This June 29, 2018 photo shows tanks at the Enbridge Energy terminal in Superior, Wis. For the second time in a year, the federal government is invoking a little-known 1977 energy treaty between Canada and the United States to defend the Line 5 pipeline. This time, it’s in Wisconsin, where Line 5 crosses the southwestern shores of Lake Superior before crossing into Michigan. THE CANADIAN PRESS/AP-Jim Mone For the second time in a year, the federal government is citing a little-known 1977 energy treaty between Canada and the United States in an attempt to prevent a federal court from shutting down the Line 5 pipeline. This time, it’s in Wisconsin, where Line 5 crosses the southwestern shores of Lake Superior before crossing into neighboring Michigan, the state that wants to stop the pipeline for fear of ecological destruction in the Great Lakes. “The economic and energy disruption and damage to Canada and the US from closing Line 5 would be far-reaching and significant,” Secretary of State Melanie Jolie said in a statement. That impact would include a spike in energy prices, including propane, which is used to heat homes in much of the US Midwest, as well as gasoline prices, which hit new highs across the continent during a summer which was destroyed by inflation. Joly also warned of the “domino effects” of Line 5’s termination on jobs in Canadian oil production, as well as additional economic impacts that are likely to reverberate across both countries. “At a time when global inflation is making it harder for families to make ends meet, these are unacceptable results,” Jolie said. “The closure could have a significant impact on some communities on both sides of the border that depend on the prosperity of businesses along the supply chain.” Legal disputes over Line 5 have been brewing in both states since at least 2019, but took on new urgency in the fall of 2020 when Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer sought to revoke a 1953 easement that allowed the pipeline to cross the Great Lakes. He cited the risk of an anchor strike or technical failure causing a spill in the Straits of Mackinac, the ecologically sensitive waterway that connects Lake Huron to Lake Michigan and separates the state’s upper and lower peninsulas. The twin lines running through the bottom of the straits are healthy, Enbridge insists, but it still wants state and federal permits to install a new pipe housed inside a protective underground tunnel. Environmental concerns are also front of mind in Wisconsin, where the pipeline crosses the Bad River Reservation, more than 500 square kilometers of pristine wetlands, streams and wilderness that is home to the Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Chippewa. The group has been in court with Enbridge for more than three years, claiming the Calgary-based company is violating the terms of easements that have allowed the pipeline to cross the reservation since 1953. Enbridge, which maintains that a 1992 agreement with the Bad River Band allows the pipeline to continue operating until 2043, is in the process of trying to reroute the pipeline around the reservation. “Canada strongly supports Enbridge’s proposal to relocate this portion of Line 5 out and around the Bad River Band Reservation,” Joly said. “In the upcoming treaty negotiations with the United States, Canada is committed to working constructively to find a solution that meets the interests of communities, respects Canada’s treaty rights, and ensures the continued and secure supply of energy to the Central Canada. “ The group filed a lawsuit earlier this year seeking summary judgment against Enbridge — in other words, to shut down Line 5 without a trial. Enbridge submitted its own such proposal in May. The case has been largely mired in procedural controversy since then, with a trial date tentatively set for October 24. All the while, business groups and chambers of commerce on both sides of the border, provincial governments and Ottawa have rallied behind Enbridge in its effort to portray the survival of Line 5 as a critical issue of continental energy security. The Allies have argued, both in court filings and in public forums, that Line 5 is a vital source of energy — especially propane — for several Midwestern states and a key source for Canadian refineries that feed some of Canada’s busiest airports. . Just last week, the company won a key battle in Michigan, where a federal judge rejected Attorney General Dana Nessel’s efforts to bring the case back to district court, where he believed it had a better chance of success. Enbridge remains willing to resolve the Wisconsin dispute “amicably” as it pursues the necessary permits to reroute the pipeline, the company said Monday. “We remain focused on providing consumers and industry in the region with safe, reliable energy,” she said in a statement, noting that the alternative to Line 5 would exacerbate the world’s climate change problem. “Pipelines are still a safer, more reliable way to transport fuel than truck, train or van. These other modes burn much more fuel to move it, releasing more greenhouse gases into the environment and presenting increased safety risks .”
