TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Dakota Access Pipeline to win US Army permit for completion

177 点作者 socialentp超过 8 年前

13 条评论

protomyth超过 8 年前
At this point, the main concern is getting that camp cleaned up before the flood comes. It should be noted that the tribe has passed a resolution for protestors to go home[1] with no provisions for relocation. This isn&#x27;t the only area of North Dakota that is going to flood this year and money spent on this foolishness is going to be missed. Devils Lake is going to rise about 4&#x27; under current estimates.<p>The reporting has been so bad and at times just stupid[2] that the state had to setup a FAQ[3] just to combat some of the foolishness. Point 14 directly contradicts this article and pretty much shows how bad the reporting has been.<p>1) <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;fortune.com&#x2F;2017&#x2F;01&#x2F;21&#x2F;standing-rock-sioux-pipeline&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;fortune.com&#x2F;2017&#x2F;01&#x2F;21&#x2F;standing-rock-sioux-pipeline&#x2F;</a><p>2) There are no friggin wild buffalo roaming North Dakota - they are all on ranches, preserves, or the national park land.<p>3) <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ndresponse.gov&#x2F;dakota-access-pipeline&#x2F;myth-vs-fact" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ndresponse.gov&#x2F;dakota-access-pipeline&#x2F;myth-vs-fact</a><p>[edit]The reason this particular corridor is used is because it was initially cleared in 1982 for an existing gas pipeline. The DAPL pipeline runs parallel to that pipe. [&#x2F;edit]
评论 #13600271 未加载
评论 #13599844 未加载
评论 #13600035 未加载
评论 #13599893 未加载
评论 #13600482 未加载
评论 #13600387 未加载
评论 #13600099 未加载
评论 #13600017 未加载
评论 #13600450 未加载
trothamel超过 8 年前
Forgive me, but isn&#x27;t this the final environmental assessment the Army Corps of Engineers produced?<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdm16021.contentdm.oclc.org&#x2F;cdm&#x2F;ref&#x2F;collection&#x2F;p16021coll7&#x2F;id&#x2F;2801" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdm16021.contentdm.oclc.org&#x2F;cdm&#x2F;ref&#x2F;collection&#x2F;p16021...</a>
评论 #13599912 未加载
评论 #13599830 未加载
dang超过 8 年前
We changed the url from <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;amp&#x2F;www.bbc.co.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;amp&#x2F;38901498" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;amp&#x2F;www.bbc.co.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;amp&#x2F;38901498</a>, which points to this.<p>The submitted title (&quot;US Army approves Dakota Access Pipeline without required environmental review&quot;) rewrote the original when it wasn&#x27;t misleading or linkbait. This breaks the HN guidelines (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;newsguidelines.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;newsguidelines.html</a>), so please don&#x27;t do that.<p>Doing it to emphasize a contentious detail in the story is editorializing, which is particularly bad. On HN, unlike some other social news sites, submitters have no special rights over the story and don&#x27;t get to frame it for everyone else. If you&#x27;d like to say what you think is important about a story you&#x27;ve submitted, please do so by commenting in the thread. Then you&#x27;re on a level field with everyone else.
评论 #13600513 未加载
lucb1e超过 8 年前
Link without going to google.com:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.co.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;amp&#x2F;38901498" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.co.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;amp&#x2F;38901498</a><p>Still has a dependency on resources from ampproject.org, though.
评论 #13599731 未加载
评论 #13600234 未加载
eh78ssxv2f超过 8 年前
I always wonder what&#x27;s the best way to assess environmental impact of the oil pipeline. Sure, it&#x27;s going to leak at some point, and create a mess that may never get cleaned up. However, is it safer (or energy efficient) than carrying the oil on trains&#x2F;trucks?
评论 #13599798 未加载
评论 #13599758 未加载
评论 #13599778 未加载
评论 #13600080 未加载
评论 #13599869 未加载
评论 #13600231 未加载
评论 #13599756 未加载
评论 #13599918 未加载
评论 #13599766 未加载
评论 #13599875 未加载
评论 #13600114 未加载
评论 #13600619 未加载
评论 #13599802 未加载
评论 #13599801 未加载
ars超过 8 年前
The review is pointless anyway, it&#x27;s just useless stalling.<p>They already built 1,171 miles of it - do you think an environmental review is going to make a difference for the last 1 mile?<p>It doesn&#x27;t matter if you are for or against this, the time to protest it was before they built it, not when it&#x27;s basically done.
评论 #13600040 未加载
评论 #13599847 未加载
评论 #13599955 未加载
jadell超过 8 年前
From looking at the map, it seems like the pipeline could have been built heading south-east directly from Stanley, avoiding crossing the river at all. Does anyone have any insight as to why it was built west first, then swing to the south-east?
phkahler超过 8 年前
The route is interesting. First it goes west apparently to get around a body of water. Then it goes under the water at this location anyway. It would have been shorter to go south-east so I wonder what prevented that.
jessaustin超过 8 年前
Goofy politicized edited headline <i>and</i> link redirection through G to BBC? Try again, &#x27;socialentp.<p>[EDIT:] Here is the original headline: &quot;Dakota Access Pipeline to win US Army permit for completion&quot;
评论 #13600335 未加载
WillyOnWheels超过 8 年前
I don&#x27;t know Alex Zaitchik personally but I follow his work.<p>The Radio War Nerd podcast people interviewed him about his stay in the DAPL protest camp.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;player.fm&#x2F;series&#x2F;war-nerd-radio-subscriber-feed-1318376&#x2F;radio-war-nerd-ep60assassinations-alex-zaitchik-at-standing-rock-protest" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;player.fm&#x2F;series&#x2F;war-nerd-radio-subscriber-feed-1318...</a>
hackuser超过 8 年前
The title seems incorrect; it doesn&#x27;t match the article&#x27;s title, the article mentions the environmental review once and not prominently, and the article doesn&#x27;t say the review is required.
WildUtah超过 8 年前
So now we&#x27;re getting DAPL and DACA but not DAPA.<p>Well, Trump could withdraw support for DACA as he promised, but he&#x27;s now signed off on thousands of new DACAs, so he&#x27;s in no hurry to change the program.
spraak超过 8 年前
&gt; presidential-directed review<p>Welp.