Enbridge’s Line 5 Pipeline Project Faces Continued Legal Challenges

Enbridge’s Line 5 tunnel project under the Great Lakes faces legal battles and environmental concerns, as supporters and opponents clash over its necessity and potential risks.

Quick Takes

Enbridge plans to build a $500 million protective tunnel for Line 5 beneath the Straits of Mackinac.
The Michigan Court of Appeals upheld permits for the project, but legal challenges continue.
Environmental groups and Native American tribes oppose the project, citing potential risks to the Great Lakes ecosystem.
Supporters argue the project will enhance pipeline safety and provide economic benefits.
The ongoing dispute may reach the Michigan Supreme Court.

Legal Battles and Environmental Concerns

Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline, which carries 23 million gallons of oil daily under the Straits of Mackinac, has become a focal point of environmental and legal challenges. The company’s plan to construct a protective tunnel around the aging pipeline has ignited a fierce debate between those who see it as a necessary safety measure and those who view it as an environmental threat.

The Michigan Court of Appeals recently ruled in favor of Enbridge, upholding permits issued by the state Public Service Commission for the $500 million project. This decision marks a significant victory for the company, but opponents remain steadfast in their resistance. Environmental groups and Native American tribes have challenged the permits, arguing that the commission failed to consider the overall need for the pipeline and its potential environmental impact. A report from The Epoch Times indicated that despite the appeals court ruling, the case may ultimately end up before the state Supreme Court.

The seven-year fight to keep oil and natural gas flowing under a major Michigan waterway may be headed to the state Supreme Court. pic.twitter.com/XRZT1Irzv3

— The Epoch Times (@EpochTimes) February 25, 2025

Safety Concerns and Past Incidents

Concerns about a potential spill have been present since 2017, fueled by known gaps in the pipeline’s coating and damage from a boat anchor in 2018. Critics often cite the 2010 Kalamazoo River oil spill as evidence of the pipeline’s potential danger. This history has led to increased scrutiny and calls for alternative solutions.

“Nobody wants their water poisoned or their property values torpedoed in order to keep Canadian oil and gas flowing through the Great Lakes,” said Adam Ratchenski.

In response to these concerns, the U.S. Coast Guard banned large ships from dropping anchor in the straits in 2018 to prevent potential pipeline damage. However, for many opponents, this measure falls short of addressing the core issue: the presence of the pipeline itself in such a sensitive ecological area.

Economic Benefits vs. Environmental Risks

Supporters of the Line 5 tunnel project, including some energy companies, labor unions, and business groups, emphasize its economic benefits. Enbridge argues that Line 5 benefits Michigan by supplying natural gas liquids and crude oil to local facilities and industries. The company has agreed to construct and maintain the tunnel and pipeline at its own expense under the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority (MSCA).

On the other hand, critics argue that Line 5 primarily benefits Canada and poses unacceptable environmental risks to Michigan. They contend that the growing shift towards renewable energy reduces the need for Line 5 and that alternative transport methods were not properly considered during the approval process.

Looking Ahead

As legal battles continue, the fate of the Line 5 tunnel project remains uncertain. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has a separate lawsuit to shut down Line 5, and a 2020 order by Governor Gretchen Whitmer, which was overturned, demanded the end of oil and gas flow through Line 5. The battle over the project may ultimately reach the Michigan Supreme Court, potentially setting a precedent for similar projects across the country.

While the debate rages on, one thing is clear: the Line 5 tunnel project has become a symbol of the broader struggle between energy infrastructure development and environmental protection. As America grapples with its energy future, the outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for pipeline projects nationwide.