Tag: Line 5

State Advisory Board Must Recognize Urgency, Consider Line 5 Oil Pipeline’s Impact to Inland Waterways and Climate Change


Great Lakes Group: State Advisory Board Must Recognize Urgency, Consider Line 5 Oil Pipeline’s Impact to Inland Waterways and Climate Change


TRAVERSE CITY – Great Lakes law and policy center FLOW submitted additional comments today to the Michigan Pipeline Safety Advisory Board in response to its requests for information and proposals to conduct alternatives and risk analyses for the Line 5 oil pipelines in the Mackinac Straits.  The group expressed deep concern about the Advisory Board’s lack of urgency addressing the potential for a catastrophic oil spill in the Straits, failure to consider Line 5’s climate change impacts, and the pipeline’s additional threat to inland waterways that feed the Great Lakes.  In response to criticism from concerned groups and citizens about the narrow 5-day comment period, the Advisory Board extended its public comment period to February 16, 2016.

One of the group’s key concerns is the unclear process by which the Advisory Board plans to integrate the two separate risk and alternatives analyses reports.  “This is a critically important step because the level of acceptable risk that is determined in the risk analysis will inform which alternative will ultimately be selected by the state,” said FLOW Executive Director Liz Kirkwood. “This correlation is essential to this process and must be understood by the contractors and the public.”  Another key issue is the lack of a sense of urgency by the Advisory Board and the entire process as a whole, as evidenced by the lack of any timeline for the review and reporting stage.  “At this time, it appears the current process will run into 2017 and there are no expectations for interim or conclusive measures in the meantime,”  Kirkwood said. A third recommendation is to create one central website accessible to the public that includes all of the Advisory Board’s findings, reports, and opinions as well as all public comments, testimony, and reports related to Line 5.  The group also is calling for more transparency and public comment opportunities on the risk and alternatives analyses reports.

The group’s most substantive remark is the need to recognize climate change and how it impacts our understanding of both the risk and alternatives analyses, given national and global commitments to keep average temperatures below 1.5 degrees Celsius.  Accordingly, FLOW contends that contractors must assess each alternative’s role in contributing to carbon emissions by examining its fossil fuel emissions, economic viability in a rapidly changing global energy market, and externalized social and environmental costs.  Line 5 is a part of a larger Enbridge network that makes up the world’s largest pipeline system carrying the planet’s dirtiest and most energy-intensive oil – light crude derived Canadian tar sands.  In addition, vulnerable inland sections of Line 5 must be examined as part of the overall analysis.

FLOW submitted separate comments to the Advisory Board last week, before the public comment period was extended. These recommendations included the call for a public peer review of both reports, the importance of defining a broad range system that identifies and reviews the economic impacts to the Great Lakes, and the inclusion of credible worst-case scenarios instead of the antiquated regulations defined by the Dept. of Transportation.  Additional recommendations were to include alternative release and worst-case scenarios in the risk analysis and to address public health impacts on drinking water and air emissions.

View Full Comments: 2/4/16 and 2/12/16 at flowforwater.org.


Watch How Spilled Oil Could Spread Across the Straits

A new animated video by the University of Michigan and the National Wildlife Federation shows how devastating an oil spill beneath the Straits of Mackinac would be for the Great Lakes, wildlife, and communities. The animation shows that if an oil spill occurs, oil could reach popular tourist destinations like Mackinac Island, blanket 50 miles of Lake Huron shoreline, and reach Lake Michigan landmarks such as Beaver Island.

The University of Michigan research scientist says that “one million gallons is conservatively the amount of oil that resides in the pipelines in the Straits at any time.”

Great Lakes Lawyers & Scientists Urge Gov. Snyder & AG Schuette: Imminent Hazard Requires Immediate Actions to Eliminate Oil Risk in Straits of Mackinac

Filling a void left by the state, a Great Lakes law and policy group and its scientific advisors released a report today calling on the Snyder administration to take interim steps – including the immediate temporary halt of oil flowing through two aging pipelines in the Mackinac Straits – and swiftly pursue an “action plan” to prevent an oil spill that likely could not be cleaned up and would threaten the state and regional economy, a vital fishery, and the drinking water supply for Mackinac Island and St. Ignace.

“The Michigan Task Force and Attorney General Schuette have determined that the magnitude of harm from a release of oil in the Straits is unacceptable, and that the days of these aging pipelines for transport of oil are limited,” said Jim Olson, a Traverse City attorney and President of FLOW.  “According to FLOW’s scientific experts, the transport of oil under the Straits is an imminent hazard that is at the highest level risk. Based on standard hazardous management practices, this means that interim measures that significantly lower the risk must be immediately implemented.  This also requires an immediate independent evaluation of alternative pipeline routes, capacity and logistics to eliminate the high risk of serious harm.  Until this evaluation is done, the reasonable and prudent thing to do is to halt the transport of crude oil under the Straits.”

“An effective oil spill response and recovery is virtually impossible, particularly in winter months when the Straits are covered with four feet of ice,” said Liz Kirkwood, FLOW’s Executive Director.  “According to our scientists, shutting off the flow of oil under the Straits won’t interfere with natural gas liquids, such as propane used for home heating, because they do not pose the same risk to the Straits and would continue to flow to residents in the Upper and northern Lower Peninsulas.”

The 33-page report on the Enbridge “Line 5” pipelines points to new findings, including the pipeline company’s own admission that tens of thousands of gallons of oil a day could leak into the Mackinac Straits undetected, to conclude that an “imminent harm” to the Great Lakes exists and must be stopped. The report also finds that at least one of the Straits pipelines is dented despite Enbridge’s reassurances otherwise and that the wooden slats meant to surround and protect the outside of the pipelines are missing.

“Analysis of these issues, as documented by several reports, now leads me to the conclusion that Line 5 is far more likely to present an imminent threat to health and property than not,” said Ed Timm, PhD., PE, a former senior scientist and consultant to Dow Chemical’s Environmental Operations Business and member of the FLOW expert team.  “Immediate action should be taken to assure the safety of Line 5 while the legal deliberations go on.”

The report released by FLOW, an independent nonprofit organization that evaluates Great Lakes scientific and policy issues, is intended to fill and strengthen the gap left by a state task force report issued in July that made important recommendations for assessing the risk and seeking alternatives to the Enbridge oil pipelines, but lacked action steps and a timetable. The FLOW report charts a course with clear actions to the Snyder administration and Attorney General Schuette who are charged with the responsibility of implementing the state task force recommendations and protecting the Mackinac Straits and Great Lakes from any release of oil with serious and catastrophic consequences.

The FLOW report concludes that the current use of Line 5 for the transport of crude oil “poses a high level of risk and imminent high magnitude of harm,” and proposes a specific action plan to eliminate the harm, including to:

  1. Promptly conduct an independent expert alternatives assessment regarding transport of crude oil in Line 5 through the Straits segment, as called for by the state task force;
  2. Convene and complete immediately an independent risk analysis based on credible, worst-case scenarios;
  3. Require adequate financial assurances and an approved emergency response plan by independent qualified experts that conform to the level of risk and worst-case scenarios;
  4. Require immediate submission of additional verifiable information from Enbridge and other qualified and independent sources.
  5. Take immediate enforcement actions against Enbridge to address any material violations of the state-granted 1953 easement allowing Enbridge to occupy state bottomlands in the Straits.
  6. Exercise the full authority under our constitution and laws, including common law and the public trust, that eliminate or prevent the failure of Line 5 under the Straits.

Built in 1953 during the Eisenhower administration, the aging Enbridge pipelines push nearly 23 million gallons of oil and natural gas liquids a day through the Mackinac Straits, which the company uses as a shortcut for its Line 5 route from Superior, Wis., to Sarnia, Ontario. Canadian-based Enbridge is infamous for its Line 6B pipeline that corroded and spilled 1 million gallons of heavy tar sands oil in 2010 into the Kalamazoo River watershed near Marshall, Michigan.

Enbridge estimates that a “worst-case” spill from Line 5 in winter would dump up to 360,000 gallons of oil in the Mackinac Straits and would cost as much as $900 million to clean up, not including any damages to persons, property, or natural resources for which Enbridge is liable, nor for any fines or penalties. A U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on-site oil cleanup coordinator said in March 2015 that in good conditions, no more than half of the oil spilled in open water is ever recovered. The U.S. Coast Guard Commandant in April testified to Congress that he is “not comfortable” with the current contingency plans for a worst‐case spill in the Great Lakes.

In the report, FLOW’s science and technical advisors reached several key findings, including that Enbridge’s own documents filed with the state show that 140,000 gallons of oil per day can leak into the Great Lakes at the Mackinac Straits from Enbridge’s aging Line 5 oil pipelines without Enbridge detecting it or triggering its “automatic” shutoff valves because of the technological limits of its equipment.

“A permanent solution – eliminating the Line 5 Straits crossing – may take time, but short-term action to immediately reduce the risk should be undertaken.” said Rick Kane, a hazardous materials risk-management specialist and member of the FLOW expert team. “The Line 5 crossing is a high risk due to the severe consequences of a leak and probability that a leak could occur from a number of causes, including a large failure or a smaller failure that would leak over a number of days or weeks below the system detection threshold, potentially releasing thousands of gallons per day, unknown to operators.”

The experts also found, similar to the findings underlying a recent formal notice sent by the National Wildlife Federation to the federal Department of Transportation, that Enbridge has never been required to do, and has never done, a competent emergency response plan based on a full and worst-case scenario of a rupture or release of crude oil in the Straits. In addition, Enbridge lacks sufficient capacity at the local level to respond, particularly in the winter when a response or clean up could not be done.  The expert team also found that there is a lack of sufficient structural supports and wooden slat covers to protect Line 5 under the Straits, exposing the pipeline to currents, abrasion, and other failures.

As Long as Oil Flows through the Straits Pipelines, the Great Lakes Remain at Unacceptable Risk

The Great Lakes are no safer from an oil pipeline spill today despite yesterday’s release of the State of Michigan Pipeline Task Force’s 80-page report and recommendations.

The Task Force report included four recommendations directed at Enbridge’s twin 62-year-old petroleum pipelines located on the bottom of the Straits of Mackinac: (1) Ban transportation of heavy crude oil through the Straits pipelines; (2) Require an independent risk analysis and full insurance coverage for the pipelines; (3) Require an independent analysis of alternatives to the existing pipelines; (4) Obtain more inspection data from Enbridge relating to the pipelines.

Yet, oil still flows through Line 5.  The Task Force rejected shutting down Line 5 while gathering additional information on the basis that they had “inadequate information at this time to fully evaluate the risks presented by the Straits Pipelines.” (P. 57)

Impose Emergency Measures Immediately

At a minimum, however, the Task Force should impose immediate emergency measures on the pipeline given (1) potential violations of the 1953 Easement related to Enbridge’s inability to demonstrate that it has adequate liability coverage to cover all damages from an oil spill; (2) the Coast Guard’s admission that it is inadequately prepared to clean up an open water spill in freshwater let alone under frozen winter conditions; (3) Enbridge’s failure to disclose inspection, maintenance, and repair records to document internal and external corrosion rates under the Straits and inherent limitations related to inline inspection tools.

The question remains: how much more information do we need to unveil before our trustee – the State – takes swift protective action that prioritizes the paramount interests of citizens over private corporations?

The Task Force and the public have rejected the idea that the Straits Pipelines can last indefinitely.  In fact, the Attorney General Bill Schuette has declared that “the days of letting two controversial oil pipelines operate under the Straits of Mackinac are numbered.”  This is hopeful news, but every day counts, and until we have specific measures in place that prevent a catastrophic spill, the State of Michigan is placing the Great Lakes at risk.

FLOW Responds to Task Force Report

LANSING – This morning Attorney General Bill Schuette and DEQ Director Dan Wyant released the long-awaited Michigan Petroleum Pipeline Task Force report, outlining specific recommendations to address the significant risks surrounding a Canadian pipeline company’s controversial twin pipelines (known as “Line 5” or the Straits Pipelines).  The Task Force report establishes a framework to determine whether the transport of oil through the pipelines under the 5-mile long Straits segment is prudent or justified, especially when it appears other pipelines or routes could deliver the oil to markets without endangering the Great Lakes and the public and private uses that depend on them.

Four of the 13 recommendations are directed at the 62-year-old Straits Pipelines:

  • prevent the transportation of heavy crude oil through the Straits Pipelines;
  • require an independent risk analysis and adequate financial assurance for the Straits Pipelines;
  • require an independent analysis of alternatives to the existing Straits Pipelines; and
  • obtain additional information from Enbridge on personnel, products transported, inspections, and repairs.

FLOW – a Great Lakes policy and research center located in Traverse City – credits the Task Force for seriously considering and incorporating many public interest recommendations like the need for an independent alternatives analysis.  However, the report lacks a timeline for implementation of the recommendations, enforcement measures under public trust law, and a clear process on conducting the independent alternatives analysis.  Further, there are no interim measures to keep the Great Lakes safe while the state continues to gather information.  FLOW urges Attorney General Schuette and Director Wyant to implement these additional recommendations and establish a transparent public process for evaluation under the Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act.

“The report is promising and surprisingly frank, recognizing the state’s legal authority and duty under the 1953 Easement and public trust law.  However, it doesn’t recognize the urgency of the situation in the Straits,” said Liz Kirkwood, Executive Director of FLOW, “Allowing the oil to continue flowing while awaiting further information is simply unacceptable given the ongoing risk and magnitude of harm to the Great Lakes.” FLOW expert Ed Timm observed, “Line 5 becomes more hazardous with each passing day.”

The 62-year old pipeline is owned and operated by Enbridge under a 1953 Easement that reserved ownership and the public’s rights in the Great Lakes to the State of Michigan.  Enbridge ships liquid natural gas and oil through Line 5, and its use is limited by what a reasonably prudent person would do to protect public safety, public property, and private property from harm.

According to FLOW expert Rick Kane, “there is an “end-of-life” for the Line 5 Straits Crossing that can be established by proper planning and implementation.  An alternatives assessment with an aggressive time schedule is needed to protect the Great Lakes from an unplanned incident such as those that have occurred with other aging pipelines.”  The Enbridge Line 5 pipelines push nearly 23 million gallons of oil and natural gas liquids a day through the Straits of Mackinac, which the company uses as a shortcut for its Line 5 route from Superior, Wis., to Sarnia, Ontario.  A July 2014 study by the University of Michigan called the Straits “the worst possible place for an oil spill in the Great Lakes” and depicted the prospect of a plume from a million-gallon oil spill in the Straits stretching for 85 miles – from Lake Michigan’s Beaver Island to Mackinac Island to Rogers City down the Lake Huron shore.

FLOW and partner organizations, including National Wildlife Federation, Michigan Environmental Council, and Oil & Water Don’t Mix Coalition have submitted reports and made presentations to the Task Force during the last year.  FLOW’s expert report released in April 2015 identified grave structural concerns related to corrosion, welding and coating failures, and invasive quagga mussel impacts weakening the steel pipelines.  “Emergency measures are needed, and they are needed now.” said FLOW expert Gary Street.

“Attorney General Schuette, Director Wyant, and the Task Force should be commended for their hard work on the report and the direction of these recommendations,” said Jim Olson, Founder and President of FLOW.  “Our state officials are legally recognized trustees who have a solemn duty to protect the Great Lakes from harm.  If our leaders quickly and prudently implement these recommendations, it should put an end to the transport of oil in the Straits because the risk is unacceptable to the citizens and well-being of Michigan.  At the moment, there are absolutely no executive orders, letters to Enbridge, or even suggestions for procedures, notices, and decisions to implement the Task Force recommendations.  The Attorney General, Director DEQ, and state officials must establish immediately a procedure, with public participation, transparency, and accountability under rule of law and the public trust in the Great Lakes.  Failure to do so, would be a clear violation of their public trust responsibilities.  We urge them to implement a timely, fair, and meaningful process to bring these recommendations on Line 5 and Enbridge.”

Over the last year, FLOW has elevated the State of Michigan’s leading role in addressing these petroleum pipelines that were built on state-owned bottomlands under a 1953 easement held in public trust (see FLOW’s July 1, 2014 letter to the State). The State has changed its position and accepted that they as trustees of the Great Lakes have jurisdiction over these pipelines in addition to the federal pipeline agency, PHMSA (Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration). Without the State of Michigan’s express authorization under the 1953 Easement and public trust law, Enbridge’s predecessor, Lake Head Pipe Line Company, could never have built these pipelines on the bottomland of the Straits of Mackinac.  As trustee, the State of Michigan must ensure the interests of the public by protecting the waters for citizens’ use and enjoyment in perpetuity.

“Extraordinary measures for management, communication, continuous monitoring, inspections, and emergency response are typical actions regulators take and industry expects when faced with major environmental and economic risks like Line 5,” said Kane.


For more information, visit our Line 5 page.

KOEHN: Michigan citizens deserve full transparency from Enbridge

A great article calling for full transparency from Enbridge and the State in relation to the Line 5 oil pipelines, written by Sarah Koehn (a recent graduate of the University of Michigan, and the policy intern at West Michigan Environmental Action Council), was recently published in the Grand Haven Tribune. She concludes:

“The people of Michigan deserve full transparency and a proactive, thorough process to assess the risk of moving oil through the Great Lakes in an aged pipeline. Taking Enbridge’s word on its safety is not good enough. The state of Michigan should act decisively to protect our most valuable natural resource.”

Read the full article here.

Mayors of Traverse City and Mackinac Island Urge Gov. Snyder to Regulate 61-Year-Old Oil Pipelines in Straits


Traverse City’s Mayor Michael Estes urged Gov. Snyder in a letter this week to take action as the state’s primary trustee and to regulate twin 61-year-old pipelines in the Straits of Mackinac that transport about 23 million gallons of oil every day.

Traverse City’s letter follows a similar letter that Mayor Doud of the City of Mackinac Island sent to the governor’s office just last month.  A catastrophic oil spill in the Straits would surround Mackinac Island and affect an 85-mile stretch from Lake Michigan’s Beaver Island to Rogers City in Lake Huron, according to University of Michigan’s recent dispersion model.

“Due to our proximity to the pipelines, a spill of almost any size would surround the Island in oil, shut down all ferry service, and leave residents without a viable drinking water supply for an indefinite period of time,” stated Mayor Doud in her letter to the Governor. “As Mayor of this unique community, I cannot stand by and simply hope that the pipelines pose no threat.”

Mayor Estes heralded the importance of water to Traverse City’s economy and way of life in his letter to the governor: “Lake Michigan’s clean water and magnificent shores are the backbone of Traverse City…  In 2013, tourism alone generated more than $1.23 billion in economic activity and was responsible for maintaining nearly 12,000 jobs in the Traverse City area.  Allowing the integrity of these waters to fall by the wayside would thus have dire consequences for the economy of the Traverse City area and subsequently the State of Michigan.”

This issue is a high priority for Mayor Estes who is a U.S. Michigan Advisor to the Great Lakes Fisheries Commission, which issued a resolution in the spring for the replacement of Enbridge’s pipelines in the Straits of Mackinac.

The State of Michigan issued an easement to pipeline owner and operator, Enbridge, in 1953 to place two twenty-inch-diameter oil pipelines on the state-owned bottomlands and waters of Lake Michigan.  As owner and trustee, the state has a perpetual duty to the public to protect these waters and public uses of drinking, swimming, fishing, navigation, and recreation.  This means the state must ensure that that these private oil pipelines never harm or impair the state public waters.

Liz Kirkwood, executive director of FLOW, commended both Mayors Estes and Doud saying, “Mayor Estes and Mayor Doud are serving their cities well by taking this leadership role and raising this important Great Lakes issue before the Governor who is our primary state trustee and steward of our waters.”

FLOW is a lead partner in the Oil & Water Don’t Mix campaign – comprised of over 17 environmental organizations, businesses, and tribes – that authored a letter to the Governor, Attorney General, and Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Director in July, calling on state leaders to ensure Enbridge is in full compliance with the State’s 1953 easement.  The letter requested the state to require Enbridge to file an application under the Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act and conclude that these oil pipelines will not impair or substantially harm the public trust waters or bottomlands in Lake Michigan.



Desmog: Concerns Mount About 61-Year Old Enbridge Pipeline in the Great Lakes

Click here to read the article on Desmog

By Derek Leahy, Desmog Canada

March 6, 2014

Of the 30 million Canadians and Americans depending on the Great Lakes for water very few would guess there is an oil pipeline sitting in their drinking water supply. It is anyone’s guess if this 61-year old Enbridge pipeline, known as Line 5, is pumping bitumen from the Alberta oilsands through the Great Lakes.

U.S. pipeline regulations do not require Enbridge to make public if Line 5 is transporting bitumen. Enbridge says the pipeline carries light crude oil mainly from the Bakken shale in North Dakota. The pipeline begins in Superior, Wis., and cuts through Straits of Mackinac, where Lake Huron and Lake Michigan meet, in the U.S. to get to its end destination of Sarnia, Ont.

“(U.S.) Pipelines in general are considered a national security risk,” says Beth Wallace, a regional coordinator with the National Wildlife Federation based in Ann Arbor, Mich.

“So PHMSA is not willing to provide records of Line 5 that provide detailed information about the location, integrity or product transported,” Wallace told DeSmog Canada. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHSMA) oversees pipelines for the U.S. Department of Transportation.

The National Wildlife Federation conducted an underwater dive last year to investigate and film the condition of Line 5. The federation discovered some of the pipeline’s steel supports meant to keep Line 5 secured to the bottum of the Straits had broken. Other sections of the pipeline were covered with debris.

Line 5 To Transport Bitumen Soon, If Not Already

The National Wildlife Federation believes if Line 5 is not transporting bitumen now, it will be in the near future.

“If Enbridge is granted authority to increase capacity on the Alberta Clipper pipeline, there will be an incredible increase in the amount of heavy bitumen pushed into Superior, Wisconsin, where Line 5 begins,” Wallace says.

A U.S. decision on Enbridge’s Alberta Clipper is expected next year. Earlier this week, Enbridge announced its Line 3 pipeline will be replaced by a new pipeline with expanded capacity. Both pipelines ship oil and bitumen from Alberta to Superior, Wis.

Concerns of a Bitumen Spill in the Great Lakes

Residents of Michigan experienced the worst bitumen spill in U.S. history when Enbridge’s Line 6B pipeline ruptured, spilling more than three million liters of bitumen and oil into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River. Bitumen — the tar-like form of petroleum in oilsands —sinks in water, unlike conventional oil. Enbridge has dredged the Kalamazoo multiple times in an attempt to remove the bitumen from the river. The cleanup is still going on four years after the spill.

The environmental damage a bitumen spill can cause plus Enbridge’s spill record — estimated at eight hundred pipeline spills between 1999 and 2010 — has Canadians worried about a Line 5 rupture as well. Georgian Bay, Ontario’s most vibrant bay, makes up the eastern part of Lake Huron.

“We are very concerned about Line 5,” says Therese Trainor of the Manitoulin Area Stewardship Area Council in Manitoulin Island, Ont.

“Georgian Bay is one of the most unique ecosystems in the world. We have flora and fauna here you cannot find anywhere else. We could lose this in an oil spill,” Trainor told DeSmog Canada.

There is no land between Lake Huron and Lake Michigan to stop the Straits of Mackinac’sswift water currents from spreading an oil spill into either lake. The National Wildlife Federation estimates in its Sunken Hazard report that if Line 5 has a large oil spill it could reach Georgian Bay.

Condtions in Straits of Mackinac Make it a Terrible Place For A Oil Spill

“This (Straits of Mackinac) is a terrible place for a rupture,” says pipeline safety expert Richard Kuprewicz.

Kuprewicz, a pipeline safety expert with 40 years of experience in the energy sector, says pipeline ruptures are difficult enough to cleanup, but conditions in the Straits of Mackinac would make things much worse. Line 5 at its deepest is 90 metres underwater and the straits freeze over in the winter.

What emergency responders could do about a burst pipeline nearly 100 metres below in the either stormy or frozen straits is questionable.

“Pardon the expression, but cleaning up and containing a Line 5 rupture in the straits would be a crap shoot,” says Wallace of the National Wildlife Federation.

There are no reports of Line 5 rupturing in the Straits of Mackinac. The 76-centimeter (30-inch) wide pipeline splits into two smaller 50-centimeter (20-inch) wide pipelines with thicker pipe walls (2.5 cm) in the straits. An external coal-tar coating minimizes corrosion on the pipeline. Coal-tar coating has had “mixed success” in the past protecting pipelines, according to Kuprewicz.

“Just because a pipeline hasn’t leaked or ruptured in the past doesn’t mean it won’t in the future. The past does not predict the future,” Kuprewicz, president of research group Accufacts Inc.,  told DeSmog Canada.

Line 5 has ruptured on land, notably in 1999 at Crystal Falls, Mich., spilling 850,000 litres of oil and natural gas liquids.

Michigan Needs To Protect the Great Lakes Commons

Liz Kirkwood, executive director of the Michigan-based Great Lakes advocacy group FLOW (For Love of Water), argues Enbridge should be required to secure permission from the state of Michigan under the Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act before the pipeline company can transport bitumen through the Straits of Mackinac.

“As a trustee of the Great Lakes, the state of Michigan is obligated to assess possible impairments to the public’s use of the Great Lakes and protect the lakes for the enjoyment of present and future generations,” Kirkwood says.

Michigan’s Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act requires companies to obtain state permits to build or modify structures in the Great Lakes. Line 5 was built in 1953. The Act came into effect in 1955.

The Pipeline in the Straits: Learning About Line 5 with Enbridge in St. Ignace

By FLOW intern Jonathan Aylward. Jonathan has been with FLOW since January 2014 and also works on food-related projects throughout the Grand Traverse region.

There is an oil pipeline running through the Great Lakes underneath the Mackinac Bridge. The pipeline, called Line 5, is owned and operated by Enbridge, a Canadian energy corporation. Enbridge has pumped crude oil through the less than one-inch-thick pipeline for sixty-one years along the bottom of the Straits of Mackinac. Built under Dwight Eisenhower’s administration at a time before modern pipeline regulations, Enbridge increased the output of Line 5 by 50,000 gallons per day in 2013. While Line 5’s capacity has increased, neither regulatory scrutiny nor corporate transparency have followed suit. The Great Lakes, which contain 84% of North America’s and 20% of the planet’s surface freshwater, are at a greater risk than ever.

Line 5 is part of a vast network of Enbridge pipelines that transports crude oil and natural gas liquids originating in Western Canada (mainly the Athabasca tar sands) and North Dakota around the country. Line 5 is the section that passes from Superior, Wisconsin through the Upper and Lower Peninsulas of Michigan into Sarnia, Ontario.

Enbridge put on a public presentation in St. Ignace, MI, on February 5, 2014 in response to mounting public concern spurred in part by an alarming report released in 2012 and an unsettling video released last year, both by the National Wildlife Federation (NWF). Some of the most illuminating segments can be heard and read below.

First, a quick reminder of why Michiganders should be especially wary of Enbridge’s Line 5 and its 1,900 miles of pipeline surrounding the Great Lakes.

Enbridge’s Dilbit Disaster in Kalamazoo, MI

Bitumen is the type of oil that is extracted from the Athabasca tar sands, a region of Alberta the size of New York state. It’s not normal liquid oil; bitumen is more solid than it is liquid, and it has to be strip mined or boiled to be released from the ground. It is the heaviest form of petroleum in the world, which makes it especially hazardous to transport because in the event of a spill it can sink. From extraction to refinement, it has the largest carbon footprint of any type of petroleum.

Since 1999, Enbridge has been responsible for 983 spills, the largest of which happened in Marshall, MI (near Kalamazoo, MI) in 2010. That spill, on Line 6b, was the largest on-land oil spill in US history.  About one million gallons of diluted bitumen (dilbit) leaked into Talmadge Creek, a tributary of the Kalamazoo River. The pipeline was forty years old, twenty years younger than Line 5. Enbridge has responded with negligence ever since the initial rupture:

  • The Line 6b leaked for 17 hours, and during the spill operators actually increased the pressure to release what was thought to be a blockage.
  • Enbridge monitors weren’t the ones to discover the spill; it was a local utility man that reported it to local authorities.
  • 180,000 gallons of bitumen still sits on the bottom of the Kalamazoo River three and a half years later.

The Kalamazoo spill has forced Michiganders to wake up to the interrelated threats to public health, the economy, and our environment that Line 5 poses. Pressing questions about the age and condition of the pipeline and the type of crude being pumped quickly surface.

  • After Kalamazoo, why should the public continue to entrust Enbridge as stewards of the Great Lakes?
  • Why is Enbridge using a sixty year old pipeline if their forty year old pipeline ruptured in Kalamazoo?
  • Which type(s) of tar sands oil product are shipped through Line 5?
  • Why is there a pipeline going through the Great Lakes at all?
  • Under what conditions was the pipeline approved and why is it still there?

Enbridge Comes to St. Ignace

Enbridge sent a public relations advisor and two of their engineers along with their cleanup contractor to St. Ignace to present “their side of the story” at the Mackinac County Planning Commision meeting. The room was packed with around 175 attendees. No representatives from NWF or other concerned organizations were present on the Q&A panel.

The environment was carefully controlled. Two Enbridge employees in the front row acted as a whispering counsel to the panel throughout the event. Instead of an open floor question and answer format, Enbridge opted to have the public write their questions down. Then, through an unexplained process, Enbridge proceeded to answer certain question cards. The mood shifted from respectful concern to outright frustration over the course of the hour and half long event. Many questions were left unanswered, and even more questions arose.

The Potential Disaster

1. Enbridge says 5,500 barrels (231,000 gallons) of light crude oil could leak into the Great Lakes.


[soundcloud id=’136703886′ color=’#091571′]


In the audio build-up to the video clip, the public relations advisor initially dismisses a question about the company’s assessment on a worst-case discharge. A minute passes (which has been edited out), and the citizen that wrote the question stands up and demands that they revisit his question. In the video, after more audience questioning, the Enbridge Engineer gives the number off the top of his head.

2. “Extremely conservative” estimate says 25 square miles could be covered.

[soundcloud id=’134804334′ color=’#091571′]

3. In the winter, “Mother Nature will dictate.”

[soundcloud id=’134804343′ color=’#091571′]

Winter ice is not the only force of nature present at Line 5’s Straits crossing that would enhance the complexity and difficulty of a clean-up. Here is an excerpt from the NWF report “Sunken Hazard” about the powerful currents in the Straits:

“The Straits of Mackinac in northern Michigan is a unique area of the Great Lakes, a four-mile-wide channel that funnels colossal amounts of water between Lakes Michigan and Huron. Powerful storm-driven currents that cause water to oscillate back and forth between the two lakes can move water through the Straits at a rate of three feet or more per second. At times, the volume of water flowing beneath the Mackinac Bridge is 50 times greater than the average flow of the St. Clair River, one of the largest rivers in the Great Lakes basin. Those currents also make the Straits one of the worst places in the Great Lakes for an oil spill. There are few other places in the lakes where an oil spill could spread so quickly.”

What’s Inside the Pipeline?

4. Question: Are there any plans to pipe tar sands through this pipeline?
Answer: “There are no plans to pump what’s known as heavy crude, and sometimes called tar sands, through that pipeline.”

[soundcloud id=’134804329′ color=’#091571′]

This was the first question selected by Enbridge in the Q&A segment. Enbridge openly reports on their website that they are piping several types of tar sands oil through Line 5, mainly the product called synthetic crude, and not the heavier dilbit. Bitumen from the Athabasca tar sands becomes transportable in two ways: it’s either diluted with other chemicals to create dilbit, or it is partially refined at an upgrader facility in Alberta and mixed with chemicals to create a lighter product called synthetic crude. This document on Enbridge’s website reports “Light Synthetic” as one of four groups of products piped on Line 5, and this other Enbridge document lists the specific products that are commonly shipped through Line 5. All of the Light Synthetic products are derived from tar sands bitumen, and some of the “Light & High Sour” products are as well.

5. Question: What procedure does Enbridge have to follow if they change their mind and want to start shipping tar sands?
Answer: “It’s complicated, let me come back to that.” She didn’t.

[soundcloud id=’134804330′ color=’#091571′]

Again, Enbridge is already shipping a variety of tar sands crude products through Line 5. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), the federal pipeline regulatory agency, treats all crude oil the same despite the fact that spill consequences vary by type and product. Enbridge can pump anything that classifies as crude oil or natural gas liquids through their pipelines, from conventional light crude oil to dilbit. On page three of this document from Enbridge’s website, it says that even if a product is not marked as permissible or existing for a specific pipeline (e.g. dilbit in Line 5), transporting it would simply “require prior authorization from Enbridge”. It appears that pipeline companies do not even have to document changes in batches or the chemical composition of its current products.

6. Line 5 currently pipes low density crude oil and natural gas liquids in 10,000 barrel batches.

[soundcloud id=’134804328′ color=’#091571′]

540,000 barrels pass through Line 5 per day.

7. Most of the product comes from the Bakken Shale in North Dakota.

[soundcloud id=’136693110′ color=’#091571′]

Over half of the products listed on Enbridge’s website that pass through Line 5 can be traced to the Athabasca tar sands’ region. Here is the link again.

Kalamazoo River Spill

8. All oil floats, but some oil floats better than other oil.

[soundcloud id=’134804332′ color=’#091571′]

The 180,000 gallons of bitumen on the bottom of the Kalamazoo River demonstrate otherwise.

9. All questions that mention the Kalamazoo River spill were rejected.

[soundcloud id=’134804331′ color=’#091571′]

Enbridge says Lines 5 and 6b are ”two different lines that do different things”, so all questions that mention the spill are rejected.

The Condition of Line 5

10. Enbridge inspects for dents, cracks, and wall thickness. Line 5 under the Straits has no dents and good wall thickness.

[soundcloud id=’134804341′ color=’#091571′]

11. In 2012, Enbridge documented hundreds of “abnormalities or cracked features” on Line 5.
[soundcloud id=’134804342′ color=’#091571′]

12. “They don’t build it like this anymore.”

[soundcloud id=’134804335′ color=’#091571′]

13. “The seamless pipeline under the straits is in fact seamless.”

[soundcloud id=’134804336′ color=’#091571′]

At this point in the event, the word seamless had been used a lot.

14. The pipeline is welded every 40 feet. The seamlessness of the pipeline is referring to the side-seam.

[soundcloud id=’134804338′ color=’#091571′]

For an hour and a half, the audience pondered how it was possible to make, transport, and install a 5-mile long seamless pipeline. The question was finally answered near the end of the meeting. An Enbridge engineer clarified that the each pipeline piece is welded to the next section every 40 feet, and that the “seamless pipeline” is referring to the lack of a side-seam.

15. “There were no regulations that had to be met when that line was built,” but Enbridge looked it over in 2004 and concluded that Line 5 to par.

[soundcloud id=’134804340′ color=’#091571′]

16. People got angry that Enbridge didn’t answer all their questions at a public meeting about Line 5.

[soundcloud id=’134804344′ color=’#091571′]

For audio and video transcripts, click here.

TRANSCRIPTS: The Pipeline in the Straits: Learning About Line 5 with Enbridge in St. Ignace

Want more? Here are the transcripts of the clips from the February 5 Enbridge meeting with Mackinac County officials and the public regarding the expansion of the Line 5 oil pipeline that is, in part, submerged underwater at the Straits of Mackinac in the Great Lakes.


1. Enbridge says 5,500 barrels (231,000 gallons) of light crude oil could leak into the Great Lakes.

[soundcloud id=’136703886′ color=’#091571′]

One of our residents would like to know, if there is a, um, break, uh, leak, in that 3 minute period from a 20 inch line at 300 pounds per second, what are we looking at, how much oil or volume would be lost to the on site?
Um, you know, I’m going to be completely honest, we talked about how to address this question, and the bottom line is we can speculate all day on worst case scenarios, what I can tell you, and I’ve tried to show you are all of the different safety mechanisms we have in place to ensure that hopefully we don’t have any incidents, but if we do, we work with our Osrow, and the Coast Guard, and all these other places to ensure that we contain it as quickly as possible, and return it to, um, return it back to the state in which it was. And, there’s more questions, you know, related to , um, who is going to pay for it, and of course we do assume that responsibility, um. What materials do you have in the straits? We talked about that. We have stuff on both ends of the straits, with boom, and our people that live and work here. Um, this a an um, I found this kind of interesting: are you planning for the Madrid earthquake? I can tell you that, um, not necessarily Enbridge, nor osrow =, but i can tell you from my past life that the Madrid earthquake is practiced every year by the department of defense, so that’s a homeland security issue and they are dealing with it. (huh?–crowd.)
Simple math problem about the oil spill–crowd
Compensations to businesses would be the same to county and private residents.
Sorry, you didn’t exactly answer my question with quantity. And, surely you know how much is flowing through just like if i spill a 2 cup, uh pale of water i know how much spilled. so, if there was a breach, what would be the release, because you know the quantity right?
Blake: Well, ok, we’d call that a worst case discharge.
Repeat the question!
Jackie: the question is how much is oil is in the pipeline between the two places in which we can isolate it
After the two minute shutdown
There’s 3 minutes before you totally shut down, you said that earlier. So let’s take the worst scenario of 3 minutes of oil flowing at 100%. Like you said, that’s a simple math problem.
Yeah, that’s a simple math problem. Ok, uh, it’s uh, like, without the automatic shutoff system, it was like 15000 barrels, and then when we installed the automatic shutoff system, that cut it down to like 5,500 barrels, but it’s at a pressure, like i showed you, the pressure is like say 150 psi, or less, and i imagine if those valves shut, it’s going to be less, because they wouldn’t shut unless it was less. And we’ve talked about this, so, we have to give them a figure, and it’s on volume, so the very worst case, and it’s very unlikely, is 5,500 barrels. But, you know, one thing that was interesting, some of our engineers were saying, that the water pressure at the bottom of the straits is almost that much, so. not like we are actually going to open and it up and find out what happens, but there’s a good chance that there’s gonna be water going in at one point and holding the oil in. and the oil wants to float up, and it goes down like this. So I really doubt that even close to even a percentage of that would even leak in a scenario.

2. “Extremely conservative” estimate says 25 square miles could be covered.

[soundcloud id=’134804334′ color=’#091571′]

So, the first one, given the shutdown response stated, what is the volume of discharge during the time frame stated? That was answered right? Ok, what is the surface area that would result? 5,500 barrels? I’m sorry, I don’t have this exact calculation ready for you, but if anybody needs it, but if anybody needs the exact number, uh, predictive number, we can talk about it, but it’s substantial, very substantial, a figure, and I’m probably very low estimating it, 25 square miles, to figure something like that.

3. In the winter, “Mother Nature will dictate.”

[soundcloud id=’134804343′ color=’#091571′]

Next question: May Day, May Day May Day, it’s January 21, 2014, -18, -40 below wind chill, ice is 4 feet htick, oil leak alarms start sounding at 3 locations under the Straits of Mackinac. What are you, Enbridge, and the US Coast Guard going to do about it?
How soon will you have the critical response personal on site, and time to stop the leak. We’ve talked a lot about winter operations, and it should be very clear to everyone that it is a much more difficult type of approach. Now, from a response perspective, we have two ways to access oil under the ice. If it’s thick enough, we can walk out and start drilling holes to get to it. So if this oil spill of one of these 3 leaks that is proposed here, occurs near shore, then we’re going to go out from shore and start doing that. How quick can that happen? First boots on the ground, our first partner companyy is here in St. Ignace, Mackinac Environmental, that provides some assessment, then we start rolling personnel in. And equipment in. As we saw in my slide, we have a 6 hour mainframe model, and a 12 hour time frame model. Now, we need to put a lot of boots on the ground to do that, and to give you an idea of what i would conceive of an operation like that, we’re talking about 100’s of people having to be mobilized in 6-12 hours, so we’re prepared in our planning standards to achieve those kinds of concepts, but to answer the question, in the winter, mother nature will dictate, we need those kinds of resources, and it will complicate it that way, that’s the reality of it.

4. Question: Are there any plans to pipe tar sands through this pipeline?
Answer: “There are no plans to pump what’s known as heavy crude, and sometimes called tar sands, through that pipeline.”

[soundcloud id=’134804329′ color=’#091571′]

Are there any plans to pipe tar sands through this pipeline? As I said earlier, um, Line 5 is a light crude, um, pipeline, there are no plans to, um, pump what’s know as heavy crudes, and sometimes called tar sands through that pipeline. There are no plans to pump, um, heavy crude through Line 5.

5. Question: What procedure does Enbridge have to follow if they change their mind and want to start shipping tar sands?
Answer: “It’s complicated, let me come back to that.” She didn’t.

[soundcloud id=’134804330′ color=’#091571′]

If you decide at some point to change what you…to pipe tar sands oil through the straits, what procedure do you have to follow? I’m going to come back to that one because..it’s complicated. Let me come back to that one.
There was a question that she was asked that she said she would defer. I’d like to hear the answer to that question. “She’s ended answering the questions” She deferred that question, she said she would answer it!

6. Line 5 currently pipes low density crude oil and natural gas liquids in 10,000 barrel batches.

[soundcloud id=’134804328′ color=’#091571′]

Blake Olson – Enbridge Engineer: “Mixtures of petroleum, does that flow through this pipe? Well, It’s light density crude oil and natural gas liquids, that’s what flows through the pipe. Uh, they’re batched in like 10,000 barrel batches, and they have different names by who produced them and from where they came, but they are basically the lighter density oil. Line 5 is designed for piping that type of fluid. If we were to switch to heavy crude, we would have to change a lot of things on the pipeline, including all the pumps and whatnot. That’s all, I guess, I can explain, petroleum dense…light density oil and natural gas liquids, which is raw propane and butane.”

7. Most of the product comes from the Bakken Shale in North Dakota.

[soundcloud id=’136693110′ color=’#091571′]

Where does that product come from? Our light crude comes mostly from the Bakken.

8. All oil floats, but some oil floats better than other oil.

[soundcloud id=’134804332′ color=’#091571′]

The question here was: Does all oil float? Well, all the oil has, you know, a density less than water, so it should float. Uh, The, uh, light crude oil has lower density than the heavier crude oil service, and this is the light oil, so, uh, it floats better on line 5 than, it, uh, maybe on the heavier oil lines. But it all floats.

9. All questions that mention the Kalamazoo River spill were rejected.

[soundcloud id=’134804331′ color=’#091571′]

There were a lot of questions here about Kalamazoo. Line 5 and line 6 are two different lines that do different things I’m not going to get into discussing Kalamazoo here today. We’ve learned a lot from it. “It’s still not cleaned up” We’re in the process of finishing that.

10. Enbridge inspects for dents, cracks, and wall thickness. Line 5 under the Straits has no dents and good wall thickness.

[soundcloud id=’134804341′ color=’#091571′]

The monitoring efforts and inline inspection: the inline inspection tools in our sophisticated electronic vehicles move inside the pipe along with the oil, they obtain detailed measurements in the pipeline condition, they’re look at, these are three of the different types: they look at corrosion or wall thickness of the pipe, that’s how they can tell that the pipe is still the same thickness. They also look for dents in the pipe. And they look for, uh, cracks in the pipe. And the, uh, data, at the end of last year, the new data shows that the wall thickness is still almost an inch thick, and it also shows that there’s no dents on any of the straits.

11. In 2012, Enbridge documented hundreds of “abnormalities or cracked features” on Line 5.

[soundcloud id=’134804342′ color=’#091571′]

Based on Enbridge 2012 documents, hundreds of abnormalities or cracked features have been documented on line 5, and these abnormalities, they say, are similar to 6b which ruptured and caused that largest inland heavy sands spill. And uh, so, what, specific measures is Enbridge taking to remediate these abnormalities on the pipeline through the straits? Well, that’s what I was talking about, that;s what we’re doing; we beefed up the whole division that works on those, and we keep, just, and then, of course the straits piping, we’re running the tools, and we’re not finding any indications. So, uh, it’s because, that’s the thickest pipe we have in our whole system in all of North America. They just over-designed the whole straits crossing, that special seamless pipe.

12. “They don’t build it like this anymore.”

[soundcloud id=’134804335′ color=’#091571′]

Hello, thank you for coming. Ok, Enbridge, uh, strives for a safe delivery of liquid petroleum, and transport. The seamless steel pipe is a very robust design, it’s, you, we really have to give credit to the engineers that designed it, it’s really built to last. It’s really one of those stories where “they don’t build it like this anymore”. The, uh, pipeline is nearly 1 inch thick of steel, the two 20-inch lines.

13. “The seamless pipeline under the straits is in fact seamless.”

[soundcloud id=’134804336′ color=’#091571′]

Um, there’s a question about seams, the pipeline, the seamless pipeline under the straits is in fact seamless.

14. The pipeline is welded every 40 feet. The seamlessness of the pipeline is referring to the side-seam.

[soundcloud id=’134804338′ color=’#091571′]

Ok, just a clarification probably: how is a pipeline 5 miles long created without any seams. And, as you can see on the pipeline, there’s a different process to make a seamless pipe than there is to make a regular piece of pipeline. A regular piece of pipeline you take a flat piece of metal, it get’s rolled and folded, it gets welded, kind of like your pantleg, you’ve got a seam going down your pant leg, and that’s the side seam. As far as that piece of pipe it’s more continuous, there’s a whole different process that produces a seamless pipe. Now, there are joints in the pipe, so to be clear on that, the pipe did come out in 40 foot sections, so they are welded every 40 feet along there, there’s a butt welded to a joint, but there’s not a seam going all the way down there.

15. “There were no regulations that had to be met when that line was built,” but Enbridge looked it over in 2004 and concluded that Line 5 to par.

[soundcloud id=’134804340′ color=’#091571′]

A question that is a 2 part one: if teh pipeline were to be installed today, how would it differ from the way it was designed originally? Would it be done differently to meet design requirements? For example would a double walled pipe be required?
Just a little history, I used to work for the Minnesota office of pipeline safety, so I was trained with PHMSA, and so I got a pretty good background on the requirements. This pipeline going across the straits was built before PHMSA existed, so there were no regulations that had to be met when that pipeline was built. Now that said, Enbridge went back in 2004, went back through all the orignial design calculations just to double check how it was built and if it was still built to an acceptable standard today, and it was far in excess of what PHMSA requires.

16. People got angry that Enbridge didn’t answer all their questions at a public meeting about Line 5.

[soundcloud id=’134804344′ color=’#091571′]

Um, we’ve exceeded the time that the commission has allowed us, we hope we’ve answered your questions. (Audience angry yelling) I realize that. I’m sorry, this is going to end, if you want to have your question answered after this session by Enbridge employees, uh…we could go on for hours but uh, this is what was sessioned…(audience yelling)