We are not talking about just any ordinary piece of real-estate. The Straits of Mackinaw are a irreplaceable gem, core to a Michigander’s identity. I have been crossing that Strait since before there was a bridge. It acts as a gateway to the unique environment and culture of the Upper Peninsula, What is to be gained by threatening this gift, this treasure? The transportation of tar sands oil, the dirtiest of oil, whose processing produces a wide range of chemical toxic waste, to be refined down south and then shipped back to Canada? Really? Taxpayers/citizens of Michigan get all the risk and none of the benefit. Seems like a bad tradeoff.
Enbridge’s claim that encasing the pipeline in a concrete tunnel would secure the safety of the Straits is deeply flawed. How do I know this? Let the record show that 99% + of all oil and gas pipelines do not run through tunnels.. Wonder why? Could it be that the industry’s unwillingness to utilize such .structures is the strongest indication of all, that such a tunnel is fraught with risk and not worth the effort. Exposing the Straits of Mackinaw to the potential of catastrophic destruction for the profit of a small Canadian company seems like a fool’s choice. The Strait is ours only for the short time we inhabit this life. It truly belongs to the generations to come.
If you have any questions, please contact me, Andy Buchsbaum, at buchsbauma@gmail.com, 734-717-3665. Thank you.
API represents all segments of America’s oil and natural gas industry, which supports nearly 11 million U.S. jobs and is backed by a growing grassroots movement of millions of Americans. Our approximately 600 members produce, process and distribute the majority of the nation’s energy and participate in API Energy Excellence, which is accelerating environmental and safety progress. API has developed more than 800 standards that enhance operational safety, environmental protection and sustainability. Promoting technological, environmental and regulatory innovation is a driving force for API and our members to ensure we have the energy used every day by tens of millions of American families and businesses.
API and its member companies support the prompt approval of the EIS and all required permits and authorizations, which will allow Enbridge to move forward with the Line 5 Great Lakes Tunnel Project as quickly as possible, as the tunnel is the best option from an environmental and safety perspective. The proper scope of the USACE’s EIS should focus on assessing tunnel alignments across the Straits, not a review of the entire pipeline. The design and engineering of the tunnel project adheres to the principle of having a minimal impact on the surrounding environment and protecting the Great Lakes. The tunnel project offers the greatest possible safeguards to Lake Michigan while continuing to deliver essential energy to the region. Line 5 meets the propane demands for more than half of the State of Michigan and 65 percent of the Upper Peninsula alone.
Safety is a core value that is paramount in every aspect of our industry’s operations. Pipelines are the safest way to transport the natural gas and oil that Americans use every day, and consumers – whether hospitals, schools, emergency responders, manufacturers, or families – have an expectation that energy will be there when they need it. The Great Lakes Tunnel Project will help ensure the safety and reliability of Line 5 in the Straits by housing 30-inch diameter pipeline replacement segment 100 feet below the lakebed within the subsurface easement issued by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority (MSCA). There is almost no impact to wetlands and no permanent impact to the lake bottom, which is why the tunnel was chosen by the State of Michigan.
As determined by the State, the tunnel enhances safety of the Straits, as compared to other alternatives, by providing secondary containment to virtually eliminate the potential for a release into the Straits. Other alternatives to replace Line 5’s crossing of the Straits would likely result in significant environmental impacts to the Great Lakes, such as dredging associated with the installation of a pipeline on the lakebed. Additionally, non-pipeline alternatives are not an option to connect Enbridge’s existing Line 5 facilities on either side of the Straits. The significant amounts of petroleum products reliably and safely transported by the dual pipelines could not possibly be carried by trucks across the Mackinac Bridge, by vessel as barge transportation infrastructure at the Straits does not exist and would adversely impact vessel traffic transiting the Straits, or by rail as infrastructure between Enbridge’s existing Straits’ facilities does not exist. Transportation alternatives like trains, trucks and ships use fuel to move fuel, is a less environmentally friendly and sustainable approach and puts Michiganders at far greater risk than a well-protected pipeline under the Straits. Additionally, non-pipeline alternatives have higher greenhouse gas emissions compared to pipelines and could result in a higher frequency of incidents on a per mile basis.
At a time when we least can afford it, this would be another lost opportunity for Michigan if we do not leverage the chance to help protect and preserve our environment by building the Great Lakes Tunnel. This is the right plan for the environment and Michigan. The Great Lakes Tunnel can help ensure extra layers of safety and environmental protection in our waterways without compromising the delivery of the energy on which Michigan depends. There is a reason more than 70 percent of Michiganders support the Great Lakes Tunnel project; it will provide additional connectivity between the Peninsulas, safeguarding important utilities while helping protect the waterways that millions treasure and still provide much-needed affordable, reliable energy.
API and the pipeline industry are committed to safely delivering its products to market without incident by employing robust and holistic safety practices. The reality is there are no viable alternatives to the Great Lakes Tunnel to house a replacement section of Enbridge Line 5, and the Tunnel will continue to help support the safe and reliable delivery of essential energy supplies to Michigan residents and the region. We urge the USACE to ensure a timely review and decision on the approval of the tunnel project EIS as it has now been over 5 ½ years since Enbridge filed their first permit.
Line 5 is 65+ years old, already has leaked 33 times, and mostly serves Canadian markets.
If Line 5 spills in the Great Lakes, Michigan taxpayers could be on the hook for up to $6 billion in cleanup, while most of the oil goes to Canada and all profits to Enbridge.
We could do without this pipeline. Studies show Michigan and the Midwest can meet energy needs without it, and do it safer, cleaner, and smarter.