A sign protesting Enbridge Line 5 in Michigan. (Laina G. Stebbins | Michigan Advance)

“The land does not belong to us, it is borrowed by us from our children’s children” said Robert Blanchard, chairman of the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. “We harvest our wild rice from the waters, we hunt from the land, fish from the lake, streams, and rivers to feed our families and gather the medicines to heal our relatives.” 

The Bad River Band cites this relationship with the land in its fight against the Enbridge Line 5 pipeline, which has operated in trespass on the Bad River Band’s reservation for years. Now, the Band and its allies are challenging the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) decision to grant permits that the Canadian oil company Enbridge will need to construct a re-route of the pipeline. The new route no longer trespasses on the reservation, it will still run through the Bad River watershed. The tribe and a coalition of state environmental groups say a spill in that area could be devastating.

Last Thursday, Midwest Environmental Advocates, 350 Wisconsin, the Sierra Club of Wisconsin and the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin filed a petition for a contested case hearing with the DNR, challenging DNR permitting for Line 5. Shortly after filing the challenge, Midwest Environmental Advocates received a report of a 69,000-gallon oil spill in Jefferson County.

According to an accident report shared with Wisconsin Examiner, the spill originated from Enbridge’s Line 6 pipeline. Some 1,650 barrels of crude oil are estimated to have leaked from the pipeline, with 42 gallons to a barrel. When plugged into Google Maps, GPS data in the accident report point to a roadway running through a grassy, wooded area. The map shows that the spill occurred near a waterway that flows into Lake Ripley, not far from a group of nature preserves and campgrounds. Although the pipeline segment had a leak detection system, the accident report states that this didn’t alert anyone to the leak, which was first noticed on Nov. 11 by an Enbridge technician.

Line 6 is one of four pipeliness that run from Superior, Wisconsin, to Illinois. It carries crude oil from Superior to Lockport, Illinois.

Tony Wilkin Gibart, executive director of Midwest Environmental Advocates, said in a statement that the Line 6 spill highlights the dangers of Line 5. “Consider that in the very same week that DNR issued permits for Line 5 based on its conclusion that the risk for a spill would be ‘low,’ DNR was investigating a significant oil leak on another Enbridge pipeline in Wisconsin,” said Gibart. “DNR’s reasoning for approving Line 5 defies common sense.”

In November, the DNR decided to issue wetland and waterway permits to Enbridge as a step towards moving the pipeline off the Bad River reservation. The DNR highlighted that the wetland permits would include over 200 conditions which Enbridge would need to honor, and which would keep the company in compliance with Wisconsin’s wetland and waterway standards. Both the DNR and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers would need to approve the permits before construction of the reroute could begin. 

“Many of our people will feel the effects if we lose these resources,” said Blanchard. “In my view, the DNR failed our children when it gave Enbridge the permits to build this reroute. They failed to consider the company’s multiple disasters in Minnesota and in Michigan, which are still being cleaned up. They failed to consider our tribe, our water quality, and the natural resources of the entire Bad River watershed. As a tribal chairman and an elder, it’s my responsibility to protect the generations still to come. That’s why we are fighting this reroute in court.”

The Band is represented by EarthJustice in a lawsuit filed against the DNR which, like the petition filed last week by the environmental groups, accuses the state agency of producing an inadequate final Environmental Impact Statement on the reroute which violates the Wisconsin Environmental Protection Act. 

Blanchard highlighted his tribe’s reliance on wild rice fields growing along the Bad River and Lake Superior, as well as natural medicines, wild game, and the land itself which are crucial to the Bad River Band’s cultural practices and way of life. Every year the tribe holds an annual wild rice harvest, and Bad River Band members hunt and gather from the land all year. 

“If something was to happen during that time, or when that pipeline is in place, you know, it’s really going to affect a lot of things that we do here, and the way that we do things here on the reservation as far as our way of life,” Blanchard warned. 

Currently the Line 5 pipeline crosses the Bad River inside the boundaries of the reservation. If the reroute goes through,  Enbridge would construct 41 miles of new pipeline to cross the river outside of reservation land. The reroute would still place the natural resources the tribe relies on in danger if an oil spill or leak were to occur. 

Stefanie Tsosie, senior staff attorney at Earthjustice, also warned that constructing new pipeline damages natural formations and resources which are often irreplaceable. “Once construction starts they can’t undo the damage,” Tsosie said in a statement. “Enbridge has a terrible track record for pipeline construction and operation. And this place — this watershed and this territory — is not another place they can just plow through.” 

Opponents to the pipeline point to a history of ecological disasters due to spillage from Enbridge pipelines. In 2010, millions of gallons of crude oil contaminated the Kalamazoo River, creating a crisis which took years to address. Over the past 50 years, Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline has spilled over 1 million gallons in dozens of different incidents. 

Today, an area known as the “meander” is also creating concern for the Bad River Band. “The river is changing course, and it does that throughout the way it runs,” said Blanchard. At the meander where the pipeline crosses,  he added, “If we have high water events, flooding, harsh winter with a lot of ice build up, and all that breaks loose in the spring, then we get this high water that very well could take that pipeline out, and cause a spill.”

The tribe is monitoring the situation regularly, but this does little to ease their anxieties. The meander is “quite difficult to get to,” said Blanchard, and it’s also just one area of concern along the pipeline’s route. “A few years back, we had an exposed pipeline coming down one of the sidehills up there,” said Blanchard. “There was quite a ways where the pipeline was exposed and just kind of hanging in mid-air, which could have been disastrous if it wasn’t found and something done about it.”

If Line 5 were rerouted, it would still go through other wetlands and habitats outside the reservation. “These are some of the most treasured areas in Wisconsin,” said Brett Korte, an attorney with Clean Wisconsin. “When we think of the beauty of our state, our precious freshwater resources, the places we must protect, these areas are at the top of the list.” 

In a statement, Korte added, “This push from Canadian oil giant Enbridge is getting national attention because what it’s proposing to do here in Wisconsin is dangerous.”

This report was updated with additional information about Line 6.

A billboard promoting Enbridge Inc. (Susan Demas | Michigan Advance)

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has decided that it will issue an individual wetland and waterway permit to the Canadian oil and gas company Enbridge, as the company seeks to relocate its Line 5 pipeline. Permits will also be issued to the company for stormwater site construction and pollution discharge elimination systems. The state agency’s decision is the latest development in the contested operation of Line 5 in Wisconsin. 

A DNR press release states that the wetland permit authorizes specific construction-related activities that may impact waterways and wetlands. The permit contains “more than 200 conditions to ensure compliance with state’s wetlands and waterways standards,” according to the DNR. The construction permits for stormwater sites also involve “specific plans for erosion control and water quality protection.”

Both the DNR and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers must approve the permits before the project can proceed. Enbridge may need to also obtain other permits involving  groundwater, burning and incidental takes of species listed as threatened or endangered. Enbridge will also need to apply for a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit to discharge dredge or fill material to waterways, which is required under the Clean Water Act. The DNR has issued a water quality certification “that serves as a determination that the project as proposed will meet State of Wisconsin water quality standards.” The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will also have to consider Wisconsin’s water quality certification as part of the permitting process. 

The announcement earned praise from the Wisconsin Building Trades Council, a union with  a membership of over 40,000. Emily Pritzkow, the union’s executive director, issued a statement saying the decision “reflects an intentional and balanced approach to addressing the state’s energy infrastructure needs while ensuring responsible environmental stewardship.” Calling the relocation of Line 5 “a win for Wisconsin workers, Wisconsin families, and the Wisconsin economy,” Pritzkow said the reroute “ensures operation with the highest safety standards by incorporating cutting-edge technology and construction practices.” Pritzkow added, “together, we can advance Wisconsin’s infrastructure needs while protecting the natural resources that make our state exceptional.”

Plans to reroute  Line 5 have been debated for years. In 2019, when the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa filed a federal lawsuit to remove the pipeline from the tribe’s reservation, a judge determined that the company had trespassed on the Bad River Band’s land, and ordered the pipeline to be removed within three years. Although the decision was a victory for the Bad River Band, the tribe argues that Line 5’s rerouted path still crosses the Bad River watershed, and thus still poses a threat to the tribe’s natural resources. 

In late August, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers received over 150,000 public comments opposing the continued operation of Line 5. Nearly a month later, the DNR released a final environmental impact statement on the reroute plan, which itself was a step necessary for Enbridge to receive the permits it needed to relocate the pipeline. 

Opponents to the decades-old crude oil pipeline were displeased by the DNR’s decision to issue permits to Enbridge. “I’m angry that the DNR has signed off on a half-baked plan that spells disaster for our homeland and our way of life,” said Bad River Band chairman Robert Blanchard in a statement. “We will continue sounding the alarm to prevent yet another Enbridge pipeline from endangering our watershed.”

Stefanie Tsosie, who is helping represent the Bad River Band as senior attorney at Earthjustice, said in a statement that the DNR “chose to serve Enbridge’s interests at the cost of the Bad River Band’s treaty rights and the state’s future clean water supply.” Tsosie added, “it’s sad that they are willing to gamble the region’s irreplaceable wetlands, the wild rice beds, and even Lake Superior to secure Enbridge’s cash flow.” 

Clean Wisconsin is considering legal challenges against the permit issuances. “Wisconsin law makes it clear that projects causing harm to our waters must meet a high bar to move forward,” said Clean Wisconsin attorney Evan Feinauer. “Given the enormous impacts that construction of this pipeline would cause, we are skeptical that the proposed project meets these legal standards.” Opponents of the pipeline also point out  that constructing the reroute would involve clearing trees, digging trenches, filling wetlands, and other activities which could disturb vulnerable ecosystems in northern Wisconsin. 

“We will evaluate what actions are needed to protect our state,” said Feinauer. 

A solar energy array. Environmental groups are calling on Microsoft to bypass a planned gas-powered electricity project and instead focus exclusively on solar and wind power for its data center in Racine County. (Photo courtesy of the National Center for Appropriate Technology and the Agrisolar Clearinghouse | USDA)

A coalition of environmental and health groups has called on Microsoft to rely on clean energy generation instead of a proposed expansion of methane-fueled power for its planned Racine County data center — projected to become Wisconsin Electric’s “largest electric load.”

In an open letter to Microsoft, the groups charge that the plan underway by We Energies to build new methane gas power plants  “will push our state’s climate goals out of reach, locking us into 30 more years of fossil fuels at a time when we all know we must rapidly transition to clean energy.”

We Energies defended its plan Thursday, calling the gas plants an essential transition step as the company expands its clean energy portfolio.

Microsoft’s decision to build an artificial intelligence data center in Mount Pleasant has been highlighted as a Wisconsin economic development success story, but alongside that has come a growing awareness about the heavy demand that data centers and AI make for electric power.

In testimony to the state Public Service Commission supporting a proposed rate increase to pay for the cost of expanded methane power generation, a Microsoft consultant said the data center is expected “to become the largest electric load” served by Wisconsin Electric, the Milwaukee Business Journal reported. Wisconsin Electric is a subsidiary of We Energies.

The letter distributed Thursday by Clean Wisconsin and signed by a dozen organizations declares that if carried out, the utility’s plan will increase air pollution from nitrogen oxide, particulate matter, lead, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds and greenhouse gasses that contribute to climate change.

 “It’s time for Wisconsin to leave these dangerous ways to produce energy behind, not double-down on dirty fuels in the name of new technology,” the letter states.   

Instead of backing the methane power build-out, the letter urges Microsoft to embrace expanding solar and wind power in Wisconsin to meet the increased demand.

“Microsoft’s recently-announced plan to help fund a currently unspecified 250-megawatt solar project in Wisconsin is a good start, but this represents just a fraction of the data center’s energy needs,” the letter states. “There must be more.”

The letter cites Microsoft’s public claims of commitment to addressing climate change.

“This data center project represents a critical opportunity to help drive change in Wisconsin and put us on a path to clean wind and solar,” the letter states. “Microsoft knows what we all know, that the window to make meaningful progress in the fight against climate change is closing, and the decisions we make right now matter.”

In a statement Thursday responding to the letter, We Energies spokesman Brendan Conway said the new proposed natural gas generation plants were necessary to ensure reliable service as the company continues its move toward cleaner power sources.

“Now more than ever, it is critical for us to have quick-start gas plants available and running in our state for those times when intermittent renewable generation cannot meet customers’ energy needs,” Conway said. He called the gas plants “the cheapest, most reliable and lowest carbon approach to support our customers when solar and wind are not able to provide enough power.”

The proposed plants comply with EPA emission standards, Conway said. He added that We Energies continues to expand its clean energy production, spending more than $7 billion on solar, wind and battery storage capacity by 2028. The utility calculates that with those investments it will be producing four times its current output of non-carbon energy within five years.