Judge Gives Favorable Ruling Against The Dakota Access Pipeline

A judge’s ruling that might open the door for at least a temporary shutdown of the disputed Dakota Access pipeline surprised the industry that hailed the project as a “game changer” for North Dakota oil.

Source: Ruling on Dakota Access pipeline surprises oil industry

Judge Gives Favorable Ruling Against The Dakota Access Pipeline


US District Court Judge James Boasberg ruled in favor of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe in a ruling that could temporarily shut down The Dakota Access Pipeline.  The judge ruled that the US Army Corps of Engineers had not taken all factors into consideration when they ruled that the pipeline could continue to be built.

In his ruling, he said that the adverse effects on the Standing Rock Sioux’s hunting and fishing rights were not taken into consideration when the Corps of Engineers made their decision.  He said this lack of consideration could cause the Dakota Access Pipeline to be temporarily closed until the matter was settled.

Throughout the fight against that Dakota Access Pipeline, the Standing Rock Sioux tribe maintained that the pipeline would adversely affect them because it runs under Lake Oahe, the tribe’s primary source of water.  How could the US Army Corps of Engineers be stupid enough to believe that a pipeline filled with petroleum could not have adverse effects?  I’ll bet if you took the time to look behind the scenes, you would find some money changing hands and some corruption taking place.  Something smells really bad here!

Needless to say, this caused a stir at Energy Transfer Partners, the company responsible for building and maintaining this controversial pipeline.  Just when they thought they had it all sewn up and in their pockets, this honest judge comes along.  They either did not consider buying him off or he is an honest judge who cannot be bought off.  Good for him!

Hopefully, the worst (or best, depending on how you look at) scenario happens and the Dakota Access Pipeline is shut down.  Even if the shutdown is only temporary, it could potentially be a good thing for the Iowa farmers who are banding together in their attempts to sue to have the pipeline stopped from passing beneath their farmland.  This ruling could buy them some time to pursue their lawsuit in better form.

For a cynic such as myself, it does my heart good to see corporate America suffer a setback, and the common person to prevail, if only for a little while. The Dakota Access Pipeline is an environmental disaster waiting to happen and everyone should know that by now.  Maybe, some justice will prevail and the pipeline will be shut down.


Dakota Pipeline: What’s behind the controversy? – BBC News

Feb 7, 2017 Donald Trump’s backing of the Dakota Access Pipeline project has set the stage for a new confrontation with native Americans and …
Map: The Conflicts Along 1172 Miles of the Dakota Access Pipeline

Mar 20, 2017 A detailed map showing the Dakota Access Pipeline, the site of months of clashes near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota.


Dakota Access Pipeline Already Has Its First Oil Spill

The Dakota Access pipeline leaked 84 gallons of oil in South Dakota early last month, which an American Indian tribe says bolsters its argument that the pipeline jeopardizes its water supply and deserves further environmental review.

Source: Dakota Access pipeline leaked 84 gallons of oil in April – StarTribune.com

Dakota Access Pipeline Already Has Its First Oil Spill

The Dakota Access Pipeline, which isn’t supposed to officially open until June, already has its first oil spill.  The spill, which happened on April 4, was just reported today.  If this doesn’t prove that the Dakota Access Pipeline isn’t a potential environmental disaster, I don’t know what will.  Perhaps, if the pipeline should have a spill that reaches all the way down to St. Louis, maybe they will pay attention to this disaster waiting to happen.

Officials tried to downplay the spill by pointing out that it was only 84 gallons of oil that leaked.  What the hell difference does it make that it was only 84 gallons?  A spill is a spill, isn’t it?  84 gallons of crude oil has the potential to do damage, despite the state of North Dakota saying otherwise.  If a spill kills one bird or one animal, it is too much.  I suppose they think that a spill on the Dakota Access Pipeline would be worth mentioning if it caused as much as some of the oil platform accidents off the coast of Santa Barbara, right?

An official of the North Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources says that the state of North Dakota doesn’t even bother to make an announcement about an oil spill of this size.  To me this begs the question how much, or would it take before they issued an “official announcement”?

The public has a right to know about an oil spill of any size.  The people have a right to know that the Native Americans and others who oppose this potential nightmare for one hundred percent correct when they said that the Dakota Access Pipeline was a potential environmental disaster.  After all, if they can spill 84 gallons of raw crude oil without penalty, how much do they have to spill before they are penalized.  This question is especially important because the state of North Dakota announced that Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), the builders and operators of this controversial pipeline.


Could the Dakota Access Pipeline Still Happen Under Trump?

President Barack Obama’s administration is expected to push through long-delayed safety measures for the nation’s sprawling network of oil pipelines in its final days, despite resistanc… Source: Obama oil pipeline rules face uncertain future under Trump   Could The Dakota Access Pipeline Still Happen Under Trump? During the last days of his presidency, President …

Energy Transfer Partners Building Another Pipeline With More Mishaps

The same company that built the controversial Dakota Access oil pipeline has twice spilled drilling fluids in two pristine Ohio wetlands this month. Source: The company behind the Dakota Access pipeline is in another controversy Energy Transfer Partners Building Another Pipeline With More Mishaps In a recent incident in Ohio, Energy Transfer Partners …


The Bakken Shale: Fracking in North Dakota

Lately, we have been hearing a lot about the Dakota Access Pipeline, mostly about the negative affect it will have on the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, but most people don’t know anything about its relationship to the Bakken oil field in North Dakota.

The Bakken Shale: Fracking in North Dakota

We have heard a lot about the Dakota Access Pipeline, mostly about the over the effect it will have on the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, but most people don’t know anything about its relationship to the Bakken Oil Field in North Dakota.  It is important to understand the relationship between the two.

For the past several years, there has been an oil boom happening in the state of North Dakota.  This oil boom is because of oil that was discovered in what is called the Bakken Shale, or the Bakken Shale formation.  The Bakken Shale formation is a large deposit of shale containing oil that is in eastern Shale Montana, Western North Dakota, and part of Saskatchewan, in Canada.

Even though the so-called Bakken oil boom has the potential to create jobs and puts more revenue into the economy of North Dakota, it also poses a significant threat to the environment of that region.  To mention that the oil produced in the Bakken Shale formation will create a necessity to lay a pipeline to help transportation of this oil to where it can be refined into different products.  The Dakota Access Pipeline is being built to carriers oil from the Bakken Shale Formation.

As we know, this pipeline threatens the water supply of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, and other people living in that particular region because it will be necessary to build this pipeline under the Missouri River, upon which many depend on for their water supply.  Also, this pipeline will also pose a threat to the underground aquifer that is also the supply of a significant amount of water to this region.

To produce oil from the Bakken Shale, it will be necessary for the oil companies to use the controversial and environmentally dangerous technique known as hydraulic fracturing, or just known as fracking.

There has been a huge controversy over fracking, to the point where it has been banned in a couple of states and is the source of large-scale protest across the nation.

Fracking has proven itself to be harmful because it requires the consumption of massive quantities of water and the use of many toxic chemicals, which are pumped underground to force oil from the Bakken Shale.  The use of fracking is a major reason that environmentalists are opposed to further development of the Bakken oil field.

At a time when our nation is trying to end its dependency on fossil fuels, such as petroleum and coal, further developing the Bakken oil field flies in the face of our need to divorce ourselves from fossil fuels.



Sep 17, 2016 Rune Likvern of Fractional Flow has done a wonderful job providing data on the Bakken Shale Oil Field. Here is his excellent chart showing the …
Bakken Shale News, Wells, Formation, Markets and Resources: Oil …

Bakken Shale Image The Bakken shale is primarily an oil play. It straddles the US border with Canada and runs through two states – North Dakota and Montana …


The Obama Administration and the Bakken Oil Field

The environmental policy of the Obama administration has always been a mystery to me.

The Obama Administration And the Bakken Oil Field

Bakken oil fieldThe environmental policy of the Obama administration has always been a mystery to me.  On the one hand, the president says that we must end our dependency on fossil fuels, particularly oil and natural gas, yet when it comes to controversial issues like the Bakken oil field, President Obama takes no position on this controversial subject.  This issue begs the question for President Obama, “do you mean what you say or are you just trying to be politically expedient.”

By remaining silent on the issue of exploiting the oil contained in the Bakken oil field, it makes one wonder if President Obama is genuine in his environmental policy.  Why he doesn’t recognize the dangers of oil companies being allowed to have their way on Bakken oil field production is beyond me.  More than that, why doesn’t President Obama get more involved on the issue of this oil field, in North Dakota?

natural-vs-human-enhanced-greenhouse-effectThe Obama administration has always taken a firm position against any further production of greenhouse gasses that causes global warming, yet he says nothing about a major source of greenhouse gasses, fracking.  Fracking is a dangerous practice that is being used extensively in Bakken oil production, primarily because the oil companies are taking the oil from an area known as the Bakken formation, a vast area of shale known as Bakken Shale.  This area is particularly environmentally sensitive because of a large aquifer, or water table, exists under the Bakken oil field.  This aquifer supplies the drinking water for the people living in this area.  The fracking process being used to extract the oil endangers this water supply.r

If the Obama administration is serious about its environmental position, why does is allow the extensive fracking in North Dakota to continue?  The major question for me is, “is the president sincere about his wish to slow down the production of greenhouse gasses, or is he just paying this crucial issue more lip service?”


Bakken oil field is causing a rise in air pollution, study says …

Apr 29, 2016 WASHINGTON — An oil and natural gas field in the western United States is largely responsible for a global uptick of the air pollutant ethane, …

The New Oil Landscape – Pictures, More From National Geographic …

The fracking frenzy in North Dakota has boosted the U.S. fuel supply–but at what cost?



The Dakota Access Pipeline Protest: A Brief History

The Dakota Access Pipeline Protest: A Brief History

I hope that this video about the Dakota Access Pipeline protest is as informative to you as it was me. Finally, the “mainstream media” is giving some coverage to this crucial issue. It’s appalling to see the way that the US Government is mistreating the Standing Rock Sioux tribe.  I guess some things never change.

The Dakota Access Pipeline will cause tremendous and irreparable damage to the water supply of the Native Americans who occupy this region, located in North Dakota. In addition to destroying their water supply, the intended route of this pipeline will take it through the burial grounds and many other sacred sites, belonging to the Standing Rock Sioux tribe.

It is appalling to see heavily armed police officers, looking more like a paramilitary force, is trampling on the civil rights of these unarmed, and peaceful protesters who are doing nothing more than trying to protect a fundamental necessity in the lives like water. The US government should be ashamed of itself, but as we all know, the US government never apologizes for anything it ever does, no matter how egregious.

What is happening to these Native American people is an atrocity that equals the Wounded Knee protests of the 70s. Hopefully, these peaceful protesters are not harmed.


Bakken pipeline

Harvard (13 September 2016). “‘The Daily Show’ sheds light on the Dakota Access Pipeline protest with brilliant segment”. The Daily Show. Retrieved 30 September

The Dakota Access Pipeline Protest Is Unprecedented — And 150 …

Sep 15, 2016 Streaming, posting, and updating from “Facebook Hill” in the Sacred Stone Camp, thousands of protesters have made their fight impossible to…

Related articles