Cory Morgan: Canada Must Establish a Robust East/West Energy Corridor to Avert the Catastrophe of a Line 5 Shutdown

An above-ground section of Enbridge's Line 5 at the Mackinaw City pump station in Michigan on Oct. 7, 2016. (John Flesher/AP Photo)

Commentary

The battle over the operation of the multi-national Enbridge Line 5 pipeline appears to have no end. American anti-energy activists—invigorated by their victory in shutting down the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada—have set their sights on Line 5 and won’t quit until the line is shut down one way or another. Cross-border pipelines could soon be a thing of the past, and Canada’s energy security is vulnerable due to this.

Line 5 carries Canadian petroleum products. It begins in Superior, Wisconsin, crosses Michigan, and terminates in Sarnia, Ontario, where the products are refined. It has been safely operating for over 65 years and it services energy needs in the Northeastern United States and Canada with over half a million barrels a day of petrochemicals. If the line were to be suddenly shut down, it would wreak economic havoc. Ideologically driven opponents to the line don’t care about the consequences, though, and they may have their way soon.

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer has made it her personal mission to shut down Line 5. While the state keeps losing court challenges against the pipeline, it just continues to appeal decisions and take the case to other courts.

Indigenous bands have gotten on board with the opposition, and the Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Chippewa has forced Enbridge and the courts into a tough position. The band is demanding a federal court issue an injunction and shut down Line 5 for fears that erosion on a stretch of the line may cause a rupture. The problem is the band won’t allow Enbridge to access the piece of line in question to repair the erosion damage. The band is purposely putting land and water at risk to try and compel a shutdown of the line. This demonstrates the lengths opponents are willing to go to against the line.

Thousands of jobs will be lost in Sarnia if Line 5 is shut down, and the energy shortages will be acute and painful. Propane supplies, gas, diesel, and jet fuel will all be in short supply as the line provides the feedstock for all of those products in the region. If the shutdown happens in winter, it could become dangerous for millions of people on both sides of the border who rely on propane as a source of heat. But ideologically driven opponents to the line don’t care.

So far the line remains operational, but eventually one of the shots fired by its opponents will score and the pipeline will be shut down. It’s clear opponents won’t give up under any circumstances and they will go to any lengths to achieve their ends.

If Enbridge’s Line 5 is shut down, don’t think for a moment that opponents to petrochemical fuel sources will stop there. They will pick another Canadian line and focus their efforts there.

Canada needs to avert a crisis and be proactive in pursuing domestic energy security. In using American land as a shipping route for petrochemical products, we have made ourselves vulnerable to the actions of foreign activists and there is little we can do to defend ourselves from them.

Canada must sideline its own anti-energy activists, including the prime minister, and get a full East/West energy corridor constructed to avert a pending catastrophe. We have the demand and the resource capacity to become energy independent, but we don’t have the infrastructure in place to reach that status. It’s absurd that Western Canada struggles to get energy products to market while Eastern Canada purchases oil and gas from nations such as Saudi Arabia. It’s also ridiculous that a country as energy-rich as Canada may experience a catastrophic and sudden energy shortage in its central region because it put its main lines through the United States.

Pipelines and energy infrastructure can be built quickly if the government demonstrates the will to get it done. Germany managed to become an importer of LNG products in record time as they realized how dangerously dependent upon Russian gas products they had become. Canada could have been supplying some of those products to Germany if Justin Trudeau’s policies would only stop hindering the development of export infrastructure.

The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion and the Coastal Gaslink pipeline in the West are hopelessly delayed, and the federal government doesn’t appear keen on speeding them along.

Canada has the resources and the skilled workforce to become an energy-independent nation with a large export capacity. It would be preferable that we build the infrastructure for that energy independence before it becomes a crisis rather than after.

Can the government set aside its ideological opposition to petrochemicals to do that? Or will they let us suffer before accepting there is a need for pipelines?

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.