Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Monday June 19, @11:47AM   Printer-friendly
from the considering-the-other-side dept.

AlterNet reports

A federal judge ruled [June 14] that the Trump administration must conduct additional environmental review of the Dakota Access Pipeline, handing a limited victory to Native American tribes fighting the administration's decision to move forward with the project.

In an extensive opinion,[PDF][1] Washington, DC District Court Judge James Boasberg sided with the tribes by agreeing the Army Corps of Engineers "did not consider the impacts of an oil spill on fishing rights, human rights, or environmental justice."

[...] Boasberg did not order a shutdown of operations on the pipeline, which began pumping oil early this month. The tribes and pipeline owner Energy Transfer Partners are ordered to appear in court next week to decide next legal steps, and the tribes are expected to argue for a full shutdown of pipeline operations.

[1] Link in article redirects.

Previous coverage:
Dakota Access Pipeline Suffers Oil Leak Even Before Becoming Operational
Recent News Dispatches From Standing Rock (DAPL)
Army Corp of Engineers Now Accepting Public Comment on the Dakota Access Pipeline
Army Corps of Engineers Blocks the Dakota Access Pipeline
Standing Rock Protester May Lose Her Arm Because of Police Grenades
Water Cannons Used in Sub-Freezing Temperatures at Dakota Access Oil Pipeline Protest
Standing Rock Protestors Gassed and Attacked; Bundy Gang Acquitted [Updated]
Journalist Charged in North Dakota with Rioting; Case is Dismissed


Original Submission

Related Stories

Journalist Charged in North Dakota with Rioting; Case is Dismissed 92 comments

Amy Goodman, host of the New York City-based leftist news programme Democracy Now! was charged with criminal trespass by the North Dakota state's attorney (prosecutor). The charge was changed to riot, then was dismissed due to lack of evidence when Goodman appeared in court on Monday. The charges stemmed from her presence at a protest in September against construction of the Dakota Access (Bakken) oil pipeline, after the protest was reported on her show.

Coverage:


Original Submission

Standing Rock Protestors Gassed and Attacked; Bundy Gang Acquitted [Updated] 58 comments

Catholic Online reports

On Thursday [October 27], the Bundy gang of ranchers who took over a federal building in Oregon and led a 41-day standoff were acquitted on all charges. At least five of the seven surviving militia members will now walk free from federal custody as a result. Ammon Bundy will not be released however because he still faces charges in Nevada over the standoff at his father's ranch two years ago. His brother, Ryan Bundy also remains in custody. An eighth member of their gang was killed by police when the standoff drew to an end.

[...]The Bundy gang also staged their occupation on sacred Native American land. This cannot be condoned; it would be like legitimizing the armed takeover of a parish church.

[...]At the same time the Bundy gang was being acquitted, heavily armed paramilitary-police moved into the crowds at Cannonball, North Dakota gassing and arresting protesters. The key difference in this case is [that] the protesters in North Dakota are peaceful and unarmed.

[...] During Thursday's protest, a fire broke out at the site and police moved in with riot gear and military-grade armored vehicles. They attacked the crowd with tear gas, a sound cannon, batons, and bean-bag ammunition. Police are evicting the protesters by force to make way for the pipeline's construction. Protesters have built barricades to keep authorities at bay.

Peoples World continues

[Continues...]

Water Cannons Used in Sub-Freezing Temperatures at Dakota Access Oil Pipeline Protest 105 comments

Authorities used rubber-coated steel bullets, concussion grenades, tear gas, and water cannons against unarmed protesters near the Dakota Access oil pipeline in 26°F (-3°C) temperatures over the weekend.

Indian Country Today reports

"We have seen four gunshot wounds, three of them to the face and head", said Leland Brenholt, a volunteer medic.

[...]400 protesters, or "water protectors", attempted to dismantle a police-enforced barricade on State Highway 1806.

[...]"Water protectors are done with the military-style barricades. We are done with the floodlights and the armored military trucks. We are are done with it!" declared organizer, Dallas Goldtooth in a mid-evening Facebook post.

Their action was met with the same militarized response that the Morton County Sheriff's Department has demonstrated on protesters for weeks: the use of armored trucks, less-than-lethal ammunition, tear-gas, mace, and on this below-freezing night, water cannons.

[...]Reports from a coalition of advocacy groups near Standing Rock report hundreds of water protectors were receiving treatment for contamination by tear gas, hypothermia, and blunt traumas as a result of rubber bullets. One person, an elder, was reportedly revived after suffering cardiac arrest, organizers said.

"As medical professionals, we are concerned for the real risk of loss of life due to severe hypothermia under these conditions," read a statement from the Standing Rock Medic and Healer Council.

A more measured take is available from the AP.


Original Submission

Standing Rock Protester May Lose Her Arm Because of Police Grenades 63 comments

Snopes reports

On 20 November 2016, the Dakota Access pipeline protests reached new proportions when an ongoing demonstration turned into a violent [assault on protesters by] law enforcement officials.

Pipeline protesters say 21-year-old Sophia Wilansky was critically injured when she was struck with a concussion grenade thrown by Morton County sheriff's deputies while she was handing out water. As a result, she has been hospitalized and now faces the prospect of having her left arm amputated.

On 21 November 2016, Wilansky's father, Wayne Wilansky, [...] told reporters that she may need as many as 20 surgeries and that, aside from her arm injury, Sophia had welts all over her body from being shot by rubber[-coated steel] bullets, and that it took hours for an ambulance to reach her because of roadblocks.

Heavy.com continues

A statement from The Standing Rock Medic & Healing Council stated:
"Sophia was heading to bring water to the unarmed people who were being attacked for several hours by Morton County Sheriff forces. The Morton County Sheriff's Department has stated that she was injured by a purported propane explosion that the Sheriff's Department claimed the unarmed people created.

"These statements are refuted by Sophia's testimony, by several eye-witnesses who watched police intentionally throw concussion grenades at unarmed people, by the lack of charring of flesh at the wound site, and by the grenade pieces that have been removed from her arm in surgery and will be saved for legal proceedings."

Snopes also notes:

A total of 26 protesters were hospitalized and more than 300 were injured.

Previously:
Water Cannons Used in Sub-Freezing Temperatures at Standing Rock


Original Submission

Army Corps of Engineers Blocks the Dakota Access Pipeline 137 comments

According to an article at Snopes.com:

The Army Corps of Engineers has denied the easement needed to complete the Dakota Access Pipeline, according Colonel Henderson, who notified Veterans for Standing Rock co-organizer Michael A. Wood Jr on 4 December 2016.

More than 3,000 veterans had converged at the Standing Rock camp to support the Sioux in their ongoing opposition to the building of a $3.7 billion pipeline that would cross through disputed land managed by the Army Corps of Engineers. Wood said upon learning of the move, "This is history."

From a report in Al Jazeera :

The US Army Corps of Engineers has turned down a permit for a controversial pipeline project running through North Dakota, in a victory for Native Americans and climate activists who have protested against the project for several months, according to a statement released.

The 1,885km Dakota Access Pipeline, owned by Texas-based Energy Transfer Partners LP, had been complete except for a segment planned to run under Lake Oahe, a reservoir formed by a dam on the Missouri River.

"The Army will not grant an easement to cross Lake Oahe at the proposed location based on the current record," a statement from the US Army said.

The Standing Rock Sioux tribe, along with climate activists, have been protesting the $3.8bn project, saying it could contaminate the water supply and damage sacred tribal lands.

[...] "Today, the US Army Corps of Engineers announced that it will not be granting the easement to cross Lake Oahe for the proposed Dakota Access Pipeline," said Standing Rock Chairman Dave Archambault II, in a statement.

"Instead, the Corps will be undertaking an environmental impact statement to look at possible alternative routes."


Original Submission

Army Corp of Engineers Now Accepting Public Comment on the Dakota Access Pipeline 53 comments

The Army Corp of Engineers is now accepting public comment until February 20th regarding the permits for the Dakota Access Pipeline.

You may mail or hand deliver written comments to Mr. Gib Owen, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, 108 Army Pentagon, Washington, DC 20310-0108. Advance arrangements will need to be made to hand deliver comments. Please include your name, return address, and "NOI Comments, Dakota Access Pipeline Crossing" on the first page of your written comments. Comments may also be submitted via email to Mr. Gib Owen, at gib.a.owen.civ@mail.mil. If emailing comments, please use "NOI Comments, Dakota Access Pipeline Crossing" as the subject of your email.

The location of all public scoping meetings will be announced at least 15 days in advance through a notice to be published in the local North Dakota newspaper (The Bismarck Tribune) and online at https://www.army.mil/?asacw.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Gib Owen, Water Resources Policy and Legislation, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Washington, DC 20310-0108; telephone: (703) 695-6791; email: gib.a.owen.civ@mail.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The proposed crossing of Lake Oahe by Dakota Access, LLC is approximately 0.5 miles upstream of the northern boundary of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe's reservation. The Tribe protests the crossing primarily because it relies on Lake Oahe for water for a variety of purposes, the Tribe's reservation boundaries encompass portions of Lake Oahe downstream from the proposed crossing, and the Tribe retains water, treaty fishing, and hunting rights in the Lake.

The proposed crossing of Corps property requires the granting of a right-of-way (easement) under the Mineral Leasing Act (MLA), 30 U.S.C. 185. To date, the Army has not made a final decision on whether to grant the easement pursuant to the MLA. The Army intends to prepare an EIS to consider any potential impacts to the human environment that the grant of an easement may cause.

Specifically, input is desired on the following three scoping concerns:

(1) Alternative locations for the pipeline crossing the Missouri River;

(2) Potential risks and impacts of an oil spill, and potential impacts to Lake Oahe, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe's water intakes, and the Tribe's water, treaty fishing, and hunting rights; and

(3) Information on the extent and location of the Tribe's treaty rights in Lake Oahe.

Those wishing to submit comments opposing the pipeline can do so directly at the email address listed above, or use web pages setup to do so by the following groups:

Action Network

Sierra Club

Likewise, if you support the pipeline you can comment as well and respond to the questions asked via email or letter to the addresses listed above.


Original Submission

Recent News Dispatches From Standing Rock (DAPL) 18 comments

The Guardian reports that the U.S. Army sent a letter, dated 7 February, to member of Congress Raúl Grijalva, saying it would grant a permit for the construction of the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline. Work could resume as early as 8 February.

"I have determined that there is no cause for completing any additional environmental analysis," wrote Douglas W Lamon, the senior official performing the duties of assistant secretary of the army, wrote in a notice to the federal register.

More recent news in Standing Rock from Feb 9:

The restarting of the drilling operation, which a pipeline spokeswoman confirmed on Thursday morning, began soon after the US government gave the oil corporation the green light to proceed on Wednesday. The controversial pipeline could be transporting crude oil from North Dakota to Illinois within three months.

At the Standing Rock camps in Cannon Ball – where activists have been stationed since last spring to fight the project – indigenous and environmental organizers vowed to stay put and continue opposing the pipeline.

[Continues...]

Dakota Access Pipeline Suffers Oil Leak Even Before Becoming Operational 38 comments

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

The Dakota Access pipeline already had its first leak – 84 gallons of oil – at a pump station in South Dakota in early April, sparking outrage and calling into question its environmental safety.

[...] The report of the spill can be found on the Department of Environmental and Natural Resources website. The agency apparently did not make any official announcement on the incident as it was relatively minor and had no environmental impact, according to Brian Walsh, a scientist with the department, as cited by the Guardian. The site "was cleaned up right away," the official added as quoted by ABC news.

The spill occurred less than 110 miles from Lake Oahe, which supplies Sioux tribes with water.

Source: Dakota Access pipeline suffers oil leak even before becoming operational


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough

Mark All as Read

Mark All as Unread

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @12:09PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @12:09PM (#527863)

    And massively contaminate the groundwater/downstream ecosystem, would it result in the pipeline getting shut down, or simply a payout, eminent domaining of the land, and forced relocation of the tribes to another (smaller) reservation made somewhere else?

    That could be win win for the oil company and government, because once the land is polluted are they really going to want to live on it, ancestors or no?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @09:52PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @09:52PM (#528171)

      And massively contaminate the groundwater/downstream ecosystem, would it result in the pipeline getting shut down, or simply a payout, eminent domaining of the land, and forced relocation of the tribes to another (smaller) reservation made somewhere else?

      That could be win win for the oil company and government, because once the land is polluted are they really going to want to live on it, ancestors or no?

      Or it could result in:
      -A massively lawsuit (land is by definition unique so money is not on its own enough, eminent domain "shouldn't" apply because this pipe "shouldn't" be a matter government interest... although the Trump Administration may try to do that anyway)
      -A huge and expensive cleanup effort (see: Exxon-Valdez, and Deepwater Horizon)
      -Tons of bad publicity (again, see: Exxon-Valdez, and Deepwater Horizon)
      -Major impediments to future projects (how much harder will it be to build the next pipeline when the next NIMBYs can go to court and point to the Great Spill of 2017 as proof the technology can't be made safe)
      -Poisoned water (injured Indians, more expenses for shipping in water, like at Flint)

      Sounds like a lose-lose to me.

      Yes, the oil companies and government could do some kind of black ops (or maybe even just willful neglect and try to "get lucky") and things work out as you say... But that's a HUUGE risk to be taking.

  • (Score: 0, Interesting) by khallow on Monday June 19, @12:31PM (9 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @12:31PM (#527867) Journal
    It's too bad the judgment turned against the pipeline though at least the remedy is something reasonable. But this illustrates the morass of laws that make up environmental regulation. A sane policy could have been in place years ago to handle the problems of oil pipelines rather than this long, dragged out process.

    I notice too the judge ignored the Obama administration's malfeasance in deliberate obstruction of pipeline construction and operation. For example, the judge stated:

    The Corps’ February 8, 2017, decision to grant the easement was arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law because the Corps reversed a prior policy without reasoned justification and because the decision constituted a breach of trust responsibilities

    while ignoring that the Obama administration had done this for real in the Fall of 2016 and the latter Corps decision was a mere reversal of a prior bad and unlawful decision.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by VLM on Monday June 19, @12:36PM (3 children)

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @12:36PM (#527869)

      the judge ignored the Obama administration's malfeasance

      The judge has Trump Derangement Syndrome.

      Its highly unlike the judge knows anything about the oil biz or ecology, so naturally they're in charge.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @04:27PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @04:27PM (#527986)

        This commenter has Trump Phelatiotic Syndrome.
        Its highly unlike(ly) the keyboard warrior knows anything about the oil biz or ecology, so naturally they support Trump and spew uninformed bile.

        • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday June 19, @06:06PM (1 child)

          by DannyB (5839) on Monday June 19, @06:06PM (#528061)

          Trump Phelatiotic Syndrome

          Google has "can't find that word" syndrome.

          • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday June 19, @09:33PM

            by Gaaark (41) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @09:33PM (#528165) Homepage Journal

            It's Felatio, but on a person with really small....... hands... yeah. Hands.

            --
            --- I wish i had a cig for every sig i've ever had: i'd have cancer and wouldn't you feel bad for looking here. ---
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @03:27PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @03:27PM (#527958)

      Looks like no one cares to push back against the cabal of corporatist evil that us all over these arrixles. I'm not going to bother with more than calling you out.

    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday June 19, @06:01PM (1 child)

      by DeathMonkey (1380) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @06:01PM (#528056) Journal

      Guess who's approval is required to grant an easement that crosses a US border? Guess who's approval wasn't granted.

      It's almost like one of the President's powers is to veto bad ideas...

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 23, @12:50AM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 23, @12:50AM (#529732) Journal

        Guess who's approval is required to grant an easement that crosses a US border? Guess who's approval wasn't granted.

        No US border was crossed by this pipeline.

        It's almost like one of the President's powers is to veto bad ideas...

        The power to veto bad ideas is the power to veto good ideas.

    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday June 19, @07:45PM (1 child)

      by DeathMonkey (1380) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @07:45PM (#528104) Journal

      I notice too the judge ignored the Obama administration's malfeasance in deliberate obstruction of pipeline construction and operation. For example, the judge stated:

      The Corps’ February 8, 2017, decision to grant the easement was arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law because the Corps reversed a prior policy without reasoned justification and because the decision constituted a breach of trust responsibilities

      Guess who wasn't president in Feb, 2017.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @09:56PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @09:56PM (#528173)

        Guess who didn't read their parent's post.

        The Corps’ February 8, 2017, decision to grant the easement was arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law because the Corps reversed a prior policy without reasoned justification and because the decision constituted a breach of trust responsibilities

        while ignoring that the Obama administration had done this for real in the Fall of 2016 and the latter Corps decision was a mere reversal of a prior bad and unlawful decision.

        Whether or not you agree, the argument was a rational one to make... quoting the courts saying "Trump did bad" and then explaining how Obama (supposedly) did the exact same thing but wasn't called out on it.

  • (Score: 2) by bradley13 on Monday June 19, @12:36PM (7 children)

    by bradley13 (3053) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @12:36PM (#527870) Homepage Journal

    I didn't read the whole opinion, but just picked one of the issues to look at: "environmental justice". I expect this section is typical of the rest of the document. First, the undisputed facts:

    - The government is required to consider whether or not there is a disproportionate environmental impact on minority populations (including tribes) in the designated area.

    - The designated area is typically 0.5 miles around the area being considered, in this case, the boreholes where the pipeline goes underground and re-emerges above ground by a small lake.

    - The tribal lands are 0.55 miles away from the nearest borehole.

    The tribe claims that the 0.5 mile zone is arbitrary; that the government could have extended it to include the tribal lands, which would have lead to a different analysis. While this is obviously true, it is equally obvious that the borehole sites will have been deliberately chosen to be outside of this range, precisely to avoid problems with the tribe.

    The judge goes through quite some contortions, in order to find fault with this. For example: "The EA is silent, for instance, on the distinct cultural practices of the Tribe and the social and economic factors that might amplify its experience of the environmental effects of an oil spill."

    WTF? How are you supposed to objectively analyze the cultural effects of an oil spill? Seems to me that the judge is deliberately handing the government an impossible task. Which makes me think that this is a partisan decision.

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @01:26PM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @01:26PM (#527887)

      You are absolutely correct. The Trump haters (and I did not vote for him) are irrational. They have let their blind hatred of what they think he represents to cloud their judgment of everything (they think) he stands for. The plain letter text of law is being contorted to suit their own prejudices. It wouldn't be so funny if it wasn't primarily coming from the oh-so-tolerant left.

      And this is coming from a Classic Liberal! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism [wikipedia.org]

      • (Score: 5, Informative) by arulatas on Monday June 19, @02:48PM (4 children)

        by arulatas (3600) on Monday June 19, @02:48PM (#527927)

        The problem with your logic is that many had issues with this process before Trump was even involved.

        --
        ----- 10 turns around
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @04:29PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @04:29PM (#527988)

          Woah woah woah, you can't just call out their psychological projection like that. They hated Obama so much and attacked him for being bla.. ahem, "liberal" and now they naturally assume their opponents are doing the same thing with Trump. Reason has left these mad men! Let sleeping dogs lie or they'll wake up and shit all over your shoes.

        • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday June 19, @06:06PM

          by DeathMonkey (1380) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @06:06PM (#528062) Journal

          The problem with your logic is that many had issues with this process before Trump was even involved.

          Hmm...I wonder if those issues could have prevented the issuance of the original permits?

          And then, when word came down to approve no matter what, I wonder if they ensured those issues were resolved?

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 23, @12:55AM (1 child)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 23, @12:55AM (#529735) Journal

          The problem with your logic is that many had issues with this process before Trump was even involved.

          I'll note here the judge was involved solely due to Trump's involvement.

          • (Score: 2) by arulatas on Friday June 23, @12:57PM

            by arulatas (3600) on Friday June 23, @12:57PM (#529990)

            Fair point. I just wanted to point out that not everyone who had issues with the pipeline had Trump anywhere in that decision.

            --
            ----- 10 turns around
    • (Score: 5, Informative) by tonyPick on Monday June 19, @02:11PM

      by tonyPick (1237) on Monday June 19, @02:11PM (#527909) Homepage Journal

      The judge goes through quite some contortions, in order to find fault with this.

      Really? Having had a quick spin through that section I'm not seeing contortions - the 0.5 mile buffer isn't a standard used in any other oil pipelines (it's apparently the value you'd use for bridge construction and traffic widening), and the SR folks point to other oil pipeline projects that use much much higher buffer ranges (14 and 40 miles downstream for water contamination) as standard.

      Following that it doesn't seem a stretch to say that the value chosen is unusually low, to try to avoid having to consider the tribal lands, and that they needed to be considered.

      How are you supposed to objectively analyze the cultural effects of an oil spill?

      well, from the actual report:

      Standing Rock provides one such example in its briefing: many of its members fish, hunt, and gather for subsistence. See SRST MSJ at 41. Losing the ability to do so
      could seriously and disproportionately harm those individuals relative to those in nearby non- tribal communities.
      The Corps need not necessarily have addressed that particular issue, but it needed to offer more than a bare-bones conclusion that Standing Rock would not be disproportionately harmed by a spill.

      This doesn't sound particularly contorted to me...

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Monday June 19, @01:08PM (3 children)

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @01:08PM (#527879)

    Its interesting how the issue has been abstracted and politicized into a referendum on Trump, which is all the discussion is at this point.

    However, I found it interesting to learn "the hidden truth" about the actual situation via some google searches.

    Some interesting things to google for... "oil spill liability trust fund" and its tax. Something I didn't know is there's an excise tax of 9 cents per barrel that's continually increased since the 90s to fund spill cleanup. The biggest problem with the trust fund seems to be something like the big BP spill bumped up against the liability limit of a billion bucks. No matter what happens to this reservation the cost doesn't seem possible to approach a billion. Its an interesting socialized insurance system.

    Its surprisingly difficult to find information about the fund but I did find a treasury dept balance sheet from Jan 1 2014 which claims the fund is worth $2.7B at that date, so given the liability limit of $1B per event its surprisingly well funded.

    In a way learning the facts is not useful, because the people in opposition to Trump (or in favor) are certainly not going to stop merely because of reality. However its interesting to daydream past the well known propaganda given some facts.

    • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Whoever on Monday June 19, @02:59PM

      by Whoever (4524) on Monday June 19, @02:59PM (#527937)

      Apparently you didn't find all the "hidden truth".

      Look up the original route. What was the justification for changing the route?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @05:29PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @05:29PM (#528038)

      politicized into a referendum on Trump

      Should it be referred to Obama or Bush?

      In a way learning the facts is not useful

      You are largely right about that:
      "It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." - Jonathan Swift

      Reality does win in the end, but you just need to know when and where to bet your money to take advantage of your knowledge. Social enterprises, such as politics, have less to do with reality so it is probably best to keep that quote in mind.

    • (Score: 3, Touché) by DeathMonkey on Monday June 19, @07:49PM

      by DeathMonkey (1380) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @07:49PM (#528107) Journal

      Yes, the people who have been protesting for like two years now can all see the future and have been referenduming against Trump this whole time.

  • (Score: 2) by Sulla on Monday June 19, @02:45PM (7 children)

    by Sulla (5173) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @02:45PM (#527925)

    We should shut down the pipelines and run everything by rail. Tried, true, proven, and safe.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac-M%C3%A9gantic_rail_disaster [wikipedia.org]

    • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @03:31PM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19, @03:31PM (#527960)

      The world energy group found that rail actually is a little better when it comes to less spilled oil.

      You corporate apologists needbetter material and better than a few anecdotes.

      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday June 19, @06:09PM (3 children)

        by DeathMonkey (1380) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @06:09PM (#528065) Journal

        You don't even know the name of the organization you are "citing" yet you accuse others of anecdotes.

        • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday June 19, @09:40PM

          by Gaaark (41) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @09:40PM (#528168) Homepage Journal

          Yeah, you know the world energy group: headed by Barnacle P. Whutzaburgerbun, with his deputies Barney Fife, and Barney the big purple dinosaurorwhateverhisnameis.

          Yeah, you know them... you've just forgotten. Easy to do.

          :)

          --
          --- I wish i had a cig for every sig i've ever had: i'd have cancer and wouldn't you feel bad for looking here. ---
        • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday June 19, @09:45PM

          by Gaaark (41) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 19, @09:45PM (#528169) Homepage Journal

          We've always been at war with world energy group: it's group world energy that are our allies.

          --
          --- I wish i had a cig for every sig i've ever had: i'd have cancer and wouldn't you feel bad for looking here. ---
        • (Score: 2) by WalksOnDirt on Tuesday June 20, @03:28AM

          by WalksOnDirt (5854) on Tuesday June 20, @03:28AM (#528319) Journal

          The "world energy group" mentioned probably refers to the International Energy Agency rather than the World Energy Group (yes, it exists). Think Progress [thinkprogress.org] links to one of their reports that claims that while oil trains spill more often, pipelines spill more. Oddly, Forbes and Fortune only tout the number of spills, not their size.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 23, @01:02AM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 23, @01:02AM (#529737) Journal

        The world energy group found that rail actually is a little better when it comes to less spilled oil.

        A huge problem here is that the comparison is biased. Tanker rail cars are taken off the tracks after about 20 years, by law. But about half the US's oil pipelines are fifty or more years old. So when comparing spilled oil rates, we're comparing fairly new rail cars to a high portion of ancient pipelines which are naturally going to leak a lot more than a modern one. Now, that may also be an argument for replacing pipelines with more modern ones, but that's not the argument being made.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20, @01:32AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20, @01:32AM (#528278)

      You do realise that this is exactly what they're doing with that Bakken oil *right now*, and what this pipeline was intended to replace, right?

      Funny you don't hear many Native Americans protesting against that rail network though. Almost as if there was some financial incentive behind the recent protests...

(1)