Social Question

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

23 Answers

kritiper's avatar

He’s a idea man, not a answer man.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

It appears that the alternative was to break yet another treaty with the American Indians. Our government agreed that they would have autonomy on the piss poor lands we gave back to them. The pipeline can go around, the sovereignty of the Indian land will be preserved, and we can preserve our honor by honoring our agreements. This is oil and that means money and I really don’t think this will inconvenience the oil people as much as it will inconvenience these Indians.

Air Force One should be running on solar by now anyway..

Coloma's avatar

The Obama administration does not mean Obama, himself, in a singular fashion.
He’s the header but not the ultimate hitter.

elbanditoroso's avatar

Is this a serious question?

The US has countless other sources of oil (domestic) and we still buy from the mideast. So it’s a bit of an overstatement to say that Obama’s travel plans in any way rest on the existence of that pipeline.

There seem to be two factors in Obama’s decision:

a) the sovereign rights of the Sioux tribe

b) the well-being of the lake nearby

Both of those are real issues – the tribe has rights that predate the USA and definitely predate the oil company.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

The oil people should have anticipated both the problem of Indian land sovereignty and the endangerment of the lake in their planning stage. This one is on them. They fucked up either through stupidity or arrognance and now it’s going to cost them. If I ran that company, heads would surely roll.

Aethelwine's avatar

It’s not just one lake that is threatened. The pipeline would run under several rivers, including the Missouri and Mississippi, and end up in south west Illinois near the New Madrid fault.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

Well, now the oil people just sound insane. Sometimes you can get things done, and sometimes you just have to wait for the tech to catch up. We’ll get the oil if it is meant to be got, but it must be done wisely, or there will be hell to pay on the back end.

Coloma's avatar

I bet the Cartwrights would be handling this in stellar fashion.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

Yeah, old Ben would take care of it, peacefully and quietly. After he had Hoss sit on Adam to keep him from goin’ for his gun.

RedDeerGuy1's avatar

~Only if they had peanut butter with them and raisins.~ Like Trump says he would alow the pipeline to be built but as long as Americans get a cut of the pie.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

^^In that one respect I partially agree with Trump. We should get a cut. These are our national resources. The Norwegians get a check for their oil after paying a fair compensation to contractors to exploit it and the Alaskans get a check for theirs. Why shouldn’t all of us? It’s ours. It belongs to all of us.

stanleybmanly's avatar

The pipeline has been a “dead horse for better than 2 years. The dog and pony show on both sides of the issue are about posing and little else. Obama gets to pretend that he champions the environment, while his enemies pretend that he’s wrecking us economically.

The truth is that no one is going to build a pipeline while the crude oil price is this low and still falling. This is the REAL reason that the once white hot issue of the pipeline is now relegated to the dust laden obscurity of “nobody cares.”

MrGrimm888's avatar

The pipe line is yet another example of how big oil would like to make more money with ZERO respect for the environment, or any people getting screwed over in the process. It’s route,last I checked, has it traveling over many environmentally sensitive areas. It will no doubt leak,or gush oil all over the place. Then when permanent damage is done, they’ll all just pay minimal reparations to the affected, and keep drilling, pumping, spilling etc.There is NEVER a plan in place for the worst case scenario. As evidenced by the BP spill,and really ALL oil spills.

As pointed out above, we already have plenty, yet still buy from the middle east.

Obama hasn’t caved, under immense pressure , to this stupid project and I’m proud of him. The people pushing this project are careless,selfish, greedy assholes.

If cheap oil is SO important, move somewhere else. All pros and cons have been weighed. The cons out weigh the pros.

The only reason this project has ANY traction at all is the oil companies have their hands up our politician’s asses. And the puppets are doing what is asked of them.

Focusing on ANY advancements regarding oil,other than replacing it as a fuel, is absurdly backward, and greed motivated.

My personal hat is off to Obama. Somebody has to make a thoughtful decision every now and then, even if just for kicks.

To me big oil hasn’t proven responsible enough for ANY future undertakings.

ucme's avatar

I don’t get why the prez gets to have that big arse plane anyway, stick with the helicopter you decadent twat

MrGrimm888's avatar

^He needs the big plane so he can stay in flight for a long time if a nuclear war breaks out. We melt while the ‘important’ people who caused the war live ;)

Also, the US president has a large group assigned to provide a versatile support structure. The plane itself is a beast, with a good , rugged design. A fitting chariot for a man made god.

The helicopter is for shorter trips with less than ideal landing circumstances. As far as runways, surroundings and an overall smaller escort group.

ucme's avatar

Yeah, but…helicopters are all kinds of awesome

MrGrimm888's avatar

^True. I’m sure he could fly in the Sky Dreadnought (look it up). If he wanted. That things amazing.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Of course the Sky Dreadnought is amazing. It is truly incredible—because it is a hoax..

rojo's avatar

Rather self-serving @SecondHandStoke. The pipeline in question is nothing but an end run around; another way of getting the Keystone Pipeline in place. The arguments that the principle of eminent domain apply to this private pipeline (that lines the pockets of the former governor of Texas, pRick Perry, for one) are bogus and based on the lies that eventually some of the product will find its way back to S. Dakota when it is widely known that the vast majority of it will be exported, that is why they want to get it to Texas in the first place. The original pipeline crossed the Missouri just above Bismark but fears of a spill fouling the waterway and water supply of the capitol caused a redesign to send it through a ¼ mile above the reservation because, fuck them, they don’t matter anywhere near as much as the white citizens and government officials living in the capitol and besides, what can they say or do about it.
Pipelines are safer than trucking it down? Sure. Here are a list of pipeline spills to date in 2016: 2016

On January 2, 3 people were injured, and numerous homes were damaged in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, when a leak gas from a gas main entered a home. Preliminary results indicate that a leak occurred at a weld seam on the gas main.[559]
On January 9, a 30-inch Atmos Energy gas transmission pipeline exploded and burned in Robertson County, Texas. 4 families nearby were evacuated.[560]
On January 11, butane leaking from a pipeline storage facility, in Conway, Kansas, forced a closure of a nearby highway for a time.[561]
On February 14, a 6-inch crude oil pipeline broke near Rozet, Wyoming, spilling about 1,500 gallons of crude oil into a creek bed.[562]
On February 16, an explosion and fire occurred at a gas plant in Frio County, Texas. 2 employees at the plant were injured.[563]
On February 24, a 10-inch propane pipeline exploded and burned, near Sulphur, Louisiana. There were no injuries. About 208,000 gallons of propane were lost, and, the cause of the failure was not found.[564][565]
On March 11, about 30,000 gallons of gasoline spilled from a leaking plug on a pipeline, at a tank farm in Sioux City, Iowa.[566]
On March 22, about 4,000 gallons of gasoline spilled from a 6-inch petroleum products pipeline in Harwood, North Dakota.[567]
On April 2, the TransCanada Corporation Keystone Pipeline was observed by a local resident to be leaking, near Freeman, South Dakota. The cause was a crack in a girth weld, and amount of tar sands dilbit spill was about 16,800 gallons.[568][569]
On April 12, a pipeline at a gas plant in Woodsboro, Texas exploded, killing 2 men, and injured another worker.[570]
On April 17, a 10 petroleum products pipeline failed in Wabash County, Illinois, resulting in a sheen on the Wabash River. About 48,000 gallons of diesel fuel was spilled.[571]
On April 29, a 30-inch Texas Eastern/Spectra Energy pipeline exploded, injuring one man, destroying his home and damaging several others. The incident was reported at 8:17a.m., near the intersection of Routes 819 and 22 in Salem Township, Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania. Later, Spectra Energy Corp. announced plans to dig up and assess 263 miles of that pipeline, from Pennsylvania to New Jersey.[572][573]
On May 20, a Shell Oil Company pipeline leaked near Tracy, California, spilling about 21,000 gallons of crude oil.[574]
On June 23, a Crimson Pipeline crude oil line leaked in Ventura County, California. Initial reports said the spill size was from 25,200 gallons to 29,000 gallons, but, later reports estimate 45,000 gallons of crude were spilled.[575][576]
On July 6, a Plantation Pipeline line was noticed to be leaking in Goochland County, Virginia. The spill did not reach nearby waterways.[577]
On August 12, contractors were working on one of the main lines in Sunoco Pipeline LP’s Nederland, Texas terminal when crude oil burst through a plug that was supposed to hold the oil back in the pipeline and ignited. The contractors were knocked off the platform to the ground, suffering injuries from the fall and severe burns. 7 contractors were injured.[578]
On September 4, a pipeline broke in Kern County, California, spilling reclaimed water & oil.[579]
On September 5, a pipeline in Bay Long, Louisiana was hit by dredging operations, resulting in a spill of about 5,300 gallons of crude oil into the water.[580]

It is just another case of the rich getting richer at the expense of those who do not have the resources to fight back.

MrGrimm888's avatar

@rojo. Nice. That’s WTF I’m talking about.

@Espiritus Corvus. Are you trying to tell me there are hoaxes on the Internet? ~~

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

Mr. Grimm, I am so glad you weren’t serious. With the other stuff you’ve written here, it would have made no sense at all.

@rojo Very thorough. GA.

rojo's avatar

A couple of articles for perusal:

The first, from RBN Energy discusses how the DAPL as designed is oversized to carry the product being furnished by the Bakken oilfields.
The second, from BTU Analytics discusses how energy companies with ties to Canadian oil (Enbridge & Marathon), and active in trying to get the Sandpiper pipeline in (been cancelled) are now partners in the DAPL. It also mentions a “Line 26”, apparently an existing pipeline that sent Canadian oil to the US that was reversed in 2013 sending oil northward. They speculate that this could be reversed again to send oil southward and as an existing line it “A key point to this project is that it was conducted under an existing Presidential Border Crossing permit, which suggests that if it were to reverse again it may not need to refile.” thus no way for the government to stop it this time. And by coincidence new partner, Enbridge, owns Line 26.

Interesting huh? An oversized, over designed pipeline and an end around run to get Canadian oil to the Gulf.


I think not.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther