Great Lakes are too precious to risk a catastrophic oil spill. The construction of the tunnel would also result in major environmental destruction. Line 5 needs to be shut down. The current line is of very advanced age. The proposed tunnel is not a solution.
I speak as a resident very concerned that the US Army Corps of Engineers has not thoroughly considered the short-term nor the long-term impacts of allowing a Canadian company to construct a tunnel under the Great Lakes to carry oil.
The potential impacts of the construction process need to be considered, including the possibility of accidents.
The potential impacts of the operation of such a pipeline-in-a-tunnel need to be considered, including the possibility of accidents.
The risks associated with construction and operation need to be weighed against the potential benefits of construction and operation. Right now, I am experiencing the negative impact of our changing climate–in the form of polluted air drifting down from Canada, filled with particles that I don’t want to breathe. This has a hugely negative impact on my ability to conduct my daily activities safely.
This smokey air underlines for me that climate change is happening now and needs to be reversed–or at least abated–to the maximum extent possible.
Continuing to facilitate the extraction of fossil fuel in Canada and continuing to allow it to flow under the Great Lakes so that people (mostly outside the US) can burn it–all of this contributes to negative change in our climate. The US Army Corps of Engineers needs to take this into account.
This proposed tunnel, of course, also threatens Michigan’s economy (fishing, safe drinking water, recreation, tourism), our environment in general, and Native Americans’ treaty rights and their ability to live sustainably in their ancestral homeland.
But, most of all, this tunnel is part of an antiquated and dangerous way of life, based on fossil fuel, that we are moving away from. Private companies and consumers are moving away from fossil fuel. Governmental entities at some levels are moving away from fossil fuel.
I urge the US Army Corps of Engineers to think beyond the false “emergency” that was declared, and to think of generations ahead who will ask why it took us so long to stop facilitating use of fossil fuels.
Just think–the Line 5 pipeline was built in 1953, back when we had little idea that we were heating up our planet in destructive ways, back when Mt. Shasta (near where my mom grew up in the 1930s-50s) was always snow-covered. I remember how shocking it was to see the peak a bare brown.
Keep in mind that the decisions the US Army Corps of Engineers makes now will affect my–and your–grandchildren, their children, and ensuing generations. You can leave a legacy of safety and forward thinking, or leave a threat or, worse, devastate our Great Lakes and leave us poorer, poisoned and hotter still.
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. 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.
Additionally, the fact that an oil spill in the Great Lakes would be catastrophic for drinking water, wildlife, and Michigan’s economy should also be taken into consideration. More than 1.3 million jobs, equating to $82 billion in wages, are directly tied to the Great Lakes.
Thank you for considering my comments.
It is not needed, too expensive, and too risky considering the national resource it threatens.