SHARE Click image to enlarge.

By of the

A proposal to sharply increase capacity of a crude oil pipeline running from Superior to the Illinois state line is drawing fire from environmentalists and others who worry about future spills.

Enbridge Energy Co. is planning to triple capacity to 1.2 million barrels of oil a day. That would send more oil from Canada and North Dakota through the Wisconsin pipeline than the capacity of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline from western Canada to the Gulf Coast.

Supporters of the Wisconsin and Keystone XL pipelines see both as critical tools in reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil. Enbridge's pipeline carries Bakken crude from North Dakota and oil sand crude from Alberta to U.S. refiners.

Until recently, the Houston-based company's plans have attracted little attention. In one instance, an application to the state Department of Natural Resources for a permit to construct and upgrade pumping stations on land with wetlands failed to generate a single public comment.

Critics said the lack of response is because the company and the DNR made little effort to publicize the project. Both the agency and company say they followed state rules on such matters, which included public notices published in February in newspapers in Marshfield and Spooner, two communities along the route.

This spring, with one state approval completed and another environmental review still to be decided, opponents are raising questions about the size of the project and the company's track record with oil spills.

In July 2010, an Enbridge pipeline ruptured near Marshall, Mich., sending 834,000 barrels of oil into the Kalamazoo River. "Heavy rains caused the river to overtop existing dams and carried oil 35 miles downstream on the Kalamazoo River," according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The company has spent more than $1 billion on the cleanup of crude from the river basin, which is continuing. The EPA said in March that all cleanup work and dredging should have been completed by the end of last year, but has not. The EPA said then it was "considering enforcement options."

Also, Enbridge paid $1.1 million to settle claims by the DNR and the state Department of Justice that numerous environmental laws were broken during construction of the initial phase of its pipeline system in Wisconsin in 2007 and 2008. The forfeiture involved more than 100 environmental violations in 14 counties.

"In terms of Marshall, that was one of the worst days in the company's history," said Enbridge spokeswoman Lorraine Little. "Every system and person in our company is dedicated to making sure that never happens again."

Little said the company has spent more than $4 billion in the past two years to upgrade safety and inspection of its pipeline system and other related costs.

The company's past environmental troubles and the role of pipelines in global warming are generating criticism in the environmental community and elsewhere.

Jefferson County issue

The Jefferson County Board voted on May 13 to oppose an air permit the company will need to build storage tanks that will feed the pipeline. In Jefferson County, the pipeline crosses under the Rock River south of Fort Atkinson.

The DNR says that it has received more than 200 comments on the air permit application, with some asking the DNR to conduct an environmental analysis of the project before the agency decides whether to issue a permit.

"We need an environmental impact statement because Enbridge doesn't have a very good track record on how they operate," said Harry Bennett, Enbridge information coordinator for the 350 Madison Climate Action Team.

The Madison group is affiliated with 350.org, a national organization that favors curbing global greenhouse gases and is opposed to Keystone XL.

Pipeline targeted for 2016

Enbridge's pipeline went into operation in 2009 with a capacity of about 400,000 barrels of oil a day. A year ago, the company said it wanted to expand capacity within its existing 42-inch diameter pipeline to more than 800,000 barrels. It has since bumped up the figure to 1.2 million barrels because of growing demand, the company said.

The revamped pipeline is scheduled to be in operation in 2016.

"Enbridge doesn't build anything or expand anything unless there is customer support to do so," Little said. "We're not going to build and hope that they will come. We build it because our customers say, 'We have product and we need to move it from A to B.'"

The higher capacity, however, worries opponents such as the 350 Madison Climate Action Team and the Wisconsin chapter of the Sierra Club, which say more oil, and heavier oil of the type produced by Bakken shale and Canadian oil sand, will be harder to clean up if a spill occurs.

"Tar sands oil is incredibly dense, so if there is a contamination in a waterway, it does not float, making cleanup much more difficult," Elizabeth Ward of the Sierra Club said in a recent statement after the Jefferson County vote.

Becky Haase, a representative of Enbridge, said the pipeline was built to carry 1.2 million barrels a day. Welds are X-rayed and tested by running water through the pipelines at high pressure, she said. The pipes are also inspected by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Office of Pipeline Safety.

Public comment on the air permit ended last week.

The agency has 60 days to make a decision, said Benjamin Callan, DNR spokesman for the project. But the decision could be delayed if the DNR decides to conduct an environmental analysis, he said.

Enbridge says the analysis isn't needed because the DNR conducted one as part of its review in approving the initial construction of the pipeline.