When word reached the frozen, snow-covered Standing Rock Indian Reservation that the Army Corps of Engineers had ruled against the Dakota Access Pipeline, the throngs of protesters erupted into cheers. However, it didn’t take long for the gathered crowds – a mingling of Native American tribe members and other supporters from across the country – to once again coalesce into a united front. The message was clear: the fight is not over. The Federal government, in many ways, has reflected the same tone. Though President Obama has frequently sought to delay the project or push for the pipeline to be rerouted, President-elect Trump and many in his forthcoming administration have been vocal in their support of the project proceeding as intended.
What does the future hold for the Dakota Access Pipeline, and what might it mean for other oil infrastructure projects across the United States?
Standing by in Standing Rock
As the icy grip of winter closes in over the Dakotas, the situation at Standing Rock has settled into a near-standstill. Blizzards and sub-zero temperatures haven’t been enough to dislodge many of the most committed protesters, and tensions between the demonstrators and law enforcement in the area remain uneasy. The encamped crowds found renewed vigor following a nearby spill in mid-December, when the Belle Fourche Pipeline – about 150 miles away in Billings County – dumped an estimated 176,000 gallons of crude oil into the environment. Much of the spill ultimately found its way to the nearby Ash Coulee Creek, raising environmental and ecological concerns for the area.
As the Dakota pipeline project grinds to a standstill, some activist leaders in the area have already turned their attention to channeling the energy of the movement toward opposing other projects, including both oil and natural gas pipelines and other infrastructure throughout the country. With a looming change in administrations, other protesters are ignoring calls to leave the area and are instead planning to dig in at Standing Rock for as long as they deem necessary. Still others have sought to reach out to government leaders in an attempt to find equitable solutions for all involved.
The Winding Path Forward
The election of Donald Trump has injected even more uncertainty into an already ambiguous situation. Trump has often voiced his support for the Dakota Access Pipeline, and he will soon be in a position to push for its completion. He has pledged to streamline the often laborious permit process, and as President of the United States, he will wield powers that include the ability to overturn the decision made by the Army Corps of Engineers. Though he and his administration would face significant backlash and potential legal battles from the pipeline’s opponents, the project will likely move ahead once again should Trump commit to making the project a priority.
Another option is rerouting the pipeline. Under its current path, the pipeline would burrow about 90 to 115 feet below nearby Lake Oahe – just half a mile from the reservation of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. This has prompted fears that the water supply could be contaminated, and that some of the tribe’s most sacred sites could be disrupted or destroyed. The Corps of Engineers has called for a robust analysis of alternate routing options that would avoid Lake Oahe and surrounding areas. However, the group behind the project – Energy Transfer Partners, having already rerouted the pipeline 141 times, remain opposed to changing the route and maintain that fears over the pipeline are unfounded as the crossing for the pipeline is well below the bottom of the lake and already hosts several line crossings, including a pipeline for natural gas.
Reviving Keystone XL?
Of course, the Dakota Access Pipeline isn’t the first high-profile project to be derailed by fierce opposition. The Keystone XL pipeline, a proposed 1,179-mile pipeline that would stretch from the oil sands region of Alberta, Canada to a connection point with an existing pipe in Steele City, Nebraska, was met almost immediately with opposition from environmental activists in both Canada and the United States. Though the pipeline would have transported about 830,000 barrels of oil per day upon completion, it was ultimately rejected by President Obama in 2015.
That rejection, however, may not represent a permanent defeat. President-elect Trump has called on TransCanada, the corporation behind the Keystone XL project, to renew its efforts and resubmit the permit applications necessary to begin work on the pipeline. Trump has made the pipeline project a priority for his first 100 days in office, and while murky legal issues may delay the immediate action he seeks, it’s clear that the path for the Keystone XL has been re-opened. Now, a bigger hurdle may be the question of whether the pipeline is still necessary. Other transport methods have already been employed to handle production from the oil sands region, and Mr. Trump’s talk of demanding a share of the profits in return for allowing the pipeline’s construction may slow any push for completion.
The Future of Oil Infrastructure
Though the Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines have garnered most of the attention in recent months and years, they likely only signal the beginning of a trend. Many activists remain intent on opposing oil infrastructure projects around the country, including the Pinon Pipeline in New Mexico and the Line 3 Replacement project that runs from Hardisty, Alberta, Canada to Superior, Wisconsin. Natural gas pipeline proposals including the Atlantic Coast Pipeline and the PennEast Pipeline have also sparked controversy and will likely be met with opposition as the projects progress.
Nonetheless, the next four years could be a boon for oil infrastructure despite the opposition. The incoming president and his administration have made investments in infrastructure and increased development of America’s energy reserves central tenets of their platform, and that commitment is unlikely to change. With U.S. oil production projected to grow considerably in the coming years, the ability to transport greater volumes via pipelines and other infrastructure will take on a position of great importance in Trump’s oft-stated goal of attaining energy independence.
