Posted Draft EIS Comments

I am very much against the Line 5 Tunnel.
I write as a veteran Biology and Environmental Science teacher.
The potential for catastrophic impact on the unique ecosystem of the Great Lakes is not worth installing the project. Just as “there’s more than one way to skin a cat” (which is true!), there are other means of addressing energy needs of the people.

I’m not against the use of oil, I am against routing its transport beneath the Straits of Mackinac.
Sincerely,
Tina M Larson

I am writing to oppose approving the Line 5 tunnel project. It has not been thoroughly vetted and just one spill would ruin the Great Lakes. The risks way outweigh the benefits. There is no energy crisis that has to be dealt with only in this way, The Indigenous peoples whose land will be crossed have not had meaningful input. This tunnel is just a disaster waiting to happen.

I would like to share my concerns for the Line 5 project. I understand the need to move fuels across the state and in between countries; however, the slightest leak or damage to the line could , not only put our wildlife in danger, it could have detrimental impact on the health and safety of the residents of Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, Indiana and our Canadian neighbors. Alternatives can and should be considered. Given the severity of this matter it’s time to think outside of the box to find a different way, above water, to move materials. Thank you for the opportunity to share my concerns. I’d be happy to serve on a citizen committee to further discuss alternative ideas.

My utmost concern is for the health of the Great Lakes and health of the communities that recreate and make a living from them. The supposed "energy emergency" is false and politically motivated, and should not override public safety and environmental protections. An oil spill in the Great Lakes would be catastrophic for drinking water, wildlife, and Michigan’s economy. More than 1.3 million jobs, equating to $82 billion in wages, are directly tied to the Great Lakes. Approving this tunnel locks us into decades of fossil fuel dependency, exacerbating the climate and public health crises; it must be thoroughly assessed for its greenhouse gas emissions and health impacts before proceeding. Tribal nations and Indigenous communities have not been meaningfully consulted. Their rights, treaties, and voices must be honored.

I was born and raised in Michigan, with a family history that dates back before statehood. Building any new fossil fuel infrastructure is pure negligence during a climate emergency, especially when 90% of the oil in Line 5 goes back to Canada and lines the pocket of a foreign energy company. Furthermore, Enbridge has a history of disastrous oil spills in Michigan's precious wetland ecosystems. In fact, Line 5 has already leaked at least 33 times and more than 1.1 million gallons of oil. There is no reason to risk 90% of our country's freshwater supply for a pipeline that provides 90% of oil to Canada. There is no urgent need for this Line 5 pipeline energy. Michigan has plenty of energy alternatives that operate on renewable energy, that would not cause environmental and socioeconomic harm, and can easily replace and surpass the 10% of tar sand oil that the Line 5 pipeline will potentially leak into the Great Lakes. In addition to all of the biological and economic reasons to shut down the Line 5 pipeline, the cultural loss and violation of treaty rights must also be considered amongst environmental impacts. For the Anishinaabe people of the Bay Mills Indian Community (BMIC) life began in the Michilimackinac (Place of the Great Turtle, with Mackinac being a mistranslation of ‘turtle’), now known as the Straights of Mackinac. Not only is the drinking source and livelihood of more than 40 million people at risk, the pipeline is located where Lake Huron and Lake Michigan meet, known to the indigenous community for centuries as a sacred space. I urge you to stop the Line 5 pipeline project so we can invest and move forward with more sustainable energy infrastructure such as biomass, solar and wind.

Regarding Line 5 crossing the Straits of Mackinac - this is a disaster in waiting! There are no protections for oil leaking into the Great Lakes, and this would be a complete disaster - especially for Michigan. Our state depends on this area of the Great Lakes for fishing, recreation, tourism, as well as a natural habitat for wildlife. I am totally against using Line 5 to transport oil anywhere.

The Line 5 tunnel project should not be approved at all, let alone fast-tracked. There is no "energy emergency" that requires this tunnel or indeed any more fossil fuels at all. The data is overwhelming and clear: today, solar energy is the cheapest and most efficient source for energy. It doesn't contribute to climate change, dirty air, and oil spills that destroy biological life and indigenous communities. If anything should be fast-tracked, it's solar energy. In addition to Line 5 being wholly unnecessary for our energy needs, it has not undergone a comprehensive risk assessment, and many tunnel experts agree that the risks of placing a tunnel under a lake bed are substantial. Again, because we don't need the oil, there is no need to risk the catastrophe of an oil spill in the Great Lakes. Moreover, tribal nations have rights that are not being honored and indigenous communities, directly affected by this tunnel, have not been meaningfully consulted. Finally, if you don't care about clean air and clean water and climate change and indigenous communities, consider the negative economic impacts of this proposed project: more than 1.3 million jobs are directly tied to the Great Lakes, along with billions of dollars in tourism Approving this tunnel locks us into decades of fossil fuel dependency to the detriment of people and the planet, for no good reason,