mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
Pipeline Politics
Dakota Pipeline Protests Putting More Crude on Trains
Features Icon
show comments
  • CaliforniaStark

    Believe part of this Obama decision is to save face for the protesters at the Dakota Access pipeline site. When the full brunt of the North Dakota winter hit, it was unlikely they would stay in their protest camp, without using fossil fuels. If they used fossil fuels, or left because of winter, it makes the case for why we need pipelines and fossil fuels. This is one of Obama’s last acts of running interference against reality.

  • Tim Fairbank

    Things may not be exactly as they appear.

    The latest word from the protest site is that Energy Transfer Partners is continuing to drill a tunnel under the Missouri River, and seemingly hopes to complete the pipeline as originally planned. Does the Obama Administration know this? Perhaps this IS all just face-saving political theater.

    • JR

      It still seems like an eternity away, but fairly soon we will no longer have to care about Obama and what he and his minions know. The end can’t come soon enough,

  • Disappeared4x

    What do they hope to accomplish? Bill McKibben says Standing Rock is the civil rights issue of our time, turning the no-hydrocarbon movement into ‘you are being deplorable to the Sioux and other Native Americans’.

  • Fat_Man

    “its final segment—a part that travels underneath the Missouri river—has come under intense national security”


    • Andrew Allison

      With respect, I think you were (as I often am) a bit to terse. Of course there’s been no actual scrutiny of this, or any, environmental issue. It’s all about virtue-signalling.

      • Fat_Man

        You are correct. But, I thought it was an auto correct error.

        • Andrew Allison

          Guilty as charged!

  • Andrew Allison

    Given the immediately preceding post on the environmental disaster represent by the EU’s nonsensical and counter-productive renewable energy policy, and TAI’s frequent debunking of the ethanol boondoggle, should we be surprised that the Dakota Access outcome was an environmental negative?

  • FriendlyGoat

    There is just no reason on earth for Obama to side with ETP against Native Americans on his way out the door with the specter of Trump coming in. So he didn’t. I mean, it’s one thing to cooperate with a transition for the sake of a transition. It’s another to be goaded into doing the next guy’s dirty work. Trump needs a little practice in the art of “no drama” himself, after all.

  • jsdozcn9

    Can they run the trains along the pipeline route?

  • Frank Natoli

    The author forgot to mention that Warren Buffett and his Burlington Northern gain immensely from the rail traffic in crude. Rich Democrats always get richer. Nice trick.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service