- The Line 5 tunnel project is shortlisted for ‘emergency’ status after President Donald Trump declared a national energy emergency
- The Corps has not made a final decision; it’s unclear what such a declaration would mean for the project’s future
- Environmental groups are raising alarm, citing fears of a fast-tracked permitting process
Opponents of the proposed Line 5 tunnel project are raising alarm as the US Army Corps of Engineers considers giving the project “emergency” status in response to President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national energy emergency.
The Corps has not yet made an announcement of the final emergency projects list, but the tunnel project is shown on a Corps online map that lists potential emergency projects. That map also includes electrical transmission and solar energy projects in Drummond Island and Muskegon County.
The agency has spent years studying whether to grant a key permit for the proposed tunnel project. Corps officials previously said they expected to publish a draft environmental impact statement this spring, followed by a final decision in early 2026.
Within hours of taking office on Jan. 20, Trump declared a national energy emergency and gave the Corps 30 days to “identify planned or potential actions to facilitate the Nation’s energy supply that may be subject to emergency treatment.”
A frequent critic of clean energy and proponent of fossil fuels, Trump has vowed to “unleash” American oil and gas. Line 5 transmits Canadian products, most of which merely pass through the US on their way to refineries across the border. But some of the pipeline’s products end up in Michigan, providing propane to the Upper Peninsula.
Environmental groups expressed dismay at the potential emergency designation, fearing that it could prompt the Corps to fast-track permitting for the tunnel.
“Rushing a risky pipeline project under the guise of an emergency would be dangerous and irresponsible,” said Beth Wallace, climate and energy director for the National Wildlife Federation.
“This is not a final decision,” she added. “There is still time to demand a thorough, transparent process that prioritizes safety over shortcuts.”
Related:
- What a Donald Trump presidency means for Michigan’s environment
- Judges return Line 5 case to Michigan court, hand Dana Nessel win
- Enbridge: Federal review of Line 5 tunnel permit is ‘inexplicably lethargic’
The 72-year-old pipeline transports Canadian petroleum products from Wisconsin to Ontario, crossing the Straits of Mackinac in a pipe that rests in the open water along the lakebottom. For years, it has been a topic of controversy amid fears that the line could rupture, spilling petroleum into the Great Lakes.
In the final days of former Gov. Rick Snyder’s administration, the state struck a deal in which Enbridge agreed to encase the pipeline in a tunnel deep beneath the lakebed, arguing that doing so would virtually eliminate risks of an oil spill.
Opponents have accused the company of downplaying the risks. They worry that permitting infrastructure for oil would run counter to global efforts to mitigate the catastrophic effects from climate change.
Enbridge officials originally estimated that the tunnel project would be complete by 2024 at a cost of $500 million, but rising costs and permitting delays have plagued the project. Construction has yet to begin and costs are expected to exceed $1 billion, potentially by a lot.
In a 2023 letter to Michigan regulators, Enbridge officials complained of an “inexplicably lethargic” Corps permitting process.
Thank you to our Michigan Environment Watch sponsors
Environment Watch is made possible by generous financial support from our sponsors. Please visit the About page for more information and to subscribe to Environment Watch. Interested in becoming a sponsor? Contact Emma Carr.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under our Republication Guidelines. Questions? Email republishing@bridgemi.com
