Pipeline Problem down South 8

[cranky108]

In general I agree, but I heard something of secraid ground, which if true maybe part of a god thing. So it maybe worthwhile to just move the pipeline route.

After all we don't hear much about demolishing churches for pipelines.

But I also haven't been keeping up with all the facts.

In the case of a pipeline with no backup, would it not be prudent to keep rail, or truck loading facilities as a second transportation method?

 

[ornerynorsk]

For people groups with no written history, "sacred ground" is largely fuzzy logic after about 3 generations, barring the discovery of artifacts. My ancestral Norse cohorts established encampments all over the north-eastern coast of north America and inland at Kensington MN and near Bigstone SD and possibly several other locations. Can I now lay claim to those areas? I agree in principal though, if remains and artifacts are found, we should not be desecrating those sites. However, with DNA technology available, I think efforts should be made to connect remains to currently living groups, both for the purpose of scientific discovery and to help settle disputes where ancient remains may very well have no relevancy whatever to the currently living. There is a case like this in the last few years, but the details escape me at the moment. Life is messy!

It is better to have enough ideas for some of them to be wrong, than to be always right by having no ideas at all.

 

[JNieman]

I think you're being belligerently obtuse and insensitive to absolutely justifiable concerns by a people that deserve a little more respect than you're displaying.

 

[ornerynorsk]

Your opinion. Yes, I tend toward insensitivity, no apologies. Too much sensitivity would kill every project before it gets off the drawing board. You can't please everyone.

Bells are not easily un-rung. This is the way history played out. I display profound respect to those that work toward betterment of their lives in ways other than becoming giant thorns in the posterior of others.

In addition, I believe that when human remains are found in any construction dig, work stops so a proper investigation and disposition can be made. That much is already in place. Whether this is always followed is a function of company culture and whether the guy on the Cat is keeping a sharp eye or not.

It is better to have enough ideas for some of them to be wrong, than to be always right by having no ideas at all.

 

[BigInch]

Yes, you could say that. Petroleum is the coak of the industrial age. Tar sand is the heroin. Pipelines, las mulas. Should the transporter be punished? I don't know. Certainly yes, if they do something wrong in the process, but if the pipeline stays togther in one piece and doesn't leak, you might be inclined to say, "No, not really". Same logic as the Colombians used at one time. "We are just supplying the demand. Get rid of the demand and you will have no problems from us, because we will be out of that business well before the demand dries up."

From what I understand of the motive, those protesting just just don't want the heroine, as it only increases the demand for petroleum in general, which makes it that much harder to get off of it later. Many think, rightly or wrongly, that tar sand has heavy metals that drop to and get embedded in the bottom mud, so that makes it that much worse. If society gets any more used to using any more than what is used now, then it will be simply that much harder to adapt when supply comes to the end and, in the meantime, there will be no further incentive to fund developent of alternatives. From what I gather the same logic, among other arguments, is used to resist fracking.

 

[Spartan5]

This is the way history played out. I display profound respect to those that work toward betterment of their lives in ways other than becoming giant thorns in the posterior of others.

The way history played out was the attempted, systemic extermination of these peoples' ancestors; complete with lies, misdealings, and outright thievery by our government in the taking of their lands. It was the USA's Holocaust, if not worse. You can bet they have a thorn in their posterior that they'd like to place elsewhere, and this is all too familiar to them.

 

[JNieman]

Thorns and sides are relative.

Those you perceive to be a thorn in someone's side has the opposite view. They are the side which suffers from the thorn.

Genocide and forced relocation is a helluva thorn.

Despite forced relocation, our country /has/ promised them, through treaty, that the lands they are protesting on, which the planned pipeline would traverse, are actually owed to the tribe because of the Fort Laramie Treaty which has been trampled on, since.

I expect that simple Eminent Domain desires can't take land granted to the Dakota/Lakota Nation through treaty.

 

[ornerynorsk]

Spartan5, et al. No, I don't think you can say it is worse than the holocaust. Not even close. So what is the remedy? I'm simply stating a fact - this is the way history played out. 130+ years and 4 or 5 generations after the fact, how does one get out of the rut of self-pity and self-destruction and move on with life so that there is meaning and purpose? There is no reset button to undo the horrible things that were done. This is not about a pipeline, the pipeline thing is just a passive-aggressive response. I don't have the answer and I bet not a lot of other people do, either.

It is better to have enough ideas for some of them to be wrong, than to be always right by having no ideas at all.

 

[JNieman]

It is not the past. They are a different nation of people. That live. Today. Now. They only want promises and treaties honored. Such documents last longer than lives. I don't expect anyone believes that we should ignore our Constitution, Bill of Rights, or any other document important to our nation that was written over 250 years ago simply because we need to "move on" and not worry about what happened 4 or 5 generations ago.

 

[BigInch]

OneryNorsk, You've pretty much still got hold of Greenland. Not sure how that happened myself.

"For people groups with no written history, "sacred ground" is largely fuzzy logic after about 3 generations, barring the discovery of artifacts."

What makes unwritten history any less valid than written history. I suppose that makes perfect logic, if your civilization can write. Passing culture down through unwritten means is arguably more meaningful and powerful than, for example, reading the Bible. I myself could far more easily believe what I heard with my own ears what my grandfather told me as opposed to what Luther or King James' scribes wrote in either version of their bibles, which I note don't agree and were made through translation and political negotiations several thousand years after those happenings.

Anyway, I think native North Americans are considerably different from most of us in their cultural beliefs concerning their environment, although I admit I have little understanding of what other native cultures may or may not believe in other parts of the world. Put in simple terms that I am capable of grasping, natives of North American tend to believe that the land owns them, rather than the reverse, which I believe is prevalent in European derived cultures. One North American tribal chief, after observing effects of gold mining, was known for his saying, "The white man is so greedy that he wraps his own snot up in a little cloth and puts it in his pocket." My personal belief is that one day, maybe sooner than we expect, all of us will find out that the Earth does indeed own us. In the meantime I believe that we should respect the ways of the historic land owners of the regions we are working around. They may just turn out to have the best idea in the long run. Just because they didn't write it down, doesn't make it any less valid.

 

[ornerynorsk]

That's all fine and dandy, but you know as well as I do, and as well as everyone else does, that there is no amicable closure to what you are suggesting. I'm no lawyer (see, I do have some endearing qualities after all!) but there are time constraints, whether written or not, associated with all legal treaties, agreements, contracts, etc. If a treaty, etc is not exercised, either by force or mutual agreement, at what point in time does it become null and void? The Constitution and Bill of Rights hold water because we exercise it, it is not just a dead piece of paper. I agree with you that the tribal nations got a very raw deal. The time to have done something about it is long past. Like a century ago. Do we create just as large an injustice by stripping ownership of all land and property and returning it to the "rightful" owners? That's a pretty neat formula for civil war. There is no good solution. There is no choice but to move on and make something of oneself with the hand that life has dealt. Quit living in the past. Learn from it, ensure it is not repeated, and move on.

It is better to have enough ideas for some of them to be wrong, than to be always right by having no ideas at all.

 

[ornerynorsk]

Ouch, Big Inch. Being confused with a Dane, now that's really low. (humor intended)

It is better to have enough ideas for some of them to be wrong, than to be always right by having no ideas at all.

 

[BigInch]

Correct, I have no solution, just saying that respect for the land occupants are always a high priority in a successful pipeline company. Pipeline companies typically are only renters.

Good to see you have a funny bone. Not exactly intended as such, but I do know there exists a multitude of, shall we say, "differences", between the various Scandinavian nationalities, having worked for a Swedish company (not mobile phones) for 10 years. Happily, these days they are usually taken in good humor.

 

[Don56]

Pipeline failures and commercial airplane crashes are similar in that they both are low probability, high order of magnitude events. When either occurs it's big news. But many more people are killed by automobile crashes and the pollution caused by the consumers of petroleum products far exceeds the pollution of spills. Both of these are low magnitude events so they are tolerated more easily and less news worthy.

 

[BigInch]

"pollution caused by the consumers of petroleum products far exceeds the pollution of spills"

Yes, exactly. I believe that the pollution by consumers aspect is the real objectionable part of the equation, except perhaps for the people that own land that will be affected. The pipelines are simply a convenient point for attack.

 

[IRstuff]

But, that's in the aggregate; we, as individuals,have been programmed to think that individuals do not have impact on smog, elections, etc. Pipelines are not aggregates, they are single, high-impact, things. Also, it's always easier to blame someone else than one's self. We blame drug cartels and various countries for importing drugs, but that demand comes from us. No demand, no drug cartels; they've have to go back to doing common extortion and crimes. Likewise, no demand for oil, no pipelines needed. Unfortunately, we've yet to find a substitute that even remotely comes close to the energy density and usability.

Pogo said it best, "We have met the enemy, and he is us."

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529

 

[dik]

The NTSB is getting involved:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-alabama-pipeline-ntsb-idUSKBN12Z2Q7

Dik

 

[BigInch]

Thanks for that link.

I notice there is another link on that page

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-transport-idUSKBN13002A

to an article about how BC hopes to prohibit ocean tankers from entering their coastal area now. This is the direct result of the court case stalling the Gateway Pipeline overland through BC having been recently overturned, so this will be an end-around attempt to keep that project stonewalled.