Why this Canada-U.S. pipeline has emerged as a midterm election issue in the U.S. Midwest

Article content

Insko said the construction of Line 5 helped accelerate an era of booming postwar oil production in North America.

Article content

Why is Line 5 controversial in the Midwest?

Article content

Line 5 came under increased scrutiny in 2010, after a rupture in nearby Enbridge Line 6B caused upwards of one million gallons (3.79 million litres) to spill into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River.

Article content

The Line 6B spill raised fears that a major rupture of Line 5 could do catastrophic damage to the Great Lakes, which supply drinking water to about 10 per cent of the U.S. population. One especially sensitive section of the pipeline runs underwater through the Straits of Mackinac, which bisect Lake Michigan and Lake Huron.

Article content

Environmentalists have also raised concerns about the 73-year-old pipeline’s aging infrastructure, which has already led to smaller-scale spills and seepage. Dave Holtz, a spokesperson for anti-pipeline campaign Oil & Water Don’t Mix told National Post that Line 5 has spilled at least 1.2 million gallons of product through its lifespan.

Article content

A long list of Tribal Nations have also called for Line 5 to be shut down, claiming it violates treaty rights and threatens their way of life.

Article content

Article content

What’s Line 5’s current state?

Article content

Line 5 is currently caught up in deep legal and regulatory certainty amid challenges from both the Michigan government and a coalition of Tribal Nations across Michigan and Wisconsin.

Article content

Governor Whitmer tried to terminate an easement allowing Enbridge to run the pipeline through the Straits of Mackinac in 2020, but was blocked from doing so by a federal judge.

Article content

Whitmer reversed course somewhat last month, giving Enbridge the green-light to build a $500-million tunnel under the Great Lakes as part of a Line 5 replacement project.

Article content

Mike Shriberg, director of the University of Michigan Water Centre, said locals were surprised to see the Government of Canada intervene on Enbridge’s behalf during the litigation.

Article content

“It’s pretty extraordinary for the Canadian government to weigh in, in the U.S. court system on behalf of a private company, over the objections of the state of Michigan and Tribal Nations,” said Shriberg.

Article content

Enbridge has also been mired in a separate legal dispute with the Bad River Band of northern Wisconsin. The company has agreed to re-route 41 miles of pipeline in response to a trespassing order from the band, which was upheld by a federal appeals court earlier this month.

Article content

Article content

Could Line 5 be decommissioned?

Article content

Holtz’s says Line 5 will likely be on its last legs if the Michigan tunnel project doesn’t go forward.

Article content

“If there’s no tunnel, Enbridge has lost the excuse for avoiding the discussion about the orderly decommissioning of the old existing pipeline,” Holtz.

Article content

Shriberg agrees that Line 5 could be shut down, noting that Michigan and the other Great Lake states are by no means dependent on the pipeline.

Article content

“There’s plenty of excess capacity in other areas to supply the needs of the U.S.,” said Shriberg.

Article content

Shriberg noted that, historically, temporary disruptions in the flow of product through Line 5 have not substantially affected energy prices in the region.

Article content

He added that a decommissioning of the pipeline would need to be “orderly” and take energy needs on both sides of the border into account.

Article content

Would Trump cut off Line 5 to punish Canada?

Article content

U.S. President Donald Trump’s escalating feud with Ontario Premier Doug Ford has sparked chatter that he could use Line 5 as a cudgel to attack his foe. (Trump issued an executive order changing the name of Lake Ontario to Lake America on Thursday, in response to a series of slights from Ford.)