Skip to main content
You have permission to edit this article.
Emily Park: Enbridge should be required to carry extra liability insurance

Emily Park: Enbridge should be required to carry extra liability insurance

Dear Editor: As a resident of Dane County, I read Matt Rothschild’s article about the upcoming Enbridge v. Dane County case in the Wisconsin Supreme Court with great concern.

I’ve lived in numerous states throughout the Midwest, and I can say that Wisconsin is special in its beautiful rivers, ecosystems, and its appreciation for its natural wonders. The thought of a major oil spill happening in this beautiful state is heartbreaking; it’s even worse to think that Enbridge wouldn’t have the money to cover remediation efforts if the unthinkable were to happen.

One only has to look at the destruction caused by Enbridge’s spills in Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, North Dakota, Manitoba, and Alberta, not to mention here in Wisconsin in Grand Marsh (2012), Superior (2009 and 2007), and Rusk County (2007) to see that Enbridge’s pipeline poses significant risk for Dane County. Enbridge should absolutely be required to carry the “sudden and accidental” pollution liability insurance, as Enbridge has proven that “sudden and accidental” may be their modus operandi.

I stand with Rothschild in urging Chief Justice Roggensack and Justice Ziegler to recuse themselves from this case. The new state attorney general’s actions in withdrawing the brief in favor of Enbridge prove that the new government — elected by the people of Wisconsin — care about the water quality and environmental health of our beautiful state.

Give Dane County — and the rest of Wisconsin — its best possible chance at clean water and a healthy ecosystem!

Emily Park


Send your letter to the editor to Include your full name, hometown and phone number. Your name and town will be published. The phone number is for verification purposes only. Please keep your letter to 250 words or less.

Related to this story

Most Popular