A Brief Overview of the Dakota Access Pipeline

Before looking into the most recent news about the Dakota Access Pipeline, also known as DAPL, we must look into some of the many complex issues that began this broad though familiar issue of a land use conflict.

DAPL is an oil pipeline project set in motion by the Texas-based company Energy Transfer Partners in 2014. According to the Energy Transfer Partners website, this 1,172 mile pipeline that stretches across four Midwestern states is costing the company about $4 billion, and is expected to deliver 470,000 barrels of crude oil per day upon completion.

Jack Healy from the NewYork Times writes that this project has and will continue to create 8,000-12,000 construction jobs and will generate an annual $55 million in property taxes when finished.

Although this may seem like a lucrative business operation with many promising aspects, multiple groups have raised concerns over the impacts that this pipeline may have on the environment and elsewhere.

Along the crop-rich plains of central North Dakota, just south of the city of Bismarck, lies the Native American reservation of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe: the most vocal opponents of the DAPL.

According to the New York Times, the pipeline’s construction was halted on the northern edge of the reservation, where peaceful protests by the tribal members have been going on since last spring. The tribal members voice concerns not only on the proposed encroachment of their native land, but also on the possible contamination that could come from DAPL.

According to commondreams.org, there are over 3oo oil pipeline spills in the US alone each year.

The largest concern that local landowners and tribal members had was of the proposed plan by Energy Transfer Partners that the DAPL go under the Missouri river, which serves more than 17 million Americans as their primary source for fresh water, as reported by the LA Times.

A pipeline leak in that specific location could mean disaster for the health of millions of Americans, hence the local and widespread opposition to the DAPL.

The reason why construction has been halted by the edge of the Standing Rock Sioux reservation was not only because of the protests, but also due to the fact that the Army Corps of Engineers had not issued a permit to allow the company to build under the Missouri River, as stated on CNN.

On the morning of Dec. 4, however, the Army issued a statement that denied the DAPL from being able to go under the River to “reduce the risk of spill or pipeline rupture.”

While the news came as victory to many, this exhausting fight is still far from over.

Joshua Norman

Contributor

Joshua.E,Norman@uwsp.edu