I like Tulsi, and agree with her 100% on foreign policy, but I don't know enough about this issue to take a position.  My natural instinct is to be skeptical of protesters in general because I know they have very little to offer in terms of objective, unbiased, factual information and some kind of intellectual defense of their position.  Since I don't recognize emotions and feelings as a legitimate substitute for a valid argument, I largely have to ignore them most of the time.

It's certainly possible that they have the better argument, I've just never seen it.  The claims about contaminating the water supply would make sense to me if I weren't aware of the fact that we have oil and gas pipelines snaking throughout this entire country.  By their reaction, you'd think we never built a pipeline before.  Pipelines are very normal and used throughout the world.  We fight wars in the Middle East for pipelines (Syria, Afghanistan).  I don't see what makes this one special.