An unpopular position: DAPL

I have a feeling that this is going to be a fairly unpopular position.  However, I believe I’ve done my homework, so here it is.  The US Government is not wrong for continuing or allowing the development of the Dakota Access Pipe Line (DAPL).  Here are the facts (via Wikipedia):

Under Obama, Energy Transfer Partners and several other energy companies, designed and vetted the 1,172-mile-long oil conduit in June of 2014.  The purpose was to improve transmission of oil between the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota and an oil-tank farm in Patoka, Illinois.  It should be noted that, currently, oil from the Bakken fields is being moved by freight train.  As with any major development, the project required significant Federal approvals by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) due to the sensitivities of winding lengths of pipe that crossed major environmental and cultural features.  At the expense of the designers, these routes were re-tooled in order to minimize impact.  In fact, the routing is nearly identical to right-of-way of an already-developed gas main.  This was intentional so as to minimize impact even further.  And, the Washington Times has reported that the project is 89% complete. 

Before I go further, let me qualify my opinion.  I firmly believe that money spent on the physical development of the pipe could have been better used to research far more sustainable energy solutions.  The projected cost was at $3.78 Billion.  The total hasn’t been realized yet due to a political halt to the project, and then reinstatement.  However, Energy Transfer Partners has assumed the additional cost of the delay (at an amount projected as “millions of dollars”) as the USACE scrambled, under Obama, to force the company into an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process for a lake crossing.  Then, when the company appealed to delay the EIS process, they were denied, again, through pressure from #44POTUS.  

This is what stinks most about this pipeline.  I’ve read the original Environmental Assessment (EA) which is the precursor for a full-out EIS.  When an EA is written, the process is to find out what the most direct path is.  If there’s a finding of no-significant-impact, then the project moves forward.  In the case of DAPL, most direct did not equal best.  There were direct impacts to Bismark as well as Native American reservations (i.e. cultural impacts) along with a slew of environmentally sensitive lands.  So, they figured out a way around all of those, minimizing direct impacts.  Typically, if there is an impact that is significant and unavoidable, then it moves to a full EIS which is a far more comprehensive environmental study to ensure that construction absolutely minimizes impacts.  Under Obama, the company successfully proved that there was no significant impact in the EA stage (achieving a FONSI: finding of no significant impact) and that includes lands held by indigenous peoples.

That’s right, it avoids direct impact of any reservation or Native American lands.  Why, then are so many tribal leaders upset with the alignment?  They’re upset due to the potential down-stream contamination IF it leaks along the Missouri River crossing.  I understand the concern.  There have been many instances of pipeline breaches and plumes that travel greater distances thanks to the currents.  But, it’s not built to break.  And, it can be argued that there’s risk with any development of our energy system.  Just ask the people who live proximate to Indian Point, NY…an aging nuclear power plant with an expired operations license that is only 36-miles north of NYC.  There are risks, but it’s definitely in the business' best interest to prevent failure and minimize risk for both environmental and economic reasons.

What’s your point Herb?  My point is, originally, the EA was enough to demonstrate that it could work as designed.  All Obama did by directing the USACE and courts to lengthen the permitting process by requiring a full EIS for DAPL was to stall.  And, when he was able to stall the work, he gave credence to the protest and protesters.  He made them feel as if they were accomplishing something.  Yet, all the former President did was provide false hope.  The DAPL was going to move forward eventually.  There are pages and pages of previously approved documents which would have weighed against the politically motivated stoppage of work.  It would have cost both the taxpayers and the company millions in legal fees.  And, the exiting President had nothing to lose.  He was on his way out.  And, rather than look like he wasn’t addressing the issue, he put the protesters lives in the hands of the Cheeto-in-Chief.  My concern now is that Trump uses undue force to clear the camp…a camp made on USACE lands.  That’s right, the protests aren’t on the reservation or lands held by tribal leaders.  Instead, the camp is on land that they have no claim to. 


As concerned as I am for our energy policies, I believe that I am now more concerned for the people at that camp, emboldened by the political actions of a president in his final months in office, and who are now facing a man with far fewer scruples.  This president will merely order the camp cleared by any means necessary, regardless of the potential image issues that may come from it.  While it may seem unpopular, I would urge tribal leaders and their supporters and any who are concerned about sustainable energy solutions to leave those lands in peace.  It may be smarter to intentionally lose the battle so that you can fight the war another day.