Proposed solutions for the Dakota Access Pipeline Period 1
0 have signed. Let’s get to 1,000!
By some, the Dakota Access Pipeline is viewed as the safest and most environmentally sensitive way to transport oil. By others, it is viewed as a risky and hazardous pipeline that could cause all water supply to be contaminated. The DAPL is a long series of connected pipes, that stretches across four states; North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois. This $3.8 billion project travels beneath the Missouri River, and has been causing chaos within a half-mile of the Standing Rock Sioux reservation river. The pipeline could decrease the reliance on foreign oil, but it could also contaminate the water supply and disturb sacred tribal sites. As a result this has caused havoc amongst worrisome Indian protesters wanting to protect their burial sites. With that being said, is there a compromise?
Life as a Native American started strong, especially before Europeans colonized America. Once the Europeans landed in the new world, they spread diseases and eliminated many of the remaining Native American tribes. Between the 18th-20th century, the US has been persecuting Native Americans by removing their land, isolating them, and building projects on Native American soil. DAPL(Dakota Access Pipeline), has been a topic of conversation in 2016-2017 and probably for future years to come. Native American groups such as the Sioux Tribe have argued against the government in the building of the project. However, due to the advancement in technology and cruciality in world relationships, the government has a reasonable response that is proved just in their point of view.
The DAPL can prove to have many benefits yet, also have consequences that will affect each side’s opinion and perspective of the situation. While the government sees the pipeline as a way to transport oil and raise the economic status of the country, the various opposing sides disapprove this act because it could bring potential harm to the environment. Although this may decrease the U.S.’s dependency on foreign oil, this will affect other countries since trade relations between the countries will be disrupted. Even though each benefit is backed with a negative and vice versa, this isn’t necessarily a win-lose situation, because to prevent this deepening struggle, a compromise solution is possible to support both causes.
For the government, deciding whether or not to discontinue the building of the pipeline is a difficult decision. They have invested over $3.8 billion in the construction of the DAPL and if they decide to stop it, they will become independent from the countries that supply oil all over the world but they will lose all the money. And if they decide to continue with the project, the government will access a vast amount of oil; jobs, gasoline, economical challenges will be gained and saved with this progressive project. With a goal of transporting crude oil to refining markets across the continental United States, proponents of DAPL believe that it will make transportation of oil safe and cost-effective. Ignoring the significant protests and the cruciality of the environment, they thought of their country’s benefits first before anything else.
The environment is a large factor that is being most affected by the pipeline access. It has been in increasing danger from the hands of people, which is becoming more of a threat, because of the oil production and transportation throughout the country borders. People that support nature’s well-being protest against the usage of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). Evidence of their investigations support their sayings, “The Missouri River is the tribe's only source of water. If this leaks, it is going to spill into the river. So the tribe's legal stance — that they were not adequately consulted, that there are potential water issues here — their legal concerns are strong," Devashree Saha, a senior policy associate at Brookings Institution, told Business Insider. If leaks of the pipe occur, the harmful crude oil would enter the water and contaminate it, meaning the tribes will have no clean water to drink. Additionally, farmers and other landowners are displeased because the DAPL could drown their lands with oil, leading to an unbalanced economy in the United States.
It is not a win-lose situation because there is a solution that may please both sides. Completing the pipeline project will rejoice the company's side of profit, but both will equally face environmental challenges. Additionally, preventing DAPL will lead the protesters to reclaim their homes, however, both of the sides will endure the lack of oil and U.S. independence. There is a compromise solution that is deemed fair and equitable for both sides, for example, to continue the project for oil, they can go around the Native American sacred sites and lakes, which could protect historical places as well as the water sources. Furthermore, if they are persistent in keeping the placement of the pipeline, they may do so however at the expense of providing the Native Americans more land for their reservations. Both solutions are just for the cruciality of U.S. connections with other nations and self-producing oil, and supporting the environmental safety of the United States and preventing harm for the historical and sacred sites of the Native Americans.
By using this compromising solution, many conflicts can be rectified. The oil processing company can profit from the oil, protesters can be satisfied and return to the comfort of their homes, and the Native American Reservations will remain undisturbed. The United States of America will prosper from trade because now, thanks to the pipeline compromise, it has the upper hand in oil. Gas prices will plummet, and many people will benefit from this. However, the group that would benefit the most would be the Native Americans. This is because it is only fair that what you take is what you return, meaning that if you return some land to the Native Americans to make up for the ones withdrawn, then there won’t be any loss. By putting this proposal into action, the government, the citizens, and the Native Americans will all benefit. An anonymous person once said “The worst feeling is regretting not having done something when you had the chance.” Similar to this quote, we can all learn from our terrible mistakes and hope that we learn from them and spread our message. Please support our petition through social media in the hope that we can all reach a common agreement about this crucial situation.
“I am a human not a robot. I need water, not oil."
-Chloe a 3 year old in Utah, Paiute
Today: LFCMS is counting on you
LFCMS needs your help with “President Trump: Proposed solutions for the Dakota Access Pipeline Period 1”. Join LFCMS and 643 supporters today.