English Dakota Access Pipeline Protest

Question: Discuss about the Englishfor Dakota Access Pipeline Protest. Answer: Introduction: The Dakota Access Pipeline Protest has been making news since the spring of this year, as a large number of protestors, residing in the northern part of Dakota are revolting against the governmental decision of construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline, over the Lake Oahe. The major reason behind this perpetual protest is that the protestors, most of which are the inhabitants of Native America, are complaining that in case of accidental oil spill, their major source of water is going to be affected. Background: The protest of the local inhabitants, is indeed quite justified, as the research studies conducted by the Associated Press from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, claims that since the year of 1995, at least 2000 accidents of oil-spill occurred (Wood 8). These accidents were reported to have been disastrously affected the water resources of the locality. There is indeed no gain stating the fact that the contamination of the source of drinking water is a massive health problem. Discussion: The recent study conducted by Worcester Polytechnic Institute has showed that major oil spills in the past has caused cancer and chronic indigestion problems, among the masses. Considering these reports, the continual rebellion of the local inhabitants of northern Dacota is indeed justified. Besides, it should be noted that as per the National Environmental Policy Act of 1970, the construction of any federal project should be initiated, after proper evaluation of its impact on the environment (Mattozi 15). In this case, the pipeline construction does not comply with the environmental laws stated in the NEPA Act. However, the counter-argument shown on side of the government states that in case the oil is transported not through the lake, but through rail, it would lead to greenhouse emission, and that again is a serious issue of global concern. Besides, the government authority have clearly explained that there is not even a little chance of mishap, resulting in oil-spill, as effective measures are being taken on part of the government (Fox 21). Besides, the current President of the USA, Donald Trump, himself holding shares in two of the companies involved in the pipeline construction, is likely to encourage the construction of the pipeline. This might explain why the probability of adverse consequence has been largely underrated and belittled over the last months by the government. Analysis: The organization engaged in the construction of the pipeline claimed that the construction of the project should be encouraged, as it is the safest way of transferring the crude oil from the fields to the refineries. Besides, by now, 92% of the construction process is complete, and hence backing out would be futile (Fox 25). However, it has been observed that the interest and the needs of the local inhabitants have been largely overlooked in the process. Conclusion: In case of an accidental burst of pipeline, the crude oil would go deep and mix up with the water of the Missouri river, which acts as the single source of bathing and drinking water for the large number of inhabitants of the northern Dakota. The legal concern of the project construction is too strong. Final Statement: The protest is quite justified, and though the conflict may not be resolved, the government authority can take steps that can minimize the risk of oil spill. Reference List: Fox, Josh. " The Arrest of Journalists and Filmmakers Covering the Dakota Pipeline Is a Threat to Democracyand the Planet."The Nation, Oct14 (2016). MATTOZZI, SAVIN. "Activists continue to fight against DAPL." (2016). Wood, Roberta. "Protesters' pipeline victory."Guardian (Sydney)1752 (2016): 8.