Public can still comment by 11:59 p.m. on Fri., Oct. 14, on agency website
Editor’s note: Learn more about FLOW’s efforts to shut down Line 5 and stop the proposed oil pipeline tunnel on FLOW’s Line 5 program page and new Line 5 fact sheet.
By Zach Welcker, FLOW Legal Director
For Love of Water (“FLOW”) submitted legal and technical comments before today’s deadline in response to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Enbridge’s proposal to bore and blast a 20-foot-in-diameter tunnel under the Straits of Mackinac, just west of the Mackinac Bridge, to house a new Line 5 oil pipeline for another 99 years.
The public can still comment on the proposed oil tunnel in the Great Lakes by 11:59 p.m. EDT today (Oct. 14, 2022) on the Army Corps’ project website.
The public can still comment on the proposed oil tunnel in the Great Lakes by 11:59 p.m. EDT today (Oct. 14, 2022) on the Army Corps’ project website. The Oil & Water Don’t Mix campaign, of which FLOW is a founding steering committee member, also is collecting and forwarding comments to the Army Corps using an email template that suggests key points to make. FLOW’s tunnel comment also provides critical elements to convey.
FLOW urged the Army Corps to broaden the scope of its analysis to ensure that all regional alternatives are fully considered in an effort to meet regional fossil-fuel energy demands, which are forecasted to dwindle in the ongoing transition to clean energy, while maximizing protection of the Great Lakes and combating climate change.
Enbridge’s proposed Line 5 oil tunnel is not a viable alternative given the forecasted dwindling demand for fossil fuels and the need to maximize protection of the Great Lakes and combat climate change.
In FLOW’s view, Enbridge’s proposed Line 5 oil tunnel is not a viable alternative to meet these regional objectives when viewed in light of all relevant facts. FLOW anticipates that the manifold risks of the tunnel proposal will continue to grow as Enbridge begins to fill data gaps related to geologic conditions, construction challenges, and worker safety.
FLOW Raises Concerns about Risk to Great Lakes, Lack of Public Need, and Information Gaps
FLOW’s comments to the Army Corps include an emphasis on the:
- Line 5 Pipeline Risk—FLOW opposes tethering the shutdown of the existing dual Line 5 pipelines to a tunnel project that will not resolve underlying the environmental and cultural concerns about siting a major oil pipeline in the middle of America’s greatest surface freshwater resource.
- Lack of Information—The public is deeply concerned about the risk of a catastrophic tunnel explosion, the economic feasibility and environmental impacts of constructing the tunnel, and the long-term climate impacts of the tunnel proposal. The public needs more information than Enbridge has provided to understand the risks and benefits.
The public is deeply concerned about the risk of a catastrophic tunnel explosion, the economic feasibility and environmental impacts of constructing the tunnel, and the long-term climate impacts of the tunnel proposal.
- Lack of Public Need—As Enbridge implicitly concedes, there is no long-term public need for the proposed tunnel from an energy standpoint, and it would undermine federal greenhouse-gas reduction policies. Enbridge’s own expert has determined that a Line 5 shutdown would have a de minimis impact on fuel prices.
- Overly Narrow Focus—Regionalizing the Purpose and Need Statement in the Army Corps study is warranted because Enbridge’s 645-mile Line 5 pipeline is almost 70 years old and past the end of its projected operational life. As Line 5 would need a systemic makeover to keep operating for another 99 years, Enbridge’s proposed tunnel should not be segmented and evaluated in isolation from the entire operation.
Line 5 pipeline is almost 70 years old and past the end of its projected operational life.
- Strong Public Interest in Great Lakes Protection—The Army Corps’ Purpose and Need Statement in the Notice of Intent is also deficient for lack of recognition of the public interest in protecting the Great Lakes in the face of global water shortages, chronic drought in the United States, and other costly impacts from climate change. Protection of the largest and most valuable surface freshwater system in the world is an economic and environmental imperative. The Great Lakes contain 84% of North America’s fresh surface water and are the cultural backbone for eight states, two provinces, and multiple tribes and First Nations.
FLOW cited lack of recognition of the public interest in protecting the Great Lakes in the face of global water shortages, chronic drought in the United States, and other costly impacts from climate change.
Army Corps Should Consider a Range of Reasonable Alternatives
In order to meet the objectives of a Purpose and Need Statement that focuses on the connection between Enbridge’s Superior, Wisconsin, and Sarnia, Ontario, terminals and gives primacy to the public’s interest in maximizing protection of the Great Lakes, the Army Corps should, at a minimum, consider the following alternatives:
- An alternative to connect Enbridge’s Superior and Sarnia terminals without crossing the Great Lakes.
- An alternative to use existing capacity in other pipelines and, if necessary, other transportations solutions–such as rail and truck transport of natural gas liquids–in lieu of building new pipeline infrastructure.
- A tunnel alternative that fully eliminates the risk of oil intrusion into the Straits of Mackinac in the event of an explosion or similar event.
- A “no action” alternative.
Protection of the largest and most valuable surface freshwater system in the world is an economic and environmental imperative. The Great Lakes contain 84% of North America’s fresh surface water and are the cultural backbone for eight states, two provinces, and multiple tribes and First Nations.
The Army Corps’ analysis of “energy need” should result in a determination that Enbridge’s proposed tunnel is contrary to the public interest. The confluence of future demand-side constraints, including the electrification of transportation, disinvestment in Albertan oil production, North American and global prohibitions on the sale and use of internal combustion engine vehicles, and governmental efforts aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions are accelerating the transition to a global clean energy economy. These forces driving change are being embraced by public and private interests and represent future trends that will bring measurable economic, environmental, and social benefits. The confluence of these market forces militates against future large-scale investment in fossil fuel infrastructure.
Editor’s note: Learn more about FLOW’s efforts to shut down Line 5 and stop the proposed oil pipeline tunnel on FLOW’s Line 5 program page and new Line 5 fact sheet.
How do I sign up to help with this? I am all in on protecting the Great Lakes and this Enbridge proposal is a disaster waiting to happen!