Trump to approve Dakota Access Pipeline next week

a reply to: Nyiah

and if it was feasible for them to do so you dont think they would have? what you think they wanna build in water because it'll be fun?

a reply to: neo96

Holy crap Neo. I keep starring all your posts!!

I think this is a first.

a reply to: Nyiah

It appears the lake is actually a wide spot in the river, which has to be crossed.. again. It's not so scary though. Any 18 wheeler hauling gas or chemicals over a bridge poses a much greater risk.

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
a reply to: Nyiah

what people is it impacting?

The people who's water source this is. It's not a couple of far-flung farms, there are a lot of people that depend on that lake for their water.

If people really think it's no big deal, nature will take care of it, blah blah, just remember the havoc BP & Exxon wreaked on those spots. Can't drink sea water without serious help, but the point remains -- there's no need to risk FRESH water supplies for oil.

Move the lake.

Or use oil filters.

Who exactly is protesting the pipe?

originally posted by: Nyiah
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason

a reply to: MALBOSIA

You both have such a hard-on to plead your case that you failed to noticed I did not say drop the transportation method entirely. I said reroute them AWAY from fresh water sources. Is more distance between them really that much of an inconvenience? No really, is it? Some extra buffer zone space is just too much to ask?

How far is away?

a reply to: burgerbuddy

Who exactly is protesting the pipe?

The Standing Rock reservation employed EarthJustice to run the campaign against the DAPL.

Trump supporter but I really don't like this, just like I don't like the US embassy being in Jerusalem. I hate disenfranchising a people for profit.

But there was no candidate that was going to do everything I wanted. It should never be a one issue election...at least in my opinion.

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Who exactly is protesting the pipe?

The Standing Rock reservation employed EarthJustice to run the campaign against the DAPL.

Oh, lot's of them white people protesting?

originally posted by: liveandlearn
Trump supporter but I really don't like this, just like I don't like the US embassy being in Jerusalem. I hate disenfranchising a people for profit.

But there was no candidate that was going to do everything I wanted. It should never be a one issue election...at least in my opinion.

Embassy will be a whole nother head exploding thread. Cool.

The pipe is as safe as we can make it with the tech we have now, right?

Personally, I'd rather tap into the sun directly for energy but I've been lazy lately. (not solar)

a reply to: burgerbuddy

Oh, lot's of them white people protesting?

Yes, the natives have on several occasions asked them to leave, but they refuse.

A Sioux tribal council on Saturday formally asked hundreds of protesters to clear out of three camps near its North Dakota reservation used to stage months of sometimes violent protests against the proposed Dakota Access Pipeline.

www.cnn.com...

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Oh, lot's of them white people protesting?

Yes, the natives have on several occasions asked them to leave, but they refuse.

A Sioux tribal council on Saturday formally asked hundreds of protesters to clear out of three camps near its North Dakota reservation used to stage months of sometimes violent protests against the proposed Dakota Access Pipeline.

www.cnn.com...

Stupid white people.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

Yes, the pipeline is as safe as it can be made. Here's an explanation of how it will make the water crossing.

Lake Oahe crossing

a reply to: windword

His stake was sold off. www.cnbc.com...

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
This is great news, the more energy the better. Jobs, costs, energy independence, it's all positive. Ok so some wacky environmentalists hate it, who cares?

Yeah lol @ those wacky environmentalist who want to protect the water supply for millions down river, and that oil ain't going to feed America's energy needs, it's for foreigners and will create 8,200-12,000 temporary jobs, and get this "40" permanent jobs, you know at one point I employed 15 ppl, and 50 when I throw events, and I am a no body who ain't oil.

a reply to: AutonomousMeatPuppet

You are exactly making my point!

The water needs to crossed. You can go over or you can go under. Trucks and trains have had their fair share of oils spills and there is definately increased risk there.

Putting the pipe over the water - well anyone can come along and shoot a hole in it. Gee, do you think trouble makers wouldn't think of it.

Under the water is safest. You put valves on either end so that if the pipe starts to leak, you can limit the amount of oil spilled. Oil is an organic substance which can be cleaned because it floats on top of the water. There is tons of equipment out there to capture such leaks. Natural bacteria will eat anything left.

Oil floats on water. Drinking water intakes are located at the bottom of the river. If necessary, the intake can be blocked with valves and alternative water supplied to the natives. Drinking water can be tested both at the intake and at the output to ensure its quality.

The new water intake will be located 70 miles downstream of the pipeline. Do you not think that is sufficient room that any spills may be captured BEFORE it reaches the intake. If not, please tell me why and how much buffer room you think if sufficient.

If there is one water intake at the bottom of the Mississippi River, are you suggesting that no pipeline may cross the river at any point above the intake.

Water treatment process includes clarification. This is a giant tank with arms that sweep the surface of the tank to remove any oils or scum. Alum is added to increase sedimentation and particales/solids are collected at the bottom of the tank.

It would be difficult for oil to make it through the treatment process to the water users.

Lets stop being stupid. Pipelines cross water all the time! Billions of gallons. Yes, there is the occasional spill but oil also seeps naturally into the environment all by itself without man having anything to do with it.

a reply to: Spider879

and that oil ain't going to feed America's energy needs, it's for foreigners and will create 8,200-12,000 temporary jobs, and get this "40" permanent jobs

Source?

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: starwarsisreal

The pipeline isn`t going on their land so what are they protesting about?

surely they don`t think that they have the right to dictate to other people what they can do with their land? because that wouldn`t be very tolerant.

Its because it goes right next to their land over the river just barely upstream from where they depend on the river for survival, and also because it was going to be put in further upstream but they moved it because a city asked them to. They got put at the bottom of the food chain in an obvious manner. You gotta be more sensitive to such powerful cultural issues and work with native americans from the start if you want do something like this.

Im far from a pc anything. Its a straight forward scenario about respecting people. Instead they did it in a confrontational way.

Makes sense to me that they would be irked. I would be if I was them.

a reply to: Nyiah

What's a;ready installed is already installed. Those can eventually be replaced with lines routed away from water sources. I will concede there are likely a few "rock and a hard place" spots where it's an under/over water route or no movement at all. But come the hell on, we could have planned for a route well away from the lake a long time ago out of principle to begin with.

Come the hell on?? Have a look at a map. Think about it, if a river runs east west, and your pipeline needs to go north south, you're going to have to cross the river. Try driving 1100 miles without going over a bridge. It's irrational to think that you can get around all the waterbodies. I've previously posted a link as to how the pipeline goes under the waterbody, click the link.
clev.tk...

a reply to: pirhanna

because it was going to be put in further upstream but they moved it because a city asked them to.

No, it follows an existing pipeline corridor, it is the best route.

Educate yourself, there is a lot of information in the court proceedings.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe vs US Army Corps of Engineers

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Spider879

and that oil ain't going to feed America's energy needs, it's for foreigners and will create 8,200-12,000 temporary jobs, and get this "40" permanent jobs

Source?

What’s to Gain From Building the Dakota Access Pipeline? Profit

www.slate.com... nce.html