I am sure most of you have heard about the court's outcome for DAPL, that they're allowed to pump oil through that pipe across the Missouri river up in North Dakota. It's believed that the oil will have started flowing Monday-Wednesday of this week. A judge ruled against an appeal or something as such.
I am left to ask two questions...WHY have some in the media basically said nothing or been very well mum?! Is it because this is in the Midwest? I mean there are media outlets who were all over Standing Rock and now they've just shut up about it. I'm not talking about some media sources that may oblige it for a while, these outlets were like a dog with a bone. The other question I'm left with is WHY does it feel like everyone has rolled over on the "Black Snake"? Why is no one staying there and peaceably resisting, or even sabotaging the pump before the oil can flow? I have heard no word about ANYTHING. If anyone hears otherwise feel free to correct me.
We know oil is a carcinogen and we know this pipe is very likely to break as many other oil pipelines have, including one comparatively recently up in Canada. When it breaks and oil leaks into the river how many people will get cancer and possibly die? Is playing nice by the courts even acceptable? Should it not be resisted non-violently every step of the way as when the oil flows this can't be taken back.
I hate even having to list this in politics in a way as this implies a conflict or even a strong question-ability of this issue and it's results. As I said before, I believe there's enough evidence to believe that this pipe will end up leaking if not breaking based on previous case circumstances regarding oil pipelines.
DAPL outcome
A word from our sponsor:
Comments
It may be because
The other options of moving the quantities of oil are by train or over the road truck. Both of which have a statistically higher chance of an accident occurring that would cause environmental damage and possible loss of human life. Not to mention the higher cost of moving the oil using either of those methods.
A pipeline is the safest most cost efficient way of moving large quantities of oil.
We the willing, led by the unsure. Have been doing so much with so little for so long,
We are now qualified to do anything with nothing.
I grew up next to 2 pipelines
One ran right beside the property on a north/south alignment about 50 feet from our home, the other was at the rear of the property on a south west/northeast alignment about 300 feet way from our home. We had well water with no issues. The pipeline beside out home was in place when my parents built the home in 1952. The other was put in about 1963 and crossed above the older pipeline. We sold the property after my parents died but I still drive past it on a regular basis and my church is a mile away. During the 65 years we'd never had a drop of oil leak anywhere within the region.
I think the fear of pipelines is simply another hysterical rant by those who like to cry and whine.
Boys will be girls... if they're lucky!
Jennifer Sue
It's not an unreasonable fear
It's not an unreasonable fear as one just recently broke in Canada while DAPL was being discussed. I'm sure I can find more occurences. Your pipeline may have been built to strict standards esp. given the possible time period of one. We're talking about companies that are likely building that pipe with subpar materials to save a buck(playing devil's advocate).
That oil is going to flow
That oil is going to flow like it or not---
Why? because in the new age. The value of any product is now measured in how much 'oil' it takes to make, from shoes, to planes, to the internet we are on. Measuring by the dollar left the building long ago.
so for now till we invent a new way to make HUGE amounts of power or let those newer much safer nuke plants get built? And I know you are going to say--what about Fukshima!
A plant scheduled for shut down after 40 years, hit by the biggest quake and then the biggest tidal wave--it actually did good and would have been fine if japan asked for help sooner instead of siting on the issue.
but till that 'new' power comes along nuke is the fastest and cleanest
And solar is not going to cut it...take it from a electrician, the systems online now are weak and expensive AND all show!
Proud member of the Whateley Academy Drow clan/collective
Proud member of the Whateley Academy Drow clan/collective
Germany begs to differ about Solar.
That being said, I believe a combo is the sensible option(Biomass and wind as well). I don't consider Geothermal given the toxic metals like Mercury that come out of it.
Already a leak.
Happened on Friday and it leaked 84 gallons. Granted it hasn't started flowing but I weep for the future.