Sierra Club Responds to Court’s Ruling on Enbridge’s Pipeline Scheme

Wednesday, December 9, 2015

Contact: Jonathon Berman, (202) 297-7533,

Minneapolis, MN — Today, the Federal District court ruled that it does not have the jurisdiction to reject Enbridge’s scheme to expand the capacity of its Alberta Clipper tar sands pipeline through a backdoor process, but the Obama Administration does.

Enbridge’s scheme is currently bringing tar sands oil into America without the required environmental review. If fully expanded, this line would carry a greater volume of tar sands than the rejected Keystone XL pipeline would have.

Yesterday, the National Academy of Science released a study that affirms tar sands is one of the dirtiest of dirty fuels, noting that it differs significantly from conventional crude oil and is more dangerous to water, such as the Great Lakes, and the environment when it spills.

In response, Director of Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign Lena Moffitt released the following statement:

“Unfortunately the court ruled today that they do not have the authority to stop Enbridge’s scheme to bring more of the dirtiest fuel on the planet into our country. Luckily, President Obama does.

“When President Obama rejected the Keystone XL proposal last month, he showed that the era of Big Oil is over. Now, just as he did with Keystone, President Obama can call for a full review of Enbridge’s plans and ultimately reject a pipeline expansion that would do irreparable harm to our climate, our environment, and our public health.

“Now is the time to move us off of dirty fossil fuels, not build a bridge — or a pipeline — to 19th century ideas. We must continue to invest in clean and renewable forms of energy, and leave dirty fuels where they belong, in the ground.”



Local Leaders Voice Concerns Over Minnesota Power’s Community Solar Plan


Thursday, December 3, 2015

Media Contact: Natalie Cook, 651-295-3483,

DULUTH, Minn. — Community members and renewable energy advocates submitted over 285 comments and a letter signed by 19 local leaders and organizations Thursday to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC). The letters call on the PUC to ensure Minnesota Power’s Community Solar Garden (CSG) program is fair and open for everyone in the area wanting to participate.

A community solar garden is a solar electric array with multiple subscribers. Subscribers can purchase a portion of the power produced by the array and receive a credit on their electricity bill. A community supported solar array might be hosted on a school, library, place of worship, or community center. Community solar gardens provide access to solar for renters or home or business owners with roofs not well designed for solar panels.

“Community Solar Gardens put energy distribution in the hands of the people. They were designed with the idea that renewable energy should be available to everyone and that energy can be produced beyond the traditional model where energy is produced, transported, and owned by a monopoly utility,” said Jason Edens, Director of Rural Renewable Energy Alliance.

In 2013 the Minnesota legislature passed a Community Solar Garden policy setting up the rules governing the programs. While Minnesota Power wasn’t required to develop a program, the utility proposed one to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission in September.

Minnesota Power’s proposal allows customers to subscribe to a solar project owned by the utility but doesn’t include a path for community developed gardens, despite what’s outlined in the state statute. The proposal would limit the way projects can be developed and allows Minnesota Power to receive all of the financial benefit in the form of Renewable Energy Credits and small scale solar goals.

“Community solar projects should do as originally intended and as the name suggests — they should be a resource held by local communities rather than exist as a limited service offered by utility companies,” said Natalie Cook, organizer with the Sierra Club.

The PUC will make a determination in the coming months on whether Minnesota Power can move forward with the plan it proposed or if the company must make changes.

Reverend Bruce Johnson, with Minnesota Interfaith Power & Light and the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Duluth will be waiting to see what is decided — the church built its building in 2008 to be ready for solar. “We see Community Solar as a way to live our values, there are church buildings and other sites in the community that are ready and able to become Community Solar Garden sites, but under the current proposal that is not realistic.  The Northland needs Community Solar, not corporate solar.”


For more technical information about the concerns with Minnesota Power’s community solar garden proposal, check here.