Posted Draft EIS Comments

Please don't rush Line 5 approval.

The Line 5 tunnel project has not undergone a comprehensive risk assessment, which is crucial for a project that poses risks to the Great Lakes, our climate, and our future.
Many tunnel experts who have reviewed Enbridge's plans share concerns for the logistics of placing a tunnel under the lakebed, considering it to be complicated, dangerous, and technically challenging. Experts also share concerns for the workers who are subjected to the dangerous pipeline construction and operations.
The supposed "energy emergency" used to justify fast-tracking this project 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.

Line 5 is vital.
The existing line is old and there is a risk of rupture.
The planned replacement is sound environmentally and Structurally.
This project MUST move forward ASAP.
It is unsafe to continue to operate the existing line and it is unreasonable to believe that we can do without the pipeline entirely.

any body that looks at all the ramifications of the pipe line being stopped a pipe line is 99% more efficiant less trucks less trains hauling less carbon emissions we need the energy from the pipe line somehow

The Line 5 tunnel project has not undergone a comprehensive risk assessment, which is crucial for a project that poses risks to the Great Lakes, our climate, and our future.
Many tunnel experts who have reviewed Enbridge's plans share concerns for the logistics of placing a tunnel under the lakebed, considering it to be complicated, dangerous, and technically challenging. Experts also share concerns for the workers who are subjected to the dangerous pipeline construction and operations.
The supposed "energy emergency" used to justify fast-tracking this project 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.

Voicing my opinion in favor of Line 5 and the help it will provide to the area. I have friends that work that pipeline and depend on it, but also our nation depends on it.

Long overdue! Get it done!!

The Great Lakes are not only a great treasure to the state of Michigan, they are a great amazing resource to all of the surrounding states and our entire country. Our actions must keep these lakes from any potential harm or threat. Our lives truly depend on it.

I am a retired Civil Engineer and am somewhat familiar with the methane explosion that occurred in the 60’s at Port Gratiot related to the construction of Detroit’s Lake Huron water intake.
Recently I attended a presentation by an Enbridge engineer who stated, I think, that there would be no long term monitoring for explosive atmosphere buildup in the tunnel since they intended for the tunnel to be low maintenance and would only be monitored when being inspected.
How would operators become aware of a potential methane leak into the tunnel should one occur? I think no monitoring would be a disaster waiting to happen if that were true.
Please clarify what precautions will be taken to avoid and deal with an explosive atmosphere if it were to develop at any point in the future.
I realize that the Port Gratiot incident was construction-related but since there will be an empty, unventilated tunnel in this case long term the potential for an explosive atmosphere is certainly possible over time.
Thank you
Dennis Benoit

I am asking you to pause all approvals on the Line 5 tunnel until a full environmental review is completed—including assessments of climate impacts, Indigenous rights, and public health. The health of our Great Lakes is vital to millions of people, and too important a natural resource to fast track a project without carefully studying the impacts. In addition, we should be moving away from the use of oil to more renewable resources!