Keystone Pipeline leaks 210,000 gallons of oil in South Dakota

Officials don't believe the leak affected any surface water bodies or threatened any drinking water systems from the spill onto agricultural land, said Brian Walsh, an environmental scientist manager at the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, which has dispatched a staff member to the site.

Keystone Pipeline leaks 210,000 gallons of oil in South Dakota

Three things: 1) Wasn't there a discussion on whether this pipeline would pose a risk to the environment?
2) Officials can be paid off and LIE to protect the best interest of a company.
3) Losing 210,000 gallons is one HUGE leak!

Any mention of possible Sabotage ?

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Image in the link...

Newsy

originally posted by: xuenchen
Any mention of possible Sabotage ?

From you.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Trump is a real POS for moving this forward.

Native land needs to be respected now more than ever and this BS is directly from his executive orders.

It is criminal for more reasons than one.

originally posted by: elementalgrove
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Trump is a real POS for moving this forward.

Native land needs to be respected now more than ever and this BS is directly from his executive orders.

It is criminal for more reasons than one.

Its oil, not hair spray. Blame Big Oil, not Trump.

Tar sand oil too. Particularly nasty stuff.

As the report explains, tar sands oil is thicker and more acidic than lighter conventional crude, and this ups the likelihood that a pipeline carrying it will leak. Complicating matters, leaks can be difficult to detect. And when the oil does spill, it is far more detrimental to sensitive water resources. Evidence of the latter was the billion-dollar-plus Kalamazoo, Michigan, disaster of 2010, which energy company Enbridge admitted was a tar sands spill only after NRDC questioning.

nrdc.org

a reply to: shawmanfromny

That is not a "huge" leak. Less than the 660,000 gallons in an Olympic swimming pool.

Losing 210,000 gallons is one HUGE leak!

Not large at all. They will clean it up, pay the fines and improve the operations.

The first two phases have the capacity to deliver up to 590,000 barrels per day (94,000 m3/d) of oil into the Mid-West refineries.[4] Phase III has capacity to deliver up to 700,000 barrels per day (110,000 m3/d) to the Texas refineries.[12] By comparison, U.S. oil production averaged 9,400,000 barrels per day (1,490,000 m3/d) in first-half 2015, with gross exports of 500,000 barrels per day (79,000 m3/d) through July 2015.[13]

en.wikipedia.org...


.

a reply to: xuenchen

That was my first thought as well...

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Isn't this where they set the dogs on the native protesters ?

Doesnt seem too hard for them to over-engineer the thing against this kind of situation, shouldnt that have been the 'compromise'??

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: elementalgrove
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Trump is a real POS for moving this forward.

Native land needs to be respected now more than ever and this BS is directly from his executive orders.

It is criminal for more reasons than one.

Its oil, not hair spray. Blame Big Oil, not Trump.

Tar sand oil too. Particularly nasty stuff.

As the report explains, tar sands oil is thicker and more acidic than lighter conventional crude, and this ups the likelihood that a pipeline carrying it will leak. Complicating matters, leaks can be difficult to detect. And when the oil does spill, it is far more detrimental to sensitive water resources. Evidence of the latter was the billion-dollar-plus Kalamazoo, Michigan, disaster of 2010, which energy company Enbridge admitted was a tar sands spill only after NRDC questioning.

nrdc.org

Am I mistaken or was it his executive order that pushed this forward?

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Heads should roll.

"Told ya so!"

originally posted by: xuenchen
Any mention of possible Sabotage ?

Trump supported the Keystone...Democrats would probably sabotage it to make him look bad.

a reply to: Skywatcher2011

This reminds me of the pipeline breaks causing "federal emergency" zones across the east last year right as the election drama was zipping up into climax stages.

Do we ever get presented with videos of the actual physical leaks with these cases?

a reply to: seasonal Well maybe it is not a "huge" leak but either way this could have been prevented. This is horrible and should not have happened. F big oil and F the people that help them get this through.

a reply to: seasonal

Below is a picture of a 39,600 gallon tank, that's nearly 31 feet in diameter. Imagine dumping @5.3 of these tanks full of tar oil. I stand by my statement...it's a huge spill that can and probably will impact the environment.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: seasonal Well maybe it is not a "huge" leak but either way this could have been prevented. This is horrible and should not have happened. F big oil and F the people that help them get this through.

If this is not a big spill, what are you so worked up about.

I do not like big oil, but you know what I like less than big oil? Walking.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Yes a small spill.

You can fit many of your little spills in this.



.

a reply to: seasonal Maybe I should've used a sarcastic quotation. That is a huge spill. My bad