CANNON BALL, N.D. — The simmering showdown here between the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and the company building the Dakota Access crude oil pipeline began as a legal battle.
It has turned into a movement.
Over the past few weeks, thousands of Native Americans representing tribes from all over the country have traveled to this central North Dakota reservation to camp in a nearby meadow and show solidarity with a tribe they think is once again receiving a raw deal at the hands of commercial interests and the U.S. government.
Frank White Bull, a tribal council member of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, was overcome with emotion as he looked out over the ocean of brightly colored tepees and tents that have popped up on this impromptu 80-acre campground.
“You think no one is going to help,” said White Bull, 48. “But the people have shown us they’re here to help us. We made our stance and the Indian Nation heard us. It’s making us whole. It’s making us wanyi oyate. One nation. We’re not alone.”
At issue for the tribes is the 1,172-mile Dakota Access pipeline — or DAPL — that runs through North and South Dakota, Iowa and Illinois, and has a capacity to transport more than 500,000 barrels of oil a day. The $3.8 billion pipeline now under construction was approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to cross under the Missouri River just a mile north of the reservation.
That river is the source of water for the reservation’s 8,000 residents. Any leak, tribal leaders argue, would cause immediate and irreparable harm. And tribal leaders point to what they consider a double standard, saying that the pipeline was originally planned to cross the Missouri north of Bismarck, the state capital, but was rerouted because of powerful opposition that did not want a threat to the water supply there.
The tribe says it also is fighting the pipeline’s path because even though it does not cross the reservation, it does traverse sacred territory taken away from the tribe in a series of treaties that were forced upon it over the past 150 years.
The reservation sued the Corps in July, saying that the agency had not entered into any meaningful consultation with the tribe as required by law, and that the Corps had ignored federal regulations governing environmental standards and historic preservation.
“The construction and operation of the pipeline, as authorized by the Corps, threatens the Tribe’s environmental and economic well-being, and would damage and destroy sites of great historic, religious and cultural significance to the Tribe,” the lawsuit asserts.
“This pipeline is going through huge swaths of ancestral land,” said Dean DePountis, the tribe’s lawyer. “It would be like constructing a pipeline through Arlington Cemetery or under St. Patrick’s Cathedral.”
Violence flares
Tensions flared Saturday when Dakota Access workers plowed under two locations adjacent to the pipeline path that just a day earlier the tribe had identified in a court filing as sacred and historic sites. When tribe members and others tried to prevent the action, they were stopped by private security workers for Dakota Access who used guard dogs and pepper spray to drive them back. Photos of the encounter shared online showed snarling German shepherds lunging at protesters. A spokesman for the tribe said six protesters were bitten. The Morton County Sheriff’s Department reported that four security guards and two dogs were injured.
The Missouri River is seen beyond an encampment Sept. 4, 2016, near Cannon Ball, N.D., where thousands have gathered to join the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s protest of the Dakota Access Pipeline. (ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images)
That incident prompted the tribe’s lawyers, from the nonprofit legal organization Earthjustice, to request a temporary restraining order on any further construction on the pipeline in that location. U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg granted the order Tuesday. Boasberg said he will issue a ruling Friday on the tribe’s request to halt all work on the project until permitting issues and the tribe’s disputes with the Corps have been properly addressed.
On Tuesday, several pipeline opponents attached themselves to Dakota Access construction equipment in a “lock-down” protest. Others hung a large white banner on a bulldozer that read “Water is our first medicine.” Police watched from afar, but did not make any arrests, according to a tribe member.
Lawyers for the Corps have argued in court that there was a standard review process for the pipeline and that the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe was consulted on the project.
Representatives of Dakota Access, a subsidiary of Texas-based Energy Transfer Partners, declined to comment for this article and directed a reporter to the company’s website.
Large labor unions, including the Laborers’ International Union of North America, have supported the pipeline and in a statement characterized protesters as “extremists.”
Support for tribe
Even as the battle over the pipeline was playing out in court, support for the tribe’s position poured in from all over. The United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues has called on the United States to provide the tribe a “fair, independent, impartial, open and transparent process to resolve this serious issue and to avoid escalation into violence and further human rights abuses.” More than 200 Native American tribes have declared their support, and many have sent food and other supplies.
On social media, activists have used the #noDAPL hashtag to spread information about the protest and provide live video feeds from the campsite and from protests. Actors Leonardo DiCaprio, Shailene Woodley, Rosario Dawson and Susan Sarandon have offered to support the tribe’s efforts.
Environmentalists also have joined the fray, hoping to halt construction of the pipeline and make it go the way of the Keystone XL pipeline, which ultimately was killed by an order from President Obama last year. Obama and first lady Michelle Obama visited the Standing Rock reservation in 2014. The tribes and environmental groups have appealed to the president to use his authority to halt the Dakota Access project, but they have received no response from the White House.
Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein toured the area and met with protesters Tuesday. Speaking at a campfire meeting in the evening, she called on Obama to “take back this illegitimate permit given by the Army Corps of Engineers.”
Neither Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton nor GOP nominee Donald Trump has stated a position on the pipeline.
For Native American environmentalists, the cause extends beyond the boundaries of the reservations.
“The goal is to stop the pipeline, and it’s not just for us,” said Nick Tilson, 34, of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. “We know there are 17 million people downstream from us. The problem is bad for whatever community is near this pipeline. It’s not going to be if it breaks, it’s going to be when it breaks.”
A sense of reawakening
At the growing campsite, just a mile down the road from the pipeline’s planned route, a sense of rural village life is emerging. There is a central kitchen where meals are prepared morning, noon and night. Another huge tent provides clothing, food and toys. Water and other supplies arrive by the truckload. Children run about kicking a basketball and squealing. The whinnies of horses blend with the whir of a chain saw cutting firewood and the far-off beat of a drum. Smoke fills the air.
Many of the Native Americans who have come here speak of a spiritual reawakening taking place.
As morning broke Tuesday, Jefferson Greene, a member of the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, Ore., greeted the day with a song in Ichshkiin, his voice carrying across the slowly stirring campground. The song was giving thanks for the light coming over the horizon and for the strength it provides, he said. Greene had arrived the night before with his aunt and his young son.
“There’s such a feeling of unity here,” he said. “When tribes put the call out for help, we need to support them. We all need to be here for each other.”
Jo Kay Dowell, 59, of Tahlequah, Okla., was beginning her third week at the camp in a tent she shares with her daughter Anna Walker, 25, and granddaughter Kyah Vann, 6.
Dowell, a member of the Quapaw and Cherokee tribes, said she has become frustrated hearing from so many Native Americans that “there’s nothing we can do about it” when it comes to standing up for tribes’ rights.
“To see this many people come fight for something like this is a dream come true,” she said.
Drucilla Burns, an octogenarian and tribal elder from Fort Mojave Indian Tribe in Needles, Calif., sat under a stretched tarp eating a breakfast of tortillas and buffalo cooked over a nearby fire.
“Water is what we’re made of,” said Burns, the elder from California. “We’re supposed to be the protectors of the land and water. My god, they took everything away from us. And now they want to take our water, too?”
For Dave Archambault, chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, the questions about what happens after Friday’s ruling are existential. Standing in his back yard, he smoked a cigarette and recited a list of treaties that his people made with the government that were broken whenever economic interests outweighed tribal rights.
“How do you eliminate a race?” he asked, letting the question hang in the air. “That’s what the government has been trying to do for 200 years. But we’re still here. We have maintained our culture. We’ve maintained our way of life. We’ve maintained our dignity. We’re still here.”
Seen this situation developing. Not only tragic, but the corporations profiting off this are so far up their own ass they don't even see reason at this point.
feeder wrote: It's stupid to sink money into dangerous pipelines when mass clean(er) energy is just around the corner.
There are a lot more petroleum based products that are commercially made than just gasoline/fuel.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Orlanth wrote: Didnt Obama want to build a military base on reservation land because to get other land would tread on land ownership rights of other Americans.
It appears that even now the native peoples still have no actual rights to their land.
Land "ownership" isn't all that ironclad for any American, just see where your rights to "your" land get you if you stop paying taxes on it.
Politics always comes into play with land development whether it's Trump's golf courses and casinos or where to put nuclear power plants or land fills or oil derricks or wind mills. The people with the most political clout/money get their way and the people with less political power/money just have to deal with it.
feeder wrote: It's stupid to sink money into dangerous pipelines when mass clean(er) energy is just around the corner.
There's clean energy around the corner? Really?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Orlanth wrote: Didnt Obama want to build a military base on reservation land because to get other land would tread on land ownership rights of other Americans.
It appears that even now the native peoples still have no actual rights to their land.
Do British citizens even have mineral rights to their land?
feeder wrote: It's stupid to sink money into dangerous pipelines when mass clean(er) energy is just around the corner.
There are a lot more petroleum based products that are commercially made than just gasoline/fuel.
Good point.
My main beef with pipelines is when (not if) they fail, it's a huge clusterfeth of a catastrophic mess, whereas when (again, not if) a truck or trainload goes, it's not as bad. (still bad though).
You know electricity has to be generated right? Right?
Ok lets take a refresher. A source of energy is something burned or used to generate energy. A Use of energy is something that takes that energy and converts it to mechanical effort. For example an electric car uses energy to convert it to movement. It does not generate the energy.
A tesla is a user of energy not a source of energy.
Frazzled wrote: You know electricity has to be generated right? Right?
Ok lets take a refresher. A source of energy is something burned or used to generate energy. A Use of energy is something that takes that energy and converts it to mechanical effort. For example an electric car uses energy to convert it to movement. It does not generate the energy.
A tesla is a user of energy not a source of energy.
Yes Fraz. Hydro is a big thing where I come from. Pretty clean. Tidal and geo thermal are great ways to generate clean power. Solar is getting there, not yet though.
Coal fired plants need to feth right off though. When is this, 1886?
We get it, your old and new ways of thinking and doing things scare you Fraz.
Anyway on topic, a few friends of mine have been keeping an eye on this for awhile now. Glad the cops have largely been hands off and that so many tribes are standing together.
Frazzled wrote: You know electricity has to be generated right? Right?
Ok lets take a refresher. A source of energy is something burned or used to generate energy. A Use of energy is something that takes that energy and converts it to mechanical effort. For example an electric car uses energy to convert it to movement. It does not generate the energy.
A tesla is a user of energy not a source of energy.
Yes Fraz. Hydro is a big thing where I come from. Pretty clean. Tidal and geo thermal are great ways to generate clean power. Solar is getting there, not yet though.
Coal fired plants need to feth right off though. When is this, 1886?
You know whats really cool?
Hydro, tidal, solar, and geo make up less than 10% (I'd say less than 5% but can't confirm).
Coal is not what the pipeline is about.
So there is no new tech around the corner-you just made it up. Way to go.
So they are suing about land they don't have title to, based on the argument the land is a cemetery?
Frazzled wrote: You know electricity has to be generated right? Right?
Ok lets take a refresher. A source of energy is something burned or used to generate energy. A Use of energy is something that takes that energy and converts it to mechanical effort. For example an electric car uses energy to convert it to movement. It does not generate the energy.
A tesla is a user of energy not a source of energy.
Yes Fraz. Hydro is a big thing where I come from. Pretty clean. Tidal and geo thermal are great ways to generate clean power. Solar is getting there, not yet though.
Coal fired plants need to feth right off though. When is this, 1886?
You know whats really cool?
Hydro, tidal, solar, and geo make up less than 10% (I'd say less than 5% but can't confirm).
Yes Fraz, hence, just around the corner.
So there is no new tech around the corner-you just made it up. Way to go.
Wait, so it's currently at 5 or 10%, but mass clean energy is not just around the corner?
Coal is not what the pipeline is about.
You're right, this train of thought (see what I did there?) is OT.
So they are suing about land they don't have title to, based on the argument the land is a cemetery?
Basically, yes. They are claiming the land was ceded to them in the original treaties, but taken away bit by bit over the years. Given what we uncovered up here with our Truth and Reconciliation Commission, I easily believe the tribe was lied to and abused out of their treaty-granted rights.
I'm with the Dakota people on this one (and not just because we borrowed their name for my truck)
Sorry, I'm the first to agree that the many different Native American people got screwed by our government/people in the past, but at this point, reversing 130ish years of land transactions and the like, would almost be akin to reparations for slavery.
It's just unrealistic. The legal rights of the current land owners should not be trampled because of the actions of over a century ago.
Thats not just around the corner. Thats "I have no idea how this happens in the realm of physics currently"
So there is no new tech around the corner-you just made it up. Way to go.
Wait, so it's currently at 5 or 10%, but mass clean energy is not just around the corner?
5-10 < 100
So they are suing about land they don't have title to, based on the argument the land is a cemetery?
Basically, yes. They are claiming the land was ceded to them in the original treaties, but taken away bit by bit over the years. Given what we uncovered up here with our Truth and Reconciliation Commission, I easily believe the tribe was lied to and abused out of their treaty-granted rights.
If the gov wants to build a road and your house is in the way they give you money for it and kick you out. We all share the same rights.
Also this would not be a problem if people finished the job. When you fight a war and you take their land finish them all off dont give them some land.... We still got quebec problems because of that. Finish the job.
Frazzled wrote: You know electricity has to be generated right? Right?
Ok lets take a refresher. A source of energy is something burned or used to generate energy. A Use of energy is something that takes that energy and converts it to mechanical effort. For example an electric car uses energy to convert it to movement. It does not generate the energy.
A tesla is a user of energy not a source of energy.
Yes Fraz. Hydro is a big thing where I come from. Pretty clean. Tidal and geo thermal are great ways to generate clean power. Solar is getting there, not yet though.
Coal fired plants need to feth right off though. When is this, 1886?
You know whats really cool?
Hydro, tidal, solar, and geo make up less than 10% (I'd say less than 5% but can't confirm).
Coal is not what the pipeline is about.
So there is no new tech around the corner-you just made it up. Way to go.
So they are suing about land they don't have title to, based on the argument the land is a cemetery?
Frazz, there's TED talks about Lithium power that are about 10 years old at this point. There's plenty of other options that aren't Hydro Tidal, Solar, and Geo.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
djones520 wrote: Sorry, I'm the first to agree that the many different Native American people got screwed by our government/people in the past, but at this point, reversing 130ish years of land transactions and the like, would almost be akin to reparations for slavery.
It's just unrealistic. The legal rights of the current land owners should not be trampled because of the actions of over a century ago.
How so? If a culture has a cemetery, regardless of race or belief, that land should be respected. The same thing happens with archaeological digs that discover ancient relics or fossils.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
OgreChubbs wrote: If the gov wants to build a road and your house is in the way they give you money for it and kick you out. We all share the same rights.
Also this would not be a problem if people finished the job. When you fight a war and you take their land finish them all off dont give them some land.... We still got quebec problems because of that. Finish the job.
A house is a lot different from "my grandparents grandparents were buried there". Ever see Poltergeist?
Iron_Captain wrote: Ah, good to see the US still being its old self. No justice for indians, eh?
Still using tanks on your own citizens in Grozny comrade?
No, we have learned the skill of subtlety. Instead of just throwing more tanks at a problem, our problems now just mysteriously disappear without a trace. It is like Stalin once said: "No man, no problem."
So now, when are these troublesome savages scheduled to be massacred deported?
Iron_Captain wrote: Ah, good to see the US still being its old self. No justice for indians, eh?
Still using tanks on your own citizens in Grozny comrade?
No, we have learned the skill of subtlety. Instead of just throwing more tanks at a problem, our problems now just mysteriously disappear without a trace. It is like Stalin once said: "No man, no problem."
So now, when are these troublesome savages scheduled to be massacred deported?
You wild and crazy guys!
Frazz, there's TED talks about Lithium power that are about 10 years old at this point. There's plenty of other options that aren't Hydro Tidal, Solar, and Geo.
All hat and no cattle. Lithium is for storage, not generation.
How so? If a culture has a cemetery, regardless of race or belief, that land should be respected. The same thing happens with archaeological digs that discover ancient relics or fossils.
You can't however, claim a region the size of New England is your cemetery. Ok, maybe China could... Their argument about the river probably has more merit though, and people power can be a force. Go for it.
Its weird but I've always found land issues in the West as confusing and very aggressive.
OgreChubbs wrote: If the gov wants to build a road and your house is in the way they give you money for it and kick you out. We all share the same rights.
Also this would not be a problem if people finished the job. When you fight a war and you take their land finish them all off dont give them some land.... We still got quebec problems because of that. Finish the job.
I looked it up and indeed you have your plot of land for 100 years. So unless they covered the land with dead every 99 years the land cant be called a cemetry.
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ruled Tuesday that work will temporarily stop between North Dakota's State Highway 1806 and a point 20 miles east of Lake Oahe, but may continue on privately owned land west of the highway because he believes the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers lacks jurisdiction on private property.
ADVERTISING
The judge said he would rule by the end of the day Friday on the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe's challenge of federal regulators' decision to grant permits to the Dallas-based operators of the Dakota Access Pipeline, which will cross North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa and Illinois.
OgreChubbs wrote: I looked it up and indeed you have your plot of land for 100 years. So unless they covered the land with dead every 99 years the land cant be called a cemetry.
So, only another 30 years before we can dig up those world war 2 cemeteries in France then.
Sometimes it is not about what is legal, but what is right. Legally they may not have a claim to that land any more. And really, do you think they were consulted when those laws were being written? How much of a say did the native americans have when it came to the laws which were applied to them and their historical graveyards and other places of spiritual importance?
jasper76 wrote: I'd like to know why private security companies have been empowered to deploy pepper spray and attack dogs on unarmed protestors.
Some more unbiased reporting tells the story about how hundreds of protesters stormed the work site, and was damaging property when the security responded.
Frazzled wrote: You know electricity has to be generated right? Right?
Ok lets take a refresher. A source of energy is something burned or used to generate energy. A Use of energy is something that takes that energy and converts it to mechanical effort. For example an electric car uses energy to convert it to movement. It does not generate the energy.
A tesla is a user of energy not a source of energy.
Yes Fraz. Hydro is a big thing where I come from. Pretty clean. Tidal and geo thermal are great ways to generate clean power. Solar is getting there, not yet though.
Coal fired plants need to feth right off though. When is this, 1886?
Hydroelectric is very region specific, as is tidal. Plus,tidal and geo-thermal are going to be a pipe dream for at least a few more decades, as far as serious contenders to replace fossil fuels go.
Solar power is a dead end. Wind power, like hydro-electric is very region specific.
If we have any "clean" sources of electrical generation within the next fifty years, it will be nuclear fusion. But as we found out with nuclear fission, getting it off the ground is going to be costly.
Petrochemicals as an energy source are going to be around for a while yet.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jasper76 wrote: I'd like to know why private security companies have been empowered to deploy pepper spray and attack dogs on unarmed protestors.
In many States, private security firms have arrest and police power on the properties they are contracted for, since they are required to meet those States' standards and regulations.
Frazzled wrote: You know electricity has to be generated right? Right?
Ok lets take a refresher. A source of energy is something burned or used to generate energy. A Use of energy is something that takes that energy and converts it to mechanical effort. For example an electric car uses energy to convert it to movement. It does not generate the energy.
A tesla is a user of energy not a source of energy.
Yes Fraz. Hydro is a big thing where I come from. Pretty clean. Tidal and geo thermal are great ways to generate clean power. Solar is getting there, not yet though.
Coal fired plants need to feth right off though. When is this, 1886?
tidal and geo-thermal are going to be a pipe dream for at least a few more decades, as far as serious contenders to replace fossil fuels go.
Well, yeah, that's what I meant by "around the corner". Look at computer tech a couple decades ago vs now.
Solar power is a dead end.
How so? Tech gets better and more efficient with development.
If we have any "clean" sources of electrical generation within the next fifty years, it will be nuclear fusion. But as we found out with nuclear fission, getting it off the ground is going to be costly
Fusion would be great. It may be the Alchemy of our time, though.
How so? Tech gets better and more efficient with development.
I dunno about Canada, but here in the States, the Federal Government and private industry has poured billions into solar power over the last forty years, and it hasn't evolved in practical use beyond a few solar farms, home use, and powering individual devices/power company access stations. Maybe one day it might amount to something. But as of right now, it's a dead end street. It's not as efficient as other sources of energy generation, both existing and projected.
In many States, private security firms have arrest and police power on the properties they are contracted for, since they are required to meet those States' standards and regulations.
Don't know about North and South Dakota, though.
Pretty messed up that people would grant private companies the power to sic attack dogs on themselves, but I suppose in a democracy you deserve what you get.
In many States, private security firms have arrest and police power on the properties they are contracted for, since they are required to meet those States' standards and regulations.
Don't know about North and South Dakota, though.
Pretty messed up that people would grant private companies the power to sic attack dogs on themselves, but I suppose in a democracy you deserve what you get.
The attack dogs does seem atypical but I'm not familiar with North Dakota laws. Trespassing onto an active construction site, disrupting the work, damaging property and refusing to leave is going to get people pepper sprayed and arrested in pretty much any jurisdiction in America. The Sioux have a right to protest but they chose to exercise that right in an unlawful manner which is a poor choice on their part. They already succeeded in stopping the work via an injunction from a federal judge so they didn't need to break the law to halt the work on the disputed land. Hopefully they abstain from instigating violent confrontations in the future.
In many States, private security firms have arrest and police power on the properties they are contracted for, since they are required to meet those States' standards and regulations.
Don't know about North and South Dakota, though.
Pretty messed up that people would grant private companies the power to sic attack dogs on themselves, but I suppose in a democracy you deserve what you get.
The attack dogs does seem atypical but I'm not familiar with North Dakota laws. Trespassing onto an active construction site, disrupting the work, damaging property and refusing to leave is going to get people pepper sprayed and arrested in pretty much any jurisdiction in America. The Sioux have a right to protest but they chose to exercise that right in an unlawful manner which is a poor choice on their part. They already succeeded in stopping the work via an injunction from a federal judge so they didn't need to break the law to halt the work on the disputed land. Hopefully they abstain from instigating violent confrontations in the future.
You need the right area to take full advantage.
A Nation like UK could get some serious tidal power though.
That is very much true. The US has some reasonably active volcanic areas, doesn't it? Yellowstone, for example. So there is probably the potential for Geothermal to play a larger part in US energy production, even if only in certain regions.
You need the right area to take full advantage.
A Nation like UK could get some serious tidal power though.
That is very much true. The US has some reasonably active volcanic areas, doesn't it? Yellowstone, for example. So there is probably the potential for Geothermal to play a larger part in US energy production, even if only in certain regions.
No one really lives close enough to these Geothermal activities to make sense...
In many States, private security firms have arrest and police power on the properties they are contracted for, since they are required to meet those States' standards and regulations.
Don't know about North and South Dakota, though.
Pretty messed up that people would grant private companies the power to sic attack dogs on themselves, but I suppose in a democracy you deserve what you get.
The attack dogs does seem atypical but I'm not familiar with North Dakota laws. Trespassing onto an active construction site, disrupting the work, damaging property and refusing to leave is going to get people pepper sprayed and arrested in pretty much any jurisdiction in America. The Sioux have a right to protest but they chose to exercise that right in an unlawful manner which is a poor choice on their part. They already succeeded in stopping the work via an injunction from a federal judge so they didn't need to break the law to halt the work on the disputed land. Hopefully they abstain from instigating violent confrontations in the future.
Significantly, no protestors have been arrested.
Not everyone who commits an unlawful act gets arrested and you don't have to arrest somebody to be justified in using pepper spray against them. If neither the construction company nor the oil company chooses to press charges that doesn't really signify anything of importance.
In many States, private security firms have arrest and police power on the properties they are contracted for, since they are required to meet those States' standards and regulations.
Don't know about North and South Dakota, though.
Pretty messed up that people would grant private companies the power to sic attack dogs on themselves, but I suppose in a democracy you deserve what you get.
The attack dogs does seem atypical but I'm not familiar with North Dakota laws. Trespassing onto an active construction site, disrupting the work, damaging property and refusing to leave is going to get people pepper sprayed and arrested in pretty much any jurisdiction in America. The Sioux have a right to protest but they chose to exercise that right in an unlawful manner which is a poor choice on their part. They already succeeded in stopping the work via an injunction from a federal judge so they didn't need to break the law to halt the work on the disputed land. Hopefully they abstain from instigating violent confrontations in the future.
Significantly, no protestors have been arrested.
No police where on hand when the altercation occurred, and when they arrived, the crowd dispersed. They were not witness to any specific individuals committing a crime, so who were they to arrest?
How so? Tech gets better and more efficient with development.
I dunno about Canada, but here in the States, the Federal Government and private industry has poured billions into solar power over the last forty years, and it hasn't evolved in practical use beyond a few solar farms, home use, and powering individual devices/power company access stations. Maybe one day it might amount to something. But as of right now, it's a dead end street. It's not as efficient as other sources of energy generation, both existing and projected.
Its not a dead end when you're raking in Federal tax dollars to install them everywhere.
How so? Tech gets better and more efficient with development.
I dunno about Canada, but here in the States, the Federal Government and private industry has poured billions into solar power over the last forty years, and it hasn't evolved in practical use beyond a few solar farms, home use, and powering individual devices/power company access stations. Maybe one day it might amount to something. But as of right now, it's a dead end street. It's not as efficient as other sources of energy generation, both existing and projected.
Its not a dead end when you're raking in Federal tax dollars to install them everywhere.
We have terms for that: "Pork Barrel" and "politics as usual". It isn't the first time worthless politicians lobbied for wasteful spending in their constituencies to buy votes. Or voting for spending measures to cater to special interest groups, lobbyists, and industry reps for votes and political donations.
The Feds sank a -ton of money into wind too. And it's still a region specific power source, nowhere the "oil killer" that some made it out to be back in the 1990's.
But I guess you are right insofar as solar not being a dead end to those getting paid.
No police where on hand when the altercation occurred, and when they arrived, the crowd dispersed. They were not witness to any specific individuals committing a crime, so who were they to arrest?
This begs the question, why weren't the police there to begin with. I heard news of this demonstration going down at least a week ago. Seems pretty derelict not to keep the peace in a situation of guaranteed tension, but rather leave it to companymen with German Shepherds and pepper spray.
No police where on hand when the altercation occurred, and when they arrived, the crowd dispersed. They were not witness to any specific individuals committing a crime, so who were they to arrest?
This begs the question, why weren't the police there to begin with. I heard news of this demonstration going down at least a week ago. Seems pretty derelict not to keep the peace in a situation of guaranteed tension, but rather leave it to companymen with German Shepherds and pepper spray.
If the work site is being actively guarded by a security company and dogs why push the protest onto the site and initiate a physical confrontation? Holding the protest directly adjacent to the work site gets the point across, provides for all of the visuals you need to disseminate to the media and social media and avoids anyone getting hurt or committing unlawful acts.
If the work site is being actively guarded by a security company and dogs why push the protest onto the site and initiate a physical confrontation? Holding the protest directly adjacent to the work site gets the point across, provides for all of the visuals you need to disseminate to the media and social media and avoids anyone getting hurt or committing unlawful acts.
These questions don't absolve the police of their duties.
No police where on hand when the altercation occurred, and when they arrived, the crowd dispersed. They were not witness to any specific individuals committing a crime, so who were they to arrest?
This begs the question, why weren't the police there to begin with. I heard news of this demonstration going down at least a week ago. Seems pretty derelict not to keep the peace in a situation of guaranteed tension, but rather leave it to companymen with German Shepherds and pepper spray.
If the work site is being actively guarded by a security company and dogs why push the protest onto the site and initiate a physical confrontation? Holding the protest directly adjacent to the work site gets the point across, provides for all of the visuals you need to disseminate to the media and social media and avoids anyone getting hurt or committing unlawful acts.
And I'm sure that Black people protesting beside whites only establishments would have been just as effective as sit ins. Sometimes being on site and doing unlawful acts is necessary.
From what I understand of the situation, on Friday, the tribes said they were going to file court proceedings, so the oil company instantly started digging into the grave sites that weekend in response. It's almost like they did it to spite the tribes.
No police where on hand when the altercation occurred, and when they arrived, the crowd dispersed. They were not witness to any specific individuals committing a crime, so who were they to arrest?
This begs the question, why weren't the police there to begin with. I heard news of this demonstration going down at least a week ago. Seems pretty derelict not to keep the peace in a situation of guaranteed tension, but rather leave it to companymen with German Shepherds and pepper spray.
Because its North Dakota. North Dakota is bigger than where you are and has a population of less than 1mm people.
No police where on hand when the altercation occurred, and when they arrived, the crowd dispersed. They were not witness to any specific individuals committing a crime, so who were they to arrest?
This begs the question, why weren't the police there to begin with. I heard news of this demonstration going down at least a week ago. Seems pretty derelict not to keep the peace in a situation of guaranteed tension, but rather leave it to companymen with German Shepherds and pepper spray.
Because its North Dakota. North Dakota is bigger than where you are and has a population of less than 1mm people.
I don't mean to be hyper-critical, but it's probably a good idea to have a police presence when you know there will be a sizeable demonstration of people who are pissed off. There seems to be a decent level of support for private companies exercising police powers...this to me, as someone from West Virginia, which has a storied and unfortunate history of companies behaving like governments and exercising police powers with impunity, this is very alarming, especially the attack dogs.
If the work site is being actively guarded by a security company and dogs why push the protest onto the site and initiate a physical confrontation? Holding the protest directly adjacent to the work site gets the point across, provides for all of the visuals you need to disseminate to the media and social media and avoids anyone getting hurt or committing unlawful acts.
These questions don't absolve the police of their duties.
You realize there is a total of 1,300 police officers in the entire state right? 1,300 police officers to cover a land mass about the same size and England and Scotland.
In contrast, Rhode Island, the smallest state in our nation, has TWICE AS MANY police officers.
So, sure. The police officers of North Dakota were completely negligent in their duties, because internet keyboard commando's say so.
If we're going to go this route though, here is my question. Why wasn't the Standing Rock Souix Police Department on hand. You may not know this, but the various Indian nations have their own police forces. This said group of Souix have their own, yet curiously they weren't present, even though this took place in the largest population center of their tribe.
If the work site is being actively guarded by a security company and dogs why push the protest onto the site and initiate a physical confrontation? Holding the protest directly adjacent to the work site gets the point across, provides for all of the visuals you need to disseminate to the media and social media and avoids anyone getting hurt or committing unlawful acts.
These questions don't absolve the police of their duties.
You realize there is a total of 1,300 police officers in the entire state right? 1,300 police officers to cover a land mass about the same size and England and Scotland.
In contrast, Rhode Island, the smallest state in our nation, has TWICE AS MANY police officers.
So, sure. The police officers of North Dakota were completely negligent in their duties, because internet keyboard commando's say so.
If we're going to go this route though, here is my question. Why wasn't the Standing Rock Souix Police Department on hand. You may not know this, but the various Indian nations have their own police forces. This said group of Souix have their own, yet curiously they weren't present, even though this took place in the largest population center of their tribe.
The police should have pulled themselves to that construction side with their bootstraps.
If the work site is being actively guarded by a security company and dogs why push the protest onto the site and initiate a physical confrontation? Holding the protest directly adjacent to the work site gets the point across, provides for all of the visuals you need to disseminate to the media and social media and avoids anyone getting hurt or committing unlawful acts.
These questions don't absolve the police of their duties.
You realize there is a total of 1,300 police officers in the entire state right? 1,300 police officers to cover a land mass about the same size and England and Scotland.
In contrast, Rhode Island, the smallest state in our nation, has TWICE AS MANY police officers.
So, sure. The police officers of North Dakota were completely negligent in their duties, because internet keyboard commando's say so.
If we're going to go this route though, here is my question. Why wasn't the Standing Rock Souix Police Department on hand. You may not know this, but the various Indian nations have their own police forces. This said group of Souix have their own, yet curiously they weren't present, even though this took place in the largest population center of their tribe.
Exactly. When one thinks of distances in the West vs. East its like different worlds.
If the work site is being actively guarded by a security company and dogs why push the protest onto the site and initiate a physical confrontation? Holding the protest directly adjacent to the work site gets the point across, provides for all of the visuals you need to disseminate to the media and social media and avoids anyone getting hurt or committing unlawful acts.
These questions don't absolve the police of their duties.
You realize there is a total of 1,300 police officers in the entire state right? 1,300 police officers to cover a land mass about the same size and England and Scotland.
In contrast, Rhode Island, the smallest state in our nation, has TWICE AS MANY police officers.
So, sure. The police officers of North Dakota were completely negligent in their duties, because internet keyboard commando's say so.
If we're going to go this route though, here is my question. Why wasn't the Standing Rock Souix Police Department on hand. You may not know this, but the various Indian nations have their own police forces. This said group of Souix have their own, yet curiously they weren't present, even though this took place in the largest population center of their tribe.
Thousands of people coming into your state from all ovver the country to a demonstrate against highly politicized construction project = common sense need for a police presence. Insults like "keyboard commando" also don't absolve the police of their duties.
If the Standing Rock Sioux PD had jurisdiction then yes, they should have provided LOE to keep the peace and protect workers and demonstrators.
If the work site is being actively guarded by a security company and dogs why push the protest onto the site and initiate a physical confrontation? Holding the protest directly adjacent to the work site gets the point across, provides for all of the visuals you need to disseminate to the media and social media and avoids anyone getting hurt or committing unlawful acts.
These questions don't absolve the police of their duties.
You realize there is a total of 1,300 police officers in the entire state right? 1,300 police officers to cover a land mass about the same size and England and Scotland.
In contrast, Rhode Island, the smallest state in our nation, has TWICE AS MANY police officers.
So, sure. The police officers of North Dakota were completely negligent in their duties, because internet keyboard commando's say so.
If we're going to go this route though, here is my question. Why wasn't the Standing Rock Souix Police Department on hand. You may not know this, but the various Indian nations have their own police forces. This said group of Souix have their own, yet curiously they weren't present, even though this took place in the largest population center of their tribe.
Thousands of people coming into your state from all ovver the country to a demonstrate against highly politicized construction project = common sense need for a police presence. Insults like "keyboard commando" also don't absolve the police of their duties.
If the Standing Rock Sioux PD had jurisdiction then yes, they should have provided LOE to keep the peace and protect workers and demonstrators.
And where are they going to get these police? You seem to have a lack of understanding about rural environments.
skyth wrote: From what I understand of the situation, on Friday, the tribes said they were going to file court proceedings, so the oil company instantly started digging into the grave sites that weekend in response. It's almost like they did it to spite the tribes.
skyth wrote: From what I understand of the situation, on Friday, the tribes said they were going to file court proceedings, so the oil company instantly started digging into the grave sites that weekend in response. It's almost like they did it to spite the tribes.
Wow. Well feth that company.
Is there any confirmation that there are grave sites? All I've read is that they "suspect it". Without confirmation, it is a little irresponsible to just be saying they just started digging graves up to give someone the middle finger.
If we have any "clean" sources of electrical generation within the next fifty years, it will be nuclear fusion. But as we found out with nuclear fission, getting it off the ground is going to be costly.
Indeed, and sadly because of Brexit certain EU funding of Fusion is in the air at the moment. Luckily the scientist are still working on it, and still finding a way around that temperature issue.
Sorry but as an outsider it does appear to reinforce the fact that mainstream America would prefer the Native Americans give up on their culture, joining the rest of the US. This just seems to prove that the tribal lands are a purely token gesture.
Wolfstan wrote: Sorry but as an outsider it does appear to reinforce the fact that mainstream America would prefer the Native Americans give up on their culture, joining the rest of the US. This just seems to prove that the tribal lands are a purely token gesture.
Perception I see from those outside of the US looking in. Not bashing you.
If Native American remains/artifacts are located in the general vicinity of the construction area (there's a Federal Law involving this) then all work has to stop. If it is a significant find then the project has to be redrawn avoiding the area by a good margin. Since a river is involve generally arrow heads can be found on banks will not stop the project. If say a smattering of "Midden" is found then its a different story.
Wolfstan wrote: Sorry but as an outsider it does appear to reinforce the fact that mainstream America would prefer the Native Americans give up on their culture, joining the rest of the US. This just seems to prove that the tribal lands are a purely token gesture.
I put up a link earlier regarding the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (yes I know, Canada, but the pacification and subjugation of the First Nations is a North American issue), and you will find there was a concerted and deliberate effort by the government of Canada to eradicate First Nations culture. This began basically with the first colonists, but the official program began in 1876 and didn't end until 1996.
skyth wrote: From what I understand of the situation, on Friday, the tribes said they were going to file court proceedings, so the oil company instantly started digging into the grave sites that weekend in response. It's almost like they did it to spite the tribes.
Wow. Well feth that company.
Is there any confirmation that there are grave sites? All I've read is that they "suspect it". Without confirmation, it is a little irresponsible to just be saying they just started digging graves up to give someone the middle finger.
Well, that is of course, said with the assumption that it's true. If it's not than I resend it.
skyth wrote: From what I understand of the situation, on Friday, the tribes said they were going to file court proceedings, so the oil company instantly started digging into the grave sites that weekend in response. It's almost like they did it to spite the tribes.
Wow. Well feth that company.
Is there any confirmation that there are grave sites? All I've read is that they "suspect it". Without confirmation, it is a little irresponsible to just be saying they just started digging graves up to give someone the middle finger.
The only "confirmation" that I've personally seen is that some of the Natives who filed those papers are saying that among the sites dug up, were some of the ones covered under the paperwork....
Personally, that this is even a fething issue tells me to give that company the middle finger.
Boasberg wrote that after reviewing the extensive record, the corps has likely complied with the National Historic Preservation Act while the tribe has not shown it will suffer injury that would be prevented by any injunction the court could issue.
The corps argues in court records it “followed a robust tribal consultation process” and said Standing Rock withdrew from a scheduled site visit of the proposed Lake Oahe crossing, a dammed section of the Missouri River.
So one could take away that the Standing Rock Sioux had a chance to participate in the review process and didn't and that whatever claims of historic and cultural significance could not be substantiated, i.e. proof of burial sites, etc.
It sounds like the whole burial ground argument has been a smokescreen and/or delaying tactic or cynical attempt to generate sympathy and outrage towards a group that quite frankly has become all too easy to vilify among liberals and environmentalists, the big bad profiteering and pollution promoting petroleum industry.
Left unresolved seems to be the claims of disruption or potential for damage to local water supplies. However given my knowledge of pipelines and pipeline construction, I think there is less of a case there than there was with the disturbing of burial and significant cultural sites.
Boasberg wrote that after reviewing the extensive record, the corps has likely complied with the National Historic Preservation Act while the tribe has not shown it will suffer injury that would be prevented by any injunction the court could issue.
The corps argues in court records it “followed a robust tribal consultation process” and said Standing Rock withdrew from a scheduled site visit of the proposed Lake Oahe crossing, a dammed section of the Missouri River.
So one could take away that the Standing Rock Sioux had a chance to participate in the review process and didn't and that whatever claims of historic and cultural significance could not be substantiated, i.e. proof of burial sites, etc.
It sounds like the whole burial ground argument has been a smokescreen and/or delaying tactic or cynical attempt to generate sympathy and outrage towards a group that quite frankly has become all too easy to vilify among liberals and environmentalists, the big bad profiteering and pollution promoting petroleum industry.
Left unresolved seems to be the claims of disruption or potential for damage to local water supplies. However given my knowledge of pipelines and pipeline construction, I think there is less of a case there than there was with the disturbing of burial and significant cultural sites.
Well I mean petroleum is a major contributor to global warming and they do make obscene profits
Frazzled wrote: You know electricity has to be generated right? Right?
Ok lets take a refresher. A source of energy is something burned or used to generate energy. A Use of energy is something that takes that energy and converts it to mechanical effort. For example an electric car uses energy to convert it to movement. It does not generate the energy.
A tesla is a user of energy not a source of energy.
Yes Fraz. Hydro is a big thing where I come from. Pretty clean. Tidal and geo thermal are great ways to generate clean power. Solar is getting there, not yet though.
Coal fired plants need to feth right off though. When is this, 1886?
Calling Hydro clean energy is absurd. Hydro's impact on the environment includes the condemnation of enormous swathes of territory, pollution of the water base by mercury, and as a consequence of this pollution, the death of a large range of the wildlife. There's a (not)good reason we've done it way up North in the Shield, where only seasonals and Natives can see the desolation.
Hydro is renewable energy, and technologically more efficient than any other secondary means of energy production, which is why I still advocate it against most other options. But it is not, at all, clean.
Calling Hydro clean energy is absurd. Hydro's impact on the environment includes the condemnation of enormous swathes of territory, pollution of the water base by mercury, and as a consequence of this pollution, the death of a large range of the wildlife.
There is a 1250MW hydro plant where I grew up that has pretty limited environmental impact (it made a pre existing loch a bit bigger). It all depends on the scale.
Calling Hydro clean energy is absurd. Hydro's impact on the environment includes the condemnation of enormous swathes of territory, pollution of the water base by mercury, and as a consequence of this pollution, the death of a large range of the wildlife.
There is a 1250MW hydro plant where I grew up that has pretty limited environmental impact (it made a pre existing loch a bit bigger). It all depends on the scale.
I could hook up a small generator at my dad's, and of course I wouldn't cause the destruction of the lake. But I wouldn't power much more than the lights and a few other fixtures.
Hydro-Quebec produces 36 643 MW as of 2014, and we still only answer 40% of the energy needs of la belle province. We also sell a lot to Ontario, New-England and New-York, but it remains for each of those clients a secondary, altough reliable source. To do so we had to condemn 10s of thousands square km to inondation, which caused mercury accumulation from the decomposition of so much biological matter and ruissellement. To the point where lots of Northern-Quebec fishes no longer meet toxicity standards, and raised concerns for local Natives health. Other events, such as the drowning of over ten thousands caribous in the reservoirs shows that there remains a constant ecological cost to their installation.
Hydro is not a realistic approach to the North American energy need, not unless we (not so)collectively decide to say a final feth you! to Mother Nature.
Kovnik Obama wrote: Hydro is not a realistic approach to the North American energy need, not unless we (not so)collectively decide to say a final feth you! to Mother Nature.
The thing with hydro also, at least in the US, is that there aren't too many more places we can actually put them... Most of the dammable rivers have been. And most of them (such as Hoover, Bonneville, Colville, etc) were all built before we really took wildlife considerations into account. We are now having to try and go back and redesign/remodel existing dams to allow for fish populations to migrate again
I still maintain that based on what I've read, nuclear is still the best mass producer of electricity we have. It has a proven track record of safety compared to coal/gas and even hydro power.... The instances of failures, emergencies, etc. while more severe, have been much fewer.
It seems the US is taking a page out of Putin's favourite book now:
Arrest warrant for Democracy Now! journalist Amy Goodman over North Dakota pipeline protest Democracy Now! journalist and producer Amy Goodman has been issued an arrest warrant for covering the Standing Rock Sioux tribe’s North Dakota pipeline protests.
The Native American tribe and their supporters are protesting a proposed $3.8 billion Energy Transfer Partners pipeline, which would carry oil across four states, because of concerns that the 470,000 barrels of oil passing through their land each day could poison the water.
While reporting from the site of the protests last week, Goodman captured private security contractors using dogs and pepper spray on the demonstrators in a broadcast that went viral.
On Sunday, Goodman announced that she had received an arrest warrant for alleged criminal trespass during the protest. The misdemeanor carries a maximum penalty of a $500 fine and 30 days’ imprisonment.
“This is an unacceptable violation of freedom of the press,” Goodman said in a statement on Sunday. “I was doing my job by covering pipeline guards unleashing dogs and pepper spray on Native American protesters.”
Democracy Now! is an independent news channel that has covered the Native-American-led protests in depth, capturing the clashes between private security and protesters and showing a man with bite marks and a dog with a bloody mouth.
Goodman’s arrest warrant was reportedly discovered by attorneys looking into the arrest of Red Warrior Camp protest organizer Cody Charles Hall, who was arrested for criminal trespass on Friday.
Thirty-eight people have been arrested at the protests, Native News Online reports.
Green Party presidential nominee Dr. Jill Stein also received an arrest warrant, along with her running mate, Ajamu Baraka, for scrawling graffiti on equipment during the protests.
Strange I have not heard anything about it in mainstream Western media. If this had happened in Russia they'd be having a field day in screaming "Oh that dastardly dictator Putin! Look how evil and repressive Russia is!". Well, let me take their place then and say it is a damn shame that journalists can't do their job properly in the US without having to fear being fined and arrested. Land of the free? More like land of the prisons.
Iron_Captain wrote: It seems the US is taking a page out of Putin's favourite book now:
Arrest warrant for Democracy Now! journalist Amy Goodman over North Dakota pipeline protest Democracy Now! journalist and producer Amy Goodman has been issued an arrest warrant for covering the Standing Rock Sioux tribe’s North Dakota pipeline protests.
The Native American tribe and their supporters are protesting a proposed $3.8 billion Energy Transfer Partners pipeline, which would carry oil across four states, because of concerns that the 470,000 barrels of oil passing through their land each day could poison the water.
While reporting from the site of the protests last week, Goodman captured private security contractors using dogs and pepper spray on the demonstrators in a broadcast that went viral.
On Sunday, Goodman announced that she had received an arrest warrant for alleged criminal trespass during the protest. The misdemeanor carries a maximum penalty of a $500 fine and 30 days’ imprisonment.
“This is an unacceptable violation of freedom of the press,” Goodman said in a statement on Sunday. “I was doing my job by covering pipeline guards unleashing dogs and pepper spray on Native American protesters.”
Democracy Now! is an independent news channel that has covered the Native-American-led protests in depth, capturing the clashes between private security and protesters and showing a man with bite marks and a dog with a bloody mouth.
Goodman’s arrest warrant was reportedly discovered by attorneys looking into the arrest of Red Warrior Camp protest organizer Cody Charles Hall, who was arrested for criminal trespass on Friday.
Thirty-eight people have been arrested at the protests, Native News Online reports.
Green Party presidential nominee Dr. Jill Stein also received an arrest warrant, along with her running mate, Ajamu Baraka, for scrawling graffiti on equipment during the protests.
Strange I have not heard anything about it in mainstream Western media. If this had happened in Russia they'd be having a field day in screaming "Oh that dastardly dictator Putin! Look how evil and repressive Russia is!".
Well, let me take their place then and say it is a damn shame that journalists can't do their job properly in the US without having to fear being fined and arrested. Land of the free? More like land of the prisons.
Could be worse she could be in another country only to be poisoned by radioactive material
I have seen stories of this. Stein loses any credibility with me as a candidate when she trespassed and started putting graffiti on someone's property.
Freedom of the press doesn't mean immunity from prosecution for criminal acts. If you commit criminal trespass you can be prosecuted for it whether you're a reporter or not has no bearing on the crime.
Relapse wrote: I have seen stories of this. Stein loses any credibility with me as a candidate when she trespassed and started putting graffiti on someone's property.
Prestor Jon wrote: Freedom of the press doesn't mean immunity from prosecution for criminal acts. If you commit criminal trespass you can be prosecuted for it whether you're a reporter or not has no bearing on the crime.
That's not altogether true, tho. New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) established that the freedom of the press warranted a different application of legal standards. Perhaps, if something as important as the Espionage Act can be set aside, then trespass laws can too.
Prestor Jon wrote: Freedom of the press doesn't mean immunity from prosecution for criminal acts. If you commit criminal trespass you can be prosecuted for it whether you're a reporter or not has no bearing on the crime.
That's not altogether true, tho. New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) established that the freedom of the press warranted a different application of legal standards. Perhaps, if something as important as the Espionage Act can be set aside, then trespass laws can too.
Not very likely. In the NYT case the Pentagon Papers were leaked by a 3rd party to the NYT and the NYT wanted to publish the classified documents without having any of their staff arrested so they challenged the US govt in court for the right to publish without being prosecuted. The NYT reporters didn't break any laws to get the story, the story was given to them by a third party that broke the law the Times just wanted to tell the story. In this instance a reporter broke the law deliberately and doing so had no bearing on the story. The reporter could have stood by and reported the events without being an active participant in the crimes. She chose to commit crimes she can deal with the consequences.
Yep....journalists are not immune to trespassing (or any other laws) for that matter. Just because you say you are a journalist or work for the "public" press doesn't give you carte blanche to go onto private land or residences without permission. I believe that was why there were security guards w/ dogs there. I don't know about you, but if someone has effectively told me "don't trespass" or "beware of dog" on private property, its my own fault if I get hurt, bit, or prosecuted.
As for other developments, soon after (minutes in fact) the Federal court ruling it looks like the Executive branch, i.e. Obama administration made the Judicial branch's decision moot by blocking further construction on the part of the pipeline that crosses federal lands, which was described as a sliver and asked the company to voluntarily suspend work on the pipeline on 40 additional miles that are on private land that is on either side of the sections that they have blocked further construction on.
I am guessing given that the order literally came down minutes after the court ruling that this was set to go in anticipation of a negative ruling. My guess is that this is more about a cooling off period than anything portending the permanent stop to construction given that the pipeline builder and operator would have a good case for damages from the government (i.e. the costs of delays, relocation, etc.) as it was properly permitted and construction having since commenced accordingly.
My guess is that the pipeline company will be extorted....ur I mean encouraged fund "archaeological assessments and retrieval" and water and sewer facilities for the Indian reservation after the government "consults" further with the Indian tribe with the lion share of the funds being committed to Indian owned or operated businesses. I wonder if this is the "game changer" that the Indian representative was referring too in interviews.
feeder wrote: Peaceful protest is worth squat when the company is ripping into your ancestral sacred ground.
Where was the peaceful protest when you were being taxed without representation?
We did send Ben Franklin to England to argue our case in parliament. If a deal had been brokered we likely wouldn't have revolted.
The original plan had the pipeline going through the barren not sacred ground of the reservation it's the shorter route but the tribe wanted more money than the company was willing to pay so they detoured around the reservation and suddenly that land that the Cortes have ruled that the tribe has no jurisdiction over became sacred ground that the company can't build on.
This is true. Hydro is great, but it's basically fully utilised in the developed world.
Plus,tidal and geo-thermal are going to be a pipe dream for at least a few more decades, as far as serious contenders to replace fossil fuels go.
Tidal is slowly expanding, it has a place but it is a niche power source. It's really just one of the broad mix of power sources that will make up our future energy production.
Solar power is a dead end.
This is an aggressively, intensely wrong statement. The price point for solar has plummeted. When generated at the point of use it is already comparable with coal production, and will soon be significantly cheaper. Solar energy production has averaged 40% growth per year for 15 years. It will produce around 25% of total energy by 2050.
You are like the 'expert' who was quoted in the NYT on whether humans might one day fly... "In the very, very far future, there may be flying machines, but not now." He said that more than a year after the Wright Brothers had made their first flight.
Petrochemicals as an energy source are going to be around for a while yet.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I still maintain that based on what I've read, nuclear is still the best mass producer of electricity we have. It has a proven track record of safety compared to coal/gas and even hydro power.... The instances of failures, emergencies, etc. while more severe, have been much fewer.
The issue with nuclear is that any new plant is going to need a few billion in cash, for a plant that will be up and running hopefully five years from when you first stump up the cash. That's a hell of a risk for any company to take when the power industry is in such a state of change.
It's the big advantage that solar has. The price per unit is still higher, but new solar can be put in place for a few grand, and be up and running in a week.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I still maintain that based on what I've read, nuclear is still the best mass producer of electricity we have. It has a proven track record of safety compared to coal/gas and even hydro power.... The instances of failures, emergencies, etc. while more severe, have been much fewer.
The issue with nuclear is that any new plant is going to need a few billion in cash, for a plant that will be up and running hopefully five years from when you first stump up the cash. That's a hell of a risk for any company to take when the power industry is in such a state of change.
It's the big advantage that solar has. The price per unit is still higher, but new solar can be put in place for a few grand, and be up and running in a week.
Thorium based reactors are the future (if the nuclear lobby lets it happen that is).
feeder wrote: Peaceful protest is worth squat when the company is ripping into your ancestral sacred ground.
Where was the peaceful protest when you were being taxed without representation?
Umm... A lot of places? It's not like we started shooting the British as soon as they passed the sugar act.
As for the main topic... Unless they are illegally building on reservation grounds I don't see how the company is in the wrong here. The Native Americans are fighting a battle they lost a long time ago. As callous a sentiment as that is.
SlaveToDorkness wrote: The company obtained all of the requisite permits but the tribe is alleging that they didn't do their due diligence in researching the site.
It would be nice to find some impartial information on this. Most major media I've read said the ARCOE followed regulations on this, but don't go into a lot of details. Just about every non-major media site that I've looked at has clear impartiality going on.
The judge described a series of attempted meetings and missed communications between government and tribal officials; the judge suggested that the lack of cooperation was mostly on the part of the tribe, while “the Corps has documented dozens of attempts it made to consult with the Standing Rock Sioux from the fall of 2014 through the spring of 2016” on the pipeline plan.
Two days after the Corps approved what are known as preconstruction notifications on the pipeline, the tribes filed suit demanding that the permits be withdrawn.
The judge said the efforts to obtain cooperation from the Standing Rock tribe were exhaustive, with dozens of attempts documented by the Corps to bring them to the table for discussion of Lake Oahe and other points of water crossings. The judge then wryly added: “To the reader’s relief, the Court need not repeat them here. Suffice it to say that the Tribe largely refused to engage in consultations.”
Sure this won't mean much to die hard folks who've made their mind up already, but to me it's pretty clear that the ARCOE acted in good faith, and the local population didn't.
djones520 wrote: Sure this won't mean much to die hard folks who've made their mind up already, but to me it's pretty clear that the ARCOE acted in good faith, and the local population didn't.
Alternately, the South Pine could easily see this entire situation as nothing more than the continuation of injustices perpetrated against Native Americans in the United States. There's a much longer history here than just this pipeline informing one party's decision. It's hard to argue against the bad treatment Native Americans have received in this country. I think it's flawed to presume that ARCOE and the tribe could have come to a compromise, and assume that the one side that refused to do so is automatically in the wrong if the entire situation is wrong to begin with.
Prestor Jon wrote: Freedom of the press doesn't mean immunity from prosecution for criminal acts. If you commit criminal trespass you can be prosecuted for it whether you're a reporter or not has no bearing on the crime.
Yeah, that is what the Russian government tries to explain too every time again when some journalist in Russia happens to break a law and Western media starts blaring about this arrest being evidence that Russia is a repressive dictatorship. Even though the arrest is perfectly normal and legal. So apparently journalists in the West should be subject to the law, but in Russia journalists should be sacred and above every law. Yay for Western hipocrisy!
Prestor Jon wrote: Freedom of the press doesn't mean immunity from prosecution for criminal acts. If you commit criminal trespass you can be prosecuted for it whether you're a reporter or not has no bearing on the crime.
Yeah, that is what the Russian government tries to explain too every time again when some journalist in Russia happens to break a law and Western media starts blaring about this arrest being evidence that Russia is a repressive dictatorship. Even though the arrest is perfectly normal and legal. So apparently journalists in the West should be subject to the law, but in Russia journalists should be sacred and above every law. Yay for Western hipocrisy!
I have to admit that we tend to treat things differently based on where it happens.
About this story...Well, it doesn't happen to just indians. Same for coverage. Doesn't make it right, though.
Prestor Jon wrote: Freedom of the press doesn't mean immunity from prosecution for criminal acts. If you commit criminal trespass you can be prosecuted for it whether you're a reporter or not has no bearing on the crime.
Yeah, that is what the Russian government tries to explain too every time again when some journalist in Russia happens to break a law and Western media starts blaring about this arrest being evidence that Russia is a repressive dictatorship. Even though the arrest is perfectly normal and legal. So apparently journalists in the West should be subject to the law, but in Russia journalists should be sacred and above every law. Yay for Western hipocrisy!
The difference is our journalists actually live through their incarceration.
If we have any "clean" sources of electrical generation within the next fifty years, it will be nuclear fusion. But as we found out with nuclear fission, getting it off the ground is going to be costly
Fusion would be great. It may be the Alchemy of our time, though.
They tested out system that if it works as theory goes allows to maintain fusion for longer than it takes to generate enough power to restart(there's still limit how long you can keep it going. Ergo you need to start it, collect energy, shut it down, restart. Currently issue is that starting takes more energy than it would generate!).
Albeit fusion lasted only like fraction of second but data from this experiment will be used to further check things work as theory says and then try it out on longer.
But sounds like it could be closer than thought. And it's absolutely essential. Fuel isn't unlimited. Fusion meanwhile for practical intents is.
-ton of money into wind too. And it's still a region specific power source, nowhere the "oil killer" that some made it out to be back in the 1990's.
