Fuel prices in Michigan would increase by less than a penny per gallon if Line 5 shut down, according to a recent federal court filing in a lawsuit between Enbridge and a Wisconsin tribe attempting to evict the company’s pipeline from its reservation.
Expert witness testimony filed in the federal trespass case says a shutdown of the controversial pipeline likely would cause gasoline, jet fuel and diesel prices to increase by about a half-cent per gallon in Michigan and Wisconsin, and around 5 cents per gallon in Ontario. Those figures are drastically less than what Enbridge and other fossil fuel advocates have long said would be the financial fallout at the gas pump should its Line 5 shut down.
And this prediction for a half-cent per gallon price change comes from Enbridge’s own paid expert.
Now opponents of the pipeline that pumps 23 million gallons a day of crude oil and natural gas beneath Great Lakes waters at the Straits of Mackinac are pointing to the federal court filing as proof Line 5 is unnecessary. They argue Enbridge officials have known that fact yet continue to tell the public the pipeline remains critical infrastructure for the economy – all while state and federal authorities consider whether to let the company build a $500 million tunnel to replace the existing underwater section of the pipeline.
However, Enbridge officials said it is clear a shutdown of Line 5 would only add to the current disruption of the energy market and would hurt hardworking families and small businesses in Michigan and throughout the region, at a time when they can least afford it.
Indeed, a top federal official on Tuesday indicated inflation is expected to remain high while Michiganders remain worried about skyrocketing gas prices in the wake of market instability following the onset of the Russia-Ukraine War.
Expert opinion uncovered
Line 5 critics in Michigan have closely watched the Wisconsin case. They found the 120-page expert report amid the multiple filings in the federal trespass suit between Enbridge and the Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians now underway in the Western Wisconsin U.S. District Court.
The tribe filed the report into the court record as part of a rebuttal argument to show Enbridge’s argument about the financial need for Line 5 was not supported by the company’s expert.
The Bad River Band sued Enbridge in 2019 to halt Line 5 from operating through its reservation lands. That came after the tribe refused to renew expired easements for Enbridge’s pipeline, which crosses 12 miles of tribal land.
National Wildlife Federation lawyers combed through court documents in the case to find any information that may prove useful in their fight against the Canadian energy firm’s continued use of the underwater section of the pipeline near the Mackinac Bridge in Lake Michigan.
The nonprofit organization has long been among those that contend the nearly 70-year-old underwater pipeline puts northern Lake Michigan and Lake Huron at risk of a disastrous oil spill that would taint drinking water for millions of both Americans and Canadians, plus wreak billions of dollars in havoc on the natural environment and dependent industries. The federation’s 2012 “Sunken Hazard” report helped galvanize scrutiny on the Line 5 section under the Straits of Mackinac.
This court filing contradicts recent predictions in an analysis for energy industry advocacy group Consumer Energy Alliance, which issued a report in February that predicted as much as a 9.47 to 11.66 percent spike in fuel prices. Four months ago, that would have been about 40 cents per gallon; at today’s prices it would be closer to 52 cents per gallon.
Contrarily, the opinion mirrors a report issued in January this year by nonprofit Environmental Defence Canada, which said a Line 5 closure would lead to only modest increases in gasoline and diesel prices in Ontario and Quebec.
“Enbridge has got a pretty long track record of misleading the public, but this is just a flat out lie by their PR people,” said Andy Buchsbaum, federation lawyer. “If Line 5 were not operational the gas prices would be what they are. It is not relevant.”
Other environmental groups are also reacting to the discovery.
“It’s right on brand for Enbridge to have known that and to have hidden it from the public for at least the last six months,” said Sean McBrearty, coordinator of the Oil & Water Don’t Mix campaign to shut down Line 5. “I’m not surprised that they know that Line 5 will not impact gas prices.”
McBrearty said he hopes regulators consider this newly discovered information while deciding the future of the pipeline and Enbridge’s proposed tunnel, into which a replacement section would be routed.
“The fact that even Enbridge now has to admit that shutting down Line 5 won’t impact gas prices should really be considered at the Michigan Public Service Commission because their decision over whether or not to grant routing approval for the tunnel is largely based on need and this proves there’s no need,” he said.
Fuel, propane, and crude oil
The recently discovered expert report was written in January by Enbridge consultant Neil K. Earnest. Court records show Earnest has prolifically testified as an energy industry expert about pipeline issues and developments across the nation.
His report on ramifications of a Line 5 shutdown said Michigan and Wisconsin motorists could expect to pay just a half-cent more per gallon for fuel. But those half-pennies would add up: collective annual costs for motorists would be $20 million in Wisconsin, $30 million in Michigan, and $300 million in Ontario, Earnest calculated.
But Enbridge officials disagreed with their expert’s transportation fuel cost projections for Michigan consumers, arguing those figures do not include the cost to the economy from the closure of area propane processors who make that fuel available to local markets, nor the potential oil refinery closures and loss of competitiveness if Line 5 shut down.
Ryan Duffy, company spokesperson, said a different Enbridge expert assessed those losses in another rebuttal report that concluded even a 20 percent loss in output at the Detroit and Toledo refineries from closure of Line 5 would cost more than $3 billion in economic loss to that area each year.
And this is not the time to shutter pipelines, he said.
“All pieces of energy infrastructure are needed now more than ever,” said Duffy in an email that argued Line 5 is part of an integrated North American energy network that provides “affordable, reliable, sustainable, and secure energy needed across the continent.”
“The impact of ongoing inflationary pressures and the Ukraine War’s disruption to global energy markets has made this a particularly fraught time to be considering the closure of any oil pipelines, much less one as significant to the U.S. and Canadian economies as Line 5,” Duffy said.
Earnest’s report in the Wisconsin case did detail his predictions about what a Line 5 shutdown would also do to the propane and crude oil markets – estimated to be far more severe than fuel price changes.
Enbridge’s Line 5 begins in Superior, Wisconsin, and transports crude from Alberta oil fields to petrochemical refineries in Sarnia, Ontario, picking up some fuel from northern Michigan along the way.
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer revoked the company’s Great Lakes bottomlands easement and ordered the line closed in 2020, which sparked multiple lawsuits between high-ranking state officials and the company.
In November, a federal judge ruled the case between the governor and the Canadian fuel transportation giant should remain under federal jurisdiction. After the setback, Whitmer dropped her case to support Attorney General Dana Nessel’s instead, which had been paused in state court.
Enbridge filed to send the AG’s suit to federal court, too. A decision in that case remains pending.
Enbridge wants to build a utility tunnel through the bedrock beneath the Straits of Mackinac and run a replacement section of Line 5 through it, arguing it would heighten protections against environmental damages.
Critics argue the urgency of the climate crisis means investment in fossil fuel industry infrastructure is counterproductive, especially given the soonest the tunnel could be completed is 2028.
Enbridge already received permits to build the tunnel from Michigan state environmental regulators and the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority but awaits a decision from the state Public Service Commission, which will consider climate impacts. The company also requires a federal permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which has begun its environmental impact assessment, and which also is expected to include climate change consequences.
Related articles:
Pro-Line 5 businesses, critics argue whether legal fight should be in federal court
Enbridge can seek Line 5 tunnel construction bids, Michigan panel says
Islanders throw wrench into company’s Line 5 camera surveillance plans
Enbridge contract boat crashed into Mackinac Bridge, authorities say
Michigan’s Indigenous tribes ask Biden to shut down Line 5
Line 5 fight goes international; experts suggest independent, binational study
Enbridge Line 5 has spilled at least 1.1M gallons in past 50 years