by Jeffrey Insko | Sep 21, 2012 |
An important blog entry from the always razor-sharp Anthony Swift at the National Resources Defense Council. Swift calls our attention to more essential investigative work at Inside Climate News, this time by Lisa Song (whose work we’ve praised before). From Swift:
Enbridge’s Kalamazoo tar sands spill presents another case undercutting industry’s claims about pipeline safety and leak detection. As the InsideClimate piece notes, “Just 10 days before the accident, Enbridge Inc., which operates the Michigan pipeline, told federal regulators it could remotely detect and shut down a rupture in eight minutes. But when the line burst open, it took Enbridge 17 hours to confirm the spill.”
by Jeffrey Insko | Sep 19, 2012 |
This morning, we were in the midst of revisiting our series on the outrageous recent statements in Inside Climate News by Enbridge spokesman Larry Springer— and then we were planning to take the dog out for a run (we do have a life beyond Enbridge, you know!)– when we received word that an Oakland County Circuit Court judge has dismissed an Enbridge condemnation suit, finding that the language in Enbridge’s proposed easement agreement was over-broad.
Of course, we’re not surprised to know that the case involved another example of Enbridge over-reaching. But it is nice to see that once in a while, their attempts can be thwarted. We’re also pleased to be able to congratulate attorney Kim Savage (who received some assistance from the crackerjacks at Ackerman, Ackerman and Dynkowski) on this one, as we’ve long admired her dedication and intelligence.
This ruling also has some important potential implications that extend well beyond the specific property owners involved. Once we’ve had a chance to read through the case and the judge’s ruling, we’ll have more commentary and analysis.
by Jeffrey Insko | Sep 19, 2012 |
Some good news from Oakland county circuit court this morning. We’ll have details and analysis soon. Stay tuned.
by Jeffrey Insko | Sep 14, 2012 |
A good article about Enbridge’s use of eminent domain in this morning’s Battle Creek Enquirer. Landowner Barbara Atkin speaks for many others:
“Whatever they say goes. I understand we need oil. But we could have been treated better. If they just would have looked us in the eye and said, ‘We know this must be devastating for you, but we we really need to do this and this what we’re going to do for you.’ Instead, we just got threats of, ‘Well, I guess we’ll see in you in court.’”
by Jeffrey Insko | Sep 7, 2012 |
We apologize for our silence the past few days. It’s not for a lack of things to discuss, however. It’s just that we’re on an academic calendar and have been caught up with sundry back-to-school tasks and responsibilities. That said, we’re doing a little catching up today. Let’s start with a news roundup: (more…)
by Jeffrey Insko | Aug 24, 2012 |
We’ve just received a report about today’s MPSC hearing on phase two of the Enbridge project. The hearing before Administrative Law Judge Theresa Sheets today was to rule on two questions:
- The motion for order compelling discovery. We wrote about this one yesterday in our post welcoming Enbridge readers. At issue was whether Enbridge would have to answer certain questions, such as whether they had obtained appropriate local consents. As I said yesterday, Enbridge has argued that such questions are irrelevant to the MPSC proceedings; I also said that their argument was plausible, given the weakness of the MPSC from a regulatory standpoint. Well, sure enough, the Judge denied the motion, which means that Enbridge does not have to answer the question of consent in these proceedings. That’s not a huge surprise– but it is all the more reason to contact your state elected officials to demand legislation that puts in place sue real regulation in Michigan.We look forward to reading and commenting on the transcript of this hearing when it becomes available in the next few days. Stay tuned.
- The second issue was whether to allow “delayed intervenors.” These are affected landowners who missed the original deadline to intervene, but who nevertheless wanted to do so– and so filed late. Enbridge sought to deny their motion to intervene late. And they won. However, there are still plenty of intervenors whose testimony and experiences will still be considered. And all those delayed intervenors who can no longer be an official part of the MPSC proceedings? Well, they can just become part of the growing number of folks making noise in other ways.
More details on all of this as they become available.
by Jeffrey Insko | Aug 24, 2012 |
More from Jack Lessenberry (we admired him long before this Enbridge business!), who tells a bit of our story in his column this week. A small taste:
. . . when we learned that Enbridge refuses to pay fair replacement value for trees and plants, we got mad. The fact that we had to fight just to get a portion of the appraised replacement value was frustrating and demoralizing.
Versions of this article will be syndicated across the state and region; we’ll post links as they appear.
by Jeffrey Insko | Aug 22, 2012 |
Interesting news out of Canada. If only Michigan elected officials were as responsive to the facts of the NTSB report. A taste,
The U.S. declaration that Enbridge Inc. ran a river spill cleanup like “Keystone Kops” has cost it a small investor, and a measure of credibility, after Vancity Investment Management said the pipeline company no longer meets its criteria for socially responsible investments.
by Jeffrey Insko | Aug 21, 2012 |
Is it just us or has the momentum of the last week or so shifted in our direction? Consider:
The MPSC agreed to grant intervenors more time to gather and present information regarding Enbridge’s application for approval of phase two of their project. Our concerns about Enbridge’s Line 6B project have received national attention (and more and more and more). A judge in Livingston County issued an injunction to halt Enbridge’s work on a Howell landowner’s property. One of the most respected (if not the most respected) and thoughtful journalists in Michigan has written about local citizens’ and municipalities’ attempts to keep Enbridge from having its way entirely in Michigan. A candidate for national office has spoken out forcefully. And Brandon Township passed a bold resolution demanding Enbridge to comply with certain conditions before beginning their work.
And if that’s not enough, there is also an excellent op-ed on dilbit in this morning’s New York Times.
These are all good signs. There is wind in our sails. Let your local and state officials know; invite them to hop aboard.
by Jeffrey Insko | Aug 20, 2012 |
His latest commentary, centered upon tonight’s Brandon resolution, is now up. Give it a listen.
