“Particularly from a climate standpoint, the case for a brand-new, massive tar-sands pipeline is extremely thin and frankly nonexistent,” said Moneen Nasmith, an attorney with the environmental legal organization, EarthJustice, which is challenging the pipeline. “We hoped all parties would come to accept the outcome of the thorough, science-based review and multiple approvals of the project. Built in the 1960s, the current crude oil pipeline has been beset with corrosion, leaks and spills, forcing Enbridge in 2008 to reduce its capacity by half, to 390,000 barrels a day. Oral arguments also focused on whether there was evidence of enough long-term demand for oil from Line 3. Opponents argue that the Army Corps failed to fully consider how an oil spill would affect the Lake Superior watershed.

Source: International New York Times June 07, 2021 17:03 UTC