Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Dakota Access Pipeline Suffers Oil Leak Even Before Becoming Operational

posted by mrpg on Saturday May 13 2017, @11:58AM   Printer-friendly
from the of-course dept.

MrPlow writes:

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This discussion has been archived.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.
Dakota Access Pipeline Suffers Oil Leak Even Before Becoming Operational | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 38 comments | Search Discussion
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.

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by zocalo on Saturday May 13 2017, @12:47PM (2 children)

    by zocalo (302) on Saturday May 13 2017, @12:47PM (#509123)
    The same applies to non-pollutant liquids being pumped as well, right down to potable water. You generally expect some leakage and the occassional accidental spill at pumping stations so design for it; that generally means sitting all your pumping equipment in a bunded pit with facilities for drainage and easier retrieval of split liquid for whatever disposal or reclaimation processes you have in place. While there are absolutely valid concerns for the construction and operation of the Dakota pipeline, this seems much more like business as usual being spun into something it isn't to try and generate an "I told you so" story for those opposed to the pipeline. Not exactly fake news, but definitely not the major incident and sign of things to come that some of the reporting is portraying it as.
    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   3  

  • (Score: 2) by butthurt on Saturday May 13 2017, @02:29PM (1 child)

    by butthurt (6141) on Saturday May 13 2017, @02:29PM (#509161) Journal

    > [...] to try and generate an "I told you so" story for those opposed to the pipeline.

    The article quotes one opponent who claims the company said there would be no leaks. If they really said that, this event refutes it.

    > Not exactly fake news, but definitely not the major incident and sign of things to come that some of the reporting is portraying it as.

    Who has called it a major incident? The AP story linked from the Guardian article says:

    The April 4 spill was relatively small and was quickly cleaned up, and it didn't threaten any waterways.

    The Guardian article says

    [...] an environmental scientist with the South Dakota department of environment and natural resources, said the spill was relatively minor [...]

    Democracy Now!--whose reporter was charged with trespassing--emphasises how soon the leak happened:

    [...] Dakota Access pipeline has already had its first leak—and the pipeline is not yet even in operation. The 84-gallon oil spill [...]