Standing Rock vs Dakota pipeline

[decay]

Yes looks to be the same incident.

I have not had time to look into it, but like I said I suspect its a gathering line, thats of much lower pressure and has a totally different set of rules and guidelines that govern it Vs the DAPL and other transmission lines. Especially since it was built 30+ years ago.

ok well... as a software engineer at a company that's about 10 years old, i'm still responsible for supporting engineering decisions made half a decade before i showed up, and yeah- a lot of the time, those decisions sucked. that's the fucking deal.

i'm not blaming you personally, of course, but your industry needs to fix this shit.

edit: alright, sleeve, if you start arguing with me about whether an oil spill is or is not an environmental disaster... dude, i've been trying to find middle ground.

[mrsleeve]

Yes looks to be the same incident.

I have not had time to look into it, but like I said I suspect its a gathering line, thats of much lower pressure and has a totally different set of rules and guidelines that govern it Vs the DAPL and other transmission lines. Especially since it was built 30+ years ago.

this is far from an environmental disaster, this is a dig deal for the intimidate area where oil is flowing over the ground, but out side of that its not going to hurt anything in the long term. There is far more oil spewing out of natural formations all over the place than this

[decay]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/12/pipel...test-camp.html

lol

wait is this the same event i posted about earlier (also near bismarck, ND) or another one i haven't heard about yet?

either way. jesus christ. are we clear on why the protests are happening yet? we would like to stop having environmental disasters. capiche?

[Wschnitz]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/12/pipel...test-camp.html

lol

[decay]

Will have to do some research, and without knowing at least a few more specifics it's very hard to make any informed W.A.G.s. from your link I suspect it's a gathering line of low pressure....

we're getting weather reports from the ground; not going in unprepared, but yeah, anything you hear would be great. i know we're on opposite sides of this thing but everyone going onsite needs to be prepared.

we're talking to one of the local casinos about borrowing a convention hall for base-ops but i'll probably be sleeping in a GMC Tahoe or similar

[mrsleeve]

Will have to do some research, and without knowing at least a few more specifics it's very hard to make any informed W.A.G.s. from your link I suspect it's a gathering line of low pressure....

[decay]

also- we're gearing up for 2nd wave.

first one was a show of force and got the intended result- the gov't is on our side and now if construction continues, it is an illegal action.

next one will be entrenching and fortifying.

the cavalry came first:



and i'm proud of my brothers, but now it's the combat engineers' turn *grin*

[decay]

ok, i might not agree, but i understand your argument and respect your position, based on your knowledge set and experience. i still don't think it's a good idea, but the whole fracking thing is secondary to the actual point i was making.

would you care to address the issue of the current leak in Bismarck, which is *exactly why* they wanted the DAPL rerouted through native lands?

[mrsleeve]

^

Fracking is NOTHING NEW, its has been used since the 1940s to rework underpreformaing conventional wells. It used to be VERY VERY expensive per hole, with new technology and refined techniques its far more cost effective than it was 20 years ago, but still very expensive for what it can return in a conventional well bore. What brought it the forefront was its use in conjunction with the more recent ability to turn that well bore from the vertical plane and transition to the horizontal making tightly locked resource locked in narrow layers, far more producible than just where a conventional bore passes though it. When that tight formation is "fracked" it lets the resource flow from greater distance and easier to the well bore to be pumped out, with the ability to go out into that formation 6-10 thousand feet in all directions form a single point of entry (6 well bores from one pad location) it becomes profitable far quicker than working over conventional wells time and time again or having to only drill 6 holes and frack them Vs 50 or more to produce the same geographical area.

The peak oil theory people you are drawing some of your position from, were well aware of the ability to "frack" a well, horizontal drilling was in its infancy, was outlandishly expensive, and confined to surface applications like the contested HDD that this thread is about. It has only been in the last decade and half or so has it been able to transition to resource extraction from a vertical well bore in a cost effective means.

This is one of the key flaws of peak oil theory, it 100% discounted advancing technology for extraction, and that the rise in oil pricing will demand the markets development of this tech becoming far more cost effective across the industry.

That my friend is the definition of progress.

[decay]

this argument assumes there will be no advancement in technology that replaces fossil fuels when necessary/affordable

there already has been (fracking) and will be in the future also

we used to burn wood for heat and had no electricity

it is not a static world

ok, describing fracking as "progress" is definitely something i'll be contentious with. same with tar sands. these methods are not progress, they're increasingly desperate attempts to extract energy from the ground.

i am not envisioning a utopia in which we never again use fossil fuels- we can probably agree that's impossible.

but i think it would be a good thing if we moved away from it as a primary energy source- because of shit like this: http://bismarcktribune.com/news/stat...8d9d635be.html happening *right now*.

[gwb72tii]

disagree, and here is why.

our civilization is built around dependence on a non-renewable resource.

this is going to go *very* badly for us at some point.

that's not an emotional or irrational statement.

this argument assumes there will be no advancement in technology that replaces fossil fuels when necessary/affordable

there already has been (fracking) and will be in the future also

we used to burn wood for heat and had no electricity

it is not a static world

[marshallnoise]

disagree, and here is why.

our civilization is built around dependence on a non-renewable resource.

this is going to go *very* badly for us at some point.

that's not an emotional or irrational statement.

That some point is so far into the future we can't even pinpoint it. But when that day comes, it will be not so fun. We will adapt and overcome. More importantly, if economics is left to determine when that day comes, we will actually see it coming and make adjustments then. Forcing the issue just makes certain people wealthy at the cost of the public.

[decay]

I don't think you appreciate it. I do think you hate it though.

Its an irrational hatred.

disagree, and here is why.

our civilization is built around dependence on a non-renewable resource.

this is going to go *very* badly for us at some point.

that's not an emotional or irrational statement.

[marshallnoise]

sleeve, come on man, i'm trying to meet you here- the soles of my boots were just the first thing i could think of.

i understand why there is a demand for petroleum.

given that it is a finite resource- and nobody is arguing with me about that- i think it would be a good thing for all of us if we REDUCED- not ELIMINATED- it.

I don't think you appreciate it. I do think you hate it though.

Its an irrational hatred.

[decay]

I how about the elastic in you underware, any plastic zippers on jackets or pants, any nylon or polyester in you wardrobe for the day??

sleeve, come on man, i'm trying to meet you here- the soles of my boots were just the first thing i could think of.

i understand why there is a demand for petroleum.

given that it is a finite resource- and nobody is arguing with me about that- i think it would be a good thing for all of us if we REDUCED- not ELIMINATED- it.