Current Events > Dakota Access pipeline leaked 84 gallons of oil in April

(+) Yeah! (+)

I wonder how supporters are going to try and say this is a good thing
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017/05/10/dakota-access-pipeline-leaked-84-gallons-oil-in-april.html
---

84 entire gallons? Ohhhh
---

southcoast09 posted...

84 entire gallons? Ohhhh

One gallon is to much.
---

I'm not going to say it's a good thing, it's not. But 84 gallons is pretty insignificant.
---

84 gallons leaked vs how much that was transported?
---

Medz8606 posted...

southcoast09 posted...

84 entire gallons? Ohhhh

One gallon is to much.

If you expect that, you live in a fantasy land.
---

Imagine a cube with 2'3" sides. Got it? That's how much was spilled.
---

ThePrinceFish posted...

Medz8606 posted...

southcoast09 posted...

84 entire gallons? Ohhhh

One gallon is to much.

If you expect that, you live in a fantasy land.

I do not expect that. I believe it should be expected.
---

mattnd2007 posted...

I'm not going to say it's a good thing, it's not. But 84 gallons is pretty insignificant.

SK8T3R215 posted...

84 gallons leaked vs how much that was transported?

Again one gallon is to much. Does not matter how much was transported and how much money it put into billionaires pockets.
---

Medz8606 posted...

Again one gallon is to much.

Ok then so let's just ban all investments as they may have some downsides so they shouldn't be allowed.
---

Seems insignificant compared to the amount transported.
---

That's literally close to nothing, in fact it's such a non issue it shouldn't even be mentioned.

I am no tree humping hippie however I feel the environment should never be looked as insignificant.
---

NathanX95 posted...

That's literally close to nothing, in fact it's such a non issue it shouldn't even be mentioned.

You heard it here, folks! Environmental damage is a non issue!
---

DragonGirlYuki posted...

Seems insignificant compared to the power of the force.

---

The oil was contained on site by a plastic liner and containment walls and quickly cleaned up. Some oil-contaminated gravel will be disposed of at an area landfill, he said.

They had preventative measures in place that contained basically the entire spill. So the environmental damage from this is pretty much nothing.
---

lets totally put it through a lake though!
---

According to Aqua Teen Hunger Force, that's like 28 toilet flushes.
---

The oil was taken from the ground in the first place. Who cares if a little goes back in?
---

SK8T3R215 posted...

Medz8606 posted...

Again one gallon is to much.

Ok then so let's just ban all investments as they may have some downsides so they shouldn't be allowed.

ITP: Environmental damage is fine as long as billionaires are happy
---

ZombiePelican posted...

SK8T3R215 posted...

Medz8606 posted...

Again one gallon is to much.

Ok then so let's just ban all investments as they may have some downsides so they shouldn't be allowed.

ITP: Environmental damage is fine as long as billionaires are happy

There was no damage read the article hth
---

84 gallons is literally a drop in the bucket lol
---

Eighty.

Four.

Gallons.


Oil is found naturally in greater quantities than that.
---

SK8T3R215 posted...

ZombiePelican posted...

SK8T3R215 posted...

Medz8606 posted...

Again one gallon is to much.

Ok then so let's just ban all investments as they may have some downsides so they shouldn't be allowed.

ITP: Environmental damage is fine as long as billionaires are happy

There was no damage read the article hth

I did. There wasn't any this time

But what about future spills that will inevitably happen will you be so quick to defend them too because it's "just business"?
---

ZombiePelican posted...

I did. There wasn't any this time

But what about future spills that will inevitably happen will you be so quick to defend them too because it's "just business"?

So we're supposed to act like 84 gallons is a problem because more could have spilled?
---

Now imagine if that pipe was going near your source of water.
---

Mal_Fet posted...

ZombiePelican posted...

I did. There wasn't any this time

But what about future spills that will inevitably happen will you be so quick to defend them too because it's "just business"?

So we're supposed to act like 84 gallons is a problem because more could have spilled?

Yes, not COULD happen, WILL happen

These companies are notorious for disregarding safety regulations and damning the consequences, why would this be any different?
---

ZombiePelican posted...

But what about future spills that will inevitably happen will you be so quick to defend them too because it's "just business"?

I never said it's "just business" but bringing up major spills that rarely happen compared to the amount of oil constantly moved is a fairly good risk-reward trade-off to me. If you don't want pipelines then you can move oil by rail which is roughly 4.5 more dangerous to humans and the environment.

http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/news/energy/blog.html?b=business.financialpost.com/news/energy/pipelines-much-safer-than-shipping-oil-by-rail-fraser-institute-study-says&__lsa=8054-6e54
---

Yes, not COULD happen, WILL happen

These companies are notorious for disregarding safety regulations and damning the consequences, why would this be any different?

Call the precrime department.
---

SK8T3R215 posted...

ZombiePelican posted...

But what about future spills that will inevitably happen will you be so quick to defend them too because it's "just business"?

I never said it's "just business" but bringing up major spills that rarely happen compared to the amount of oil constantly moved is a fairly good risk-reward trade-off to me. If you don't want pipelines then you can move oil by rail which is roughly 4.5 more dangerous to humans and the environment.

http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/news/energy/blog.html?b=business.financialpost.com/news/energy/pipelines-much-safer-than-shipping-oil-by-rail-fraser-institute-study-says&__lsa=8054-6e54

Yes, oil spills "rarely happen"

https://www.sciencealert.com/north-dakota-has-experienced-more-than-700-oil-spills-in-the-past-year-alone
---

ZombiePelican posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

ZombiePelican posted...

I did. There wasn't any this time

But what about future spills that will inevitably happen will you be so quick to defend them too because it's "just business"?

So we're supposed to act like 84 gallons is a problem because more could have spilled?

Yes, not COULD happen, WILL happen

These companies are notorious for disregarding safety regulations and damning the consequences, why would this be any different?

They have WAY more guidelines (That ARE followed) than most of the rest of the world. Would you prefer oil that came from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela or other places that have NO guidelines, and use the funds to harm their citizens?
---

Medz8606 posted...

I am no tree humping hippie however I feel the environment should never be looked as insignificant.

How else is the oil going to be transported? By truck and trailer? You're already dumping a ton more pollution into the air through that method than the 84 gallons leaked and contained, without even factoring in the increased accident rate from trucks compared to pipelines. Same for boats.
---

Some unrealistic lefties in this topic.

To leak only that much is an incredible feat.

In piping systems, there are so many opportunities for leaks and there are often downtimes for repairs, etc. that result in losses.

84 gallons is literally less than 2 drums of oil. Probably less than a thousandth of a percent of annual output. That's stellar efficiency.
---

I always wondered how much gasoline was spilled at the gas station pumps everyday.
---

MaverickXeo posted...

They have WAY more guidelines (That ARE followed)

Lol what? Tell that to my friend's uncle who died in a plant explosion that happened due to disregarding safety regulations


MaverickXeo posted...

Would you prefer oil that came from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela or other places that have NO guidelines, and use the funds to harm their citizens?

I'd rather we not disregard the health and safety of our citizens for the sake of corporate profits
---

Pogo_Marimo posted...

Medz8606 posted...

I am no tree humping hippie however I feel the environment should never be looked as insignificant.

How else is the oil going to be transported? By truck and trailer? You're already dumping a ton more pollution into the air through that method than the 84 gallons leaked and contained, without even factoring in the increased accident rate from trucks compared to pipelines. Same for boats.

EXACTLY. Pipelines are the most efficient, safest, and environmentally conscious methods for moving oil.

A pipeline leaking is bad, but a truck/train travelling across country will pollute FAR more, cost more, and has greater risks for damage (accidents, etc). Look up the Lac-Megantic disaster. Id feel MUCH better having a pipeline run through my backyard, than a train going through it.
---

TC, do you realize how much you rely on oil every day in your modern life?
---

RamboCell29 posted...

Some unrealistic lefties in this topic.

To leak only that much is an incredible feat.

In piping systems, there are so many opportunities for leaks and there are often downtimes for repairs, etc. that result in losses.

84 gallons is literally less than 2 drums of oil. Probably less than a thousandth of a percent of annual output. That's stellar efficiency.

So if it's going to leak regardless,why are we putting it through a lake?
---

ZombiePelican posted...

Yes, oil spills "rarely happen"

https://www.sciencealert.com/north-dakota-has-experienced-more-than-700-oil-spills-in-the-past-year-alone

Major oil leaks not any size. My article points out they have more spill occurances but these are mostly small that are contained and cleaned.

Between 2003 and 2013, pipelines experienced more “occurrences” than rail (1,226 versus 127) but fewer issues when the numbers are adjusted to account for volume and distance.

The study concluded pipelines are likely to experience 0.049 occurrences per thousand barrels of oil equivalent transported and rail will experience about 0.227 occurrences per thousand boe transported.

Transportation Safety Board data show 73 per cent of pipeline occurrences resulted in spills of less than one cubic metre (about 1,000 litres), while 16 per cent didn’t cause any spill at all, the study notes.
---

TC you ride a horse and buggy right? Have solar panels installed on your house? I sure do hope you're not riding around in a vehicle or otherwise consuming said oil while whining about a couple drops spilled that was efficiently contained. Sure wouldn't want to be a hypocrite. Or is it ok as long as the oil comes from the middle East and is only leaking into brown people's water?
---

SK8T3R215 posted...

Major oil leaks not any size. My article points out they have more spill occurances but these are mostly small that are contained and cleaned.

And mine points out that there were more than 700 oil spills in North Dakota alone none of which were insignificant by any means

Your article is about financial bullshit so of course they're going to downplay the significance of the spills because money.

Seriously, why do you trust these companies when they've shown they can NEVER be trusted?
---

Medz8606 posted...

mattnd2007 posted...

I'm not going to say it's a good thing, it's not. But 84 gallons is pretty insignificant.

SK8T3R215 posted...

84 gallons leaked vs how much that was transported?

Again one gallon is to much. Does not matter how much was transported and how much money it put into billionaires pockets.

How about how much money it put into the pockets of the workers who worked on the pipeline in order to feed their families? The maintenance workers? Engineers? I could go on forever.
---

ZombiePelican posted...

And mine points out that there were more than 700 oil spills in North Dakota alone none of which were insignificant by any means

Actually most of them are insignificant. Go to the link they provided which shows what was the incident (no always oil) and if it was contained or not.

ZombiePelican posted...

Your article is about financial bullshit so of course they're going to downplay the significance of the spills because money.

My article is a study by the Fraser Institute public policy think-tank using official statistics. Your link is someone going to the incident reports and picking and choosing one's to include in the article with no statistical basis. So how is yours more credible again?
---

SK8T3R215 posted...

Actually most of them are insignificant. Go to the link they provided which shows what was the incident (no always oil) and if it was contained or not.

And we're not talking small leaks here. One event on the 18 May 2016 saw 400 barrels of oil (16,800 gallons) leak out in Bowman County, spreading more than 100 metres outside the refinery gates and into the surrounding environment.

That same event saw an additional 2,500 barrels (1 million gallons) of brine leak outside the facility.

But here's the thing - if those figures sound alarming, they're nothing compared to the more recent oil spill that occurred in Billings County, just 2.5 hours away from where the Standing Rock protest took place.

Back in December, it was reported that the Billings Country spill leaked 176,000 gallons of crude oil (4,200 barrels) into Ash Coulee Creek and the surrounding countryside, due to a fault in the Belle Fourche Pipeline.

Yeah no. Try again

TIL: 17000 gallons is insignificant


SK8T3R215 posted...

So how is yours more credible again?

Because it isn't done by a financial institution looking to justify their rich buddies environmental damage and greed while minw was done by people actually on the ground
---

ZombiePelican posted...

Yeah no. Try again

Um ok so you reposted how they showed two larger spills. I'm talking about the other 698 which were very small and/or contained. Which goes back to my original post

Actually most of them are insignificant.

ZombiePelican posted...

Because it isn't done by a financial institution looking to justify their rich buddies environmental damage and greed while minw was done by people actually on the ground

The Fraser Institute is a Canadian public policy think tank and registered charity.

So no they're not a financial institution.

How is yours done by people on the ground? They just went to the incidents link and used those large spills to enforce their point while ignoring other small or contained spills. Mine was done using official stats over a long time period to come to conclusions. Yours is using biased information to support their argument and not coming to any significant conclusions.
---