By T. R. Shaw Jr.
Like everyone else, I shudder to
think what would happen should the Enbridge 5 pipeline rupture in the Straits
of Mackinac. It’s too horrific to even
ponder.
I’m a staunch defender of Michigan’s water and
especially the Great Lakes. I live near
the Kalamazoo River and experienced what a catastrophic oil spill can do to our
environment. As scary as a Line 5
disaster is, my opinion is the hype surrounding this pipeline is a solution looking
for a problem. Don’t get me wrong, we
need to protect the Great Lakes with every ounce of our being. Once damaged, it may never recover.
Recently, Michigan Senator Rick
Jones introduced Senate Bill 282 to shut down the Enbridge 5 pipeline just west
of the Mackinac Bridge. The effort is
widely applauded and supported by environmentalists, business and political
leaders, tribal governments and all who cherish the Great Lakes. However, should the line be forced to shut
down, what would be the alternative to our voracious energy appetite? Oil will continue to be our lifeblood for the
next century until alternative sources can prove their merit, sustainability,
and reliability. We simply aren’t there
yet to be able to divorce ourselves from fossil fuels.
Realistically, this is no “alternative” energy
source yet, with the exception of nuclear energy which few are really willing
to embrace. Solar is impractical in our
latitude and climate. As wind turbines
begin to rise on our landscape, they add only a small amount of energy to the
grid. Although, the construction,
delivery, installation and maintenance of these turbines has created a huge
employment sector.
Presently, there are thousands of
pipelines traversing our land and nearly all of them have never had a problem. Yes, the Kalamazoo River has paid an enormous
price for a failure. I hope we never see
anything like that again. My observation
is that Enbridge went above and beyond with the cleanup efforts and did everything
humanly possible to correct the situation.
I believe they never want to have to do anything like that ever again.
Without that pipeline would we be
willing to transport oil by rail, cargo ship, or trucks? Far more dangerous and risky, not to mention
the enormous expense. Would removing the
pipe from the lake create more problems than it solves? Do we reroute the pipeline and tear up tens
of thousands of acres of land through the U.P., Wisconsin or Ontario? Even if they took it East to Ontario, it
would eventually have to cross the St. Mary’s River. Think about the litigation what would ensue
to obtain land rights and eminent domain.
Another idea might be laying
another, stronger, better pipeline next to it and leave the old one in place. That idea isn’t palatable with those who
cherish the Great Lakes and want it gone, so the discussion will continue, a
discussion we need to have.
Recently, I was at a conference where a
representative of the DNR spoke. When
asked about the Straits pipeline he told the audience there is not a document,
study, or technical report which says there is a serious problem with Enbridge
5 line. In short there is no supporting
empirical evidence there is a problem to be acted upon except the fact the pipe
is aging. Everything surrounding this
issue is subjective, not objective he noted.
Herein lies the problem. In January, a bi-partisan U.S. House Bill 458
was introduced that directs the EPA to determine the state of the
pipeline. The efforts will likely
validate the enormous volume of research and work done by Enbridge who have put
everything they’ve done on their website in an effort at transparency. Do we want to believe Enbridge? Skeptics still abound and prudent legislators
will always stand up for more protection of the Great Lakes, as they should. So where do we go with this issue?
I’m not a scientist, geologist, or
engineer, but a solution to this dilemma can and will be worked out
eventually. About the only thing we can
do presently is demand that Enbridge put safety measures in place to detect and
shut down quickly should the worst happen.
According to their website they have, and state they’ve gone above and
beyond existing regulations. Hopefully
they learned from the Kalamazoo River episode and can avert such a catastrophe
in the future with stronger and quicker safeguards.
There is no doubt we need to do all
we can to safeguard the Great Lakes.
It’s the world’s largest fresh water aquifer and needs strong, vigilant
protection. But forcing Enbridge to
shut down and reroute would only increase our dependence on foreign oil and
weaken our own energy independence and greatly escalate the cost of
energy. In short, creating more problems
than it solves.
There are no easy or quick solutions to the problem,
but we cannot ignore the fact that the Great Lakes may be at risk in the future.
We need to do all we can to prevent the
unthinkable. Forcing Enbridge to shut it
down may not be the best solution to this problem. I don’t know what the right answer is, but
then does anybody? This is the
discussion we need to have, before the unthinkable happens.
T. R. Shaw Jr. is CEO of Shaw Communication in Battle
Creek, Michigan. He blogs at: The Reluctant R(L)eader at
www.read-mor.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment