TRAVERSE CITY,
Mich. (AP) - Michigan’s attorney general on Thursday called for shutting
down twin oil pipelines beneath the waterway where Lakes Huron and Michigan
meet, as the state released a consultant’s report outlining alternative
scenarios for the future of oil transport in the ecologically sensitive
tourist destination.
Republican Bill
Schuette said a “specific and definite timetable” should be established for
decommissioning the nearly 5-mile-long (8-kilometer-long) section of
Enbridge Inc.’s Line 5 in the Straits of Mackinac, which environmental
groups want removed but the Canadian pipeline company insists is in good
shape.
"The safety and
security of our Great Lakes is etched in the DNA of every Michigan
resident,” Schuette said, adding that “the final decision on Line 5 needs to
include a discussion with those that rely on propane for heating their
homes, and depend on the pipeline for employment.”
The segment is part
of Enbridge’s sprawling Lakehead pipeline network, which transports oil and
liquid natural gas to markets in the U.S. Midwest, East Coast and eastern
Canada. Line 5 runs underground from Superior, Wisconsin, across Michigan’s
Upper Peninsula to the straits area, where it divides into two 20-inch pipes
that rest on the lake floor. It continues south through the state’s Lower
Peninsula to Sarnia, Ontario, carrying about 23 million gallons of light
crude oil and liquid natural gas daily.
Enbridge, based in
Calgary, Alberta, says the pipeline delivers crucial supplies of oil for
gasoline, propane and other refined products and is closely monitored.
“After more than 60
years in service, Line 5 is in outstanding operating condition because the
rigorous maintenance done through the decades,” said John Gauderman,
director of operations for the Great Lakes region. “We intend to keep it
that way.”
Critics say the
underwater section of Line 5, in place since 1953, has been buffeted by
strong currents and shows signs of wear. They note that Enbridge offered
similar assurances before another of its pipelines ruptured in southern
Michigan in 2010, fouling the Kalamazoo River in one of the nation’s largest
inland oil spills.
Schuette said in a
news release that he “strongly disagrees” with a suggestion in the report by
the engineering consulting firm Dynamic Risk Assessment Systems Inc. that
Line 5 could operate indefinitely.
Environmental
activists said the attorney general, who is expected to run for governor
next year and has said previously that Line 5’s “days are certainly
numbered,” should prove he means business by ordering a shutdown. Although
the federal government regulates oil pipelines, Michigan owns the straits
area Great Lakes bottomlands and could revoke an easement it granted to
Enbridge when Line 5 was installed, said Liz Kirkwood, executive director of
a group called For Love of Water.
“He has the
authority to act now and we want him to act now,” said David Holtz, chairman
of the Sierra Club’s Michigan chapter.
The Michigan League
of Conservation Voters dismissed Schuette’s statement as “hollow posturing”
and urged Republican Gov. Rick Snyder to “finally put Line 5 out of
service.” The Michigan Chamber of Commerce said the pipeline was important
to the state’s economy and its fate shouldn’t be determined by “bumper
stickers or emotional political appeals.”
State agencies
considering what to do about Line 5 commissioned two reports from separate
consulting firms, one analyzing risks posed by the existing situation and
the other focusing on future option. Enbridge covered the more than $3
million cost. Officials announced last week that the state had canceled the
nearly-finished risk analysis after discovering a conflict of interest
involving one of the firm’s employees.
The Dynamic Risk
Assessment Systems report released Thursday lists six alternatives,
including continuing the Line 5 segment’s current operations or shutting it
down. Others include building a new pipeline through Wisconsin, Illinois,
Indiana and Michigan that wouldn’t cross open Great Lakes waters; moving
Line 5’s oil through other existing pipelines; using surface oil transport
methods such as rail cars, trucks or barges; and putting new pipelines in
the straits that would run through a trench or tunnel.
The report doesn’t
endorse a particular alternative but analyzes each for technical and cost
feasibility. It also assesses the condition of the existing pipelines and
possible outcomes of oil spills in the area.
Enbridge said it
needed more time to study the 337-page report before commenting, while
environmental groups said it was too friendly toward the company’s position.
It describes truck
and ship transport as impractical and says a more southerly pipeline would
cost around $2 billion while posing significant environmental and economic
hazards. The tunnel or trench options would be much less expensive, it says,
and simply shutting down Line 5 would boost gasoline and propane prices
statewide.
A final version
will be issued this fall after several public information and comment
sessions.
Â