Opposition to controversial pipeline project leads to divestment from international banks

# I. Who is involved?

The Dakota Access Pipeline Project (DAPL), also known as the ETP Crude Pipeline Project or the Bakken Pipeline, has proven to be one of the most controversial projects so far in the 21st century. Having ranked in third position on the “Most Controversial Projects of 2016 Report” and with a consistently high RRI through 2017, the USD 3.7 billion project, which transports crude oil from the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota to Illinois, has faced continuous protests from thousands of people from around the world. The project is particularly opposed by Native Americans, who claim that the pipeline would devastate sacred sites as well as the drinking water sources of the Standing Rock Sioux reservation in North Dakota.

The pipeline was constructed by Dakota Access LLC, a fully owned subsidiary of Bakken Holdings Company LLC, a joint venture formed by Energy Transfer Partners (ETP) and Sunoco Logistic Partners, both subsidiaries of Energy Transfer Equity LP. Phillips 66 owns a 25 percent stake in the project, and MarEn Bakken Company, a joint venture formed by Enbridge and Marathon Petroleum, also holds a minority share.

According to the NGO Food and Water Watch, 17 financial institutions loaned Dakota Access USD 2.5 billion to construct the pipeline. Major international banks also committed substantial resources to the Energy Transfer group of companies so that they could build additional oil and gas infrastructure.

# II. What happened?

RepRisk detected opposition to the pipeline in 2014, when a coalition of NGOs, including the Sierra Club and the Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, delivered a petition with 2,300 signatures to the Governor of North Dakota, calling on him to halt construction of the pipeline due to concerns about potential oil leaks and its impact on the environment.