The Largest Inland Oil spill in U.S. History Happened Today in Minnesota
The Largest Inland Oil Spill in U.S. History Happened Today in Minnesota
In 1991, more than 1.7 million gallons of oil spilled after a pipeline ruptured near Grand Rapids — much of the oil flowed into the Prairie River
Most Minnesotans don’t realize that we boast the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history .
On this day, March 3, in 1991 , the Line 3 pipeline ruptured near Grand Rapids, Minnesota , spilling over 1.7 million gallons of oil, much of which flowed into the Prairie River, after a negligently delayed response by the company. The Prairie is a tributary of the Mississippi, so were it not for the 18 inches of ice on top of the river, the spill could have poisoned the drinking water of millions downstream, and would likely be remembered very differently. Thankfully, this was back in the days when our territories were still frozen and snow-covered in March, before climate change had fully sunk its teeth.
Due to sheer luck, the cleanup was relatively quick and effective, so the spill received nowhere near as much media attention as the catastrophic Kalamazoo River spill of 2010. Enbridge has spent more than $1.2 billion dollars (and still counting) and the better part of a decade cleaning up that mess, and they haven’t finished yet . It turns out that 1.1 million gallons of Alberta tar sands crude oil is not easily removed from riverbanks and sensitive wetlands. Minnesota, take heed.
A clean-up worker and his hose against millions of gallons of oil that spilled after a pipeline ruptured near Grand Rapids, Minnesota, on March 3, 1991."
Line 3 is crumbling. According to Enbridge’s own data, it has ten times as many corrosion anomalies per mile than any other pipeline in their Mainline System. They estimate over half a million structural anomalies in Line 3, which is about 1 every 10 feet. Enbridge Integrity Supervisor Laura Kennett has testified, “I consider Line 3 to be in the deterioration stage … as external corrosion growth is increasing in an exponential fashion.” The company has reduced the pressure to the bare minimum that still allows oil to flow, and spends billions of dollars digging up and fixing pieces of it (they anticipate needing at least 12,000 integrity digs in the next decade just for maintenance). In other words, Line 3 is a ticking time bomb. They cite this as justification for building a new one. But that is backwards thinking. The rational response would be to shut it down immediately and prevent them from doing this again to our grandchildren.
Enbridge doesn’t care about us. Instead of cleaning up this mess, and putting hard-working Minnesotan union members to work doing it, Enbridge simply plans to abandon the pipeline and inevitable contamination in the ground, walk away, and build an entirely new Line 3 pipeline in a brand new corridor. The State of Minnesota, including the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), has the power and responsibility to regulate pipeline abandonment, but there is currently no plan. Because Line 3 is the first crude oil pipeline to be abandoned in our state, there is a risk that the PUC will avoid their responsibility and set a disastrous precedent. But tribal governments, landowners, local businesses, and concerned community members across the north are standing up to say no, and demand accountability.
After 4 years of resistance, an alliance of tribal and non-tribal communities in Minnesota defeated Enbridge’s proposed Sandpiper pipeline , but Enbridge still plans to build that corridor, through the heart of Minnesota’s lake country. They call this the Line 3 “Replacement Project,” but don’t be fooled, it is not a replacement. It’s a new pipeline with larger diameter pipe, designed to carry a completely different type of oil through a brand new corridor, with more than double the shipping capacity. The new Line 3 could eventually carry over a million barrels per day of tar sands, the dirtiest oil in the world.
The proposed corridor threatens some of the shallowest aquifers, cleanest ground waters, most permeable soil types, and largest wild rice beds in North America. The route would also pierce the heart of Ojibwe treaty lands, where we retain the rights to hunt, fish, gather, hold ceremony, and travel. It is our responsibility as water protectors to prevent this.
While militarized police forcibly evict our people from the Standing Rock encampments that fought to defend water from Dakota Access (28% of which is owned by Enbridge), Enbridge continues to plot a poisonous course in the Great Lakes. But this is not Morton County, and I hope we do not see armored vehicles deployed to brutalize our grandmothers and granddaughters as they stand in prayer. We expect Enbridge to clean up its old mess, and walk the enlightened path of clean energy. Until then, our communities will continue rising up to protect our waters.
Tags
Who is online
96 visitors
This is the area that I grew up in and am very familiar with the area and spills.
1.7 million gallons is equal to 40,476 barrels.
The Cohasset spill was 252,000 gallons or 6,000 barrels.
The fight goes on.
After they build the new Line 3 couldn't the EPA declare (like it would happen under the Cheetos Man who is trying to kill the EPA) the entire length of the old line as a toxic waste site and force the company to clean it up under that law?
The chances of that happening is zero, Randy.
The ''rule'' that Trump put in that requires American made steel doesn't apply to the XL Pipeline.
I think you know, Kavika, that the reason for the exemption is because the pipes have already been purchased, delivered and stored waiting to be used.
Buzz,
That may be, but that would be like going ahead with the "Challenger" flight, knowing that the "O"rings were defective, but the rest of the rocket was built.
You are making the assumption that the pipes are defective. Of course it appears that ALL oil pipelines are defective and will leak or burst eventually. So how do you suggest oil be transported? If not at all, a lot of people are going to suffer through cold winters, and maybe not be able to drive their cars.
When oil is taken by train, if there is a disaster it is limited.
I thought I read somewhere that pipelines were the safest method to transport oil, maybe I'm wrong.
There are pipeline ruptures regularly across America … they are rarely reported.
Not all oil pipes are defective, but this one has a long history of spills which would indicate that it was not properly constructed. Also it is well past it's use by date and needs to be replaced. I am not against oil pipes per se, as much as I am those that are routed in ways that are routed in ways that are the most convenient and cost effective for the oil companies, instead of routed in ways that make more sense for the sensitive environment, especially as it pertains to the Sovereign Nations of Native American lands. I mean we can not forget that in most ways, they are independent countries within the United States and must be respected as such.
I agree with you on that, Randy. I think it's a very reasonable attitude.
Seems that a lot of the ''good foreign steel'' has a big problem.
WTF, the hell with it use shit steel, make a lot of money than walk away from the environmental damage when it happens.
Here is one in Canada that faulty steel was used. And guess what it's Enbridge, that name should ring a bell.
I acknowledge that it is a problem. Are American-made steel pipelines free of problems? As I indicated to Perrie, you are between the devil and the deep blue sea - how to transport oil, unless you feel oil is an unnecessary product.
It is not unnecessary now, but I strongly resent the oil and gas lobby to slow down the progress toward making it unnecessary, which it can be made to be if not for their interference.
I have to agree - I have always believed that the vested interests block competition. There have been stories that inventions that save power or other major enterprises are bought up and buried by the vested interests.
The process for OK on pipelines is bullshit. The oversight is minimal and with Trump it's going to get worse.
I think that the problem we have is that the auto makers don't build natural gas and electric cars because most people won't buy them because the infrastructure to support their use simply is not there. I mean I can drive 10 miles in any direction and drive past at least 15 gas stations. Yet I only know of two electric car recharging stations and no natural gas stations. Plus it takes forever to recharge an electric car and you have what? Maybe 130 miles before it needs to sit plugged in for 8 hours? At 130 miles between recharges I can't even drive back into L.A. to go shopping or on a cruise or to visit my son or whatever. Then if I could, where do I recharge? My son doesn't have charger so I would have to hope to have enough power to make it to a recharging station with him following me in his gasoline powered car and then pay a fee for my car to recharge while I leave it alone maybe miles from where I'll be staying.
I would consider buying a natural gas car, if I could ever find a place to refuel.
Buzz, there are hundreds of thousands of miles of pipeline across the U.S. The common misconception is that they are safe. The fact is, they are not the cure all that people say they are.
Canada has the same problem that the U.S. does. Only Canada doesn't have as many miles of pipelines that the U.S. does.
Pipelines have a life span and many miles of pipelines in the U.S. are well past that age. The problems with pipelines range from bad steel, poor welds, ground movement, MIC's that eat at the steel to human error.
There is no set standard that is required for pipelines. The so called sensors that the pipeline people brag about only detect around 25 % of the leaks. The remaining are discovered by the property owner or when an inspection takes place.
IMO, the numerous spills that have happened over the years will continue to happen. unless very strict oversight by an outside group (U.S. government) is forced upon the pipeline companies. That would include that they are responsible for all the damage caused by a leak. I would like to see that it is required of them to put up a bond so to speak to cover the damage caused by a spill in case they go bankrupt.
I would also like to see that the routes are the safest, not the easiest and least costly way.
They are not out of sight, out of mind, Buzz. There are consequences to what we are and are not doing with pipeline construction.
Unfortunately such common sense as you propose is blowing in the wind, and will continue to do so as long as the Republicans maintain control. As I see it, as an outsider, the Democrats are on a suicide mission, and I believe it will be even more than 8 years before they regain control.
No, not on a suicide mission. For the first time in a long time they are on a fighting mission. There is much blood in the water. Trump insulted the media, which was stupid enough. Now The New York Times has 40 investigative reporters assigned to just this Russian story and The Washington Post has 40 of their own. The BBC has 25 and every major news organization round the world is competing to see who destroys the Trump administration first and make no mistake, they can.
However he then insults the career Intelligence agents by comparing them to Nazis, who have seen political heads of their departments come and go and Presidents come and go and who can take down any President they feel that they have to is not in the best interests of America. They are doing so now. Was Trump really so completely stupid as to think he could piss off the career intelligence agents and survive? What an idiot if that's what he thought. Trump will be crushed from the inside and will well deserve it because of his own stupid arrogance. His own government will destroy him. What a fucking IDIOT!
There will be nobody left but the Democrats to step into the void left and to take over.
Okay Randy, I'm sitting in the bleachers and waiting to see if it's a strikout or not (and in fact I think the whole world is sitting here with me). And it's NOT a cornfield.
No. It's not a corn field. It's a battle field.
There has to be a good environmental law firm that would take the case in spite of Trump or really just to piss him off. I mean Trump can make rules, but the Congress made the EPA laws and the court enforce them, so what the hell. Trump can appoint a head of the EPA, but he or they don't own the agency and with enough pissed off people even the new head of the EPA has no real control. The courts do and as far as I know the toxic waste law still says the company has to clean it up unless they declare bankruptcy or can prove they are not responsible for it), in which case the taxpayers have to. Either way the company gets screwed and, even though the taxpayers have to pay for it, at least it gets cleaned up.