by Jeffrey Insko | Dec 24, 2012 |
The Northwest Times of Indiana reports this morning that Enbridge won’t break ground on phase two of the project until this summer, pending IDEM approval. The reason for the delay? Citizens advocacy and the fantastic work of our friends at Save the Dunes and other organizations. At least that’s what Tom Hodge says:
Hodge said he believes the project would have remained on schedule for a year-end completion “if there hadn’t been any voices of public opposition raised,” pushing the IDEM public hearing process.
Just one little note for Tom Hodge (we hope he’s reading): we really wish that you and your Enbridge colleagues would stop referring to the raising of legitimate concerns, the reasonable calls for caution, and the asking of questions as “opposition.” As the article puts it,
a coalition of environmental groups issued a joint statement of concern about the project, urging the state to take extra steps to ensure Lake Michigan and its tributaries will not be compromised by the project or a breach of the pipeline.
A “statement” of concern asking for reasonable safeguards and safety measures is not “opposition.”
Anyway, it appears (or so we hope) that IDEM is taking citizen concerns seriously and plans to deliberate carefully before issuing permits. We applaud them for their prudence.
by Jeffrey Insko | Dec 22, 2012 |
Okay, well, we aren’t quite as back as we thought we were. Turns out, there were a few more end-of-the-semester duties to deal with this week and then a bit of holiday travels. We’re back in the the land of our childhood and can steal some time to do a bit of catching up. There are all the pictures and videos of the past week’s construction activities to share and there’s a semi-positive tale to tell. In addition to that, we (perhaps like you) received Enbridge’s latest construction newsletter and were amused to see our old pal “Dr. Michael Milan” smiling up at us from the glossy page; as you can imagine, we’ve got some things to say about that.
In the meantime, there are some interesting news articles to share if you haven’t seem them yet. Down in Indiana, the Department of Environmental Management held a hearing last week on the Line 6B project. The hearing was requested by our friends at Save the Dunes, along with the Hoosier Environmental Council, and the Porter County Chapter of the Izaak Walton League. From what we’ve heard (we were unable to attend, shackled to a desk by student writing!), the meeting went well and the speakers, nearly a dozen of them, raised a number of important questions eloquently. Best of all, the meeting has gotten an excellent amount of newspaper coverage. (and more and more). The groups put together a joint statement that smartly describes a number of reasonable measures that can be taken on the project to ensure safety and environmental protection. We will, of course, be following this story very closely.
Also last week, Enbridge reps were down in Indiana making nice with the good people of Hobart. Somehow, they managed to garner this astonishingly favorable coverage. Don’t get us wrong, we’re very happy that Jack Schwerin was able to get Thomas Hodge out to our property and that Hobart Mayor Brian Snedecor is so confident than Enbridge really does “care about the community.” But we hope they don’t become complacent. They may yet have cause to revise their assessment of Enbridge’s behavior (though we hope not).
In national news, we were struck by a referendum recently called for by the forward-looking citizens of Burlington, Vermont. They’re not too keen on the idea of Enbridge shipping more dilbit through their backyard, so they decided– not unlike the brave leaders in Brandon Township– to take action. We love it when local municipalities step up, though unfortunately, as we’ve learned here in Michigan, they’re being forced to do so by torpid, unimaginative state and national officials. At any rate, the Burlington action could be a model for others (including us here in Michigan!).
Down in Texas, the fight over Keystone XL rages on, led in part by our tenacious friend Chris Wilson. For months, we’ve been telling anybody who will listen that what’s happening here with Line 6B in Michigan is totally related to Keystone (and a few members of the press have gotten it). And that’s exactly what the awesome, irrepressible Michelle Barlond-Smith told the House Energy Resource Committee this week. The Texas Observer reports.
Lastly, the New York Times has a VERY important story on the failures of pipeline companies’ leak detection systems. It reports that
A forthcoming federal report on pipeline safety has found that members of the general public are more likely to identify oil and gas spills than the pipeline companies’ own leak detection systems.
Of course, those of us familiar with Marshall already understand this. As we’ve said here on the blog countless times, technology was never the problem; human error was the problem. And of course, Enbridge has been running around for months telling everyone about all of the great technology that’s going into the new Line 6B– as if that alone is supposed to quell any concerns. The new report– that, and the experience of Marshall– remind us yet again that we should not be seduced by the pipeline companies’ claims. We’ll give our friend (and hero!) Carl Weimer the last word. From the article:
“It has been clear for years that these computerized leak-detection systems don’t work,” said Carl Weimer, executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust and a member of the pipeline agency’s hazardous liquid technical advisory committee, which has reviewed the draft report. “The question for me is why have regulators continued to allow the pipeline industry to keep selling the public on leak detection systems that don’t work as advertised?”
by Jeffrey Insko | Dec 6, 2012 |
We just got off the telephone where we participated, along with a bunch of other really smart people, in our first-ever telephone press conference. It was an odd new experience and we hope we didn’t sound like a blithering idiot. We’ll see.
The topic of the conference? A fantastic new report from the National Wildlife Federation on tar sands oil and the companies (like Enbridge) pushing for its increased production and transportation through the United States. Peter LaFontaine, the report’s author, has done some important and first-rate work here. We encourage you to take a look (and a listen, as the audio recording of the telepresser is now available; the link is at the bottom of the page).
by Jeffrey Insko | Dec 5, 2012 |
A couple of interesting news items worthy of your attention:
First, yesterday’s NPR program “Stateside” featured a segment on the use (and perhaps abuse) of eminent domain. And guess what company was the primary subject of the discussion? Our friends Carol Brimhall and Connie Watson are featured in the story. Following the piece is a conversation with attorney Alan Ackerman, who has represented Line 6B landowners. At the end of the piece, Ackerman provides an example of a company that has done things right. Who, you ask? Well, it shouldn’t come as a surprise given who took the time to talk with us at the Pipeline Safety Trust conference last month.
The second item is an article in the Livingston Daily Press & Argus featuring Connie and Tom Watson— fine, decent, kind, ordinary people. Do they look like a “special interest group” to you? Do they strike you as people who will just “never be happy.”
by Jeffrey Insko | Nov 29, 2012 |
Well, the Wuori-Hodge road show/media blitz continues. My goodness how they’re accessible to the media these days. We wonder why? And as you can imagine, we’ve got LOTS to say about this one. We’re working on it. Meantime, we’ll just say that we sure wish these guys would sit down for some questions from OUR editorial board.
by Jeffrey Insko | Oct 29, 2012 |
We just returned from the Brandon Township board of trustees meeting where the smart, principled, courageous trustees passed a resolution stating that they would take whatever legal steps necessary to require Enbridge to seek local consent as required by the Michigan Constitution and the state HIghway Act. With this resolution, they not only join the MTA in support of the POLAR lawsuit, they go a step further in resolving to take legal action to enforce the law. This is precisely the sort of bold position we’ve been waiting for some government entity to take; it effectively solves the “standing” conundrum we have previously discussed.
Brandon Township has once again taken remarkable and inspirational action on behalf of their township and, in our estimation, on behalf of the citizens of the state of Michigan. As we’ve said before: this is what leadership looks like.
We’ll have more details on this action and the next steps as they become available and as time allows. In the meantime, for tonight at least, we’re actually feeling hopeful.
by Jeffrey Insko | Oct 28, 2012 |
You would think at this point we would cease to be surprised at Enbridge’s baffling public communications. Yet they continue to astound us. That is certainly the case with the latest ad they’ve published in the Detroit Free Press. They appear to be utterly incapable of presenting even the most basic information without misleading or dissembling. But we’ll say this much: at least they’re consistent.
(more…)
by Jeffrey Insko | Oct 24, 2012 |
This week in the Brandon Citizen, Susan Bromley (our favorite small-town reporter) has a q & a with Enbridge’s Jason Manshum. The interview focuses primarily on the status of construction in Brandon Township, which has evidently ceased for the time being as the parties attempt to resolve the question of Enbridge’s compliance with Brandon’s Woodlands ordinance. (more…)
by Jeffrey Insko | Oct 22, 2012 |
Last Sunday, Enbridge launched a new ad campaign in newspapers across Michigan and Indiana. We devoted considerable attention to that first ad, which appeared in the form of a letter by Vice President for Major Projects Execution Mark Sitek. In the letter, Sitek promised:
. . . over the next four weeks we will use space in this newspaper to share project updates and to address some of these questions. We will expand on the purpose of the projects and what community members can expect from us. We will present our process for reaching right-of-way agreements with landowners. We will also provide insight into the regulatory process and requirements guiding the projects’ development.
We eagerly awaited the next installment, ready to assess the quality of the information Sitek would provide. Well, a new ad did in fact appear this Sunday, only it didn’t at all provide any of the information Sitek promised.
(more…)
by Jeffrey Insko | Oct 20, 2012 |
We spent this morning re-reading the printed interview between reporters from the Times of Northwest Indiana and Enbridge spokesperson Jennifer Smith. (What a great service the Times did by publishing this!). The more we read, the more worked up we got. So we’ve decided we’re going to have to devote some serious time and attention to that intriguing, maddening document. So stay tuned for a new series. In the meantime, you might want to read it for yourself.
We’re also looking forward to the next installment of Enbridge’s ad— they’ve promised four more! You can bet that we’ll be ready to point out any and all misinformation, dissembling, and rheotrical sleights-of-hand. We’ve also decided we’re going to write directly to Mark Sitek (whose name appears on the “letter”). We’ll post that here as well once we’ve sent it.
From Canada this week came this intriguing opinion piece on Enbridge’s corporate character. It pretty much hits the nail on the head– in fact, it pretty much arrives at the same conclusion and advances the same thesis we offered some weeks back.
Lastly this morning: keep in mind that the POLAR lawsuit hearing in federal court is tomorrow. Please consider attending to show your support for the effort to make Enbridge do things right.
