Waterloo Region Record

There are alternativ­es to Line 5, and Canada must explore them

- MICHELLE WOODHOUSE Michelle Woodhouse is water program manager at Environmen­tal Defence.

In invoking the 1977 Transit Pipelines Treaty for Line 5, Canada prioritize­d the financial interests of a fossil fuel giant over what’s best for Canadians. This pipeline poses a massive threat to the Great Lakes and the recent accident in California is a stark reminder that pipelines can and do spill.

Alternativ­es to Line 5 exist, but the government has failed to properly consider them. When will Canada stop supporting the dangerous false solutions proposed by Enbridge and look critically at all of their options?

The Great Lakes hold 84 per cent of North America’s freshwater and their protection must be a priority, particular­ly in the face of the climate emergency. Line 5 is located in the worst possible place for an oil spill in the Great Lakes, according to experts at the University of Michigan. In Canada, a major spill could harm beloved places such as Manitoulin Island, the Bruce Peninsula, and Sauble Beach.

The recent underwater pipeline rupture off the coast of California spilled some 113,000 litres of oil, leaving a massive oil slick and a shoreline littered with dead birds and fish. It’s suspected that this was caused by an anchor strike, which is exactly the kind of thing that could happen to Line 5.

In fact, there have been three anchor incidents in the Straits of Mackinac over the past four years alone, despite it being a “no anchor” zone. If Line 5 were to rupture into the Straits of Mackinac, it could engulf up to 1,100 kms of shoreline and spill even more oil than in California. But a Line 5 rupture is really not a question of “if” — it’s a question of “when.”

Line 5 crosses nearly 400 water bodies and has already had larger spills than the one that just happened in California. One of these spills happened in Crystal Falls in 1999 when over 830,000 litres of oil and natural gas liquids poured out of the pipeline. This is not an isolated case — there have been other large spills along Line 5’s route and the tragic impacts linger for years.

Enbridge’s proposed solution to the ongoing threat of Line 5? A tunnel to encase the section running through the environmen­tally sensitive Straits of Mackinac. Not only is this a false solution, it’s a dangerous one. According to scientists, the proposed tunnel project and pipeline could contribute an additional 27 million metric tons of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere annually, and generate $41 billion in climate damages between 2027 and 2070.

There’s also the fact that Canada’s gambit may fail. Article IV of the Treaty states that pipelines can be regulated by the appropriat­e government when it comes to matters of safety and environmen­tal protection.

 ?? THE ASSOCIATED PRESS FILE PHOTO ?? A Line 5 rupture is really not a question of “if” — it’s a question of “when,” Michelle Woodhouse writes.
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS FILE PHOTO A Line 5 rupture is really not a question of “if” — it’s a question of “when,” Michelle Woodhouse writes.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada