This Enbridge scheme to dig a tunnel beneath the Mackinac Straits instead of abandoning and removing the existing 72-year-old pipeline is a boondoggle, and would put our most valuable resource, fresh water, at risk with little long term benefit. Here is why.

First, well before 100 years, oil will be used for lubrication purposes only. With new solid-state long-life battery technology now beginning to be produced and very soon mass produced, fossil fuel vehicles will literally be fossils with electric vehicles offering an 800-mile range on a 15-minute charge with very high performance and low maintenance. In addition, also within the next 10 years, we will see the development of smart power grids with an expansion of distributed power sources based on solar electricity generation with solid-state high-charge density battery storage for nighttime power supply. Society’s need for centralized large fossil fuel power generation will greatly decrease with more business and residences having their own solar power station connected to a smart grid. 

This will be a much more reliable and stable power supply with long supply chains for fossil fuels like pipelines vulnerable to disruption (as Ukraine has demonstrated) no longer so relevant to the economy.  Enbridge is actually aware of this future coming, with their full-page ads in newspapers featuring solar power generation!

Second, drinkable fresh water, unlike oil, is essential for all life and is the most valuable resource on this planet. Therefore, it demands the most vigilant and strict environmental protection. This means, no oil transport pathways on, through or under the largest collection of fresh water on the Earth.

Third, it’s the Achilles heel effect of digging a 24-by-7 “open access” (Enbridge’s words) tunnel beneath our water commons of the Great Lakes run by a private company from another country.  Consider a ransomware attack seizing control of Enbridge’s tunnel pipeline or combined with a high-yield dirty-bomb threat within the tunnel. Who is paying for super-vigilant security for 100 years?

Fourth, if Line 5 was removed from the Enbridge pipeline network, there would still be enough propane supply from other sources for the entire Upper Peninsula and lower Michigan. There is evidence that they also could reroute the Line 5 oil around any Great Lakes crossing via existing or modifiable (installing more pumps to increase flow) using Line 61 (as of 2022, with 300,000 barrels per day of unused capacity), line 6A, Lines 14 and 64, and Line 78 through Indiana and the Chicago metropolitan area to southwest Lower Michigan and beyond to Sarnia, Ontario.

If Enbridge is really concerned about supply of propane to the U.P., it could build gas fractionation capacity at the existing Superior, Wisconsin, refinery for less cost than a Straits of Mackinac tunnel, and send it through a remaining Line 5 spur for distribution at their Rapid River, Michigan, facility.

Fifth, experts have identified numerous risks with this project, including:

• destruction of lakebed ecosystems and rare habitats during excavation

• Long-term structural integrity risks and short-term dangers of tunneling under an operating pipeline

• Contamination from construction activities

• Limited emergency response capabilities for a deep underwater pipeline

• Cumulative harm to Great Lakes water quality

The 72-year-old Line 5 pipeline is already operating 22 years beyond its intended lifespan. A tunnel will not eliminate the risk of a catastrophic spill and the permit applications fail to address the full ecological, cultural and hydrological impacts.

The Great Lakes, the world’s largest source of fresh surface water, are too important to gamble on an unproven, high-risk oil tunnel. Michigan should deny these permits and protect our water, economy and communities.

— Scott Emerson

Chocolay Township