Kill Energy Independence and Fossil fuels. Kill a pipeline.

[Dugout DickStone]

Two major pipelines, massive power long lines, a nuclear power plant and a major military weapons depot, a chlorine production facility within a few miles of my house.

Who do I sue first?

Your realtor

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Some facts debunking the "out to get the indians" and "protect our water" sham arguments. Oh and a bomb!

What the Dakota Access Pipeline Is Really About
The standoff isn’t about tribal rights or water, but a White House that ignores the rule of law.

A little more than two weeks ago, during a confrontation between protesters and law enforcement, an improvised explosive device was detonated on a public bridge in southern North Dakota. That was simply the latest manifestation of the “prayerful” and “peaceful” protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline.

Escalating tensions were temporarily defused Sunday when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, at the direction of the Obama administration, announced it would refuse to grant the final permit needed to complete the $3.8 billion project. The pipeline, which runs nearly 1,200 miles from the Bakken Shale in North Dakota to Illinois, is nearly complete except for a small section where it needs to pass under the Missouri River. Denying the permit for that construction only punts the issue to next month—to a new president who won’t thumb his nose at the rule of law.

Like many North Dakotans, I’ve had to endure preaching about the pipeline from the press, environmental activists, musicians and politicians in other states. More often than not, these sermons are informed by little more than a Facebook post. At the risk of spoiling the protesters’ narrative, I’d like to bring us back to ground truth.

• This isn’t about tribal rights or protecting cultural resources. The pipeline does not cross any land owned by the Standing Rock Sioux. The land under discussion belongs to private owners and the federal government. To suggest that the Standing Rock tribe has the legal ability to block the pipeline is to turn America’s property rights upside down.

• Two federal courts have rejected claims that the tribe wasn’t consulted. The project’s developer and the Army Corps made dozens of overtures to the Standing Rock Sioux over more than two years. Often these attempts were ignored or rejected, with the message that the tribe would only accept termination of the project.

• Other tribes and parties did participate in the process. More than 50 tribes were consulted, and their concerns resulted in 140 adjustments to the pipeline’s route. The project’s developer and the Army Corps were clearly concerned about protecting tribal artifacts and cultural sites. Any claim otherwise is unsupported by the record. The pipeline’s route was also studied—and ultimately supported—by the North Dakota Public Service Commission (on which I formerly served), the State Historic Preservation Office, and multiple independent archaeologists.

• This isn’t about water protection. Years before the pipeline was announced, the tribe was working with the Bureau of Reclamation and the Army Corps to relocate its drinking-water intake. The new site sits roughly 70 miles downstream of where the pipeline is slated to cross the Missouri River. Notably, the new intake, according to the Bureau of Reclamation, will be 1.6 miles downstream of an elevated railroad bridge that carries tanker cars carrying crude oil.

Further, the pipeline will be installed about 100 feet below the riverbed. Automatic shut-off valves will be employed on either side of the river, and the pipeline will be constructed to exceed many federal safety requirements.

Other pipelines carrying oil, gas and refined products already cross the Missouri River at least a dozen times upstream of the tribe’s intake. The corridor where the Dakota Access Pipeline will run is directly adjacent to another pipeline, which carries natural gas under the riverbed, as well as an overhead electric transmission line. This site was chosen because it is largely a brownfield area that was disturbed long ago by previous infrastructure.

• This isn’t about the climate. The oil that will be shipped through the pipeline is already being produced. But right now it is transported in more carbon-intensive ways, such as by railroad or long-haul tanker truck. So trying to thwart the pipeline to reduce greenhouse gas could have the opposite effect.

So what is the pipeline dispute really about? Political expediency in a White House that does not see itself as being bound by the rule of law. The Obama administration has decided to build a political legacy rather than lead the country. It is facilitating an illegal occupation that has grown wildly out of control. That the economy depends on a consistent and predictable permitting regime seems never to have crossed the president’s mind.

There is no doubt that Native American communities have historically suffered at the hands of the federal government. But to litigate that history on the back of a legally permitted river crossing is absurd. The Obama administration should enforce the law, release the easement and conclude this dangerous standoff.

Mr. Cramer, a Republican, represents North Dakota in the U.S. House. As a member of the North Dakota Public Service Commission (2003-12) he helped site the original Keystone Pipeline completed in 2010.

[ChiComCat]

Truth Bomb: a Republican is blaming this on Obama

[MakeItRain]

Environmental racism? lol  It's called risk assessment and environmental assessment as part of the permitting process under NEPA review. Just Bismarck has 70,000 residents, Sioux County has like 4,000.  As part of the process the permittee is required to identify less-risky solutions associated with known problems, aka a release to water supplies, and take steps to minimize or eliminate impact. Moving the pipeline downstream of public water supply intakes for 70k+ people versus upstream of 4k+ people is a no brainer and happens all of the time.

You seem to be missing the "only water source" component of this equation. This same pipeline runs three miles from my house, I'm not freaking out about it because it does not threaten my sole manner of getting water. You don't understand the differences in water acquisition between a city and the standing rock reservation?

There are also the questions about the pre-existing land dispute and whether or not the state properly gave Standing Rock proper notification. There are so many questions about this, honestly I don't know why Dakota Access chose to fight this battle. The amount of money to reroute this pipeline away from Lake Oahe amounts to a rounding error. I guess they thought that the public was callous enough to back big oil instead of native americans who have been disenfranchised for 400 years.

You seem to not understand that the Missouri River is the sole source of water for Bismarck. Bismarck uses 34 MGPD. The entire Sioux County uses 0.83 MGPD. The Missouri River is only a PORTION of their water usage. Bismarck is 100% water from the Missouri. That's a huge planning issue from a drinking water standpoint during NEPA review and would be the only reason needed to relocate downstream of Bismarck.

Also, the State doesn't have authority over any Federal land. It's 100% a Federal notification issue. So being pissed off at the State for notification doesn't make sense when it was likely the Fed that dropped the ball. Without knowing any particulars in the pipeline's permit, these permits can't be issued without public notice so people knew about it, they're just nit-picking a side issue to advance their agenda of getting the pipeline delayed/moved.

This is probably the only local hotbed issue that has arisen in recent times so the Standing Rock people have been able to funnel and vent their 400 years of disenfranchisement. This is a non-issue 99.9% other places.   

Thanks EMAWican, I did not know that the Missouri was the only source of water for Bismarck. There is an area south of Bismarck but north of Lake Oahe, why not cross there? I'm asking because you seen to have a bit more intimate knowledge of the issue.

As far as the notification issue, you are correct, it was federal land do they would appear to bear that burden but Julie Fedorchak and the ND Public Service Commission has seemed to take the lead on this so the waters have been muddied so to speak.

[MakeItRain]

His argument is completely irrational. On one hand, he's sticking to the "threatens to their sole source of water" frivolous concern, notwithstanding:

1) that this lake is really just a wide spot in the missouri river, and anywhere upstream the pipeline may cross (any many already do) presents a nearly identical risk (he may not know how rivers work), and
2) the absurdity that is the notion that a pipeline presents abnormal and unseasonable risk of spill, which is patently innacurate.

Because these arguments are so demonstrably weak and incoherent he's resorted to the rather insane position that Dakota wants to build the pipeline here to "get" the indians. As if Dakota desires to waste its resources so it can to stick it to the indians. It's rough ridin' crazy.

The agenda needs no subterfuge, just say you hate oil and gas development and be done with it. Just more illogical partisan bullshit from mir

Hey dipshit, I have already said that I have no issue with the pipeline and this isn't a partisan issue, you are the only person using partisan language. If you can't read sit this out, let EMAWican have this one, he's much smarter than you.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

 

He really hates it when he gets pwn3d. Such rage

[sonofdaxjones]

Two major pipelines, massive power long lines, a nuclear power plant and a major military weapons depot, a chlorine production facility within a few miles of my house.

Who do I sue first?

Your realtor

Port city, man.

[EMAWican]

Environmental racism? lol  It's called risk assessment and environmental assessment as part of the permitting process under NEPA review. Just Bismarck has 70,000 residents, Sioux County has like 4,000.  As part of the process the permittee is required to identify less-risky solutions associated with known problems, aka a release to water supplies, and take steps to minimize or eliminate impact. Moving the pipeline downstream of public water supply intakes for 70k+ people versus upstream of 4k+ people is a no brainer and happens all of the time.

You seem to be missing the "only water source" component of this equation. This same pipeline runs three miles from my house, I'm not freaking out about it because it does not threaten my sole manner of getting water. You don't understand the differences in water acquisition between a city and the standing rock reservation?

There are also the questions about the pre-existing land dispute and whether or not the state properly gave Standing Rock proper notification. There are so many questions about this, honestly I don't know why Dakota Access chose to fight this battle. The amount of money to reroute this pipeline away from Lake Oahe amounts to a rounding error. I guess they thought that the public was callous enough to back big oil instead of native americans who have been disenfranchised for 400 years.

You seem to not understand that the Missouri River is the sole source of water for Bismarck. Bismarck uses 34 MGPD. The entire Sioux County uses 0.83 MGPD. The Missouri River is only a PORTION of their water usage. Bismarck is 100% water from the Missouri. That's a huge planning issue from a drinking water standpoint during NEPA review and would be the only reason needed to relocate downstream of Bismarck.

Also, the State doesn't have authority over any Federal land. It's 100% a Federal notification issue. So being pissed off at the State for notification doesn't make sense when it was likely the Fed that dropped the ball. Without knowing any particulars in the pipeline's permit, these permits can't be issued without public notice so people knew about it, they're just nit-picking a side issue to advance their agenda of getting the pipeline delayed/moved.

This is probably the only local hotbed issue that has arisen in recent times so the Standing Rock people have been able to funnel and vent their 400 years of disenfranchisement. This is a non-issue 99.9% other places.   

Thanks EMAWican, I did not know that the Missouri was the only source of water for Bismarck. There is an area south of Bismarck but north of Lake Oahe, why not cross there? I'm asking because you seen to have a bit more intimate knowledge of the issue.

As far as the notification issue, you are correct, it was federal land do they would appear to bear that burden but Julie Fedorchak and the ND Public Service Commission has seemed to take the lead on this so the waters have been muddied so to speak.

I have no idea why. I will say this, the amount of input and discussion that is generated during the permitting process that includes Federal land criteria, Section 106 outreach, NEPA review, etc. literally identifies the best location for a pipeline. I'm serious, the entire process for this pipeline is so involved and complex to the nth degree that before it was finalized, it was the best option.

I would bet that the State and local people are so involved because they are the ones who are getting the most grief, they have to answer to people/bosses, and are more readily accessible than rando departments at the Fed.

[MakeItRain]

i don't want to get too deep in this discussion because i don't want to research it, but i'm pretty sure the proposed pipeline route was placed as is because it follows an existing pipeline - which makes the permitting process about 90 billion times cheaper and easier.

Yes, it follows a gas pipeline corridor called the North Border or something. Perceived water problems are based on the fact that the Dakota Access pipeline will carry crude.

Yes this is accurate, there are no crude lines on this route but there is a natural gas pipeline following a similar route.

EMAW, there was one more point in your last post that I didn't address and it was that this pipeline is essentially being used as a symbol of 400 years of frustrating being vented. I agree with your observation and I completely agree with the sentiment. First of all, as I have pointed out more than once, this land is actively under dispute. Secondly, after all that has happened with these people what you essentially have is the state and Dakota Access saying let's put this here because it puts these people in harm's way instead of the good people of Bismarck. It's just another case of second citizenry that needs to stop.

[MakeItRain]

Environmental racism? lol  It's called risk assessment and environmental assessment as part of the permitting process under NEPA review. Just Bismarck has 70,000 residents, Sioux County has like 4,000.  As part of the process the permittee is required to identify less-risky solutions associated with known problems, aka a release to water supplies, and take steps to minimize or eliminate impact. Moving the pipeline downstream of public water supply intakes for 70k+ people versus upstream of 4k+ people is a no brainer and happens all of the time.

You seem to be missing the "only water source" component of this equation. This same pipeline runs three miles from my house, I'm not freaking out about it because it does not threaten my sole manner of getting water. You don't understand the differences in water acquisition between a city and the standing rock reservation?

There are also the questions about the pre-existing land dispute and whether or not the state properly gave Standing Rock proper notification. There are so many questions about this, honestly I don't know why Dakota Access chose to fight this battle. The amount of money to reroute this pipeline away from Lake Oahe amounts to a rounding error. I guess they thought that the public was callous enough to back big oil instead of native americans who have been disenfranchised for 400 years.

You seem to not understand that the Missouri River is the sole source of water for Bismarck. Bismarck uses 34 MGPD. The entire Sioux County uses 0.83 MGPD. The Missouri River is only a PORTION of their water usage. Bismarck is 100% water from the Missouri. That's a huge planning issue from a drinking water standpoint during NEPA review and would be the only reason needed to relocate downstream of Bismarck.

Also, the State doesn't have authority over any Federal land. It's 100% a Federal notification issue. So being pissed off at the State for notification doesn't make sense when it was likely the Fed that dropped the ball. Without knowing any particulars in the pipeline's permit, these permits can't be issued without public notice so people knew about it, they're just nit-picking a side issue to advance their agenda of getting the pipeline delayed/moved.

This is probably the only local hotbed issue that has arisen in recent times so the Standing Rock people have been able to funnel and vent their 400 years of disenfranchisement. This is a non-issue 99.9% other places.   

Thanks EMAWican, I did not know that the Missouri was the only source of water for Bismarck. There is an area south of Bismarck but north of Lake Oahe, why not cross there? I'm asking because you seen to have a bit more intimate knowledge of the issue.

As far as the notification issue, you are correct, it was federal land do they would appear to bear that burden but Julie Fedorchak and the ND Public Service Commission has seemed to take the lead on this so the waters have been muddied so to speak.

I have no idea why. I will say this, the amount of input and discussion that is generated during the permitting process that includes Federal land criteria, Section 106 outreach, NEPA review, etc. literally identifies the best location for a pipeline. I'm serious, the entire process for this pipeline is so involved and complex to the nth degree that before it was finalized, it was the best option.

I would bet that the State and local people are so involved because they are the ones who are getting the most grief, they have to answer to people/bosses, and are more readily accessible than rando departments at the Fed.

Fedorchak said that Dakota Access had archaeologists that identified 500 cultural resources that needed to be protected and they moved the route over 100 times. Now to me and others that says if you feel this pipeline is so harmful to the resources locally that this much diligence is necessary then why even do it, there inevitable result will be someone feeling aggrieved.

[EMAWican]

i don't want to get too deep in this discussion because i don't want to research it, but i'm pretty sure the proposed pipeline route was placed as is because it follows an existing pipeline - which makes the permitting process about 90 billion times cheaper and easier.

Yes, it follows a gas pipeline corridor called the North Border or something. Perceived water problems are based on the fact that the Dakota Access pipeline will carry crude.

Yes this is accurate, there are no crude lines on this route but there is a natural gas pipeline following a similar route.

EMAW, there was one more point in your last post that I didn't address and it was that this pipeline is essentially being used as a symbol of 400 years of frustrating being vented. I agree with your observation and I completely agree with the sentiment. First of all, as I have pointed out more than once, this land is actively under dispute. Secondly, after all that has happened with these people what you essentially have is the state and Dakota Access saying let's put this here because it puts these people in harm's way instead of the good people of Bismarck. It's just another case of second citizenry that needs to stop.

Yeah, people should be pissed when it's worded that way or even worse if it is the actual reason for the relocation. In reality, maybe it was a twist or misstatement from that it was moved because the overall risk to 4k+ people is less than 70k+ people. Kind of inhumane, but that's how all these Federal projects are assessed. 

[EMAWican]

Environmental racism? lol  It's called risk assessment and environmental assessment as part of the permitting process under NEPA review. Just Bismarck has 70,000 residents, Sioux County has like 4,000.  As part of the process the permittee is required to identify less-risky solutions associated with known problems, aka a release to water supplies, and take steps to minimize or eliminate impact. Moving the pipeline downstream of public water supply intakes for 70k+ people versus upstream of 4k+ people is a no brainer and happens all of the time.

You seem to be missing the "only water source" component of this equation. This same pipeline runs three miles from my house, I'm not freaking out about it because it does not threaten my sole manner of getting water. You don't understand the differences in water acquisition between a city and the standing rock reservation?

There are also the questions about the pre-existing land dispute and whether or not the state properly gave Standing Rock proper notification. There are so many questions about this, honestly I don't know why Dakota Access chose to fight this battle. The amount of money to reroute this pipeline away from Lake Oahe amounts to a rounding error. I guess they thought that the public was callous enough to back big oil instead of native americans who have been disenfranchised for 400 years.

You seem to not understand that the Missouri River is the sole source of water for Bismarck. Bismarck uses 34 MGPD. The entire Sioux County uses 0.83 MGPD. The Missouri River is only a PORTION of their water usage. Bismarck is 100% water from the Missouri. That's a huge planning issue from a drinking water standpoint during NEPA review and would be the only reason needed to relocate downstream of Bismarck.

Also, the State doesn't have authority over any Federal land. It's 100% a Federal notification issue. So being pissed off at the State for notification doesn't make sense when it was likely the Fed that dropped the ball. Without knowing any particulars in the pipeline's permit, these permits can't be issued without public notice so people knew about it, they're just nit-picking a side issue to advance their agenda of getting the pipeline delayed/moved.

This is probably the only local hotbed issue that has arisen in recent times so the Standing Rock people have been able to funnel and vent their 400 years of disenfranchisement. This is a non-issue 99.9% other places.   

Thanks EMAWican, I did not know that the Missouri was the only source of water for Bismarck. There is an area south of Bismarck but north of Lake Oahe, why not cross there? I'm asking because you seen to have a bit more intimate knowledge of the issue.

As far as the notification issue, you are correct, it was federal land do they would appear to bear that burden but Julie Fedorchak and the ND Public Service Commission has seemed to take the lead on this so the waters have been muddied so to speak.

I have no idea why. I will say this, the amount of input and discussion that is generated during the permitting process that includes Federal land criteria, Section 106 outreach, NEPA review, etc. literally identifies the best location for a pipeline. I'm serious, the entire process for this pipeline is so involved and complex to the nth degree that before it was finalized, it was the best option.

I would bet that the State and local people are so involved because they are the ones who are getting the most grief, they have to answer to people/bosses, and are more readily accessible than rando departments at the Fed.

Fedorchak said that Dakota Access had archaeologists that identified 500 cultural resources that needed to be protected and they moved the route over 100 times. Now to me and others that says if you feel this pipeline is so harmful to the resources locally that this much diligence is necessary then why even do it, there inevitable result will be someone feeling aggrieved.

That really isn't that many times for this long of a project (don't just think burial grounds or super duper sacred artifacts). As part of the permitting process that approved this location, the SHPO, the THPO and third-party people review documents and identify known cultural areas and the pipeline is adjusted accordingly. This includes manually reviewing a lot of info that isn't digitized or even readily accessible. That's normal and part of the process. Uncovering artifacts happens all of the time with projects this big that go through undeveloped areas. Sadly, the perception is that Dakota Access did it wrong and didn't follow the Unanticipated Discoveries Plan. Did they? It doesn't look like to me, other than maybe missing a bullshit timeline from discovery. I guess they should be penalized for that. Once the artifacts were found, they avoided the area and followed the buffer restrictions. But like you said, the majority of why people are upset is because the land has been under dispute and is claimed to be a burial/sacred ground.

[MakeItRain]

Thanks EMAWican

[MakeItRain]

Sup FSD
https://grist.org/briefly/pipeline-spills-176000-gallons-150-miles-from-standing-rock/

A pipeline operated by Belle Fourche Pipeline Company in western North Dakota was shut down following the discovery of a leak on Dec. 5. Cleanup is ongoing, and 37,000 gallons of crude oil have been recovered as of Monday, reports the Associated Press.

Standing Rock demonstrators have been protesting for months that one spill from the Dakota Access Pipeline could contaminate the reservation’s water supply as well as disturb sacred tribal lands.

The day before this spill, the Army Corps of Engineers denied Energy Transfer Partners a permit required to finish the pipeline, though the issue is farfrom settled.

Companies always contend their pipelines are perfectly safe and monitored, but in Belle Fourche’s case, its equipment failed to detect the leak.

Belle Fourche has a history of accidents, including 21 incidents leaking a total of 272,832 gallons between 2006 and 2014. And Belle Fourche is hardly alone — while proponents of pipelines claim they are safer than transporting fossil fuels via roads or rail, an investigation by EcoWatch found that in 2016 alone, there have been 220 significant pipeline leaks. They also found that pipeline leaks in the past decade have cost $4.7 billion — and that’s not including this one.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

No drinking water contaminated. The oil is cleaned up. Anecdotes don't change the analysis.

Nobody is claimimg there wont ever be a spill. Nobody is skirting responsibility. The option is transportation by pipe, train or truck. It's not pipe or not at all.

A black guy was elected president, so i guess that means black guys have it best of everyone.

[renocat]

The new target is the PennEast pipeline from PA to the northeast.  This is a natural gas pipeline.  Environmental groups are using every trick to stop it.  Sometimes I wonder if.there is a secret conspiracy to gut attempts to be energy independent so we can keep foreign countries afloat especially Saudi Arabia.

[renocat]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/01/24/trump-gives-green-light-to-dakota-access-keystone-xl-oil-pipelines/?client=ms-android-verizon
Well mother earthers and proponents of squirrel powered cars, in your shorts with fire ants.  Oil, hot dang.  Gravy eaters arise.

[Gooch]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/01/24/trump-gives-green-light-to-dakota-access-keystone-xl-oil-pipelines/?client=ms-android-verizon
Well mother earthers and proponents of squirrel powered cars, in your shorts with fire ants.  Oil, hot dang.  Gravy eaters arise.

Please stop

[passranch]

Ever think that we're just delaying pipeline construction and remaining dependent on foreign energy so that we can save our country's own precious resources and use up everybody else's first?

Then when the ME is pumped dry and we've ravaged every possible resource from there FIRST and those f@ckers are back to walking everywhere in the dark, we'll just sit back, build a few pipelines and bask in all that sweet, sweet crude we've been saving up for so long...

...playing the long con.

[sonofdaxjones]

Great point, BUT isn't G7 nation oil consumption on the decline?  U.S. daily oil consumption is down about 1.5 million barrels a day give or take off the 2004-2007 highs.

European daily oil consumption is down even more on a relative scale.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

Ever think that we're just delaying pipeline construction and remaining dependent on foreign energy so that we can save our country's own precious resources and use up everybody else's first?

Then when the ME is pumped dry and we've ravaged every possible resource from there FIRST and those f@ckers are back to walking everywhere in the dark, we'll just sit back, build a few pipelines and bask in all that sweet, sweet crude we've been saving up for so long...

...playing the long con.

When we are through using fossil fuels, we can use the pipelines to distribute Soylent Green.