Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 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.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
Hydroelectric is very region specific

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.

This is true. The question is always how much.

 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?

It's always interesting to see where people draw the line for acceptable cause for violence isn't it?

 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.

 sebster wrote:

 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.

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.

 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.

One nugget I found, from NY Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/10/us/judge-approves-construction-of-oil-pipeline-in-north-dakota.html?_r=0

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!

Christ your back must ache.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

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.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

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.

 feeder wrote:

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.