The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have fast tracked a permit to replace a section of aged pipeline along the lakebed of a channel connecting two Great Lakes. The project, however, disregards environmentalists’ advice to remove the pipeline all together.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers fast tracked the permit after U.S. President Donald Trump issued an executive order in January, declaring a national energy emergency.
“The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Detroit District, has found that this permit request meets the terms of EO 14156 and is therefore subject to special emergency permitting procedures to address an energy supply situation which would result in an unacceptable hazard to life, a significant loss of property, or an immediate, unforeseen, and significant economic hardship if corrective action requiring a permit is not undertaken within a time period less than the normal time needed to process the application under standard procedures,” the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said in an April 15 public notice.
The pipeline in question is Canadian energy company Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline, which travels from Superior, Wis., to Sarnia, Ont. The Bechtel Corporation built Line 5 in 1953. It’s considered the oldest major pipeline in North America. It transports 85 million litres of crude oil and natural gas liquids per day.
Both the Canadian and U.S. governments have shown support in the past to keep the pipeline operating. But a seven kilometre stretch of Line 5 runs through the Straits of Mackinac, a channel that separates Lake Michigan from Lake Huron. The pipeline, which lies along the lakebed, is exposed to the water, secured in place by supports. If the pipeline were to experience a spill, it would take Enbridge 13 and a half minutes to shut off the pipeline’s supply, leaking roughly one million to 1.4 million litres of oil into the Great Lakes.
“We could see a significant amount of Lake Huron shoreline, like Manitoulin Island, Tobermory, and the Sauble Beach area—tons of beloved Canadian beaches and shoreline—become involved with oil from a rupture,” says Michelle Woodhouse, a Great Lakes specialist, and a British-Canadian and Métis water protector.
Over the last few years, the pipeline has had several close calls with ruptures. In 2017, Enbridge alerted the State of Michigan that gaps had formed in the pipeline’s protective coating. According to Michigan’s Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, Enbridge had been aware of this information since 2014.
In April 2018, a boat anchor dropped in the Straits of Mackinac and dragged along the lakebed, colliding with the pipeline. The pipeline didn’t rupture, but the anchor caused significant dents. And in 2019, a contractor working for Enbridge damaged the supports holding the pipeline. These incidents raised concerns among State of Michigan staff about the vulnerability of the pipeline.
Trust in Enbridge had also been shaken by a 2010 spill. A separate pipeline owned by the company ruptured near Marshall, Mich., in July of that year, contaminating the Kalamazoo River with more than 4.5 million litres of oil. Clean-up efforts cost more than a billion dollars. It was one of the largest and most expensive inland oil spills in U.S. history.
In November 2017, the State of Michigan ordered Enbridge to increase pipeline protections for the Straits of Mackinac and the Great Lakes. Enbridge submitted a permit a year later to replace the current section of Line 5 under the Straits of Mackinac with new pipeline encased in a protective tunnel. At the time, Enbridge estimated that the tunnel’s construction would cost $500 million.
The permit to build the tunnel is the one the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is currently fast tracking. Even with the fast track, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers estimates that the earliest the permit could be approved is fall 2025.
But environmentalists argue that the tunnel isn’t a viable solution. “When you’re looking at it from what’s in the best interest of the Great Lakes, the tunnel is a really bad idea,” says Woodhouse.
The area where the tunnel would be built has poor rock quality for boring, which increases the chances of a tunnel collapse. The pipeline transports substances such as methane gas and hydrocarbons that have the potential risk of an explosion. Plus, there are questions around whether a tunnel could contain a rupture if one happened.
Woodhouse also points out that the Straits of Mackinac are considered a sacred location to the Anishinaabe. Mackinac translates in Anishinaabe to Mishimikinaak, which means turtle. Mackinac Island is Turtle Island. “Within their creation stories, it’s considered the epicenter of Anishinaabe creation,” she says. The Bechtel Corporation built the pipeline through the Straits of Mackinac without Indigenous consultation.
In 2023, the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) recommended that Canada and the U.S. decommission Line 5, saying that it jeopardizes the Great Lakes and presents a real and credible threat to the treaty-protected fishing rights of Indigenous Peoples.
In a 2023 report, logistics and supply chain company PLG Consulting found that there were viable alternatives to transporting crude oil other than Line 5, and that the pipeline’s closure would not have a significant impact on the market.
Yet, Enbridge plans to move forward with the tunnel construction. There is, however, an ongoing lawsuit aimed at blocking this. In 2019, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel filed a lawsuit against Enbridge, attempting to shut the pipeline down by alleging that it violated the state’s public trust doctrine. This is a legal principle that requires governments to protect natural resources, such as the Great Lakes, for the public.
The Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians also filed a lawsuit against Enbridge to have a section of the Line 5 pipeline removed from its reservation in Wisconsin. A federal court judge ruled that the company had until June 2026 to remove the pipeline.
Woodhouse says it’s unclear what jurisdiction Canada has over removing the pipeline from the Straits of Mackinac, especially when Canadian politicians have shown support for the pipeline in the past. But it’s possible that with a strong legal case, Canada could also file a lawsuit alleging a violation of the public trust doctrine.
“These are things we need to figure out,” she says, “because the Great Lakes are a shared good that all of the public should be able to benefit from and has a right to benefit from.”
Related Story Will a heat pump solve your cold cottage woes?
Related Story Could wind turbines on the Great Lakes solve Ontario’s electricity needs?
Related Story Permits protecting Ontario’s environment could be at risk if the provincial government has its way