SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Enbridge to Fork Over $75 Million for Role in Kalamazoo Tar Sands Spill
"I worry that this won't be the last time we see spills like this," says local environmentalist
May 13, 2015
The Canadian energy giant responsible for a pipeline rupture that spilled close to one million gallons of tar sands oil into the Talmadge Creek and Kalamazoo River in 2010 has reached a $75 million settlement with the state of Michigan, an amount that leaves environmentalists asking: Is it enough?
According to news reports, the settlement package between the state and Enbridge Energy--which ends any further legal action against Enbridge for the 2010 spill--includes $40 million in already-completed projects and $35 million in work yet to be done, including wetland and habitat restoration, oversight and monitoring, and improvements to water quality.
As the Associated Press notes, "wetlands are considered to be crucial in a watershed, serving as nature's filter in absorbing and releasing water and providing habitat to fish and wildlife."
The terms of the agreement stipulate that all of the money will be earmarked for restoration and improvement of the affected watershed, and that the money cannot be diverted to unrelated areas of the state budget.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality director Dan Wyant reportedly described the settlement as a "huge win for Michigan's environment" in a statement issued Wednesday morning.
The Enbridge spill, considered the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history, impacted more than 38 miles of the Kalamazoo River and 4,435 acres of adjacent shoreline habitat. The Canada-based pipeline corporation has so far spent more than $1 billion on clean-up and restoration.
In the wake of the spill, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released a damning investigation showing that Enbridge ignored warning signs for five years in its pipeline.
Given these facts, not to mention the residual oil still existing in the river, some environmentalists say the settlement is insufficient.
According to Michigan Live:
James Clift, policy director with the Michigan Environmental Council said the dollar amount was a "little low" and worries that it doesn't provide enough punishment to discourage a future spill by a corporation.
"I worry that this won't be the last time we see spills like this. We want to make sure companies are doing everything possible to protect water resources in Michigan," Clift said.
Clift said he was pleased by the money to restore the wetlands and improve hydrology but said the settlement didn't go far enough.
"They should clearly have to pay for the cleanup and reimburse all the costs the state and local officials have paid. That's a given," Clift said. "But it should have also included a larger dollar amount and a pool of money to directly address contaminants in the river that are recoverable."
And Noah Hall, an expert in environmental and water law with Wayne State University in Detroit, told Michigan Radio that the settlement "does not seem to be penalizing Enbridge."
Hall explained: "On one hand, Enbridge is being asked to pay very little in terms of additional penalties above and beyond the damage they caused. On the other hand, because Enbridge's oil spill contaminated the Kalamazoo River, they've already had to pay far more than would be typical after an oil spill to remediate the public resource."
Michigan Radio adds that Enbridge is still negotiating settlements with the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as other federal, state, and local entities for damages it caused to natural resources in the state--and that Hall expects the company will get hit with heavy payments in these upcoming settlements.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Deirdre Fulton
Deirdre Fulton is a former Common Dreams senior editor and staff writer. Previously she worked as an editor and writer for the Portland Phoenix and the Boston Phoenix, where she was honored by the New England Press Association and the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. A Boston University graduate, Deirdre is a co-founder of the Maine-based Lorem Ipsum Theater Collective and the PortFringe theater festival. She writes young adult fiction in her spare time.
The Canadian energy giant responsible for a pipeline rupture that spilled close to one million gallons of tar sands oil into the Talmadge Creek and Kalamazoo River in 2010 has reached a $75 million settlement with the state of Michigan, an amount that leaves environmentalists asking: Is it enough?
According to news reports, the settlement package between the state and Enbridge Energy--which ends any further legal action against Enbridge for the 2010 spill--includes $40 million in already-completed projects and $35 million in work yet to be done, including wetland and habitat restoration, oversight and monitoring, and improvements to water quality.
As the Associated Press notes, "wetlands are considered to be crucial in a watershed, serving as nature's filter in absorbing and releasing water and providing habitat to fish and wildlife."
The terms of the agreement stipulate that all of the money will be earmarked for restoration and improvement of the affected watershed, and that the money cannot be diverted to unrelated areas of the state budget.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality director Dan Wyant reportedly described the settlement as a "huge win for Michigan's environment" in a statement issued Wednesday morning.
The Enbridge spill, considered the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history, impacted more than 38 miles of the Kalamazoo River and 4,435 acres of adjacent shoreline habitat. The Canada-based pipeline corporation has so far spent more than $1 billion on clean-up and restoration.
In the wake of the spill, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released a damning investigation showing that Enbridge ignored warning signs for five years in its pipeline.
Given these facts, not to mention the residual oil still existing in the river, some environmentalists say the settlement is insufficient.
According to Michigan Live:
James Clift, policy director with the Michigan Environmental Council said the dollar amount was a "little low" and worries that it doesn't provide enough punishment to discourage a future spill by a corporation.
"I worry that this won't be the last time we see spills like this. We want to make sure companies are doing everything possible to protect water resources in Michigan," Clift said.
Clift said he was pleased by the money to restore the wetlands and improve hydrology but said the settlement didn't go far enough.
"They should clearly have to pay for the cleanup and reimburse all the costs the state and local officials have paid. That's a given," Clift said. "But it should have also included a larger dollar amount and a pool of money to directly address contaminants in the river that are recoverable."
And Noah Hall, an expert in environmental and water law with Wayne State University in Detroit, told Michigan Radio that the settlement "does not seem to be penalizing Enbridge."
Hall explained: "On one hand, Enbridge is being asked to pay very little in terms of additional penalties above and beyond the damage they caused. On the other hand, because Enbridge's oil spill contaminated the Kalamazoo River, they've already had to pay far more than would be typical after an oil spill to remediate the public resource."
Michigan Radio adds that Enbridge is still negotiating settlements with the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as other federal, state, and local entities for damages it caused to natural resources in the state--and that Hall expects the company will get hit with heavy payments in these upcoming settlements.
Deirdre Fulton
Deirdre Fulton is a former Common Dreams senior editor and staff writer. Previously she worked as an editor and writer for the Portland Phoenix and the Boston Phoenix, where she was honored by the New England Press Association and the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. A Boston University graduate, Deirdre is a co-founder of the Maine-based Lorem Ipsum Theater Collective and the PortFringe theater festival. She writes young adult fiction in her spare time.
The Canadian energy giant responsible for a pipeline rupture that spilled close to one million gallons of tar sands oil into the Talmadge Creek and Kalamazoo River in 2010 has reached a $75 million settlement with the state of Michigan, an amount that leaves environmentalists asking: Is it enough?
According to news reports, the settlement package between the state and Enbridge Energy--which ends any further legal action against Enbridge for the 2010 spill--includes $40 million in already-completed projects and $35 million in work yet to be done, including wetland and habitat restoration, oversight and monitoring, and improvements to water quality.
As the Associated Press notes, "wetlands are considered to be crucial in a watershed, serving as nature's filter in absorbing and releasing water and providing habitat to fish and wildlife."
The terms of the agreement stipulate that all of the money will be earmarked for restoration and improvement of the affected watershed, and that the money cannot be diverted to unrelated areas of the state budget.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality director Dan Wyant reportedly described the settlement as a "huge win for Michigan's environment" in a statement issued Wednesday morning.
The Enbridge spill, considered the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history, impacted more than 38 miles of the Kalamazoo River and 4,435 acres of adjacent shoreline habitat. The Canada-based pipeline corporation has so far spent more than $1 billion on clean-up and restoration.
In the wake of the spill, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released a damning investigation showing that Enbridge ignored warning signs for five years in its pipeline.
Given these facts, not to mention the residual oil still existing in the river, some environmentalists say the settlement is insufficient.
According to Michigan Live:
James Clift, policy director with the Michigan Environmental Council said the dollar amount was a "little low" and worries that it doesn't provide enough punishment to discourage a future spill by a corporation.
"I worry that this won't be the last time we see spills like this. We want to make sure companies are doing everything possible to protect water resources in Michigan," Clift said.
Clift said he was pleased by the money to restore the wetlands and improve hydrology but said the settlement didn't go far enough.
"They should clearly have to pay for the cleanup and reimburse all the costs the state and local officials have paid. That's a given," Clift said. "But it should have also included a larger dollar amount and a pool of money to directly address contaminants in the river that are recoverable."
And Noah Hall, an expert in environmental and water law with Wayne State University in Detroit, told Michigan Radio that the settlement "does not seem to be penalizing Enbridge."
Hall explained: "On one hand, Enbridge is being asked to pay very little in terms of additional penalties above and beyond the damage they caused. On the other hand, because Enbridge's oil spill contaminated the Kalamazoo River, they've already had to pay far more than would be typical after an oil spill to remediate the public resource."
Michigan Radio adds that Enbridge is still negotiating settlements with the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as other federal, state, and local entities for damages it caused to natural resources in the state--and that Hall expects the company will get hit with heavy payments in these upcoming settlements.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.