Posted Scoping Comments

I am against the project. After working on the Marshall oil spill 2014, i reached a conclusion that Enbridge does not care about the environment. Tunnels do fail, how will they deal with that. With that, we all know that the ice in the Straits area can get up to 1' foot deep, if something happens in the winter time, how will they be able to deal with that? Who oh, I am sorry I forgot, they have alarms for low pressure. there was low pressure alarms going off the evening before the Marshall Oil spill as well. their solution to the problem was send more oil to get the pressure back up, mean while law enforcement, and fire fighters and others are calling to report a leak, that goes for about least 17 hrs. unanswered. You have to be out of your minds if I am going to trust them with that kind of responsibility. What happens when the alarm sounds next time. I know we can not count on Enbridge to take care of the problem. Tunnel or no tunnel. I say NO. They have a track record, and it is not good.

Please do not construct any new pipelines under or in our great lakes. Climate change is upon us, and someday soon we will probably be having a great crisis regarding access to clean water. Pipelines and fresh water should not mix. We need to preserve our Great Lakes at all cost. They are our most valuable resource, and their value will only increase over time -- so long as we do not put them at risk. Lastly, oil and gas are fuels of the past. We are moving toward 100% renewable energy, so it makes no sense to invest in soon-to-be obsolete fuels. Thank you.

If the government had not stopped this tunnel after it was first approved it would be dug and currently pumping thru the tunnel . Why is there always government interference that causes these huge delays to necessary development? Politicians continually cause political interference in issues that are responsible and good for the people. Why delay it any longer?

The Great Lakes hold 20 percent of the world's freshwater. Enbridge has a bad reputation in Michigan after a ruptured pipeline into a Kalamazoo River tributary in 2010 caused one of the largest inland oil spills in US history. In the last 50 years, the pipeline has had 29 spills, releasing a total of 1.1 million gallons of toxic oil into the environment.

The pipeline has also repeatedly violated safety standards, said the State of Michigan's court filings against Enbridge in 2020. An anchor strike in 2018 was the last straw for us, the people who live here. An oil spill into the Staights of Mackinac would devastate our beautiful area and everything living in the waters.
One of our most popular summer destinations, Mackinac Island, is a stone's throw from where the pipeline runs across the straights. This aging line, built in 1953, needs to be retired, just like me, and I am younger than the pipeline!

Enbridge also has a bad reputation in other states. Since 2002 in Minnesota there have been 17 significant spills over 50 barrels, and seven spills over 1,000 barrels in Cohasset, MN and Grand Rapids, MN.

Enbridge has caused enough damage to our environment here and needs to close line 5 and get out of Michigan.

At the basic level, the benefits of this line are dismal compared to the catastrophic impact of a spill. Nobody wants a spill, but as we see with pipelines all over, they happen. Fresh water becomes a more valuable resource every single day as its supply in the word dwindles and it is vastly more important to protect the Great Lakes rather than risk a spill. There are alternative methods to transporting the goods other than the pipeline which would not put the Great Lakes at risk of a massive spill.

What will the consequences be if this project does a significant harm to the water and ecosystem? There is not enough accountability between the government and private companies, and if a mistake happens the people will see the consequences and those in power will get off Scott-free. I don’t need my comment shut down for “worrying to much” or shoo’d away because “we cannot fail.” That’s what they thought in Flint too, and now the water is still poison. I am an epidemiologist by profession, and I can tell you that environmental disaster directly hurts and kills people, especially children. Do not do this unless you can assure 100% safety for the water and environment. And If you disregard this advice, make sure there is accountability. Real accountability.

Do not build this tunnel and remove this pipeline that only benefits Canada etc. the pipeline company has a terrible record and if a leak occurs it will cause irreversible harm to our water and recreation . Screw canada

The risk to the great lakes is far too great to continue transporting oil/gas through or under it. Climate change caused drought is drastically increasing all over the US and making fresh/clean water an increasingly invaluable resource. As history has shown us, its not a question of if an oil spill will occur, its only a question of when and where. The great lakes need all the protection they can afford now as the future will likely depend on them far greater than even now.

The Line 5 Tunnel should be built. It is core to helping the State of Michigan out and more than enough has been done to prove it will be safe and help out.
This thing should be built, it should've started a long time ago.

Build the tunnel in a safe way and let's go

Given that there have been no leaks to date and that the tunnel would further insure the safety of the supply without leaks, I believe that the tunnel is a sound choice.
Also there is no plan B. Closing the line would create economic hardships for families and small business. It is not economically or environmentally responsible to deliver fuel to the UP by truck, train or boat and create a situation where heating costs would be excessive.
Also, the federal government has weighed in. There is a federal treaty in place. The fuel being transported is not just for the UP or the lower peninsula, but is part of an international pipeline that moves fuel north and south and between Canada and the United States.
If there is concrete evidence of immenent danger of a leak, I have not seen it. What I have seen in reports is that the pipeline has withstood past threats without leaking and that the tunnel would only increase the safety.
So the real impact of trucking or using an alternate delivery system for the fuel, which will decrease the flow of fuel with a known environmental impact is being compared to a proven system with no known real threat of an impact, only a desire to increase the safety of the delivery of the fuel.