Michigan’s Oil Disaster: Another symptom of Capitalism

It has been several days now since the Enbridge owned & operated pipeline began spewing oil into the Kalamazoo River in southwest Michigan. The EPA now estimates that nearly 1 million gallons of oil have already contaminated the river and ecosystems that the river runs through.

As to be expected there is a tremendous amount of local news coverage, due in part to the onslaught of coverage of the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. MLive has 32 stories posted since the oil disaster began just days ago and features a link to the archived stories on the main page for MLive/Grand Rapids.

After wading through the 32 stories it was clear that the bulk of the coverage on MLive was about the “leak,” political responses from Michigan, the “clean up,” and reactions from those who live on or near the river where the oil has been detected. There was one story from the Detroit Free Press with a promising headline that read, “Michigan oil spill, could this have been prevented?”

The article began by stating that the company that owns and operates the pipeline had received several notices about potential problems. “In one report, the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration raised concerns in January about Enbridge discontinuing the use of monitoring systems for corrosion inside Line 6B, saying its plans for ensuring pipe safety while a new monitoring system was brought on line didn’t meet standards.” However, the reporter did not continue any further investigation into the company’s history and whether or not they have failed to comply with regulations at other locations in North America.

An Associated Press story does provide some of this information in a story that was published on July 29, which clearly shows that Enbridge has a history of regulatory violations.

“Houston-based Enbridge Energy Co. spilled almost 19,000 gallons of crude oil onto Wisconsin’s Nemadji River in 2003. Another 189,000 gallons of oil spilled at the company’s terminal two miles from Lake Superior, though most was contained.

In 2007, two spills released about 200,000 gallons of crude in northern Wisconsin as Enbridge was expanding a 320-mile pipeline. The company also was accused of violating Wisconsin permits designed to protect water quality during work in and around wetlands, rivers and streams, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources said. The violations came during construction of a 321-mile, $2 billion oil pipeline across that state. Enbridge agreed to pay $1.1 million in 2009.”

Unfortunately, this kind of information has not appeared in the Grand Rapids Press or the numerous articles sourced on MLive specific to the recent oil spill into the Kalamazoo River. What one would have seen in the Grand Rapids Press on Thursday, July 29 was a full-page ad by Enbridge, with a statement from their CEO Pat Daniel. The thousand dollar (estimated cost for the ad) statement was similar to what the BP CEO said, which amounted to nothing more than a weak apology and assurances that the company has the well being of the people who live near the oil spill as their “top priority.”

Lets be clear at this point, Enbridge Energy Partners is a company that owns and operates oil and natural gas pipelines in the US and Canada. Their “top priority” is to make as much money as possible. Enbridge does not make the public or the environment, but their shareholders the “top priority” and this means to increase their market shares no matter what.

It is important for us to see companies like Enbridge and BP as nothing more than particular corporations that operate within a capitalist model, which is based upon growth. If growth drives the economic system then oil spills, environmental degradation and global warming should be seen for what they are – symptoms of a destructive system. For example, Enbridge is one of the partner companies in a $778 million “carbon capturing” project in Canada known as Project Pioneer. This project will include injecting carbon underground, despite widespread belief that carbon sequestration is highly problematic.

Sure, one can argue that if there was better regulation it might have prevented this particular oil spill into the Kalamazoo River, but since the system demands growth there will always be environmental disaster. You cannot sustain healthy eco-systems when oil, gas, coal and other polluting energy sources are extracted from the land.

Besides the lack of investigative journalism on the Enbridge oil disaster there is also no real discussion about the need to reduce our collective levels of energy consumption. Several environmental organizations such as Clean Water Action and the Michigan Environmental Council have responded to this disaster with calls for a shift to renewable energy. While a shift to renewable energy sources is critical, none of these environmental groups are calling for a reduction in energy consumption (individual consumption not included).

The problem with looking at a reduction in energy consumption means that society would have to make serious changes, since the economy is built around growth. However, if we are serious about wanting to prevent more oil spilling into the Gulf of Mexico or the Kalamazoo River then we need to question an economic system that is based on exponential growth.