|
Gobbeldygook posted:I thought business consumers paid more simply because they can pay more? I know some (most? all?) areas charge on a sliding scale where as you use more electricity you pay more per watt. Energy utilities have three classifications for a property/building: -residential. self-explanatory, this includes apartments, high rises, and other high density buildings, as well as every stick-built house or double-wide trailer that plugs into the grid. (don't ask me how a high rise with commercial space as well as residential works, I suspect it involves multiple meters though). -commercial. This is a HUGE range of property and buildings, because it includes stuff like retail, office space, server farms (this should probably be industrial, the energy usage of these things is ENORMOUS), schools, universities, and governmental buildings as well as communal stuff like sports arenas and stuff.. Probably even churches. Retail spaces can also have drastic fluctuations in energy consumption based on who moves into the space... Imagine the utility bills of an American Apparel store at the mall, versus an Ice Cream shop (refrigeration and cooling are by far the highest consumption in any given building, in almost every possible case), versus someone just papering over the windows and installing a server farm in that empty space? -industrial. manufacturing plants, distribution plants, water and sewage treatment, waste disposal, you name it. Now the second two both use the same kind of meter, but there reasons to keep them seperate - largely due to the power draw being a lot higher use and for longer sustained periods in industrial, than most commercial tends to end up with. (again, this is a great reason to move large-scale IT facilities into industrial classification, for various reasons which would assist infrastructure) Once you get a commercial meter, the utility provider watches your energy usage in minute increments over a long period, so they can get some benchmarks and stuff to figure out how much you use per hour, day, week, month, and annum - as well as in much smaller intervals. Once they get a good baseline (I dunno how they charge for a fresh building that's not started up yet, but probably by using stats on similar structures in similar climes, with similar output and production levels - they probably get the data from the EPA's Portfolio Manager software which contains stats for every goddamned building in every state in the USA that's ever had an energy audit done, its climate, power draw, etc etc, amazing tool https://www.energystar.gov/buildings/facility-owners-and-managers/existing-buildings/use-portfolio-manager insert political comment: this is one reason why we don't want to get rid of the EPA, among other things they provide tools like this to anybody at all - for loving FREE! ) they go through and identify the highest peak usage within a 15 minute window for the ENTIRE year. Then the utility provider says "well, we need to make sure we cover our asses, so we'll need to have enough juice bought up that we could cover that building's 15 minute peak times 30,040". Then they adjust the price each year, based on the same metrics.. This also means that a business can get absolutely astounding RoI by just figuring out what their worst 15 minute window was and then dealing with it.. Energy Managers and Auditors tend to literally pay for their own salaries of consulting fees almost immediately, for this reason.. Part of the reason it's so important to focus on energy use reduction and efficiency increases in the business sector, is that residential buildings have a much, much longer expected RoI window - if you go to install a better water heater, or a solar panel, or a set of new windows in your house, you are going to have to figure out how many years it will take before it pays for itself, and a lot of those type of projects will not "pay for themselves" for a period which is usually 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, or 40 years depending on the installation. So immediate benefits for businesses include saving huge loads of money, good public PR, better production from employees as well as higher employee satisfaction (well-maintained buildings have good lighting, good ventilation, and no stale air, as well as nobody fighting over the thermostat all day). NewForumSoftware posted:
coyo7e fucked around with this message at 00:10 on Nov 3, 2016 |
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 23:59
|
|
stop building oil pipelines
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 07:59 |
|
|
Gobbeldygook posted:I thought business consumers paid more simply because they can pay more? Publicly-Owned Utilities - their entire purpose is to provide enough power to support the needs of their area and its customers and also to prevent disasters due to shortages or poor infrastructure maintenance. I live in the PNW where the public utility providers formed a co-op which provides them with a load of bargaining power when they go to Bonneville Power and give them their order of juice for the upcoming year (and they do try to do that, because if BP runs out of juice errybody gets hosed, so they need enough warning about the demand, to make sure they can handle providing enough power to meet that assumed demand as it comes up - while still understanding that the actual consumption of energy may be different and covering it anyway). Privately-Owned Utilities go by the (totally non-ironic) acronym IOUs because they're Investor-Owned Utilities, who manage the energy and water needs of their area and customers with the ultimate goal of providing a profit to their investors. I can list 30 or 40 years of what happened with IOUs on the west coast in large part, as well as give plenty of anecdotal evidence from friends and family I know who live far out in the sticks and rely on IOUs rather than public utility district providers - their bills are huge, they hate their service, it takes eons to get anyone to fix their poo poo. For reference to someone not living in the PNW, my personal energy bill is 5.27 cents per kilowatt-hour (you can find this, it's itemized on your power bill), which means that the actual electricity-used part of my bill for my current place I live came to like 16 bucks for the month of July (I used 306 KWH), on this bill I just had in a nearby drawer - which is shockingly lower than a lot of places back east, ignoring the water portion or service fees. It really is that simple - the government stepped in a long time ago and said, "hey, everybody has the right to water and power - it's a basic human need due to our level of civilization and society, that pretty much nobody ends up living like an animal (because they're, ultimately, a drain on society if they're unable to consume or provide goods or services in the most socially-accepted manner.) Some places have deregulated, and that generally lends itself to areas where there isn't enough demand or customers to bother to keep them happy, so the utilities get jacked way up, and the customers go "welp, I'll buy a loving generator and live mostly off the grid because this bullshit is unreliable." coyo7e fucked around with this message at 02:38 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:For reference to someone not living in the PNW, my personal energy bill is 5.27 cents per kilowatt-hour (you can find this, it's itemized on your power bill), which means that the actual electricity-used part of my bill for my current place I live came to like 16 bucks for the month of July (I used 306 KWH), on this bill I just had in a nearby drawer - which is shockingly lower than a lot of places back east, ignoring the water portion or service fees. To give you a comparison, I paid 11.17 cents per kilowatt-hour on last month's bill in Iowa. MidAmerican, our provider, surprise, surprise is an IOU.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:To give you a comparison, I paid 11.17 cents per kilowatt-hour on last month's bill in Iowa. MidAmerican, our provider, surprise, surprise is an IOU. 11 Cents/kwh in Atlanta.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:To give you a comparison, I paid 11.17 cents per kilowatt-hour on last month's bill in Iowa. MidAmerican, our provider, surprise, surprise is an IOU. However, I'm curious if you or CommieGR are aware of any incentivized programs in your state/region (you can often find them through your provider) which offer rebates and the like for upgrading your equipment, and possibly if they're fed-funded or funded through your IOU? I know that in Catching the Sun covers some incentive programs (both career and customer-oriented) but those are in CA, and CA is still recoiling from the cock-slap that Enron gave them in the early 2000s.. I am curious if IOUs in any of the areas that weren't hosed over by blackouts due to the system being gamed by privately owned organizations, are being active in helping their customers use less power so the IOU has less overhead costs (and thus higher profits) or whether or not public incentive programs are available.. Or maybe there have been brownouts and blackouts all over states in the midwest and on the east coast (summer of sam cough cough) and it's already been addressed and I'm just not familiar enough with local politics and history? Programs like those have the capacity to be huge agents of change while not hurting anybody's bottom line and also providing shitloads of new jobs in growing industries coyo7e fucked around with this message at 01:16 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
I've been camped at Oceti Sakowin, at Wounded Knee Kitchen on Wild Oglala Lane for about six weeks now. https://www.facebook.com/david.guthrie this's me
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:I've actually been thinking about starting a thread along these lines of the stuff I've been talking about here, for the last few days, and maybe tossing it up in in A/T or something.. I was mostly hoping to find a few other folks with some background in energy mgmt or facilities and infrastructure maintenance and controls before tossing up an OP and looking like the wet behind the ears intern that I still am. MidAmerican is doing a ton of work in that direction. Putting in literal billions of dollars of wind infrastructure right now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:MidAmerican is doing a ton of work in that direction. Putting in literal billions of dollars of wind infrastructure right now. But seriously, this is the biggest potential growth sector I can possibly think of, right now. I missed the silicon bubble, the search engine bubble, etc. But we're all gonna die if someone's not doing these jobs, it's not really that tough of poo poo (especially if you're already strong in IT or construction or electrical, because it's basically maintenance with a lot of analytics and the ability to read blueprints and calculate physics poo poo based off thermodynamics, liquid dynamics, and pressure differentials) to do, there's a million off-branches and most haven't been invented yet, and I don't particularly care if I'm a hired gun helping a big gross company cut their margins by saving energy usage, or helping people at 2*poverty get new water heaters and windows and poo poo for free, or anything in between.. Watch Catching the Sun, and then ignore all the wankery about solar power - solar's great, we've got some new cells which are way more efficient, but there's so much more which can be done before we even bother strapping poo poo to the roof of any given building. Also google up cradle to cradle, and that philosophy of sustainable design book. coyo7e fucked around with this message at 01:45 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Coyo7e, who's publishing your book?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:I've been camped at Oceti Sakowin, at Wounded Knee Kitchen on Wild Oglala Lane for about six weeks now. Can you tell us how bad it's gotten? Every day has claims of rubber bullets and demolished camp areas, but there's no real way to tell what's happening here on the outside.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 09:01
|
|
|
I live in Bismarck ND. I only drove by the area once on the way to a job on the reservation a couple weeks ago so I can't say much about the state of things at ground zero. However the police presence in the city here is remarkable. Local hotels are filled with cruisers in the parking lot and I see large caravans of police vehicles headed to Bismarck regularly on I-94. I've never seen such a mobilization of police forces before.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:It took a long time for BP to pay out, a much longer time to distribute those funds to the affected populations and industries. Some people still had their lives ruined by the spill. BP had a team of incredible lawyers and the people affected by the spill had only unreliable and corrupt elected officials. And a lot of them where white - imagine trying to coordinate a fair settlement between a Native American tribe that's undergoing an emergency situation and a huge oil firm. It'd be almost impossible, and the tribe is understandably concerned about it! Also, the construction of the pipeline is going to at least temporarily disrupt the ability of these people to visit their sacred sites. These aren't potential costs to be handled in the case of a future emergency, they're 100% unavoidable costs that need to be addressed now (unless you think that the costs are equal to 0). Not all the liabilities are risks; the ones that aren't risks, at least, should be addressed prior to construction. So I see we've moved from "BP avoided significant liability for the spill in the Gulf" to "OK, they paid one of the largest penalties in US history, but that took time to sort out." Quite the walk back there. The claim that "some people still had their lives ruined" is too vague to respond to. Which corrupt and unreliable officials were these? The US Deptartment of Justice? Eric Holder? Their private attorneys? I don't think anyone in a position to sue BP had trouble finding a lawyer willing to take the case. Your argument that it would be impossible for the tribes to access the courts is belied by the fact that their attorneys are pursuing several motions right now to try to halt the pipeline construction. The claim that construction would somehow unduly impede access to identified sacred sites on public or tribal land does not appear to have been substantiated, in court or otherwise. Your belief about how things are is at odds with reality, and you aren't making and sort of coherent claim about how how things ought to be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:So I see we've moved from "BP avoided significant liability for the spill in the Gulf" to "OK, they paid one of the largest penalties in US history, but that took time to sort out." Quite the walk back there. quote:The claim that "some people still had their lives ruined" is too vague to respond to. quote:Which corrupt and unreliable officials were these? The US Deptartment of Justice? Eric Holder? Their private attorneys? I don't think anyone in a position to sue BP had trouble finding a lawyer willing to take the case. Your argument that it would be impossible for the tribes to access the courts is belied by the fact that their attorneys are pursuing several motions right now to try to halt the pipeline construction. But seriously: the fact that attorneys are pursuing a motion in court doesn't indicate anything about how easy it would be for them to sue a rich firm. quote:The claim that construction would somehow unduly impede access to identified sacred sites on public or tribal land does not appear to have been substantiated, in court or otherwise Yeah, it has. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/09/dapl-dakota-sitting-rock-sioux/499178/ "“This is one of the most significant archeological finds in North Dakota in many years,” said Tim Mentz, a Standing Rock Sioux member and a longtime Native archeologist in the Great Plains. “[Dakota Access Pipeline] consultants would have had to literally walk directly over some of these features. However, reviewing DAPL’s survey work, it appears that they did not independently survey this area but relied on a 1985 survey.” These newly discovered finds may no longer exist. The tribe and its legal team say that less than 24 hours after evidence of the new sacred sites were provided to the court, the Dakota Access company began construction on those same exact sites, perhaps destroying many of them forever. " There are people who are protesting the DAPL even though they're getting bitten by attack dogs, even though they're being shot at. These people aren't all dummies, they're people with concerns so major that they're making this colossal stand. At least get yourself straight on what those concerns are before you dismiss them, please. You can maybe group the concerns into two groups: potential risks from the pipeline spilling, and guaranteed destruction of sacred sites emerging from the construction of the pipeline. You and I/the protesters disagree on whether the first has the infrastructure to be handled correctly, but there's no time to handle the second other other than now. And those concerns aren't being handled now - the sacred sites and archaeological finds are being destroyed without any compensation - so there's an issue worth protesting. Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
At the end of the day: If you feel the need to defend a multi-billion dollar industry with a notoriety for lax safety, lackluster maintenance, and extremely poor environmental record, against a bunch of people that have been basically abused left and right by both said company and the government, I think you need to step back and look at yourself long and hard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:But seriously: the fact that attorneys are pursuing a motion in court doesn't indicate anything about how easy it would be for them to sue a rich firm. quote:Yeah, it has. quote:Dakota Access, not surprisingly, hotly contested Mentz’s version of events in its opposition to the TRO motion. In a map of the area, the company sought to demonstrate that many of the sites documented by Mentz were in fact well outside the pipeline route. See ECF No. 34 (Response to TRO) at 6-8. The rest, according to Dakota Access, were directly over the existing Northern Border Natural Gas Pipeline that runs through the area and thus could not have been historic artifacts. Id. at 6. The company instead alleges that the route of the pipeline in this area proves its point: it twists and turns to avoid the finds that Mentz documented adjacent to the pipeline and thus demonstrates that Dakota Access did purposefully shift the route to avoid any sites of cultural significance in its planning phase. Id. The Court acknowledges that the map provided by the company does seem to indicate that the pipeline curves to accommodate the cultural sites.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
twodot posted:Doesn't this directly indicate that? I agree they have an uphill battle to fight, but they've plainly demonstrated both an understanding that protective laws exist, and that they have access to legal representation. quote:Here's Dakota Access's response to Mentz's report: Although consider this: what motive does the tribe have to lie about this? Do you think they're working incredibly hard, even to the point of lying about important archaeological sites, just to protect land they really don't care about at all?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:I still think BP underpaid, (the liability was huge but the disaster moreso) but there's no point in overextending claims Civilized Fishbot posted:You're right. It's not difficult for a bunch of poor people to sue a major company. Rich entities have no advantages in our courts over poorer ones. These cases are often resolved swiftly and efficiently in the plaintiff's favor. Thus, in a time when their food and water are poisoned, a bunch of poor native americans will have a really easy time acquiring the funds needed to swiftly fix the issue. Nobody would possibly fear that a large, rich firm could dominate all legal proceedings through seemingly endless capital and legal expertise. There have not been, like, a trillion movies about this that permeate the public consciousness Civilized Fishbot posted:Yeah, it has. CommieGIR posted:At the end of the day: If you feel the need to defend a multi-billion dollar industry with a notoriety for lax safety, lackluster maintenance, and extremely poor environmental record, against a bunch of people that have been basically abused left and right by both said company and the government, I think you need to step back and look at yourself long and hard. Civilized Fishbot posted:That's my point! It's an incredibly uphill battle and the tribe would rather fight it before a disaster than during one. Or at least see some assurances that the battle won't be so uphill if/when it has to be fought.  "The tribe's hypothetical lawsuit might fail, so everyone should be required to act like they already won."The Standing Rock already had a chance at to participate in additional surveys on private land with the cooperation of the company. Other tribes did. They declined to do so. They're trying to get a do-over now that their injunction was dismissed for lack of merit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:WTF is this. "Facts aren't really important here, maaan, because everyone knows the petroleum industry are some bad dudes." Prove me wrong then. Show me why they should have no say in a gigantic gently caress off pipe of oil crossing their only water source, and demonstrate that these companies do not have a legacy of being utter fuckups and scumbags to people in general. Here, let me help you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYusNNldesc
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
The pipe was originally slated to cross at Bismarck but was moved over concerns about the water supply. Sioux county, the reservation, is the sixth poorest county in the nation. Having done work there its a bombed out poo poo hole.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
Goodpancakes posted:Sioux county, the reservation, is the sixth poorest county in the nation. Having done work there its a bombed out poo poo hole. Now think long and hard as to why that is and get back to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:Yes, which is why we need a more-or-less impartial third party (the government seems like the best option) to carry out that substantiation. And, given the obvious risks of proceeding if the tribe is correct, pipeline construction should cease until that substantiation has been carried out. quote:Although consider this: what motive does the tribe have to lie about this? Do you think they're working incredibly hard, even to the point of lying about important archaeological sites, just to protect land they really don't care about at all? twodot fucked around with this message at 18:46 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Again, this is a free-floating assertion. Who are these people? Have they been compensated? Did they take the settlement? Are they still litigating against BP? I'm not interested in making this a thread about the BP oil spill. If you think that the BP oil spill has been completely fixed, that's weird, wrong, and irrelevant, because my point is that the tribe has concerns about how easy it is to sue a major company - and those concerns are rooted in very real realities about America's complex and expensive legal system! It's actually hard as hell to take on a major corporation and win. Sometimes meritorious cases win, but sometimes meritorious cases lose when they ought to win. quote:Given that the article contains several factual inaccuracies (the land the pipeline is on was not part of the Treaty of Laramie, it's 30 miles north; the ACE doesn't permit interstate pipelines except where they cross waterways) and credulously reports the tribe's claims with no rebuttal, I'd hardly consider that proven. Twodot already posted the company's response, which the courts acknowledged seems compelling. When people disagree on whether or not sacred artifacts are being destroyed, maybe we should wait until there's some certainty before we continue to maybe destroy them? "Seems compelling" isn't good enough here, you need "we got some independent factual confirmation that there are/aren't artifacts here" quote:
quote:The Standing Rock already had a chance at to participate in additional surveys on private land with the cooperation of the company. Other tribes did. They declined to do so. They're trying to get a do-over now that their injunction was dismissed for lack of merit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
twodot posted:I would assume there is broad agreement the tribe doesn't want the pipeline where it is. Okay, but why not? If they'll always be able to sue for any damages, and there's no risk of construction destroying artifacts, why should they care? You clearly disagree with the Standing Rock on whether or not they have any cause to protest the pipeline. Do you know better than the Standing Rock about how this pipeline will affect their lives and sacred sites, or are the Standing Rock fighting - and suffering literal violence in the process - to prevent a pipeline that they actually wouldn't mind at all?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
Mentz has a pretty good reputation among the states Archaeologists for what that is worth. Bottom line is that the pipe was going to cross at Bismarck but they moved it out of concerns over water contamination. It got moved to near the reservation for a variety of reasons I'm sure. Among them how terribly poor and poorly represented they are. Someone was going to be the loser here, and they dumped it on the reservation. Now the disaffected are protesting. What are you gonna do? Id say move it back to Bismarck with all the enthusiasm people have here for that pipeline.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:Okay, but why not? If they'll always be able to sue for any damages, and there's no risk of construction destroying artifacts, why should they care? quote:You clearly disagree with the Standing Rock on whether or not they have any cause to protest the pipeline. Do you know better than the Standing Rock about how this pipeline will affect their lives and sacred sites, or are the Standing Rock fighting - and suffering literal violence in the process - to prevent a pipeline that they actually wouldn't mind at all?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
twodot posted:A number of people have put forward a number of arguments, I doubt there is a hivemind consensus on why in particular the pipeline is bad. quote:I don't know better than the Standing Rock how this pipeline will affect their sacred sites, I haven't surveyed poo poo, but the government, so far, doesn't think the Standing Rock has cause to stop the pipeline from being built, regardless of how passionately they feel about it, so I'm going with the neutral third party that we've already agreed is the party that should be responsible for resolving this dispute. Has the government independently worked to verify the arguments made over the sacred sites, or just examined the legal arguments made by both parties? So far I see the government siding with the pipeline in a he-said she-said; I think it's fine to say that the government should do the work of actually carry out an independent fact-checking operation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:I'm not interested in making this a thread about the BP oil spill. If you think that the BP oil spill has been completely fixed, that's weird, wrong, and irrelevant, because my point is that the tribe has concerns about how easy it is to sue a major company - and those concerns are rooted in very real realities about America's complex and expensive legal system! It's actually hard as hell to take on a major corporation and win. Sometimes meritorious cases win, but sometimes meritorious cases lose when they ought to win. Dakota Access has their own obligations. They are contractually obligated to be operational in 2017. They have already moved the path of the pipeline several times, in large and small ways, in response to native concerns. It is not realistic to expect them to commit to an indefinite and open-ended planning process based on any novel, unverified claims that may arise. The tribe already has a remedy for actual damages caused by the pipeline. It's called a lawsuit, but you think that there needs to be some sort of additional, preemptive "remedy" for harms that have not been proven to have actually occurred, one which the tribe shouldn't have to litigate or prove in any sort of adversarial proceeding before a neutral party, because that might be difficult and expensive. The hypothetical destruction of artifacts isn't a punishment. It isn't being imposed by the government, and Dakota Access isn't kicking over cairns around the state because the tribe didn't cooperate. They are proceeding with their jobs after what I think can be described as a good faith effort to avoid damage to archeological and cultural sites. Civilized Fishbot posted:Has the government independently worked to verify the arguments made over the sacred sites, or just examined the legal arguments made by both parties? So far I see the government siding with the pipeline in a he-said she-said; I think it's fine to say that the government should do the work of actually carry out an independent fact-checking operation. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:Has the government independently worked to verify the arguments made over the sacred sites, or just examined the legal arguments made by both parties? So far I see the government siding with the pipeline in a he-said she-said; I think it's fine to say that the government should do the work of actually carry out an independent fact-checking operation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:Not participating in those surveys was a mistake. It's unreasonable and dumb to punish that mistake by destroying artifacts, especially considering past interactions between tribal governments like the Standing Rock and the government (genocide). They've earned a little slack, c'mon Well the bad news is that by not participating in the survey process, Standing Rock's leadership has probably allowed the vast majority of any potential damage to already occur since like 97% of the pipeline is constructed so uhhhh I certainly hope that the average Standing Rock-er is calling for their heads in addition to everything else. Naw naw dude, you are the one who doesn't get it. Only 1% of U.S. power grid generation comes from petrofuels. Whether or not you run the A/C when you're gone doesn't make a difference to oil consumption. I brought up energy density before and that's for a reason-- energy density matters when power to weight ratios really matter. That's not houses or power plants. That's planes, cars, and ships. Unless you've got a plan to come up with an equally powerful alternative that can allow us to operate all those things on clean renewable electricity, petroleum it is! Technology will progress and we'll get there someday but we're not there yet. Sorry brah. CommieGIR posted:Prove me wrong then. Show me why they should have no say in a gigantic gently caress off pipe of oil crossing their only water source, and demonstrate that these companies do not have a legacy of being utter fuckups and scumbags to people in general. Come up with some solid percentages on how often pipelines fail already. What level of failures do we see and what level would be acceptable to you?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Come up with some solid percentages on how often pipelines fail already. What level of failures do we see and what level would be acceptable to you?  Pipelines spill less often, but spill more in quantity, and are less easily detected. Trains spill more often, but in lower quantities and are more easily detected. Ironically, tanker trucks apparently suck. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Well the bad news is that by not participating in the survey process, Standing Rock's leadership has probably allowed the vast majority of any potential damage to already occur since like 97% of the pipeline is constructed so uhhhh I certainly hope that the average Standing Rock-er is calling for their heads in addition to everything else. Sure, but changing the Standing Rock leadership is a long-term solution to a short-term problem. twodot posted:Is this not what the Corps already did to the extent that the government has any responsibility at all? But it turns out that the Standing Rock should've responded back, because there were some important artifacts on the grounds (maybe). And the administration hosed up badly, but the ideal response to that isn't "I guess we just have to accept that we might wreck some artifacts because the paperwork wasn't filed properly." It's a huge headache for everyone now and it's the government's job to put an end to it by going and actually examining the claims being made now by the Standing Rock. And it seems obvious that, if that's going to happen, construction needs to be put on hold until then CommieGIR posted:
I wonder if this is because trucks suck as a transporting mechanism or because truckers are always drowsy as hell.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:My understanding is that the Corps just contacted the tribes to try to accomplish this goal, the Standing Rock didn't respond back, and they assumed that was the end of it. quote:As a first cut, the Corps reviewed extensive existing cultural surveys both within and outside the Lake Oahe project area to determine whether the work might affect cultural resources.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:Sure, but changing the Standing Rock leadership is a long-term solution to a short-term problem. The short-term problem has already turned into long-term damage. Any sacred sites that the Standing Rock leadership could've identified but didn't are already hosed because construction already happened. The only thing left is the water crossing. Read the court document I posted earlier. The Corps spent 2 years trying to get together with them and got blown off almost completely. Maybe they didn't trust the white man but considering that of the six reservations the Corps tried to contact, five cooperated fully and aren't the ones protesting, clearly SR took the losing strategy. CommieGIR posted:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying you'd prefer trains as the best solution to transporting oil?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
Goodpancakes posted:The pipe was originally slated to cross at Bismarck but was moved over concerns about the water supply. Sioux county, the reservation, is the sixth poorest county in the nation. Having done work there its a bombed out poo poo hole. I think though the risk of the pipeline affecting the water supply is greatly exaggerated. It's either that, or, the city of St. Louis, Missouri is being incredibly stupid for permitting the pipeline to cross the Mississippi River, one of their water sources, upstream from the city.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying you'd prefer trains as the best solution to transporting oil? If I have to deal with spills, I'd rather have less total spilled than overall less spills with more total spilled. But that's just me, I'm not a multi-billion dollar company out to protect their own interests. And that assumes as well that they stop using rail overall when they switch to pipes...  ...they are not. They want all the transportation methods so they can flood the market with excess. Sure, it drives price down in theory, but it rarely reflects an overall decrease in price, because why would they?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Now think long and hard as to why that is and get back to me. Was this directed at me in particular? I wasn't using how poor and bombed out that county is as the reason why the pipe should cross there, exactly the opposite rather. Just pointing out that it was moved out of the center of power in ND in a vastly rich white area to one of the poorest in the nation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 00:45
|
|
|
Goodpancakes posted:Was this directed at me in particular? I wasn't using how poor and bombed out that county is as the reason why the pipe should cross there, exactly the opposite rather. Just pointing out that it was moved out of the center of power in ND in a vastly rich white area to one of the poorest in the nation. Ah, sorry, didn't realize.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Naw naw dude, you are the one who doesn't get it. Only 1% of U.S. power grid generation comes from petrofuels. Or perhaps you're being disingenuous about what the difference between coal and petrofuels and natural gas (methane) is, in terms of environmental cost, production cost, etc, in pursuit of your agenda? coyo7e fucked around with this message at 03:05 on Nov 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:At the very beginning, before it ever even gets to your precious 1% figure, we have this caveat: "About 67% of the electricity generated was from fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, and petroleum)." So it's cool because only 1% percent of power on the grid is literally provided by burning petrofuels, so gently caress it we need to pump more oil to provide more power to the commercial sector instead of providing them with a reason to not waste so much energy. Cars don't exist. Gotcha. Way to dodge the point by sperging on a tangent. Well, in this thread, we regard oil and natural gas pipelines to be totally different beasts. If we were to say that they are similar, it'd weaken the Standing Rock Sioux's argument since there is already a gas pipeline alongside the oil pipeline which is being built.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 07:59 |
|
|
Best (worst) part is, the pipeline was originally supposed to go through Bismarck but the white people there were like "lol gtfo" and so they basically went to the government saying "ahhh, you guys don't keep treaties with NAs anyways, let us run the pipeline all through their poo poo". And here we are.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 03:20
|
|