LETTERS – Line 5 concerns

Line 5 Tunnel
Should Michigan risk the Great Lakes for Enbridge profit?
Should we agree to 99 years of Enbridge oil when fossil fuels need to end?
1. The old Line 5 will operate another decade while a tunnel is built, so Michigan bears the risk even though over 90% of Line 5 oil goes to Canada. Tunnel safety is irrelevant without need.
2. Enbridge spent $1.3B to clean up the Kalamazoo River, yet their liability is only $1.8B for 500 miles of Great Lakes shoreline. Michigan risk again.
3. Canada has responded to the climate crisis by rejecting new pipelnes and phasing out fossil fuels, so our straits are the most profitable route East for Enbridge- ignoring safer pipelines around the lakes.
4. The Mackinac Bridge Authority is being manipulated (SB1197) in order to own the tunnel, avoid environmental regulation, and obstruct Whitmer’s plan to decommission Line 5.
5. Propane needs of the UP do not justify a tunnel. That need is met within the UP before Line 5 reaches the straits, so there are many alternatives. (2017 Dynamic Risk Alternatives Analysis) 100% of the propane NGLs crossing the straits go directly to Sarnia.
Please check these facts- then act. It’s time to stand up for the Great Lakes.
Barbara Stamiris
Traverse City