New Pipelines Mean Safer Oil Transport

February 11, 2020

Last week, the proposed Enbridge Line 3 pipeline, that was previously approved in 2018, cleared a key regulatory hurdle and won approval from the Public Utilities Commission to proceed construction after a 16-month revised review process.

This should come as good news to the environment – a safer, more secure way to transport energy across the Midwest – yet, eco-extremists are calling the decision “immoral”. These ill-informed climate change activists who would willingly put their bodies in harm’s way to stop pipeline construction projects need to take a minute and look at the facts; without up-to-date and secure infrastructure in place, parts of the country won’t have access to safe, clean energy.

According to the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board:

But allowing Line 3 to proceed is the best way to protect the environment in Minnesota and beyond. The new pipeline would replace the old Line 3, which was built more than 50 years ago. That aging pipe now can’t operate at full capacity because of corrosion and seam cracking, and Enbridge estimates it will require some 7,000 repairs by 2035. The new Line 3 would come equipped with the latest technology for the prevention and early detection of spills.

Environmentalists would prefer to shut down the old Line 3 without replacing it. But demand for oil endures, and without a pipeline it would reach consumers by road or rail. The risks of a spill persist, and the alternative methods of transportation are more carbon-intensive than pipelines.

Power the Future has previously written on the disastrous impacts of energy shortages when pipeline projects are blocked by the eco-left. Americans deserve access to affordable and efficient energy; we applaud the commission’s review and approval of this necessary piece of infrastructure.