The fight to shut down Line 5: What lies ahead in 2025
A 72-year-old problem that won’t go away
After years of political and legal drama, the fate of Line 5 – the aging oil pipeline running through the Great Lakes owned by Canadian oil company Enbridge Energy – may finally be decided in 2025.
Built in 1953, Line 5 carries crude oil from western Canada to Ontario, cutting through Wisconsin and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula before crossing along the lakebed underneath the Straits of Mackinac – the very heart of twenty percent of Earth’s fresh surface water and home to one of the most ecologically sensitive regions in the world.
For decades, the pipeline has been a point of contention. Line 5 pumps 23 million gallons of oil through the Straits every day, the place scientists have long warned would be the worst possible location for a Great Lakes oil spill due to their strong currents. According to a University of Michigan study, an oil spill from a Line 5 rupture could contaminate more than 700 miles of Great Lakes coastline, devastate fish and wildlife, and spell catastrophe for Michigan’s economy – taking years to clean up.
In recent years, Line 5 has had numerous safety incidents, including anchor strikes from shipping in the Straits that have damaged the pipeline’s structural integrity. To make matters worse, the lifespan of Line 5 was meant to be only 50 years. With the pipeline 20 years past its intended lifespan and the near-misses from anchor strikes, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer and Attorney Dana Nessel took action in 2021, with the governor issuing a shutdown order and Nessel filing lawsuits against Enbridge for the company’s failure to comply.
Despite nearly three years of legal proceedings, as 2025 begins, the fight to shut down Line 5 remains at a critical juncture.
Progress in 2024
Despite its fair share of challenges, 2024 brought some positive developments in the fight to shut down Line 5. In Wisconsin, the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa won a legal battle requiring Enbridge to reroute the portion of Line 5 that crosses tribal land or shut it down entirely by June 2026. Meanwhile, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel saw a breakthrough in her case to shut down Line 5 entirely, as a federal judge ruled the issue should return to state court from federal court, where it had been for over a year.
This decision removed a significant roadblock in the case and opened the door for the Michigan judge to rule on the case. Soon, Enbridge and the state of Michigan will return to court to argue their cases, with a hearing expected on January 20 that could have lasting implications for Line 5’s future.
The Tunnel: A False Solution
While pressure to shut down Line 5 has mounted, Enbridge has advocated for a so-called solution: building a tunnel to encase the section of the pipeline running beneath the Straits of Mackinac. Fossil fuel interests and their legislative allies in Lansing have embraced the proposal fiercely. Still, environmental, energy, safety, and Tribal advocates see it for what it is – a distraction.
Recent reports have revealed the proposed tunnel would cost three times as much as Enbridge originally estimated and take much longer to complete. Furthermore, the tunnel would not only prolong the environmental risks posed by a Line 5 oil spill but also wreak havoc on local ecosystems, fisheries, and economies.
Meanwhile, a 2023 report from logistics and supply chain advisory firm PLG Consulting concluded that Line 5 could be shut down without causing shortages or price increases for oil and natural gas by utilizing alternative transportation methods such as rail, other pipeline systems that don’t endanger the Great Lakes, and oil tankers. The reality is clear: building a tunnel is not a viable path forward for Michigan or our Great Lakes. Nevertheless, the fight continues – a fight complicated by changing political tides.
Political Complications
As a recent Detroit News article underscores, the fight to shut down Line 5 is in a precarious place as the legal case enters a new phase and political changes at home and in Canada complicate the fight to protect the Great Lakes.
Donald Trump’s return to the White House presents significant challenges. Known for championing fossil fuel expansion and denying climate change, Trump’s leadership could have a direct impact on the permitting process for the controversial tunnel project proposed by Enbridge. As the agency responsible for evaluating and approving permits, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may see increased pressure to fast-track the project under the new Trump administration, opening the door for even more environmental risks. This shift risks undermining years of environmental advocacy aimed at preventing further harm to Michigan’s most precious natural resource.
Meanwhile, the international context of Line 5 adds another layer of complexity. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s recent resignation leaves uncertainty about Canada’s approach to Line 5, both in terms of the Great Lakes and supporting a Canadian company in Enbridge. The pipeline has long been framed as an issue of cross-border energy security by Canadian officials, but while Trudeau’s successor may take a different stance, the fight to shut down the pipeline continues.
What comes next
Despite the legal hurdles and evolving political dynamics, the stakes in the fight to shut down Line 5 remain extraordinarily high. As Michigan’s legal battle with Enbridge continues, environmental advocates stand steadfast in support of Attorney General Dana Nessel and environmental champions working tirelessly to eliminate the threat of a catastrophic oil spill in the Great Lakes.
Moving into 2025, we must continue to ensure decision-makers have accurate, science-based information and work to counter fossil fuel industry misinformation campaigns that seek to hide the facts and instill fear. This moment demands vigilance, unity, and action to ensure the health and future of our region’s most vital natural resource.