The Dakota Access pipeline is a 1,172 mile oil pipeline that stretches through North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa and southern Illinois. The pipeline would allow oil companies to transport crude oil from North Dakota to oil refineries along the Eastern Seaboard. The pipeline’s construction was permitted by the participating state governments under eminent domain. Opponents of the pipeline (including several Native American tribes, including the Meskwaki and Sioux tribal nations) argue that the pipeline has the potential to pollute their water supply and destroy Native American burial sites. Proponents argue that the pipeline is necessary for the U.S. to achieve energy independence.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes
@9FLFKTQ2yrs2Y
Top Agreement
Stuff like this has happened before, like the great oil leak of the Gulf of Mexico. This incident has left animals affected for decades.
@9FJDDRS2yrs2Y
Rerouting the pipes isn't going to do anything but make more mess. I feel they should cut it off completely and keep our environment healthy.
While many people may go against the Dakota Access Pipeline, it actually is a very successful way of transporting oil.
@9FTX45W2yrs2Y
Scientists estimate it will poison almost 80% of Dakota's water and nature/wildlife with the drilling and extraction of the oil underneath. It is also on land they do not own technically but they are doing it anyway because they are selfish and want the money. It is true that it will produce many jobs in oil, but we can make more jobs for things that help the environment instead of killing it.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No
@9FG46J8 2yrs2Y
Top Disagreement
The Dakota Access Pipeline brings in so much oil into the United States contributing to so much carbon emmisions.
@9FG9JBKIndependence2yrs2Y
Oil and Gas run tons of things in the country and with the current gas and oil prices we need more of it to make it affordable to drive while electrical cars are in the making, aswell lithium will cause bad too in the long run
I believe that the Dakota Access Pipeline is bad for our environment because it has leaked several times causing contamination in our environment and disrupting the drinking water line.
@9FG79ZX2yrs2Y
I live in the area this would affect and it would make a lot of the farmland unusable for several years if something went wrong it could be really bad for people in that area
@9FGC94VLibertarian2yrs2Y
It's not our land and on top of that it's land that's sacred to the Dakota and Native American population.
@9FJ9MJH2yrs2Y
I think it should be stopped as most reservations in these areas don't have enough money to fix their water lines and make it healthier and cleaner. This oil can kill off the Native Americans living in these areas.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes, and the government should never be allowed to acquire land by eminent domain
@9FG4W9J2yrs2Y
Though we have taken land from the Natives, we now share a country with them, and their pipeline will benefit both of us, but we will prosecute the company if they affect the land in the burial grounds.
@9FT7MFPIndependent2yrs2Y
Natives have already gotten enough taken from them, this is all they have left and it should be left untouched.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No, but reroute the pipeline away from Native American land
@9FLFKTQ2yrs2Y
Top Disagreement
The pipeline, like all things, is subject to human error and can malfunction or spring a leak. Which will be detrimental to the whole area surrounding the pipeline.
@9FJCJSV2yrs2Y
As a Native American the land is sacred and important and for the most part, history is repeating itself all over again the white man taking our land again having to live and do our traditional doings on certain amount of land of which can be taken away from us
@9FST3B62yrs2Y
Either way, the pipeline will still effect the environment, and redirecting it won't solve any issues.
@9FSNNQK2yrs2Y
This project will make pollution far much worse, and it will damage our ecosystem because the government is less concerned towards that rather than money. Focus on re-useable energy and nuclear power. Reouting it will only make it less worse, but it will still damage the ecosystem.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No, but drastically increase the amount of fines the company must pay in the event of an accident
@9G7BK6P2yrs2Y
Accountability, Major corporations have to be held to a higher standard. Cutting corners on quality and safety cannot be tolerated, and a fine is just the beginning. It's time the people on top, the decision makers are held accountable and I don't mean just having to pay a hefty fine. A drastic fine is not incentive enough. Jail time, this will be the penalty for allowing destruction of such an epic scale. Some of you may be thinking, well, accidents do happen. Its the responsibility of those who are in-charge to make sure they don't. A fine to a multi billionaire is just the… Read more
Not enough knowledge to make an informed vote
@Jones4Potus2024 2yrs2Y
Yes, indigenous treaties must be respected and the environment protected
@9D68NLB2yrs2Y
No but should have to pay a land use fee to the Native Americans
@9GJTNP92yrs2Y
Given the fact that climate change is a mounting problem the pipeline shouldn't be constructed. Moreover, eminent domain shouldn't be used to seize the land of indigenous people.
No, we should find a more sustainable alternative.
@9HRD7WFRepublican1yr1Y
No, but reroute the pipeline away from Native American land. Additionally, extremely increase the amount of fines the company must pay in the event of an accident.
@9Q9RV2210mos10MO
Due to my opposition of future oil projects and the issues it could cause for the nearby residents I would say I am not a fan
@9G9FVSP2yrs2Y
we are having an energy crisis right now we need to improve and expand our oil and gas operations both current and future oil and gas refinery's
@VulcanMan6 2yrs2Y
We need to be actively waning out of oil and gas as much as possible
@B4CHTPVIndependent1mo1MO
Find a compromise between the American Indians and the construction of the pipeline. If nothing works, continue on with the construction as usual.
@B3GDS3V2mos2MO
We should stop constructing the pipeline, but only begin building again or increase flowing if a natural gas shortage should arise
@9SV9J3J8mos8MO
They should continue, but reroute it away from the water supplies and burial sites, and they should pay for any accidents that occur to the land.
@9M7X92J1yr1Y
I live in North Dakota.
Can we do this responsibly with respect to the rights of the citizen property owners?
And the local counties and townships.
Is there going to be competitive bidding on the services needed or a cozy monopoly?
Will the processes be transparent and will they be accountable to the public down to the last cent and procedures so that we the public can correctly assess what is going on and if we are being abused or exploited or if this is the tremendous benefit to our area that it looks to be.
@9DF8VN3Constitution2yrs2Y
No, but reroute the pipeline away from Native American land while also drastically increasing the amount of fines in event of an accident.
@9V93R5G7mos7MO
No but reroute the pipeline away from Native land AND drastically increase the amount of fines the company must pay in the event of an accident.
Yes, there is too great of a chance that it will pollute the water supply for Native American tribes who live on the surrounding land
@9LTVMVX1yr1Y
Yes, this is a huge environmental and Native American issue. The pipeline is moving thousands of natives out of their homes and if there is an oil spill the wildlife and environment would be in danger.
@9LQ8LGSRepublican1yr1Y
no, because of the jobs that are being taken away raising the poverty % and other factoring risks with shutting it down.
@9FFZH97Progressive2yrs2Y
No, the government should redirect the pipeline away from Native American land and drastically increase the amount of fines the company must pay in the event of an accident
@8X2XSGM4yrs4Y
No, but reroute the pipeline away from Native American land and the government should never be allowed to acquire land by eminent domain
@8XC75CK3yrs3Y
I also don’t know what that is
@8G45P7Z5yrs5Y
No, and force the Native Americans to move elsewhere or fine them for staying
@8XGVP6P3yrs3Y
I have never heard of this before
@8NM3TQQIndependent5yrs5Y
No but make sure it does not disturb Native American land or any water supply should there be a problem
@8NB7FX85yrs5Y
No provided: tighter regulations and monitoring of this pipeline and others is put in place and enforced to better protect our natural environments and higher fines and financial responsibility for recovery are leveled (and cannot be contested) against companies associated with the pipeline in the event of an accident. For any pipeline to be built, all local communities must OK the section that runs through them - if a community opposes the pipeline then the pipeline must be routed through another area.
@8LJ35GJ5yrs5Y
Yes, they should stop because oil can be transported by train and vehicle if they do it by pipe then there could be a leak of some sort and it could pollute the soil and the water.
@8ZLVPGF3yrs3Y
I don´t know enough about this to give an opinion.
@8XKFDFQ3yrs3Y
I do not have enough knowledge to answer this question.
@8FDHT365yrs5Y
No, but reroute the pipeline away from Native American land; but drastically increase the amount of fines the company must pay in the event of an accident
@B58NX8HIndependent6 days6D
No but make sure the pipeline is in safe place away from Native American land and make sure accountability is held by giving a fine to the company if not constructed correctly
@B55JSH41wk1W
Yes, we can achieve energy independence by using natural resources. And only resume the construction in the event of an emergency.
@B54TKN51wk1W
No, but one we should reroute the pipeline away from Native American land. Then two if an accident were to occur then drastically fine the company the same it'll take to rebuild.
@B54Q5HD 2wks2W
As long as it was approved constitutionally, and it doesn't break any governmental rules or regulation, I don't see the problem
No, but substantially require frequent inspections, increase fines in accidents, and perform rigorous environmental impact statements by independent parties.
@B4RRVZD3wks3W
YES the government should never be allowed to acquire land, YES the pipeline should be rerouted away from Native American land, and YES the increased amount of fines the company must pay in the event of an accident.
@B4Q58V2 4wks4W
No, but reroute the pipeline in order to avoid Native American land and allow for anyone, including states, to sue oil companies for any accidents that may occur.
@B4PRVB24wks4W
End imminent domain and imprison ceo's and board members who actively and knowingly lower safety regulations that could result in accidents.
@B4KFGJZIndependent1mo1MO
Yes, if the pipes are secure enough to no leak and do not pollute anything. Also, the native Americans need to agree with it.
@B4JFJRP1mo1MO
Maybe, but make sure whatever happens is environmentally viable & doesn't infringe on Native American land
@B4HPBGG1mo1MO
Yes, unless if there's any way to prevent any pollution or they should at least get permission to use oil.
@B4HNGD5Republican1mo1MO
I say no because the con struct goes right between our 80 acres and it is paying pretty good but something tells me yes because then they dig for the cast iron piped to go in the ground is leaves a pretty soft and low spot in the pasture. and the grass there is always dead and it starts to sink and we have to make them put sod or more clay down and two of mhh horses have been caused to go lame because of this.
@B4HCQW31mo1MO
They should ask before taking the land. If told no, go around it. If yes, it should stay where it is.
@B4GMNMGProgressive1mo1MO
Yes, if it can provide work for its employees and if it reroutes the pipeline away from Native land.
@B4G4Y5P1mo1MO
I think it should both be rerouted and should have security measures in place to reimburse the Natives if something does happen and affect their lives.
@B4FMX6Q1mo1MO
Yes and no I don’t like that they’re polluting the original people of America land but also yes because I think America should be self sufficient with energy but at the same time I don’t mind getting help from other countries we’re all human
@B4FKB49Libertarian1mo1MO
It's American job you take that away that hurts the economy plus it helps the consumer and the working class
@B4FHDWNRepublican1mo1MO
no but they need to make sure that the people have constant fresh water and that their water source is clean at least once a week
@B4FCJW4Republican1mo1MO
No, for the sake of low unemployment, a good GDP, a good supply chain, good trade, low inflation, low energy prices, freedom, capitalism, weak government, federalism, and checks and balances.
@B4F52491mo1MO
No, but local governments, including tribal authorities, should be directly involved in its ownership and operation. Technological solutions to leakage should be sought and measures against misreporting or improper maintenance should be taken.
No, but there should be a compromise between the Indians and the constructors. If it falls apart, continue as usual.
@B4D6KHP1mo1MO
No, for the sake of low energy prices, low inflation, a good supply chain, good trade, a good GDP, and low unemployment.
@B4BZS551mo1MO
Reroute it, and have plans in place to close it once it's no longer needed. And while this is done, raise fines on the pipeline that the companies must pay if an issue happens.
@ye 1mo1MO
No, but move the pipeline away from Native American land, and drastically increase the amount of fines the company must pay in the event of an accident
@B48TRXHRepublican1mo1MO
If there is a way for nobodies land to get taken than no. But if they have to use eminent domain, then yes.
@B48NXFT1mo1MO
if it would beniefit the world then I think they should reconstruct the design and if anything were to happen compensation has to go out automacticlly and the pipeline would need to be watch very closely
@B48LF251mo1MO
No, but only if there is almost a guarantee that the pipeline will not harm the environment or cultural sites.
@B466J2Q2mos2MO
The government should look to reroute this so that it doesn't harm water supply, but if there are any accidents then the company must pay a fine.
@B45H84X2mos2MO
I don't think they should be building pipelines because I don't think they should be using gas in the first place
@B44HYS72mos2MO
Yes, and it could pollute the land further degrading the environment on top of destroying Native Americans homes.
@B44HK492mos2MO
The government should stop the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline due to concerns about environmental impact, Indigenous land rights, and potential risks of oil spills.
@B43MV2G2mos2MO
You could continue, but you should watch the damage it does, and if it gets too bad, stop or close it down.
@B43H4XC2mos2MO
No, but reroute the pipeline away from native American land and still heavily fine the company in the event of an accident
@B4223QD2mos2MO
i don't really care as long as it doesn't effect any protected land (like national parks or reservations)
@B3ZYM5D2mos2MO
No!
First of all, this is subverting freedom, capitalism, federalism, checks and balances, and weak central government
Second of all, this would tank the economy such as spiking the unemployment rate, increasing energy prices, and assaulting trade, the GDP and the supply chain
@B3ZY2QC2mos2MO
We can't let native american land that have been given sovereignty to be violated and destroyed to the detroment of local residents. The pipeline will help the economy but we still need to adopt renewabe energy for the long term interest of our species and our planet.
@B3ZXTD32mos2MO
Yes and no. No: its oil, you won't have to transport it from point A to point B. Yes: What if it busts under ground?
@B3ZJTYW2mos2MO
I think the government should stop construction of the Dakota Access pipeline and find a different way that will not destroy the land.
@B3Z9ZLDRepublican2mos2MO
Reroute the pipeline away from Native American land but have certain restrictions on how much oil is drilled
No, but reroute it away from Native American land and in the event of a spill, they need to pay for all of the damage caused and make sure people still get clean water.
@B3X449T2mos2MO
no, but they should work with the native American tribes and find a different route to construct the pipelines into another are to prevent pollution and disturbing Native American burial sites
@B3W4JXY2mos2MO
Yes or work with private businesses to get what they need done and regulated the government should regulate it but not be in total control due to private property guide lines
@B3VGV2T 2mos2MO
The question of whether the government should stop construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) is complex, with arguments for and against its continued operation centering on environmental concerns, tribal sovereignty, and economic benefits.
Arguments for stopping construction/operations:
Environmental Risks:
Opponents, including the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, raise concerns about potential water contamination from a pipeline rupture, particularly near the Missouri River, which is a vital water source for the tribe and others.
Tribal Sovereignty and Treaty Rights:
The pipeline'… Read more
@B3VP58Z2mos2MO
No, we need to find other sources of energy since our country heavily relies on fossil fuels and oil for generating energy but the pipeline should be held to very strict standards since it is so large and the company should pay fines for incidents.
@B3VGV2T 2mos2MO
Yes, the government should have stopped construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) because it would have violated tribal sovereignty and endangered the environment.
Why it should have been stopped
Tribal sovereignty
The pipeline would have crossed sacred sites and traditional lands of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.
Climate change
The pipeline would have locked the country into burning fossil fuels for decades, according to Senator Bernie Sanders.
Environmental damage
The pipeline would have endangered wildlife and the Missouri River, and spills would have been devastating.
What… Read more
@B3V3SFG2mos2MO
No, but steer clear of any protected areas, lands that belong to Native Americans, and fine the company in the event of an accident occuring.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
