292 oil Spills N Dakota Dept Dept. Min. Res. Kept Quiet Feared Public Would Be “overwhelmed by li

OIL, just the name is important to the World. I use it and so do you. As with any difficult process there is bound to be unexpected outcomes, in this case it is oil not going where expected. We can trust the companies to tell the public the truth right? But in North Dakota there is/was a problem with the companies involved with "sharing" the spills or "incidents" with the land owners or public.

From January 2012 – September 2013, these pipeline spills were just a part of approximately 750 “oil field incidents” that took place in the state without the public’s knowledge, according to a report by The Associated Press.

It’s estimated that around 4,328 barrels worth of oil were spilled in this period. In an another case, a break in a Tesoro Corp. pipeline resulted in approximately 20,600 barrels of oil spreading over an area the size of seven football fields. Officials claimed that no wildlife or water sources were harmed by the spill, which apparently led them to conclude that the public did not need to be notified.

The only incident in which the public was notified was an instance in which an oil truck was involved in a collision in 2012.

This may have happened on the public roads. So the obligation for the oil corps to inform the public was a must, we must keep up appearances.

While many of these spills were relatively small and arguably had little environmental impact, landowners expressed outrage that they were kept out of the loop director Lynn Helms said that they didn’t want the public to become “overwhelmed by little incidents.”

UT OH, this is how big law suits start, with about 750,000 gallons spilled, I would think the Corps and N Dakota would want to share the spills with the land owners at the least.
As stated earlier, OIL is it man, it is it. We need it and we pay for it. It needs to taken out of the ground with care, and the problems need to be public so pressure can be applied to update outdated processes and procedures.

Even a single barrel of spilled oil has the potential to ruin water sources and acres upon acres of valuable cropland.

While the release of AP’s report ultimately led to more regulations obliging the public release of reported oil spills, including an online database of spills accessible to the public, this history of secrecy provides a troubling context for the Sioux Tribe’s distrust of the DAPL pipeline construction.

Not being in the oil drilling game I had no idea how much damage it can cause, but don't fear, more regulations were placed on the Corps that did the "hiding" in the first place.
Doesn't say anything about stiff fines (BIG Fines are the way big business learns) for the oil companies, I'm sure they will for sure be super duper honest this time, who am I kidding, I will be writing another post in a year or two on ATS about another million gallons being secretly spilled. And it will be secret so the public's little heads don't spin cause we are so stupid and delicate we will cry according to director Lynn Helms N Dakota Dept Dept. Min. Res. It's always about $ or power, Always.

wearechange.org...

a reply to: seasonal

...N Dakota Dept Dept. Min. Res...

Would that be the North Dakota Department of Mineral Resources? I'm just making an educated guess here... I'm probably not the only one wondering just what that abbreviation means.

Regarding the bigger picture, this is one of many reasons that I always hesitate to believe I "know" anything. Too often, we the public only know what we are allowed to know. This would appear to be a self-imposed silence; other times, thanks to gag orders and secret court orders and non-disclosure agreements and confidentiality clauses, the truth is made criminal.

We do not hear about many disasters, especially when they involve big oil or mining industry contamination. They usually clean them up half way decent but there is no public reporting done. It seems when a tanker gets in an accident on the highway we hear about it, but I think they exagerate those to make pipelines look safer.

a reply to: Boadicea

Would that be the North Dakota Department of Mineral Resources? I'm just making an educated guess here

Yep, North Dakota Department of Mineral Resources had to shorten to fit the heading, they were in on it.

a reply to: rickymouse

We do not hear about many disasters

That is what's scary, and it could be right next to your home, and family.

a reply to: seasonal

Thanks for confirming -- much appreciated!

a reply to: Boadicea

This was hidden from the public, the story doesn't tell who knew and when.

And was the law followed?

Is there a law to publicly report oil spills?

a reply to: seasonal

Devil's advocate here, but this stuff is actually my job. The regulations defining a spill are so loose that without details we really don't know how bad this really is. For example, my employer operates 50+ stormwater pumping stations with ~40 of those being within fifteen feet of a navigable shoreline. If *one* drop of oil gets into the water, it's a reportable quantity. If it's leaked onto land, that reportable quantity goes from one drop to 42 gallons.

You cannot operate machinery within such close proximity to the water and lose -0- oil/fuel. It cannot be done, no matter how strict you are. Lord knows I've tried. We're still expected to throw money at the wall until we can.

a reply to: seasonal

Very good questions! And ones that we shouldn't have to wonder about. Those should have been asked and answered within the article.

It used to be once upon a time that journalists actually followed the five W's in writing an article -- who, what, when, where and how. If those answers weren't available from the person being interviewed, that would be noted... and the reporter would actually take the initiative to research the law and the department policies and procedures, etc., and let the readers know what is required by law, what the proper procedure is according to policy, who may or may not have dropped the ball (or covered up), etc.

Is it just me or does it seem that too often articles are written as little more than gossip, with lots of innuendoes and implications which get folks on both sides riled up, but provide no real information or answers? And is it incompetence, ignorance or something more sinister? (I tend to believe the latter)

a reply to: netwarrior

You cannot operate machinery within such close proximity to the water and lose -0- oil/fuel. It cannot be done, no matter how strict you are. Lord knows I've tried. We're still expected to throw money at the wall until we can.

Agreed, our lives by default is going to harm what is a very robust environment.

Also, according to the story, it was 25,000 barrels (750,000 gallons) of oil leaked in the 2 years. More than a drop, more than an oops. I think this is all willful omissions on the Corps part and N Dakota Dept Dept. Min. Res. Lynn Helmsn who said that they didn’t want the public to become “overwhelmed by little incidents.”

It's cheaper to lie, and pay the little inconvenient fines. Fine 'em til it hurts a little!

a reply to: Boadicea

t used to be once upon a time that journalists actually followed the five W's in writing an article -- who, what, when, where and how.

Now all the follow is marching orders by the few big corps and very wealthy people who own them. See HRC and what has mostly been a media blackout.

a reply to: seasonal

There may be some hope left:

Fla paper makes unprecidented apology to readers for anti-Trump coverage; ‘you deserve more balance’

The Daily Commercial published an editorial titled “The media, the election and bias” on Oct. 23 that explained the paper is reliant on wire services for much of its election coverage and those reports are weighted heavily against Trump.

“The Daily Commercial hasn’t done enough to mitigate the anti-Trump wave in the pages of this paper,” it wrote. “You deserve a more balanced approach to the coverage of elections and other weighty issues.”

I sure hope it's contagious.

a reply to: Boadicea

The Daily Commercial published an editorial titled “The media, the election and bias” on Oct. 23 that explained the paper is reliant on wire services for much of its election coverage and those reports are weighted heavily against Trump. “The Daily Commercial hasn’t done enough to mitigate the anti-Trump wave in the pages of this paper,” it wrote. “You deserve a more balanced approach to the coverage of elections and other weighty issues.”

Talk is cheap, the election is almost over, hand out cash.

The problem is next time around they will be up to their own tricks..

What have they done to insure their new found sense of journalistic integrity. Blaa blaa bllaaaa, I would imagine the paper was inundated with angry calls and cancelled paper subscriptions. They can go jump in a lake.

a reply to: seasonal

I would imagine the paper was inundated with angry calls and cancelled paper subscriptions.

Probably... and that probably increased exponentially after this latest news of the re-opened investigation.

But I also wonder what they might have heard from sources about the true depths of the sexual depravity involved and if they're seeing the writing on the wall. I am almost daring to hope that these folks are realizing they will need to pick a side very very soon and are trying to do just that.

They can go jump in a lake.

I understand and can't argue... but I'm going to give it some time. What can I say? I'm an eternal optimist!

a reply to: Boadicea

they will need to pick a side very very soon and are trying to do just that.

NO they shouldn't pick a side, they need to see the next write it or type it. Keep the crapping editorials in the editorial sections. Our country wouldn't be in the outhouse pit we are in if the "free" press wasn't controlled by 10 corps/wealthy people.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: rickymouse

We do not hear about many disasters

That is what's scary, and it could be right next to your home, and family.

We learn about things here on Facebook, it spreads like wildfire and it forces a response from officials. If it is way out in the woods though, it is probably not going to be known.