Posted Draft EIS Comments

The idea. of a tunnel through the straits has not been rationally or honestly thought through. The potential for an accident that could forever alter the Great Lakes ecosystem for hundreds of years. The money to be used for an enclosed pipeline would be logically better spent on building a new pipeline around the Great Lakes, through Ontario. If a break were to happen it would be much easier to contain it on land than water. The easy way is never the overall best solution. Stop putting profits first and consider the lives of the next generation. Why leave potential disasters for others when their safety can be assured by you now.

What is the point of this silly exercise in appeasement- you have made your faulty decision and you will have to live with it !

Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the draft EIS for Line 5/Tunnel. I have just read through the draft; your observations and statements are impressive and seem comprehensive. Which is why your conclusions about the safety of the tunnel are blind-siding. You have gone thru a lot of data and trouble to clearly lay out the dangers that could happen to the waters and resources in the event of a leak or rupture on land. But you are taking the word of a company that has no history nor expertise to grant a permit to create a tunnel under the most precious of waters in the US. Have there been mock-ups? Have they worked? Because if the mock-ups don’t work, how can you expect the real thing to work. And how realistic are those building plans? Please take into consideration the concerns of others – including those with on-the water expertise. Although your scope did not include Wisconsin, you do have to consider the entire line. Because you are the linch-pin here; if you ok this foolish plan, it will affect not only the tunnel and its surrounding, but also the entire planned re-route. And in Wisconsin, the damage to our wetlands would be catastrophic to tribes and to those whose water depends on access to the underground resources that the line will impact. Your responsibility truly is not just for the tunnel. Your mission statement says your job is to protect the waters – the rivers and wetlands. Please do. Thank you.

Please do not allow the Enbridge Line 5 Tunnel project to go forward. The loss of bat habitat and critical wetlands is too great a cost to wildlife and the environment. There is also the possibility of an oil spill into the fresh waters of the Great Lakes, which would have an enormous impact on Michigan’s economy and the health of its citizens and wildlife. Please stop this ill advised project before irreparable harm is done. The pipeline needs to be shut down completely.

Constructing new fossil fuels infrastructure in the 21st century is like making a new liquor cabinet for a liver-diseased alcoholic.

I agree with line 5 tunnel under the lake bed , encased in cement. This has been dragging thru the courts much too long . Let’s get it done already !

The potential for catastropic damage is monumentally high and I encourage you to deny this project.

I am writing today to voice my dissent against a project that seeks to secure line 5. The line is advanced severely in age and has suffered numerous close calls. We do not need to look far to see what irreparable damage an oil spill in our great lakes could cause. There are numerous concerns about this project and the advancement of any pipeline. I do not support any construction designed to aid the growth of this pipeline and firmly believe that decommissioning this aged and structurally unsound pipeline is of the utmost importance to the environmental security that we cherish in our Great Lakes region. I hope that you will consider my comment towards the decommissioning of this danger before catastrophic damage is brought to our wildlife and to our people.

As a retired business professor, I’m very concerned about the economic impact should a catastrophic accident happen. More than 1.3 million jobs, equating to $82 billion in wages, are directly tied to the Great Lakes. Unfortunately, as humans we tend to underestimate the impact of low (but not zero) probability events. The risk is not worth it for an outdated source of energy.

Hello there,
So how many more Oil spills need to occur, for your industry to UNDERSTAND??.
Although building a Tunnel is safer than the existing Pipeline on the lake bed, it is not going to be Safe.
There is absolutely zero chance that it will be 100% safe. And that is an unnecessary risk to ALL OF US.
I have lived in the Great Lakes my whole life.
I have family in Wisconsin and Minnesota. Several in the U.P. of Michigan, and I myself live within 45 minutes to Lake Huron.
I frequently go up to da Bridge. Have for over 25 years.
I belong to a Wild Church, where we go out into Nature and enjoy God, and pray for our planet.
I am of European and Annishabe descent. The water and the land is something we can not put a Value on.
Line 3 was fought over Treaty rights. Keystone was stopped for a time by us Earth Warriors. And now it’s time for Line 5.
It should NEVER have been built to begin with. And since it was, you assume that we still need it.
We don’t.
We don’t need Oil within 1,000 miles of Our Great Lakes, PERIOD.
GLOBAL WARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE ARE REAL !!!!!!!
We Won’t be BULLIED and GASLIT into not accepting Sound and Intelligent Science.
Donald Trump is nothing but a MANIUPLATOR, and our planet is Going to suffer.
Our people are going to suffer.
STOP THE TUNNEL