“The Line 5 Scam”, By dave cieslewicz

“The buses also experienced breakdowns at more than twice the rate of diesel buses. In 2022, half the buses were broken down, on average, and the figure improved only slightly last year.”

Yellow Stripes & Dead Armadillos

The Line 5 Scam

By dave cieslewicz on November 19, 2024

It just doesn't make sense.

Let's say you're like me. You love the environment. In fact, maybe you've contributed to environmental causes or even, as I did, had a career in the movement. Of course, these days you're very concerned about climate change. And you live or have a place up in the North Woods.

So, now here's the question. The buses also experienced breakdowns at more than twice the rate of diesel buses. In 2022, half the buses were broken down, on average, and the figure improved only slightly last year. The answer is to reroute the line 41 miles around the disputed area.

So, here's the question. If we agree (and I do) that a pipeline carries not only fuel but risk, why is it better to have 41 miles of risk than 12?

Of course it isn't better and that's not what the opponents of the pipeline actually want. They want to shut down the entire line. That's the stated goal of the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and the various environmental groups fighting the line.

The 12-mile section of the current pipeline crosses the tribe's land. In 2019 the tribe told Enbridge, the Canadien company that owns and runs the line, that it had to leave. Enbridge said it would comply and planned the 41-mile reroute. Ever since then the company has been battling lawsuits filed by Midwest Environmental Advocates on behalf of the Sierra Club and others. They argue that the reroute is fraught with danger, but of course they also oppose the current line through the reservation. Their goal is to use this 12-mile section to shut down the whole 645-mile line.

But this is madness. There is simply no way that any court or any government agency is going to shut down that whole line over this dispute over a small section of it.

Last week the opponents lost a big battle when the Wisconsin DNR issued a construction permit for the line after reviewing a lengthy environmental impact statement. The permit came with 200 conditions, but predictably, the opponents were outraged. They claim, as is routinely the case, that the EIS is inadequate. They vowed to continue the fight.

And for good reason. Here's part of an email I received the other day from Midwest Environmental Advocates:

Despite widespread opposition to the project, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources issued permits yesterday for the construction of a new 40-mile pipeline segment that would facilitate the ongoing transportation and combustion of fossil fuels in the Great Lakes region. 

Line 5 endangers our natural resources and threatens to lock us into decades of carbon emissions—exactly what we cannot afford if we hope to meet our climate goals and protect future generations. 

But we are not backing down... We are determined to stop this dangerous and destructive pipeline, but we can’t do it without your help. 

At times like this, legal action is the best line of defense to secure and protect a healthy environment. With your support, we are prepared to do just that. Will you help make sure we have the resources we need to meet this moment? 

Bingo. That's what this is about. It's essentially a scam to raise money for MEA and I suppose the Sierra Club and other parties to the dispute. They know full well that they don't have any chance of winning their case. Eventually, the line will be fully permitted and construction will happen.

I love our place in the UP. That's why Line 5 should stay just where it is.

If this wasn't about fundraising, here's what people who were sincerely concerned about the environment would try to do. They'd work with the tribe to convince them that the best thing for the environment they truly care about would be to leave the line exactly where it is. In exchange, they'd demand that Enbridge do everything it can, under the strict scrutiny of the tribe and the DNR, to make the line as safe as possible. And, of course, have Enbridge pay a hefty lease. Enbridge would likely be a willing partner since, no matter when it spent to do that, it would have been a fraction of what it's spending on the 41-mile reroute.

Then, since the goal is to lessen climate change, negotiate a shutdown date, in a decade or two, for the line. And during the intervening period have the company set up a fund that would be used to ween Northern Wisconsin and UP property owners from heating their homes with propane. That could involve incentives to convert to electric heat or, better yet, to install solar.

That would be a sane, achievable and orderly outcome that would benefit the environment. And, in fact, if MEA is pushing this with the notion of eventually reaching that sort of sensible negotiated settlement, I'll be the first to say I was wrong -- and I'll send them a check.

But I don't think that's what they're up to. Instead, MEA, the tribe and the other groups are wasting effort -- but not my money -- on this ill-considered lost cause.