Line 5: A Great Lakes disaster waiting to happen

The view of Hope Bay, with Georgian Bay in the distance, from a Bruce Trail lookout.

You could have knocked me over with a feather when I heard the propane truck backing down the driveway the other day. It hadn’t been that long ago, I thought, that I had the two tanks feeding the furnace filled up.

Turned out it was March 23, a month and a half ago, so it wasn’t that outlandish. Still, I was surprised, and told the driver I wasn’t sure I needed a fill-up. I was just about to turn the heat off for the season, with spring finally arrived after an unusually cold April.

And then he surprised me, to say the least, when he said, “there might not be any propane” come next fall.

“Oh, why’s that?” I asked. He said it was about the possibility something called “line 5” might be shut down by then. He explained that’s pipeline that brings oil and natural gas liquids from Alberta to Sarnia, Ontario by way of Michigan. Propane is a by-product, and if the line is shut down Ontario and Quebec, as well as Michigan and Ohio, would be faced with a severe shortage.

Meanwhile, the price of propane has, along with other fuels, greatly inflated in price this past heating season. With no indication that’s going to turn around any time soon, I chose rather reluctantly to get the tanks filled up despite the unexpected expense just then.

Coincidentally, just the day before I had been to the local gas station to get my 20-litre container filled up with diesel fuel for my tractor. I stopped at $40, not quite full. A year ago, that would have been $20.

The attendant muttered something about “Trudeau” and “pipelines.” The current inflation problem, regarding the price of oil in particular, is not a political problem, unless consumers think government should intervene in the free market, and then be accused of being dictatorial. It’s a supply and demand problem: as the economy bounces back from the covid-pandemic, economic slowdown in the past couple of years, the demand for oil and its byproducts is increasing. But producers are not ramping up supply fast enough to meet the demand while cashing in on the higher prices. Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine has also helped drive up the speculative price of oil, as war always does.

That’s bad enough. But as a long-time resident of the Saugeen/Bruce Peninsula and the Great Lakes region I was also shocked to learn a section of the 69-year-old Line 5 pipeline goes underwater as it crosses the Straits of Mackinac where Lake Michigan and Lake Huron connect. That’s up to 87 million liters of oil and natural gas liquids daily.

I should have known that a long time ago, of course. To be honest, in recent years as the owner a a propane furnace installed five years ago, I didn’t think much about where the propane came from. But now, all I can think is how utterly foolish it is that such a thing exists, and also how lucky the Great Lakes are that a catastrophe has not already happened. The fate of Line 5 is now before state (Michigan) and federal courts in the U.S., and also being discussed as a treaty issue between Canada and the U.S.

In November, 2020, Michigan Governor Gretchen Wittmer ordered the pipeline’s Canadian owner, Calgary-based Enbridge Energy, to shut down the underwater section of the Line 5 pipeline within 180 days. That action came after a state review of the state easement Enbridge obtained in 1953 allowing the pipeline to cross the straits underwater.

“Enbridge has imposed on the people of Michigan an unacceptable risk of a catastrophic oil spill in the Great Lakes that could devastate our economy and way of life,” Whitmer said in a statement at the time, as reported in an Associated Press story. “That’s why we’re taking action now, and why I will continue to hold accountable anyone who threatens our Great Lakes and fresh water.” 

Wittmer said over the years the company had persistently neglected requirements under the easement to properly maintain the safety of the line. Parts of the underwater line are not adequately supported, the state claims.

A statement currently on Enbridge’s website says the underwater section of the line was “built in 1953 by the Bechtel Corporation to meet extraordinary design and construction standards, the Line 5 Straits of Mackinac crossing remains in excellent condition and has never experienced a leak in more than 65 years of operation.”

“We’re working hard to keep it that way,” the statement continues. “We monitor the Line 5 Straits crossing 24/7, using both specially trained staff and sophisticated computer monitoring systems. We also carry out regular inspections of the line, using inline tools, expert divers, and remote operating vehicles (ROVs), going above and beyond regulatory requirements.”

Enbridge defied Michigan’s 180-day, shutdown deadline and took the state to court. The situation became more complicated when the question of which U.S. jurisdiction, state or federal, was more appropriate to hear the case. Then the Canadian government raised a treaty issue.

Meanwhile, Enbridge has a plan to rebuild the Straits of Mackinac section of the line, through a tunnel under the Straits, instead of above ground, underwater. The company has applied for a permit, which has so far not been approved.

There has been no public indication recently that the complicated situation may soon be resolved. It could be any day, or weeks, months, or years. The continuing uncertainty is troubling.

Let’s hope the condition of underwater pipeline is being closely watched by Enbridge, government agencies, and organizations concerned about the well-being of the Great Lakes.

Every day the Great Lakes have to wait for that aging, underwater pipeline to be shutdown is an obvious and unacceptable risk to the well-being of the precious lakes and the socio-economic future of millions of people on both sides of the border.

Phone security for Canadians: taking too long

They keep coming, day after day, those calls from scammers and spoofers looking to steal our money, identity, or otherwise cause you and I and millions of other Canadians anxiety, hardship, and grief.

I’ve been increasingly bothered by scammer phone calls since I became a senior. Most days I get at least one, sometimes two or more. My caller ID display now often shows a three-digit prefix indicating a local call, making it more likely people will pick up and answer. I fell for that a few days ago: without giving myself a moment to think, I answered the call on my cell phone. Big mistake? I still don’t know for sure.

But one thing I am quite sure of, based on my own instincts, it was a scam/spoofer call of some sort, and it was trying to exploit the ongoing Covid-19 crisis.

The robocall message said, “This is a test. Stay home. Stay home and stay safe.” That was all.

I was immediately suspicious. I did not think for one moment the local public health unit or the Ontario government were calling to check if I was following Covid-19-related protective guidelines, including to stay home.

But I had no idea what harm I might have done by simply answering the call, except perhaps to confirm I was indeed at home. And then I made what may have been my biggest mistake: I tried to call the number back and got the recorded message, “the number you have dialed is not in service, please hang up and try again.”

And that just led to more anxiety. Was that what it was about? By calling back had I facilitated the takeover of my cell phone and laptop computer via a ‘spoofing’ bug implanted in the phone. I had a ‘smart phone’ briefly for a few weeks last month. But I stopped using it to access the internet via a ‘hotspot’ and went back to a simple cell phone. Still, the not-knowing fed growing anxiety.

I called Rogers, my cell-phone provider, to ask if they could block such nuisance/scamming calls. A pleasant enough chat agent told me there was nothing Rogers could do. I asked the agent to pass on my concerns to higher ups about the need for Rogers to find a way block such calls. “People are being victimized,” I said.

I visited the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC) website. I saw a prominent notice saying they were having “ongoing technical issues and you may experience difficulties reporting online or reaching the CAFC by phone. We are currently working to resolve the issue.” Good heavens, I wondered, have they been hacked. I did manage to get through by phone, but finally gave up waiting. So far, my search for reassuring information wasn’t finding any.

Therein lies a big problem: a lot of us of a certain age especially are in the proverbial dark, and nowhere near as computer-savvy as our children and grandchildren. And so, we are vulnerable, and need understandable information to help us navigate the new and fast-changing world in which we live. That perplexing fraudulent call I got has led me to the realization that, not just seniors, but the Canadian public in general are being badly let down in the regard.

I decided to take my search to Canada’s national regulatory agency, the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) to find out what they’re doing about the problem of fraudulent nuisance calls. And that’s where it really got interesting, and revealing:

Yes, the CRTC website is a treasure-trove of information if you know how to dig for it. That’s where my journalism experience came in handy as I discovered the Commission, and Canada’s telecommunication service providers (TSPs) have been spinning their wheels for more than a decade on the fraudulent call file. I was amazed at the number of times the CRTC has threatened the TSPs with “further action” as time after time the Commission extended deadlines for the providers to do something, anything. Most recently, that has included implementing a system called STIR/SHAKEN developed by experts in the U.S. and the U.K for blocking fraudulent calls.

On Sept. 15, 2020, the CRTC for the second time extended the implementation date for TSPs to begin using STIR/SHAKEN. That was after the Commission received a letter from Rogers Communications Canada Inc. on June 29, 2020, requesting a postponement of the launch date from Sept. 30, 2020, to June 30, 2021.

The CRTC had publicly announced the Sept. 30, 2020 date on Dec. 9, 2019 with a news release that had a tone of finality and accomplishment about it. “Nuisance calls are a major irritant for many Canadians. We are committed to addressing this issue and are working with the industry and our partners to better protect consumers. The new STIR/SHAKEN framework will enable Canadians to know, before they answer the phone, whether a call is legitimate or whether it should be treated with suspicion,” said Ian Scott, the Commissions chairman and CEO.

But in its June 29, 2020 letter Rogers cited several reasons, according to a CRTC documentary record (2019-402-2). They included “the re-allocation of resources during the COVID-19 crisis, the need to renegotiate contracts with vendors and contractors and to reacquire financial capital for STIR/SHAKEN implementation after the disruption caused by the COVID-19 crisis; and the fact STIR/SHAKEN implementation in the (U.S.) is June 30, 2021, the CRTC document says.

It continues, “Quebecor Media Inc., on behalf of Videotron Ltd. (Videotron), and Shaw Communications Inc. (Shaw) filed letters supporting RCCI’s request, substantially invoking the same reasons.” It adds, “Although it also supported RCCI’s request for an extension, the Independent Telecommunications Providers Association (ITPA) submitted that the Commission should consider whether nine months is sufficient for all TSPs – especially small ones, such as ITPA members – to be able to implement STIR/SHAKEN.”

The CRTC itself cites numerous ongoing technical and other issues in its lengthy ‘determination’ before deciding “In light of all the above” to approve Rogers’ request to extend the deadline for the implementation of STIR/SHAKEN to the new, “no later than,” June 30, 2021 implementation date. The commission then adds, “The extension will apply to all TSPs.”

That of course included Bell Canada. Coincidentally, on June 9, 2020 the CRTC had approved an application from Bell and its affiliates to block certain  fraudulent and scam voice calls on a 90-day trial basis. The Commission agreed with Bell to keep some aspects of details of their methodology confidential, to guard against disclosing information that could be useful to scammers and spoofers.

The results of the Bell Canada trial-run, “pilot project” were “impressive,” a CRTC spokesperson told me in an email response to a request for more information.

“In its first 61 days, the system blocked more than 200 million fraudulent calls, said Anne Brodeur. “Bell has since filed an application to make this initiative a permanent solution—and we are assessing that application. If those early returns are any indication, this type of approach, which relies on using emerging technologies, could be an impressive new tool in Canada’s arsenal.”

Brodeur also referred to STIR/SHAKEN, describing it as “a protocol designed to restore trust in caller ID. It will allow TSPs to verify that the caller ID displayed on a phone is authentic and pass that information along to the call recipient permitting them to choose to answer the call or not,” she said, noting the current June 30, 2021 implementation date.

So, it can be done, and there is hope.

Meanwhile, however, Canadians continue to be victimized. So far this year, according to the CRTC, as of Oct. 31 there have been 42,984 reports of fraud, with 19,641 victims losing $79.5 million. The number of victims in 2019 was 19,922, and their losses, $104 million. And those are the just the scams that get reported.

Brodeur said “the growing numbers of fraudulent and scam calls continues to represent a significant threat to Canadians and we can assure you this issue is something that the Commission takes very seriously and, as indicated, is actively addressing using several different approaches.”

Yes, the shear volume of the CRTC documentary record shows a lot of time, energy and discussion has happened over the years. But more than a decade, and still counting, is far too long for Canadian agencies and telecommunication providers to come up with solutions that protect Canadians from high-tech telecommunication predators.

The old telephone system, and its first line of phone security.