quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

people I know who've been doing pipeline construction and inspection for 25 years.

I didn't realize there was a big pipeline industry in Michigan.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

The reason a pipeline can end up going under a body of water is mostly because of the "shortest distance between two points" concept. The more direct the pipeline path, the shorter it is. The shorter it is, the less likely for leaking and the cheaper the cost. Also, pipelines are inspected from the inside using a large electronic "pig" sent through the pipe. If the pipe is full of turns, the pig can't go through the line.

If a pipeline does leak, it's better for it to leak underground where the pressure of the ground works against the pressure in the pipe and the dirt helps capture the oil instead of having it spill on top of flowing water where it could easily spread over a greater area. A leak would actually have to be pretty severe in order for it to work it's way up into a lake.

When you do have a pipeline above ground, it's going to be double-wall pipe which is nearly an inch thick of high-quality, hardened steel. Even if you shot it with a high-powered rifle, you probably couldn't penetrate it without using armor piercing rounds. The reason some pipelines are built above ground is usually because the terrain makes it too expensive to route underground. Horizontally boring through a mile of solid granite can fuck up a lot of equipment.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Not that I'm necessarily for this pipeline but it will not be on a sovereign nations land... It is miles from the reservation on federal land.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick
Well there ya go, I just learned something I didn't know. Thanks. :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
Thank you, Johnny. I knew none of this. It is helpful and might even sway me.

quote:


One addendum to this: if it's "shortest distance between two points" and the land belongs to the Souix, that is NOT (in my mind) a good enough reason to continue with it. Re-route it, I would say.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

I have:

- enough sense not to pretend I'm things I'm not
- enough sense not to believe others pretending they are
- enough sense to take a large team of very experienced engineers more seriously than an anonymous Internet friend

Go figure.

But apparently not enough sense to check any facts before running your cocksucker.

Go figure.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
Thank you, Johnny. I knew none of this. It is helpful and might even sway me.

Just trying to help. :)

quote:


One addendum to this: if it's "shortest distance between two points" and the land belongs to the Souix, that is NOT (in my mind) a good enough reason to continue with it. Re-route it, I would say.

Personally, I would think the Souix being upset over a pipeline anywhere near their land could have been easily predictable by the planners. Seems like they could have considered that in the first place and we could have avoided this whole thing with an entirely different route to start. JMO

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curmudgeonly1

http://standingrockfactchecker.org/fact-checking-srst-claims-9-7-16/

[sm=skiprope.gif]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curmudgeonly1

http://standingrockfactchecker.org/fact-checking-srst-claims-9-7-16/

[sm=skiprope.gif]

I'll type slowly so you can understand.

Fact checking from one of the partisans, in this case, the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now (MAIN), is promoting an agenda -- exactly what their "facts" lay out.

You might try Snopes, who's main function is fact-checking, not building oil pipelines.

Are you this stupid, or do you believe we are?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curmudgeonly1

http://standingrockfactchecker.org/fact-checking-srst-claims-9-7-16/

[sm=skiprope.gif]

I'll type slowly so you can understand.

Fact checking from one of the partisans, in this case, the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now (MAIN), is promoting an agenda -- exactly what their "facts" lay out.

You might try Snopes, who's main function is fact-checking, not building oil pipelines.

Are you this stupid, or do you believe we are?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curmudgeonly1

And still she's incapable of addressing any of the issues raised continuing to seek refuge in puerile personal attack.

Well done, toots.

[sm=smiley_bee.gif]

quote:


1.CLAIM: The pipeline encroaches on indigenous lands.

TRUTH: The Dakota Access Pipeline traverses a path on private property and does not cross into the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation. 100% of landowners in North Dakota voluntarily signed easements to allow for construction of the pipeline on their property. Nearly the entire route of the 1,172 mile pipeline has been sited and approved by relevant state and federal agencies and more than 22% of the pipeline has already been completed. To the extent possible, the Dakota Access Pipeline was routed to parallel existing infrastructure, such as the Northern Border Pipeline, to avoid environmentally sensitive areas and areas of potential cultural significance.

2. CLAIM: The pipeline exposes the Tribe’s water supply to contamination.

TRUTH: Pipelines are – by far – the safest way to transport energy liquids and gases. Already, 8 pipelines cross the Missouri River carrying hundreds of thousands of barrels of energy products every day. That includes the Northern Border natural gas pipeline – built in 1982 – that parallels the planned crossing for Dakota Access for 40 miles as well as high voltage transmission power lines. Once completed, the Dakota Access Pipeline will be among the safest, most technologically advanced pipelines in the world.

In addition, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s water intake is scheduled to be moved by the end by of the year. The Missouri River intake serving the Tribe is being switched to Mobridge, South Dakota, nearly 50 miles south of the current water intake and about 70 miles south of the planned Dakota Access river crossing.

3. CLAIM: The tribal community was not part of the discussion.

TRUTH: 389 meetings took place between the U.S. Army Corps and 55 tribes about the Dakota Access project. In addition the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe met individually with the U.S. Army Corps nearly a dozen times to discuss archaeological and other surveys conducted to finalize the Dakota Access route.

Based on input from a number of sources, the pipeline route was adjusted in September 2014, to shorten the pipeline by 11 miles, avoid buildings and other structures, and cross fewer waterways and roads.

4. CLAIM: The pipeline is disrupting areas of cultural significance.

TRUTH: Safeguarding and ensuring the longevity of culturally significant artifacts and sites is of interest to all Americans. That’s why the Dakota Access Pipeline traverses a path on private property. And the Dakota Access Pipeline was routed to parallel existing infrastructure, such as the Northern Border Pipeline and high voltage transmission power lines. Therefore the Dakota Access route has already been under construction twice before. Designing the route to parallel existing infrastructure mitigates any additional impacts to the environment and avoids areas of potential cultural significance.

Additionally, on site there are professional archeologists who are able to identify and properly tend to artifacts and evidence of culturally significant sites if any not identified by the surveys are discovered.

5. CLAIM: On site protests have been peaceful.

TRUTH: Unfortunately, the emotionally charged atmosphere has led to several outbreaks of violence which has endangered the safety of the workers and the protesters themselves. Protesters have rushed police lines, threatened and assaulted private security officers, and thrown rocks and bottles at workers. And let’s remember, the work that is being done is in full accordance with all state and federal regulations and on private property – not on reservation land.

6. CLAIM: A young girl from the Tribe was mauled by a security dog.

TRUTH: This is a doctored photo. The original is from a June 2012 article from the New York Daily News.

quote:


2. CLAIM: The pipeline exposes the Tribe’s water supply to contamination

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:


2. CLAIM: The pipeline exposes the Tribe’s water supply to contamination

Has been proven that there are pipes that have broken and dumped millions of gallons of oil into drinking supplies. Lets give the answer in the slobberblog a first place on the asswipe scale.

The rest of the article is uncited unproven dickwhistling, and actual factual counterpoints are rife against the propaganda presented via toiletlicking.

Lets just go to the many meetings with the Standing Rock tribe, everything all out in the open:
two quickies here:
http://rabbitsliketrumpets.typepad.com/gov.uscourts.dcd.180660.6.0.pdf
and the corps of engineers has stopped construction

are prima facie evidence that the nutsucker slobberblog felch machine is hard at work.

This is the sort of propaganda the nutsuckers constantly engage in, as they bully american citizens with their vocally accosting felchgobblings.

There are no facts presented to refute, it is all factless lying propaganda, the usual asswipe gish galloped by circlefelching nutsuckers.

There is no need to debate nutsucker asswipe. Nothing to address.

quote:

In addition, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s water intake is scheduled to be moved by the end by of the year. The Missouri River intake serving the Tribe is being switched to Mobridge, South Dakota, nearly 50 miles south of the current water intake and about 70 miles south of the planned Dakota Access river crossing.