Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline has been fueling debate for decades. 

It carries millions of gallons of crude oil and natural gas liquids each day from Superior, Wisconsin to Sarnia, Ontario. A critical segment of this pipeline lies exposed on the lakebed of the Straits of Mackinac. 

It’s a location University of Michigan scientists call the “worst possible place” for an oil spill. That’s because of strong currents that could rapidly spread contaminants across the Great Lakes. 

Now, Enbridge wants to build a $500 million dollar tunnel deep under the lakebed to shield the pipeline, prevent an oil spill, and repair aging infrastructure. A new environmental report from the Army Corps of Engineers says it will likely accomplish these things. 

But that would come at a cost. Habitats could be destroyed, wildlife disrupted, and tribal rights threatened.

Meanwhile, legal fights continue. Michigan’s governor and Indigenous communities want Line 5 shut down, citing environmental and treaty violations. 

Enbridge insists federal law protects the pipeline.

The Army Corps of Engineers is asking people to weigh in on its new report about the tunnel project through the end of the month. 

So, it’s a good time to ask: is this tunnel a safe solution or a continuation of something that violates indigenous rights and threatens the environment? 

Andrew Buchsbaum, an expert on environmental law at the University of Michigan, has been part of the movement to stop Line 5. He joined The Metro  to discuss the new report.

The Metro invited an Enbridge spokesperson to discuss Line 5 and its proposed oil tunnel, but didn’t hear back before the show’s air date.

Use the media player above to hear the full conversation.

Listen to The Metro weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon ET on 101.9 FM and streaming on-demand.

More stories from The Metro

A new study highlights the importance of removing “forever chemicals” from drinking water.

What are PFAS?

PFAS are chemicals that take a long time to break down in the environment. They can also build up in the human body and cause a variety of health problems.

Researchers took blood samples from people living near a contaminated site in southwest Michigan. They compared PFAS levels in those who drank city water to people who have private wells.

Courtney Carignan is an environmental researcher at Michigan State University. She says PFAS turned up in people’s blood three years after officials cleaned up the water.

“We still saw higher levels of PFAS in the blood of our participants who drank higher levels of contaminated water compared to those who had much lower levels in their water,” she said.

Scientists have been evaluating the impacts of PFAS for years. Carignan says this study is the first of its kind.

“No other studies really have looked at exposure from other sources like paper mills,” she said. “There are a lot of other types of industries that have used PFAS in the past, or may still currently be using PFAS, and there just really aren’t a lot of studies looking at those kinds of communities and releases.”

EPA proposes looser restrictions

The Environmental Protection Agency plans to rescind Biden-era limits on four kinds of PFAS and delay enforcement of limits on two other kinds.

Carignan says that’s not the right approach.

“These interventions to reduce PFAS in drinking water are really important,” she said. “The higher the level is in the drinking water for these PFAS, the more kinds of health effects you would see in the population.”

State lawmakers propose testing

Michigan has its own PFAS standards and is taking steps to protect people.

State Sen. Mark Huizenga (R-Walker) and Rep. Julie Rogers (D-Kalamazoo) proposed bills to test children for PFAS. They are SB 298 and HB 4499.

Carignan says people can learn more at the Michigan PFAS Action Response Team website or PFAS Exchange.