The Jan. 14 letter to the editor "We can't 'modernize' energy with technology from last century" fails to take into account some important facts.
First, Enbridge's Line 3 replacement project in Minnesota is about safety; we're replacing an old pipeline with a new one that uses the most advanced technology to protect the environment and ensure people receive affordable energy they need and count on every single day.
We believe climate change is a serious issue that requires action, and Enbridge is taking steps to address the challenge head-on. In fact, we are part of the solution to the transition to a lower carbon future.
For example, Enbridge has set and met greenhouse gas targets and is setting more aggressive ones. We've helped our utility customers reduce consumption and emissions equal to taking 10 million cars off the road. Half of our business is dedicated to moving natural gas in North America, which is helping to drive down carbon emissions dramatically. And, we've invested nearly $8 billion in renewables in the U.S. and around the globe.
Line 3 is a $2.6 billion private investment in Minnesota's energy infrastructure that will create 4,000 construction jobs, an additional $35 million in annual taxes for communities along the right of way, and $100 million in spending with tribal- and native-owned businesses. In respect and recognition of treaty rights, Enbridge has been working with the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, which led a groundbreaking cultural survey that identified resources and led to adjustments of the route of Line 3.
By upgrading and modernizing existing infrastructure and investing in new technologies, Enbridge is at the forefront of delivering long-term and sustainable energy solutions. Too often, the debate is framed as "either environment or energy." We're committed to "both/and" to deliver the energy Minnesota families need — safely, reliably and cleaner.
Barry Simonson, Duluth
The writer is project director of the Line 3 replacement.
PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY
In this election, your vote matters more than the mangled process
Don't sit out the presidential primary election! Yes, I myself would have preferred that the presidential primary balloting had the same ballot format as the admirably anonymous traditional ballot — one party along one edge of the ballot and the other party along the other edge ("We pay $12 million; the parties take our data. Sound fair?" Readers Write, Jan. 20).