“Dan Scripps quietly plays a lead role in Michigan’s energy future from his home office in Northport” began the 12/20 Leelanau Enterprise interview. Michigan Public Service Commission Chairman Scripps is highly regarded both here and in Lansing, which makes his approval of the Enbridge tunnel difficult to understand. Scripps said “..housing that [Line 5] segment within the tunnel would virtually eliminate the risk the current pipelines pose to the Great Lakes” just as Enbridge has been telling us.
To say that a new pipeline inside a tunnel is less risky than an old pipeline in open water is stating the obvious. Of course. That’s why Enbridge chose it. But MPSC accepted the Enbridge promise as thought the tunnel existed, without examining the actions necessary to make it a reality. This tunnel will be dangerous to build and to operate, but its greatest danger is what it does today: it keeps old Line 5 operating indefinitely.
Enbridge says the tunnel is for Great Lakes safety, but in truth it’s for profit. In 2018, Gov. Snyder approved the tunnel, saying old Line 5 could operate until a new Line 5 inside a tunnel is complete. This allows Line 5 to earn $6 billion in the decade it takes for a tunnel — even if a tunnel isn’t built, since the agreement is non-binding. If a tunnel is built, Michigan must own it to lease to Enbridge for 99 more years of profit.
Line 5 will be almost 80, still carrying oil, while a 20’ diameter tunnel is bored below it, according to the Enbridge plan. Tunnel expert, Brian O’Mara, testified to MPSC about the risk of explosion, unsafe design, and inadequate preparation for this experimental tunnel. A tunnel for oil and propane liquids has never been attempted. Now it’s planned for the Mackinac Straits, which Pipeline Hazardous Materials & Safety Director, Elliot, called the worst location in the US for an oil pipeline.
The MPSC must look beyond Enbridge words to assure Michigan it won’t be financially, legally or environmentally responsible for a Canadian corporate venture. Line 5 clears almost $2 million a day by operating well beyond its design life. Shutting down Line 5 before building a tunnel would be the safer way. If Enbridge was serious about wanting to protect the Great Lakes, it would use its pipelines around the lakes, not tunnel through them.
In 2022 Enbridge spokesman Duffy admitted that “the existing segment of Line 5 would simply continue to function should state or federal regulators reject the plan.” Having no plan to decommission an obsolete pipeline becomes an unspoken plan to operate it until it fails —putting the Great Lakes in great danger.
In 2020, National Geographic called the Great Lakes “the irreplaceable fragile ecosystem… that our planet needs to survive”. The Great Lakes belong to the world, and need protection more than ever today. The Public Service Commission is supposed to protect Michigan’s public interest, not Enbridge interests. The two are very different.
About the author: Barb Stamiras is a member of the Steering Committee for oilandwaterdontmix.org. and recently lobbied with OWDM in Washington DC. to make shutting down Line 5 a national issue. As a retired educator, she has made the study of Line 5 issues her full time job. She is on the board of NMEAC, Northern Michigan Environmental Action Council and a member of Leelanau League of Women Voters. Stamiras is a longtime environmentalist testifying before Congress about the Midland nuclear plant in 1983.
