What's new
Forums
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Pics
Videos
Fishing Reports
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Members
Resources
Whopper Club
Politics
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General
General Discussion
sakawea pipeline?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Trip McNeely" data-source="post: 34242" data-attributes="member: 728"><p>I don't think more railcars would be a solution either. I guess I'm more on the lines of thinking isn't there an alternative route that would have less potential of a major spill event that would affect hundreds of thousands of people? or would it be feasible to instead of laying the thing on the bottom of the lake maybe keep the section that crosses the lake above the water? theres been chatter of building another bridge further south for years? maybe a dual purpose bridge. I cant imagine maintenance on a pipeline 60ft underwater would be an easy or cheap task? why couldn't the pipeline cross south of the dam? or cross closer to Williston over the river?. then if there was an event at least the millions of acre feet of water would be above the damn wouldn't be affected and containment may be easier in a river-type setting? I'm not on one side or the other here. I'm just asking the questions as I know there is plenty of knowledge as pertains to this subject floating around this forum.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Trip McNeely, post: 34242, member: 728"] I don't think more railcars would be a solution either. I guess I'm more on the lines of thinking isn't there an alternative route that would have less potential of a major spill event that would affect hundreds of thousands of people? or would it be feasible to instead of laying the thing on the bottom of the lake maybe keep the section that crosses the lake above the water? theres been chatter of building another bridge further south for years? maybe a dual purpose bridge. I cant imagine maintenance on a pipeline 60ft underwater would be an easy or cheap task? why couldn't the pipeline cross south of the dam? or cross closer to Williston over the river?. then if there was an event at least the millions of acre feet of water would be above the damn wouldn't be affected and containment may be easier in a river-type setting? I'm not on one side or the other here. I'm just asking the questions as I know there is plenty of knowledge as pertains to this subject floating around this forum. [/QUOTE]
Verification
What is the most common fish caught on this site?
Post reply
Recent Posts
S
Bummer
Latest: snow2
Yesterday at 10:58 PM
I Love This Bar (NDA)
Latest: svnmag
Yesterday at 10:33 PM
Riddle Me This.....
Latest: svnmag
Yesterday at 9:32 PM
ROBOT
Latest: svnmag
Yesterday at 9:23 PM
Any Birders here?
Latest: svnmag
Yesterday at 9:04 PM
Prairie ghost
Latest: svnmag
Yesterday at 8:58 PM
29th Annual NDSFC Banquet
Latest: Honkerherms
Yesterday at 8:20 PM
Very GOOD shot
Latest: Davey Crockett
Yesterday at 6:57 PM
Sale
Weatherby Orion Sporting clay
Latest: 1lessdog
Yesterday at 6:45 PM
F
Border Security?
Latest: Fester
Yesterday at 5:44 PM
A good movie
Latest: risingsun
Yesterday at 1:07 PM
S
Walleye Replica
Latest: scrotcaster
Yesterday at 9:45 AM
Ghost guns
Latest: Obi-Wan
Yesterday at 9:28 AM
Sale
Lures
Latest: Sluggo
Sunday at 7:45 PM
CBD OIL
Latest: lunkerslayer
Sunday at 12:10 PM
S
Repo show
Latest: snow2
Saturday at 9:29 PM
Israel
Latest: svnmag
Saturday at 8:59 PM
P
More CWD NE ND
Latest: PrairieGhost
Saturday at 6:48 PM
Sale
Marlin 30TK
Latest: Zogman
Saturday at 3:17 PM
Tail Gate Tent
Latest: 1lessdog
Saturday at 11:36 AM
Friends of NDA
Forums
General
General Discussion
sakawea pipeline?
Top
Bottom