Note: This story has been updated to include a statement from Enbridge.
Environmental groups hosted an event Wednesday discussing Line 5, saying that continuing to operate the pipeline poses unnecessary risks to the Great Lakes.
Line 5, operated by Canadian energy company Enbridge, moves over 500,000 thousand of barrels per day of oil and natural gas liquids from Minnesota through the Upper Peninsula, with a 4.5 mile stretch under the Straits of Mackinac.
Last year, the Michigan Public Service Commission approved the construction of a tunnel around Line 5 in what regulators said was a decision that would allow the line to operate with less fear of a spill.
But environmental advocates and speakers at the event have argued that the tunnel project is too complex for the company to undertake and overall presents too many challenges and uncertainties. The event was held in Traverse City by the Groundwork Center and Oil and Water Don’t Mix. A full recording can be found here.
Brian O’Mara, an engineer and environmental consultant, said that he didn’t believe the tunnel itself would be safe to construct in the first place. O’Mara raised concerns about the quality of the rock around the pipe and safety of oil tunnels in general.
“This tunnel would be through crummy crappy rock which will be pushed in with all the groundwater. It will destroy the pipeline if it isn’t already destroyed,” he said. “And once that happens, the tunnel will collapse.”
Holly Bird, an attorney and indigenous activist, said that Line 5′s continued operation is in violation of tribal sovereignty.
“The waters are a huge way of life,” she said. “We have ceremonies around it, we have entire ways of life surrounding the water — and any encroachment on that is a violation of the treaty.”
Speakers also said that a massive investment into fossil fuel infrastructure didn’t make sense in a time when most of the world is moving towards renewable energy sources.
“Do we really want to be the last state to build an oil tunnel? I don’t think so,” said Denise Keele, a professor at Western Michigan University. Keele also argued that the economic impacts of worsened climate change would outweigh potential profits from continuing their use.
Ryan Duffy, spokesperson for Enbridge, said in a statement that the company is “investing in a cleaner energy future and the transportation systems that deliver energy resources safely, affordably, and reliably.”
Our commitment to protecting the Great Lakes continues to drive our work to build the Great Lakes Tunnel, deactivating the section of Line 5 that currently sits in the waters of the Straits and locating a replacement section inside the confines of the tunnel, deep under the lakebed,” he added.
Duffy also said that Enbridge is committed to protecting Michigan’s natural resources and has already received permits from the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy.
“The Great Lakes Tunnel for Line 5 at the Straits makes what has always been a safe pipeline even safer, ensuring energy access and reliability, and supporting jobs and the economy throughout the Great Lakes Region. Building the Great Lakes Tunnel has the support of 70 percent of Michiganders,” he said. “As we proceed with this modernization project, we remain committed to operating Line 5 responsibly with enhanced safety measures in the Straits that protect Michigan’s natural resources and infrastructure in the Straits.”
Enbridge and state regulators have previously said that a tunnel around the pipeline represents a practical solution between meeting the region’s energy needs and safety.
Supporters of the tunnel project have said that alternative transportation methods — namely transporting materials as truck cargo — would present greater opportunities for spills, given the increased traffic over the Mackinac Bridge.
Construction has yet to begin on the project as legal battles continue to play out and the company awaits an environmental impact report from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. That report is estimated to come in spring of 2025.
The main case against Enbridge is currently being considered by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals as the parties debate whether it should be heard in state or federal court. Attorneys for the state of Michigan have said that the case should remain in state court since the issue regards parts of Line 5 within the state, while Enbridge says the issue involves an international dispute and belongs in federal court.
