture yet of the ways the pipeline company paid for the arrests of its opponents — and much more.
From pizza and “Pipeline Punch” energy drinks, to porta potties, riot suits, zip ties, and salaries, Enbridge poured a total of $8.6 million into 97 public agencies, from the northern Minnesota communities that the pipeline intersected to southern counties from which deputies traveled hours to help quell demonstrations.
By far the biggest set of expenses reimbursed from the Enbridge escrow account was over $5 million for wages, meals, lodging, mileage, and other contingencies as police and emergency workers responded to protests during construction. Over $1.3 million each went toward equipment and planning, including dozens of training sessions. Enbridge also reimbursed nearly a quarter million dollars for the cost of responding to pipeline-related human trafficking and sexual violence.

(Credit: Jessie Blaeser / Grist)
Reporters for Grist and the Center for Media and Democracy reviewed more than 350 records requested from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, pulling out totals described in invoices and receipts and dividing them into categories such as equipment, wages, and training. Each agency had its own method for tracking expenses, with varying levels of specificity. In cases where reporters were unable to cleanly disentangle different types of expenses, those expenses were categorized as “other/multiple.” Generally, totals should be considered conservative estimates for each category.
The $79,000 that Enbridge paid for the single day of arrests on June 7, which doesn’t include all of the Enbridge-funded equipment and training many officers relied on, displays the wide range of activities and agencies Enbridge’s money touched. The county attorney’s office of Hubbard County, where the protest took place, even attempted to get Enbridge to reimburse $27,000 in prosecution expenses. In other words, the area’s top arbiter of justice assumed that Enbridge would be covering the cost of pursuing charges against hundreds of water protectors. (The state-appointed escrow account manager denied the request.)
Some of the most surprising Enbridge invoices were from institutions and officials associated with protecting Minnesota’s environmental resources and preserving a balance between industry and the public interest. No agency received more escrow account money than the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, or DNR, which is also one of the primary agencies monitoring Line 3 for environmental harms. Of the $2.1 million that the DNR received, the funds were mainly used to respond to protests and train state enforcement officers about how to manage protesters, in some cases before construction had even begun. Conservation officers joined police on the front lines of protests, on the pipeline company’s dime.

(Credit: Jessie Blaeser / Grist)
The Aitkin County-run Long Lake Conservation Center, one of the oldest environmental education centers in the U.S., provided facilities to police to the tune of over $40,000, which the sheriff’s office paid using Enbridge funds. And a public safety liaison hired to coordinate among Enbridge, the Public Utilities Commission, and local officials was paid $120,000 in salary and benefits by the pipeline company over a year and a half.
The invoices also document, in unusual detail, the connection between fossil fuel megaproject construction and violence against women: Enbridge reimbursed a nonprofit organization for the cost of hotel rooms for women who had been assaulted by Line 3 workers, according to an invoice submitted by the nonprofit. The pipeline company also helped pay for two sex trafficking stings conducted by the Minnesota Human Trafficking Investigative Task Force, leading to the arrest of at least four Line 3 pipeline workers.
The state of Minnesota also considered police public relations to be expenses eligible for Enbridge funding. John Elder, at the time spokesperson for the Minneapolis Police Department, put out police press releases and responded to journalist queries on behalf of the Northern Lights Task Force, which was set up to coordinate emergency response agencies throughout the protests. Enbridge ultimately reimbursed the St. Louis County Sheriff’s Office for 331 hours of his work at a wage of $80 per hour. (St. Louis County Sheriff Gordon Ramsay said he was not in office during pipeline construction and could not comment on Line-3-related work, and Elder did not respond to requests for comment.)
A year earlier, Elder had handled Minneapolis police PR when one of the city’s officers killed George Floyd, sparking an unprecedented wave of nationwide protests. Elder was behind the notorious press release stating that Floyd had “physically resisted officers” and died after he “appeared to be suffering medical distress.” Hours later, a bystander video went viral, showing that the medical distress followed an officer pressing his knee on Floyd’s neck for for more than nine minutes. Fallout from the press release did not stop law enforcement agencies from choosing Elder to lead officials’ public relations surrounding the Line 3 protests.
Water protectors contend that the state of Minnesota’s arrangement with Enbridge trampled their constitutional rights. With 97 criminal cases unresolved across the state, five defendants in Aitkin County are pursuing motions arguing that the escrow account created an unconstitutional police and prosecutor bias that violated their rights to due process and equal protection under the law. They want the charges dismissed. Attorneys with the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund’s Center for Protest Law and Litigation previously used the defense against charges filed by Hubbard County that were ultimately dismissed. They’re now preparing a separate civil lawsuit challenging the use of the escrow account on constitutional grounds.
Winona LaDuke, an Anishinaabe activist and founder of the Indigenous environmental nonprofit Honor the Earth, is among those arguing in court that charges should be thrown out. Aitkin County, the jurisdiction behind the allegations she’s fighting, was reimbursed $6,007.70 for wages and benefits on just one of the days she was arrested. LaDuke believes the money amped up the police response.
“They were far more aggressive with us, far more intent on finding any possible reason to stop somebody,” she said. “Law enforcement is supposed to protect and serve the people. They work for Enbridge.”
LaDuke added that she believes the DNR’s Enbridge money represents a “conflict of interest.” In addition to its role in monitoring the pipeline’s full Minnesota route, the agency is directly responsible for the ecological health of 35 miles of state lands and 66 waterways that Line 3 crosses — and where Anishinaabe people have distinct treaty rights to hunt, gather, and travel. To date, the DNR and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency have charged Enbridge over $11 million in penalties for violations that include dozens of drilling fluid spills and three aquifer breaches that occurred during construction. LaDuke and others have criticized the agency’s response to the incidents, noting that it took months to publicly disclose the first of the aquifer breaches.
Juli Kellner, an Enbridge spokesperson, emphasized that the escrow account was operated by an independent manager who reported to the Public Utilities Commission, not the oil company. Kellner said the account was created to relieve communities from the increased financial burden that public safety agencies accrued when responding to protests.
“Enbridge provided funding but had no decision-making authority on reimbursement requests,” she said.
Ryan Barlow, the Public Utilities Commission’s general counsel, said the commission had no comment about the appropriateness of specific expenses: “If expenses met the conditions of the permit they were approved; if they did not, they were not approved.”
In a statement, the DNR said that receiving reimbursement from Enbridge does not constitute a conflict of interest: “At no time were state law enforcement personnel under the control or direction of Enbridge, and at no time did the opportunity for reimbursement for our public safety work in any way influence our regulatory decisions.”
When asked why its officers were trained how to use chemical weapons ahead of the protests, the DNR said their peace officers’ overall mission is “protecting Minnesota’s natural resources and the people who use them” and that such equipment, while occasionally necessary, “is not used as part of conservation officers’ routine work.”
Hubbard County Sheriff Cory Aukes said his agency’s response was dictated by the protestors and water protectors. “If they want to block roads, threaten workers, and cause $100,000 worth of damage to Enbridge equipment, well, we have a job to do, and we did it,” Aukes said, adding that Enbridge is a taxpayer that officers have a duty to protect. “Enbridge is a big taxpayer in Hubbard county and we would be doing an injustice if we didn’t support them as well.”
“We were in the middle,” added Aitkin County Sheriff Dan Guida. “There were probably times when it seems like we dealt with water protectors in a more criminal way, but they were the ones breaking the law.” He added that officers had no knowledge of the reimbursement plan and that the funds spared taxpayers the cost of policing the pipeline.
Long Lake Conservation Center manager Dave McMillan, on the other hand, said he knew the money the Aitkin County Sheriff’s Office paid his organization for police officer lodging would come from Enbridge. “My concern was not wanting to become a pawn or a player in this political battle. In the same token, we said if any of the organizations that were protesting said they wanted to come here and use our facilities, we would have said yes,” he said. Enbridge’s connection to the facility runs even deeper: The company’s director of tribal engagement sits on the board of the Long Lake Conservation Foundation, which helps fund the county-run facility.
With energy infrastructure fights brewing over liquid natural gas terminals in the Southeast, lithium mining in the West, and the Enbridge-operated Line 5 pipeline in Wisconsin and Michigan, the ongoing legal cases that have ensnared the water protectors will help decide whether or not the public safety escrow account will be replicated elsewhere.
“Our concern is that this now will become the model for deployment nationwide against any community that is rising up against corporate abuse,” said Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, the director of the Center for Protest Law and Litigation, who is representing some of the water protectors. “It becomes very easy to sell this to the public as a savings for taxpayers, when instead what they’re doing is selling their police department to serve the pecuniary interests of a corporation.”
Long before Line 3 construction began, Anishinaabe-led water defenders promised they would rise up if the expanded pipeline was permitted. Members of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission warily looked west to North Dakota, where in 2016 and 2017 public agencies spent $38 million policing massive protests led by members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe against construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. With global concerns about climate change and biodiversity reaching a fever pitch, building an oil pipeline now came with a hefty civil disobedience bill, and the commissioners did not want taxpayers to foot it.
According to the pipeline permit, finalized in 2020, whenever a Minnesota public safety agency spent money on almost anything related to Line 3, they could submit an invoice, and Enbridge would pay it. Nonprofits responding to drug and human trafficking were also eligible for grants from the account. To create a layer of separation between police and the Enbridge money, the state hired an account manager to decide which invoices would be fulfilled.
Minnesota wasn’t the only state considering this kind of account. In 2019, South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem passed a law designed to establish “the next generation model of funding pipeline construction.” The law created a fund for law enforcement and emergency managers responding to pipeline protests, paid partly by new rioting penalties, but also with as much as $20 million from the company behind the pipeline. Noem’s office collaborated on the legislation with TransCanada, now known as TC Energy, which was preparing to build the controversial Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline. But with Keystone XL defunct after President Joe Biden pulled a key permit in 2021, only Minnesota would have the opportunity to fully test the new model.
Even before Line 3 received its final permit on November 30, 2020, more than $1 million in reimbursement-eligible expenses had been spent. Sheriffs’ offices were already buying riot gear and conducting crowd control trainings in 2016 and 2017, in anticipation of the protests.
Key to coordinating it all was the Northern Lights Task Force, established in September 2018 and consisting of law enforcement and other public officials from 16 counties along the pipeline route or otherwise hosting Enbridge infrastructure, as well as representatives from nearby reservations and state agencies. Task force members met at least a dozen times before construction began, the invoices show, and at times Enbridge representatives joined. It didn’t necessarily matter, however, whether Enbridge was physically in the room, because the company’s money was always there: For the law enforcement agencies that requested it, the corporation paid wages and overtime for each Northern Lights Task Force meeting attended.
David Olmstead, a retired Bloomington police commander appointed by the Minnesota Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management to fulfill the duties of the Line 3 public safety liaison, coordinated between Enbridge and public officials. Enbridge reimbursed the homeland security agency Olmstead’s salary and benefits as well as more than $20,000 in lodging expenses that Olmstead charged to a credit card, which included a room at Duluth’s Fairfield Inn that was rented for two straight months at the height of protests in June and July 2021, for a nightly rate of $165.
Indeed, for some, pipeline work became a full-time job funded by the multinational company. In October 2019, the Minnesota State Patrol assigned Captain Joe Dwyer to the role of commander for demonstration preparedness, a position he held for the next two years. “I attended various planning meetings and tabletop exercises,” Dwyer wrote in a letter submitted to the Enbridge account manager. “I also facilitated conversations, provided training and conducted extensive research related to response plans along the construction route with the various stakeholders associated with the project.” Dwyer got a dollar-per-hour pay bump and earned $50.82 hourly working in his new role. Enbridge covered tens of thousands of dollars of Dwyer’s wages.
Howie Padilla, a spokesperson for the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, which oversees both the Minnesota State Patrol and Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, underlined in a statement, “At no time were state law enforcement resources under the control or direction of Enbridge.”
Olmstead and Dwyer, who did not respond to requests for comment, helped set up a network of emergency operations centers to be activated when protests kicked off. In St. Louis County, the sheriff’s office contracted Paramount Planning, a company that counts Enbridge among its clients, to help run the Northeast Emergency Operations Center. Paramount agreed to coordinate the various law enforcement agencies, create a staffing schedule, and attend meetings, including intelligence-sharing meetings. Enbridge reimbursed the sheriff’s office just under $50,000 for Paramount’s work.
Paramount’s president and owner, Blain Johnson, said he was unaware that Enbridge had paid for his company’s St. Louis County contract. He said that an Enbridge representative attended the emergency operations center’s morning meetings, but that Paramount did not otherwise communicate with the corporation about its work for the St. Louis County Sheriff. Johnson acknowledged, however, that Paramount staff did work for Enbridge on consulting with tribes about the Line 3 pipeline. “Realistically, you could look at it as kind of a conflict of interest, but that part of the company was completely separated from what we were working on with the sheriff’s office,” Johnson said.
Law enforcement leaders also worked with task force members as they arranged dozens of training sessions. Although a large proportion focused on crowd control tactics, others covered techniques for dismantling lock-downs, responding to weapons of mass destruction, policing sex trafficking, upholding the constitution, understanding Native American culture, and using lessons learned from policing the Dakota Access Pipeline. Public officials spent over $950,000 of Enbridge’s money on training expenses, including meals, lodging, mileage, training fees, and wages.
Three quarters of the Enbridge training money went to the Department of Natural Resources. The agency’s enforcement division is not only responsible for upholding environmental laws and ticketing deviant poachers and recreational vehicle drivers, but it also has full police powers on state lands. While riot control may not be in the typical job description of a Minnesota conservation officer, previously known as a game warden, dozens of them trained to control crowds and use less-lethal chemical weapons.
The Enbridge fund wasn’t supposed to be primarily for stuff. To limit purchases, Public Utilities Commission members added language in the permit stipulating that public agencies could only use it to buy personal protective equipment, or PPE.
Over half of PPE funds went toward riot gear valued at more than $700,000, which was purchased from police equipment vendors like Streicher’s and Galls. For 13 county and city police forces, that meant more than $5,000 in riot suits, shields, and gas masks. The Beltrami County Sheriff’s Office took over $70,000 for riot gear, and the Polk County Sheriff’s Office more than $50,000. (Neither office responded to requests for comment.) However it was state agencies that received more than half of the Enbridge reimbursements for crowd control equipment: more than $200,000 for the Minnesota State Patrol, and over $170,000 for the Department of Natural Resources.

(Credit: Jessie Blaeser / Grist)
Enbridge also covered more than $325,000 in clothing — mostly cold weather apparel — as well as over $55,000 for hand, foot, and body warmers. Even the identification patches worn on many deputies’ lapels were paid for by Enbridge — totaling more than $7,000. Another $2,000 went toward porta potty rentals, and over $12,000 more toward gear to protect police as they detached protesters who had locked themselves to equipment, including face shields and flame-proof blankets to guard against flying sparks.
Enbridge paid not only for the time the Sheriff’s deputies took to arrest water protectors and bind their hands behind their backs, but also for the handcuffs themselves, which were dubbed PPE and paid for by the pipeline company. The state of Minnesota approved more than $12,500 in Enbridge funds for zip ties and handcuffs.
“Less lethal” weapons did not count as personal protective equipment, the account manager decided, to the frustration of some law enforcement leaders. The Beltrami County Sheriff’s Office attempted to claim over $10,000 worth of less lethal weaponry from Enbridge, including 250 bean bag rounds, two projectile launchers, 24 distraction devices, 61 batons, and various chemical weapons and ammunition such as pepper spray, 46 tear gas grenades, and 25 tear gas projectiles. And the Wright County Sheriff’s Office asked for Enbridge funds to cover $1,700 worth of pepper spray, sponge rounds, and other less than lethal weapons. All were denied.
Winona County Sheriff Ron Ganrude said sheriffs in southeastern Minnesota had compiled a list of equipment, including batons, that they expected deputies would need as they traveled north to assist on Line 3. Both the Winona County Sheriff’s Office and the city of Park Rapids attempted to use the escrow funds to pay for batons but were denied.
However, even though Enbridge couldn’t buy these weapons, the company did cover trainings on how to use them. Several trainings were provided by the tear gas manufacturer Safariland, costing thousands of dollars. Enbridge also reimbursed over $260,000 worth of gas masks and attachments, including filters for tear gas, presumably to protect law enforcement from the chemicals they themselves would be deploying.
It wasn’t necessarily the counties with the heaviest protest activity that purchased the most equipment using Enbridge money. Among the top five local law enforcement equipment buyers was the Otter Tail County Sheriff’s Office, located south of the pipeline route, which purchased more than $37,000 in riot gear using Enbridge money. Also among the top spenders was the Freeborn County Sheriff’s Office, located in one of Minnesota’s southernmost counties. The agency’s only Enbridge-related expense besides equipment was for three officers to spend a two- to three-day deployment assisting other agencies along the pipeline route in the northern part of the state. (The office did not respond to requests for comment.)

(Credit: Jessie Blaeser / Grist)
Otter Tail County Sheriff Barry Fitzgibbons told Grist that his agency still owns and maintains its equipment. “This in no way has impacted our ability to remain fair and impartial,” he said in a written statement.
2021 was a year of unprecedented protest among Northern Minnesota’s pristine lakes and wetlands. Enbridge and law enforcement faced a drumbeat of road blockades, lockdowns to pipeline equipment, marches through remote prairie, and layered demonstrations combining Anishinaabe ceremony with direct action tactics refined by generations of environmental and Indigenous social movements.
The biggest Enbridge escrow account expense was more than $4.5 million in wages, benefits, and overtime for officials responding to perceived security threats during construction. More than just police and sheriff’s offices were involved: The Department of Natural Resources’ largest Enbridge-funded expense was $870,000 in personnel costs during construction.
And it wasn’t just calls for service that Enbridge paid for. Dozens of invoices mentioned “patrols,” where law enforcement would drive up and down the pipeline route or surveil places occupied by pipeline opponents.
The Cass County Sheriff’s Office’s “proactive” safety patrol, described in an invoice, may help explain why that agency expensed far more money for response costs to the escrow account — over $900,000 — than any other county or city, despite facing fewer mass demonstrations than other areas.
Like Cass, Hubbard County at times instituted patrols. They also established mandatory overtime shifts. Line 3 meant that police officers across Minnesota received paychecks padded with Enbridge-funded overtime pay. One officer from the Clay County Sheriff’s Office, for example, earned $778.46 per day in wages and benefits for four 18-hour shifts in July and August 2021 – a total that included hourly pay for his four-hour 150-mile round-trip drive to the closest emergency operations center.
The invoices confirm that Enbridge-funded sheriff’s deputies in Hubbard County surveilled the Namewag camp, which was located on private land and used both as a space for Anishinaabe land-based practices and as a jumping off point for direct action protests. “On 3/6 and 3/7, Hubbard County Deputies observed roughly 30 previously unidentified vehicles arriving and periodically leaving the Hinds Lake Camp (Ginew [sic] Collective Camp) in Straight River Township, Hubbard County,” one invoice states.
It goes on to describe intelligence shared by an Enbridge employee, detailing the movements of various groups of pipeline resistors. “Migizi camp [another anti-Line 3 encampment] is empty at this time and intelligence suggests Migizi and Portland XR [short for Extinction Rebellion] are camping at a public campground,” the message from Enbridge stated.
Enbridge also paid for gas that fueled officers’ cars, hotels they stayed in when assisting other jurisdictions, and food they ate during shifts. During both planning stages and periods of law enforcement action, Enbridge covered at least $150,000 in meals, snacks, and drinks. The oil company bought bagels, Domino’s pizza, McNuggets, Subway sandwich platters, a Dairy Queen strawberry sundae, summer sausage, cheese curds, deep fried pickles, Fritos, Gatorade, and energy drinks, including one called Pipeline Punch.
From planning through construction, police and sheriff’s offices together received at least $5.8 million in Enbridge funds. For state agencies, the Enbridge funds represented a tiny proportion of massive budgets. However, for the Cass County Sheriff’s Office, the Enbridge money added up to the equivalent of more than 10 percent of the office’s 2021 budget. (The office did not respond to requests for comment.) Five other sheriff’s offices received reimbursements equivalent to over 5 percent of their annual budgets.
The biggest Enbridge payouts did not always correspond to the counties with the most protest activity. Only 17 of the 47 counties that received reimbursements were actually intersected by Enbridge infrastructure or saw any arrests.
The range of choices law enforcement agencies made regarding what to invoice makes clear the discretionary nature of the Line 3 response. Clearwater County is home to one of two places where Line 3 crosses the Mississippi River and the site of a number of protests. Although 20 other law enforcement agencies billed Enbridge for assisting the local sheriff, Clearwater County billed nothing to the pipeline company.
The invoices also offer insight into the way the influx of pipeline workers translated into incidents of human trafficking and assault. “Since the Line 3 Replacement project has come to our area, we have experienced an increase in calls and need for services,” reads a grant application from the nonprofit Violence Intervention Project, or VIP, based in Thief River Falls, Minnesota, a community through which the pipeline passes, just outside the Red Lake Reservation. “We have provided services to several victims that have been assaulted by employees working on the Enbridge line 3 project.”
Enbridge reimbursed the organization for two hotel rooms for assault survivors, since VIP’s shelter was full at the time. The company also paid $42,000 worth of hazard pay for shelter workers during the 2021 winter, due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Enbridge’s biggest human trafficking grant recipient was Support Within Reach, a northern Minnesota organization that works with survivors of sexual violence, which used the money to pay for extra personnel costs during pipeline construction and to buy emergency cell phones for advocates.
Additional funds also went to public agencies: Enbridge reimbursed $43,551.96 to local law enforcement agencies working with the Minnesota Human Trafficking Investigative Task Force. The documents describe at least two multi-agency operations in Grand Rapids and Bemidji, and news reports from the time confirm that they led to the arrest of four Line 3 workers.
Kellner, the Enbridge spokesperson, said that any employee caught and arrested for human trafficking would be fired by the company. She added that the four workers who were arrested were subcontractors, not direct employees of the oil company, and were fired by the contractor Enbridge worked with.
The Link, a nonprofit based in North Minneapolis, received $36,870 from Enbridge and used it in part to assist the task force with sting operations and support survivors who were found. Beth Holger, the organization’s chief executive officer, said she did not feel conflicted about taking Enbridge’s money, because it was going to victims: “Yes we took money from a corporation that has caused harm, and we’re giving it to people to help with that harm.”
The $8.6 million in expenses covered by Enbridge by no means accounts for the full public cost of responding to opposition to the Line 3 pipeline.
Several sheriffs’ offices anticipated thousands more Enbridge dollars than they received. The sheriffs’ offices in Cass, Beltrami, and Polk counties each attempted to expense around $25,000 of equipment that was ultimately denied reimbursement.
The state rejected Cass County’s request for an $18,000 fingerprinting system, and Polk County was denied Enbridge money for approximately $9,000 worth of TV sets for its emergency operations center as well as thousands more for tools like saws and chisels used to cut chains, cement, pvc pipes, and other materials used by protesters to lock down to Enbridge equipment and block construction.
Hubbard County Sheriff Cory Aukes said that it was unfortunate that the Hubbard county attorney’s request for prosecutorial funds was denied by the account manager, as Aukes sees the influx of charges and protestors as an undue burden on the attorney’s office as well as the sheriff’s office. He said that his agency had plenty of other expenses that weren’t covered.
He added that he believes it would be fiscally irresponsible to decline Enbridge’s funds. “Shouldn’t they have to fund that? Shouldn’t they be responsible to reimburse these additional costs?” Aukes asked.
To water protectors, however, the greatest costs of the pipeline are its consequences for the climate, water, and the Canadian forest ecosystem decimated by tar sands oil production. The nonprofit LaDuke co-founded, Honor the Earth, issued its own invoice to Enbridge before the creation of the escrow account, estimating that Line 3 would cost $266 billion annually in environmental losses and social damages.
So far, she hasn’t received a response.
This story was originally co-published in partnership with Grist and the Center for Media & Democracy and appears at Common Dreams with permission.
Cleanup and assessment efforts continued Monday after a Canadian fossil fuel company's pipeline spilled nearly an Olympic-sized swimming pool's worth of crude tar sands oil into a northern Kansas creek that feeds a watershed providing drinking water for hundreds of thousands of people.
"The only safe way to transport tar sands oil is not to do it at all."
In what's being called the largest U.S. onshore crude oil leak in nearly a decade and the largest by far in the accident-prone Keystone Pipeline system's history, approximately 14,000 barrels, or 600,000 gallons, of crude tar sands oil spewed from the Keystone 1 pipeline onto surrounding land and into Mill Creek just north of Washington, Kansas at around 8:00 pm on Wednesday.
Mill Creek flows into the Little Blue River, which in turn drains into the Big Blue River, which then runs into the Tuttle Creek Reservoir before draining into the Kansas River.
Aerial footage published by Nebraska Public Media over the weekend showed the extent of the damage:
"Over 61,000 square miles of watershed in Kansas, southern Nebraska, and eastern Colorado drain to the Kansas River, the drinking water source for over 800,000 Kansans and a vital natural resource," the local environmental group Friends of the Kaw said in a statement Friday.
"This area includes the creek, rivers, and reservoir potentially impacted by this Keystone pipeline spill. While Washington County is seemingly far away from the Kansas River, disasters like this one illustrate how connected the people and places in our watershed truly are," the group added.
Calgary, Alberta-based TC Energy said Sunday that the company has "contained" the spill and "continues to progress in our response" to the accident. The firm also said it is working with federal, state, and tribal agencies in response to the spill.
"We appreciate the patience and collaboration of the surrounding community and partner agencies for their support in responding to this incident," the company added. "We recognize this is concerning to the community and commit that we will continue our response until we have fully remediated the site."
While part of the same system, the Keystone 1 pipeline--which carries an estimated 720,000 barrels of Canadian tar sands oil per day--is a separate conduit from the proposed Keystone XL extension that was defeated by Indigenous, green, and progressive activism and rejected by the Obama and Biden administrations.
The Keystone system carries tar sands oil--what the National Congress of American Indians calls "the world's dirtiest and most environmentally destructive form of oil"--from Alberta, Canada to refineries in Illinois and the Texas Gulf Coast. The pipelines are staunchly opposed by Indigenous and environmental activists, many of whom have been arrested and some of whom have been criminally charged.
Keystone XL opponents warned of the danger of leaks prior to and during its construction, which was halted last year. According to the anti-pipeline group Bold Nebraska, there have been 22 Keystone spills since 2010.
"As we wait to hear how much tar sands and toxic chemicals like benzene have polluted our water from TC Energy's Keystone 1 pipeline, it is critical to note our state and counties need better laws on the books for pipelines," Bold Nebraska founder Jane Kleeb said in a statement.
"Thankfully, landowners and tribal nations came together to stop the larger Keystone XL pipeline from cutting through sensitive areas of the Ogallala Aquifer and the Niobrara River," Kleeb added. "Now is the time to get stronger laws on the books to protect our state's assets--the land, the water, and the people."
Friends of the Kaw implored, "For the sake of the people and wildlife in Washington County and those living downstream who could be impacted, we urge TC Energy to clean up the entire spill and to take action on any later impacts that may occur as a result of their actions."
Opponents of Line 3 on Tuesday welcomed a Minnesota judge's dismissal of all charges against five water protectors arrested last year for protesting plans to have the tar sands pipeline cross the Shell River in several places.
"Why are U.S. citizens who are trying to protect themselves from a foreign fossil fuel corporation facing arrest, when no one at Enbridge will ever be held accountable for their crimes?"
Framed as a replacement project by Canadian oil giant Enbridge, the new pipeline runs partly along a different route and roughly doubled the capacity of the initial Line 3. It began operating last month after years of construction and Indigenous-led protests.
Minnesota District Judge Doug Clark on Monday dismissed the cases of Cheryl Barnds, Mary Klein, Kelly Maracle, Trish Weber, and Barbara With "on grounds that the state had failed to demonstrate probable cause to sustain all charges," according to Honor the Earth and the legal groups representing the water protectors. "In doing so, Judge Clark did not reach the Shell River defendants' treaty-based claims."
The other two members of the "Shell River Seven," independent photojournalist K. Flo Razowsky and Honor the Earth executive director and co-founder Winona LaDuke, still face three misdemeanor charges each, to which they--like the five who had their cases dismissed--pleaded not guilty.
"Criminalizing and over-charging protestors is a common tactic used by the state to scare activists and suppress movements," said attorney Claire Glenn, the Line 3 legal fellow of the Water Protector Legal Collective and Civil Liberties Defense Center. "The criminalization of the Shell River defendants was no exception, and this dismissal is a powerful victory for water protectors."
Glenn--who represented Barnds and will continue to represent LaDuke with Anishinaabe movement lawyer Frank Bibeau--added that "we are hopeful that the prosecutor will do the right thing and dismiss the other water protectors' cases that remain open in Wadena County, including that of Shell River guardian ad litem Winona LaDuke."
Both Bibeau and LaDuke on Tuesday highlighted the controversial decision by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to establish a fund through which Enbridge reimbursed the state's Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and various law enforcement agencies for policing the construction of Line 3.
"It's no surprise that cases continue to be dismissed for lack of probable cause and other constitutional deprivations and violations, after the Minnesota Legislature criminalized protected civil rights and the PUC created a multimillion-dollar slush fund to militarize fast and furious enforcement by the DNR and local law enforcement," said Bibeau.
Arguing that the fund "incentivized" law enforcement agencies that were collectively paid millions of dollars "to bring these phony charges against water protectors throughout the north country," LaDuke said that "overzealous local police, state troopers, and DNR officers made over 1,000 arrests of people peacefully working to Stop Line 3 in 2020 and 2021."
"The state continues to waste taxpayer monies in the courts, prosecuting these frivolous attempts to make criminals out of us, while the real criminals breach our aquifers and fill the Mississippi River headwaters with frac-out fluids," she added, referring to the unintentional release of drilling fluids.
Under recently confirmed agreements with the DNR and the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Enbridge will pay over $11 million in fines and for environmental restoration projects due to water quality issues stemming from construction. The company also faces a misdemeanor criminal charge set to be dismissed after a year of complying with state water rules.
"The sad irony is that we will all pay Enbridge's fines with every tank of gas at the pump or home heating fuel, and live with the irreparable environmental degradation," said Bibeau. "Minnesota should dismiss all water protector charges and quit wasting the courts' resources."
Klein similarly said that she prays the remaining charges against water protectors will be dismissed, and "protecting water, land, and treaty rights is not a crime. Perhaps now we can hold the Enbridge corporation accountable for their crimes against nature and humanity."
Other defendants also took aim at the company. Noting the new criminal charge against Enbridge in Minnesota, With said: "When are they going to court? They aren't."
"Why are U.S. citizens who are trying to protect themselves from a foreign fossil fuel corporation facing arrest, when no one at Enbridge will ever be held accountable for their crimes?" With asked. "Today we have a tiny bit of justice but the fight for our rights and the water continue."
Barnds pointed out that "the millions they're paying for irreparable damage to pristine waters, like the millions they spent arresting those protesting crimes against Mother Earth and Indigenous rights, are line items on a spreadsheet, drops in a bottomless bucket of greed and delusion."
"Fossil fuels must be stopped," Barnds warned, "before we poison our last drop of water, pollute our last breath of air, torch our only life-sustaining planet."