Proposed pipe line
Just came across this....rather worrying.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...0b3ddfd8d265e?
I work in the oil and gas industry, not the company proposing this line or the state subject to it- but I work the whole state of North Carolina. While I am obviously pro pipelines, I believe there are better routes for this line than the current one they have laid out.
However, if the fear most people have of this line being put in the ground is the chance of having leaks then they need to reevaluate their position. Would they rather it be done by older pipelines currently in the ground? That only increases the risk of a leak. Would they rather it be done by rail? There's a laugh. Pipelines are the safest, most environmentally friendly means of transporting the oil and gas in the world, that's a fact, not an opinion.
While that 60 foot Right Of Way gap in the trees will be an eye sore, you know what would be more of an eye sore? Not having that Right Of Way and having a leak- imagine the damage they would cause getting back there in an emergency situation to repair that leak.
I've seen many many people that are against this pipeline- although I have yet to see anyone turn their heater(s) off in the winter or not fill their vehicle up when they need gas. Yet- every single person cries to us when their gas is not working or their isn't gas at the stations to fill up there cars.
There's a lot to consider besides the 60 feet width of eye pain you will be subjected to.
Kind of confusing in that story - the text talks about "crossing" the forest but the drawing makes it look like it is wandering all over the place.
Crossing (ie. a line that crosses the trail somewhere, just once) wouldn't be any more noticeable than any trail that is already crossed by a cleared section for a power line or something, which there are many of. You see it for a few minutes as you approach and maybe leave, then it's gone.
The drawing looks to be far more obvious to the trail from a larger distance and amount of times.
Proposed pipe line
F as in feck, N as in no. I'll chain myself to a tree. The protected lands are off limits.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Last edited by Greenlight; 12-17-2016 at 19:55.
Deeply concerning. I read the Wilderness Society post that was around here somewhere yesterday. File this under: "Waiting for Superman". At the risk of being controversial, you may have recently seen an example of effective civil disobedience in ND with regard to a similar situation. It also included a rather touching bit of cooperation between the Native Peoples, their Tribes, and Veterans which resisted some rather cruel suppression techniques. For example: hosing down peaceful protesters encamped there in frigid temps, and a blockade designed to stop the flow of food, water, medicine, and sanitation, along with the usual gas, shields, truncheon, and off camera beatings with bogus arrests thing. Coming soon to a trail near you? Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? It's hard to get in the way of capitalism and not get bought, or shot.
I agree with everything you say. The AT has plenty of infrastructure crossing it. This is barely noticeable by comparison.Originally Posted by eggymane
Everything is in Walking Distance
Between the power lines, roads and pipelines the AT is hardly pristine wilderness. I don't mind seeing the pipeline swaths in the east because it is often creates some of the best views on the trail.
It it is interesting that nobody wants pipelines in populated areas and there is opposition to them in non-populated areas. There is opposition to thousands of trucks on the road, opposition to trains carrying crude. Opposition to nucs and opposition to importing energy from the Middle East. So which is the least worst option.
enemy of unnecessary but innovative trail invention gadgetry
Do you purchase energy or do you happen to purchase anything that was produced with energy? I have no opinion on this particular pipeline but I have not yet figured out how to survive comfortably in a world without energy production and distribution. If the pipeline route or method of delivery is of concern then please offer alternatives and their relative costs.
Oh I'm not making friends with those comments, am I?
Indifferent... it is not passing through NP the critters will end up using it as a highway.
Hiking the AT is “pointless.” What life is not “pointless”? Is it not pointless to work paycheck to paycheck just to conform?.....I want to make my life less ordinary. AWOL
The proposed route would cross the AT in the Three Ridges Wilderness area. Contact the Sierra Club and voice your protest to your delegate/congressman. The AT has enough encroachments and the pipeline will be bad for other areas that it passes thru.
I'm curious- what part of their protest was peaceful? The part where they vandalized and burned down equipment that didn't belong to them and was on private property? The part where the pipeline didn't even encroach on the tribal land? How about the part where the DAPL offered them $10M to go the hell away and they said that wasn't enough. Or, how about the part where they were claiming this was to protect the environment but when they left the camps they were in absolute ruins with trash and feces left covering more acres than you could see with the bare eye. And the media lied, those photos they showed..ya, there wasn't even close that many people there.
FGR,
Making friends? Hell, we don't have to agree on everything, I'd still hike with you.
Do you purchase energy or do you happen to purchase anything that was produced with energy? I have no opinion on this particular pipeline but I have not yet figured out how to survive comfortably in a world without energy production and distribution. If the pipeline route or method of delivery is of concern then please offer alternatives and their relative costs.
Oh I'm not making friends with those comments, am I?
Pilgrim, re-reading my response it sounds I came off like a douchenozzle. Sorry, that was not intended! This has been a heavy topic in my industry as you can imagine and a lot of us get passionate about these issues.
Ugh really? It's nice that both sides of an issue are equally represented in a debate. Got it thanks. Pipelines across the places set aside specifically for the preservation of the wilderness like the AT are good. People who are passionately opposed to them are bad. Moving on.
Hey no big deal. I'm glad to hear from you. There are cats around who take up sides against ice cream for whatever reason. The WB debate society is alive and well. As long as we keep talking we'll be OK man!
I used to be adamantly opposed to the federal government 'owning' land and very pro eminent domain. However, I have come to completely reverse my thinking in both of those areas- not 100%, but close enough. I don't remember who said it, but it was said that public land is the great equalizer. I agree with that more and more every day.
Areas like the AT, CDT, PCT, and so on are so vast and encompassing at some point utilities will have to cross over or through them. I do think however they could incorporate a lot of the same Right Of Ways to minimize impact and preserve as much as possible.
Agree. Really great views and stealth camping is provided by power lines so hey - NBD I guess. There are bigger issues like giant on-trail parties for example, unchecked overcrowding, or trail magic at every road crossing which increasingly draws the free lunch crowd. I think the bigger issue is the massive amounts of limited resources blown on no win trail battles while all the little ones get away and so multiply. The entire donation based trail support system ensures that money talks and hikers walk in Appalachia.
The AT runs 2,189 mile N to S. Pipelines are going to have to cross. A lot of the concerns are non issues if you really research pipelines with an open mind. Animals love pipelines for one. They typically grow fresh thick vegetation that deer, rabbits, moose etc love to gnaw on. Then this gets mowed and then pops up again. Sort of like prescribed burns.I definitely feel steps should be taken to minimize the impact on the AT. But to try to block or completely oppose the pipeline is foolish. Both sides need to meet willing to give and take and sort it out. Add a charitable donation to the ATC in the deal and everybody wins.
Let's be honest the AT isn't a straight up wilderness experience, and crossing a pipeline is nothing like the road walking or even neighborhoods it already goes through.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
GAME '16 4/18/16-8/12/16
Trailjournal: http://www.trailjournals.com/jjdontplay
Blog (Post Trail Gear Reviews): https://keeppushingon.wordpress.com/
Fontana Dam is 2,400 feet wide. That must really make some people flip out!
Pipelines and power lines can be concentrated to reduce impact. There is ongoing fight over a large electric power transmission line in NH that would have cut a new swath through the state and it would have been very visible from many parts of the AT in the whites. After the developer realized they were in for major battle, the developer switched to a buried line for near 50 mile swath through the whites and realigned so it follows a road right of way where it crosses the AT (Kinsman Notch just north of Moosilaukee. The same can be done with any right of way but usually land near roads tend to have houses and other development so the developer usually switches to the path of least resistance. The standard rule of thumb is that if in doubt keep it on private land and away from federal land as eminent domain doesn't apply to federal land. The only way to cross federal land is to minimize the amount of land impacted by the development and prove there are no economically viable options on private land. Federal land managers have a lot of flexibility on how they manage the land and unless the public gets involved sometimes a few phone calls from congressman can convince them not to put up lot of fight for development projects.
Posting Permissions
