Grassroots Resistance to the Keystone XL Pipeline in Nebraska By James Patrick Ordner Submitted to the graduate degree program in Sociology and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ______________________ Chairperson: David Smith ______________________ Robert Antonio ______________________ Eric Hanley ______________________ Kelly Kindscher ______________________ Joane Nagel ______________________ Bill Staples Date Defended: December 7, 2015 The Dissertation Committee for James Ordner certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Grassroots Resistance to the Keystone XL Pipeline in Nebraska ______________________ Chairperson: David N. Smith Date approved: December 7, 2015 ii Abstract: While the Keystone XL pipeline project became a major cultural and political symbol for the greater environmental movement’s effort to curb carbon dioxide emissions and begin shifting to a renewable energy economy, a vigorous and sustained grassroots movement, led by the social movement organization Bold Nebraska, emerged in rural Nebraska to fight the pipeline at the local level. Using the politics of contention perspective and framing analysis, this dissertation analyzes the Keystone XL debate in rural Nebraska at the structural, cultural and agency levels of analysis. At the structural and cultural levels, I use county demographic data to examine the sociopolitical factors shaping mobilization outcomes in Nebraskan communities. The main body of the analysis focuses on the narratives and discourses used by the various interests involved in the debate in Nebraska. Through the use of in-depth interviews and testimony from four public comment hearings held in Nebraska (N=528), I identify the major framing strategies employed by both pipeline supporters and pipeline opponents. Findings indicate that pipeline supporter frames were employed to maximize benefits of the pipeline and minimize potential risks, while pipeline opponents’ frames were designed to minimize benefits and maximize risks associated with the project. More specifically, pipeline supporter frames closely mirror the economic, national security, and project safety frames used by political leaders and oil and gas industry advocates to promote the pipeline, while rural landowners and activists framed the pipeline debate in terms of protecting the Sandhills, the Ogallala Aquifer, and private property rights. iii Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to thank Bob Antonio and David Smith for all of their advice throughout the writing process, their guidance was invaluable. I am very grateful to have had Kelly Kindscher as my outside committee member, his knowledge of rural Nebraska and insightful input at my defense was very informative. I would also like to thank the Department of Sociology and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences for providing the Dissertation Writing Fellowship, which allowed me time to complete my data analysis and write chapters. I greatly appreciate the moral support of the Department Office Manager Janelle Williams, your chocolate chip cookies always put a smile on my face. Thanks also to Corrine Butler, Graduate Secretary, for helping me with countless administrative details and dissertation completion requirements. I also appreciate the time taken by Michael Woods to answer queries about the prevalence of rural protest, and Doug McAdam for encouraging my research project early on. Thanks to Mom and Jesse for thoughts and encouragement throughout the dissertation process. iv Table of Contents List of Figures and Tables……………………………………………………………….vii Acronyms and Keystone XL Timeline……………………………………………...……ix Appendices……………………………………………………………………………...296 Chapter 1: Keystone XL and At-Risk Communities in Nebraska………………......….....1 Introduction…12 U.S. Energy Policy, Energy Independence, and the KXL Pipeline…………….....3 The Politics of Contention and At-Risk Communities……………………..........13 Framing Analysis and Narratives of Injustice…………………………………...20 Research Design and Methodology……………………………………………...24 County Profiles: Measuring Causal Mechanisms………………………………..27 Framing Analysis: KXL Public Comment Transcripts…………………………..30 Describing the Natural and Cultural Landscape: Fieldwork and Participant Observation………………………………………………………………32 Personal Accounts: In-Depth Interviews………………………………………...33 Chapter 2: Claims Makers and Their Interests…………………………………………..37 TransCanada and Gulf Coast Refineries…………………………………………38 Laborers International Union of North America and Nebraskans for Jobs and Energy Independence…………………………………………………….45 Federal and State Agencies: Political Influence and Conflicts of Interest……….51 Nebraska Landowners and Concerned Citizens: One Big Backyard…………….65 Bold Nebraska, Cowboy Indian Alliance, and the Nebraska Easement Action Team……………………………………………………………………..73 Chapter 3: County Profiles and Contextual Measures…………………………………...83 County Profiles: A Picture of Rural Nebraska…………………………………...85 The Sandhills and Ogallala Aquifer……………………………………………...87 Objective Risk Measures………………………………………………………...95 Political Engagement Measures……………………………………………….....99 Economic Hardship Measures………………………………………………….105 To Protest or Not to Protest, that is the Question………………………………108 Chapter 4: Framing the KXL Debate in Nebraska……………………………………...116 The Social Construction of Resistance Through Narrative Framing…………...116 Core Framing Tasks: Diagnostic, Prognostic and Motivational Framing Tactics…………………………………………………………………………..121 Public Comment Testimony Summary…………………………………………123 Chapter 5: Pro-Pipeline Framing Analysis……………………………………………..129 Economic Benefit Frames: Job Creation, Tax Revenue, and Living Wages…...132 National Security Frames: Hostile Nations, Friendly Allies, and Petroleum Fatalism………………………………………………………………....141 v Project Safety Frames: Skilled Labor and State of the Art Technology………..149 Framing the Opposition: Unscientific, Emotional and Misinformed…………..156 Chapter 6: Anti-Pipeline Framing Analysis…………………………………………….162 Risk Perception Frames: Protecting Land, Water and Home…………………..163 Perceptions of Injustice Frames: Conflicts of Interests, Eminent Domain, and Bullying………………………………………………………………...177 TransCanada Critique Frames: Good Neighbors Don’t Dig Trenches!...............187 Climate Change and Global Concern Frames: One Big Backyard……………..194 Chapter 7: Mobilization Rural Communities…………………………………………...200 The Challenges of Rural Mobilization………………………………………….200 Mobilizing Grievances………………………………………………………….205 Contextual Conditions: Political Opportunities and Resource Mobilization…...206 Motivating Participation in Collective Action………………………………….219 Social Movement Organizational Structure and Mobilization Outcomes……...225 Chapter 8: In Their Own Words: Interview Data Analysis…………………………….233 TransCanada’s Reception in Nebraska…………………………………………243 Causes of Landowner Resistance to KXL……………………………………...241 Bold Nebraska’s Main Goals and Objectives…………………………………..252 Mobilizing Nebraskan Landowners…………………………………………….258 Chapter 9: The Future of At-Risk Community Opposition to Energy Projects………..270 Conceptualizing Community Opposition to Energy Projects: Petroleum Fatalism and Reactive Mobilizations…………………………………………….271 Path Dependency, Neoliberalism and Obama’s ‘All of the Above’ Energy Policy…………………………………………………………………...277 Energy Project Encroachment: Too Close for Comfort………………………...283 Potential for Future Research…………………………………………………...291 Appendix A: Bold Nebraska and Cowboy Indian Alliance Photos and Paraphernalia……………………………………………………………………296 Appendix B: Landowner Interview Guide……………………………………………...304 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………....305 vi Tables 2.1: TransCanada Pipeline Projects……………………………………………………...39 2.4: Anti-KXL Repertoires of Contention by Group Organization……………………...79 3.5: Objective Risk Table………………………………………………………………..97 3.6: Political Engagement Table……………………………………………………..…..98 3.7: Major Nebraska Religious Affiliations………………………………………….…102 3.8: Major Rural Community Churches………………………………………………..103 3.9: National Unemployment Rates 2008-2014………………………………………..106 3.10: Unemployment Rates by Nebraska County 2010-2014………………………….107 4.1: Public Comment Hearing Schedule………………………………………………..120 4.2: Public Comment Hearing Testimony Summary…………………………………...124 5.1: Pipeline Supporter Frames………………………………………………………....130 5.2: KXL Projected Tax Revenue for Nebraska Counties……………………………...140 6.1: Pipeline Opposition Frames……………………………………………………..…166 7.2: Bold Nebraska Resource Mobilization Table……………………………………...209 7.8: Landowner Mobilization Cost/Risk Typology…………………………………….221 9.5: Community Opposition to Fracking Oil and Gas Pipelines 2015………………....290 Figures 1.1: U.S. Field Production of Crude Oil 1920-2014…………………………………..….6 1.2: Energy Share of Canada’s GDP……………………………………………………..11 2.2: Petroleum Administration for Defense District Map………………………………..43 2.3: LIUNA’s Partnership with Americans for Prosperity, ALEC, and the Oil and Gas Industry…………………………………………………………………………..48 vii 3.1: Keystone Pipeline System in Nebraska……………………………………………..88 3.2: NDEQ Reroute Map 2012…………………………………………………………..89 3.3: Density of Active Registered Irrigated Wells – December 2012…………………...90 3.4: Michigan State University Ogallala Aquifer Map…………………………………..91 3.11: Average Value of Nebraska Farmland 2010-2014……………………………….110 6.2: Sandhills Blowout…………………………………………………………………182 7.1: Political Party Affiliation by State 2008…………………………………………...203