Monday, October 31, 2016

Native American Oil Pipeline Hypocrisy? The Standing Rock Sioux Apparently Don't Have a Monopoly on Native American Views of Oil



Native American Oil Pipeline Hypocrisy? The Standing Rock Sioux Apparently Don’t Have a Monopoly on Native American Views of Oil

I should make it clear at the outset of this article that I do think the state police and affiliated law enforcement response to the protest at Standing Rock has been too heavy handed. Even though the protesters have repeatedly broken the law and have been at times unreasonable and combative I think the situation could have been handled way better and with way more patience. Kelcy Warren, Dakota Access, and their hired security have generally not been helpful and have often made the situation much worse. The heavy-handed responses have especially galvanized support for the protesters. Sympathy for the oppressed is high as is disgust for the oppressors. Pipeline opposition, like it or not, is now becoming a standard feature especially of large infrastructure projects, and needs to be considered and addressed with delicate and conscientious response actions. I am part Native American so I am generally quite supportive of Native American interests. However, I think that human interests, public interests, and global/national interests are more important than ethnic interests. Things are not always as they seem.

I also find it interesting that apparently most of the protesters arrested are not part of the Standing Rock tribe and I wonder how many are simply radical environmentalists in support of the tribe. I know many are people like me with some Native American blood, that want to be supportive. Solidarity with the tribe seems to have exploded on social media and I have seen several misleading and propaganda posts suggesting recent pipeline and oil spills that actually happened in the past, posts of injured protesters that had nothing to do with it and are perhaps decades old, and the posts of the bison herd that suddenly appeared, some pics of which were from the past and/or photoshopped. The bison were herded by riders on horseback. Such misleading media propaganda is rallying support for their cause. In fact, as one spokesperson put it the riders were "guiding these buffalo towards the police line in an act of resistance and defiance." At one point apparently people on horseback charged the police line which caused police to shoot and kill a horse, probably an overreaction, but one that could have been prevented by both sides.   

The Red Warrior Camp of the Sacred Stone Camp is calling on people everywhere to support their cause. They are calling for “two months of sustained waves of action targeting the Army Corp of Engineers, investors, pipeline companies, security firms, and elected officials that are behind this project.” They are saying it is about more than this one pipeline, that it is about indigenous rights around the world, that it is about protecting water for future generations. They are calling on all ‘protectors’ to come and join them. People with whom I am acquainted are headed that way. A list of other actions recommended include “lock-downs at offices, sit-ins, taking up space, rallies, call-in days, divesting from banks, mass mailings and interruptions.” In a New York times op-ed Bill McKibben just reiterated that such actions are necessary and calls the DAPL the new Keystone, but the Keystone was never begun, was never approved by the State Department. The DAPL is nearly complete with billions spent. As I understand it there was a long review process after the DAPL pipeline route was proposed that included public hearings and public comments as well as environmental and archaeological reviews and surveys by federal, state, and independent agencies. Apparently, the Standing Rock tribe did not take part in much of this process for reasons unknown. The pipeline is now nearly finished with billions of dollars spent. It is scheduled to be ‘in-service’ in a few months. The tribe still contends they are going to prevent it from being completed. Is that even reasonable? 

The U.S. has millions of miles of pipelines that transport oil, natural gas, gasoline, jet fuel, and natural gas liquids like ethane, propane, butanes, pentanes, and condensates. Many large pipelines cross under major rivers. There are 8 that cross under the Missouri River. This is nothing new. Many Bakken wells in North Dakota are drilled on land owned by Native American tribes, by some estimates as much as a third of the Bakken and Three Forks wells in the state on reservations where the landowners receive significant royalties – by some estimates that amount to several hundred million dollars ($500 million is one estimate I heard and that dates back to 2012). 

“… the 1,300 plus wells currently on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation produce roughly a third of North Dakota's daily output … “

Those tribes are well-compensated as landowners according to the very generous mineral rights given to landowners in the U.S., by far the best in the world. So, yes, Native Americans are a big part of the profit structure of the pipelines even if they support the Standing Rock’s “No DAPL” rhetoric. One might call that hypocrisy but it would be a fallacy to assume all Native Americans have similar views on the subject. However, one might assume they do with media reports of massive indigenous solidarity with the Standing Rock tribe. In fact, in most countries the minerals are owned by governments. While there are quite a few pipeline breaks and spills, most (but not all) of them are due to old pipelines which need replaced or taken out of service. Replacing them is now much harder, even on the exact same routes due to the ubiquity of pipeline opposition. There are risks with any pipeline but leak detection, corrosion detection, and monitoring systems are improving. New federal pipeline safety rules and standards are being developed although current standards are not considered to be lax. Corrosion has often been found to be the cause of leaks, some of which involved explosions. 

But as some protesters chant: “We can’t drink oil, keep it in the soil,” some Native American Oil interests have a slogan: “Native Oil on Native Soil.” Missouri River Resources was formed in 2014 by the Mandan Hidatsi and Arikara Nation and is fully Native American owned and run.  I also know that the MHA Nation has expressed solidarity with the protestors at Standing Rock. That begs a few questions. Is their solidarity confined to the particular “sacred ground” defined by Standing Rock’s tribal archaeologist/historian? Does it include solidarity with the objection to cross the Missouri River? Does it include solidarity with anti-fossil fuel rhetoric and the ‘Keep It in the Ground’ movement? If yes to the last question then that would be in direct conflict to their own oil production interests. I have seen pics of Standing Rock spokespeople wearing ‘Keep It in the Ground’ tee shirts. Frank A. Verastro, a senior fellow on energy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies noted in the Washington Post article that, “We cannot afford to keep fossil fuels in the ground for the foreseeable future because there’s no scalable replacement.” This is rather obvious despite Bill McKibben’s notion that the movement is based on math rather than ideology. His math apparently does not understand how fossil fuel reserves are evaluated and continually change in response to price and technology.   

Grey Wolf Midstream is a subsidiary of Missouri River Resources that invests in oil pipelines. Grey Wolf Midstream is wholly owned by the tribe, presumably the MHA nation. 

From the Paradigm Energy Partners, LLC website:

Grey Wolf Midstream, LLC owns a 12 percent interest in the Sacagawea Pipeline, LLC. The Sacagawea Pipeline is constructing a 91-mile pipeline to deliver crude oil from various points in and around Johnson’s Corner and the Paradigm CDP, located in McKenzie County, to points across Lake Sacagawea.”

The Sacagawea Pipeline will cross under Sacagawea Lake to deliver up to 100,000 Bbls per day of crude oil, some of which will be drilled/operated by Native American-owned Missouri River Resources, whose subsidiary is also 12% owner of the pipeline.

From the Missouri River Resources website:

“In the meantime Native employees are learning the oil business and there are plans in the works to establish a Native American Petroleum Academy (NAPA) to teach many more all about the oil business.”

Apparently, the DAPL pipeline was originally routed to go closer to Bismarck and cross the Missouri River there but according to some, since the “wealthy” people there opposed it they changed the river crossing point of the route to go nearer the Standing Rock reservation. Actually, the proximity to water intakes for large amounts of people was one among several reasons the route north of Bismarck was not chosen. Others were that it would go too close to dwellings (500 ft. clearance is the state rule) and cross too many wetlands, water bodies and roads. The current route is, however, upstream from water intakes of the Standing Rock reservation and could potentially affect other communities downstream as well, as the Standing Rock tribe argues. However, the water intake that serves the Standing Rock tribe is scheduled to be moved 45 miles downstream form its current position and to then be 70 miles downstream before the pipeline goes into service. The Missouri River crossing at Lake Oahe is scheduled to be horizontally drilled 92 feet below the river bed (significantly further below than required) with state-of-the-art pipe and monitoring. According to the Army Corp of Engineers:

“Given the engineering design, proposed installation methodology, quality of material selected, operations measures and response plans the risk of an inadvertent release in, or reaching, Lake Oahe is extremely low.”

According to an article from the Williston Herald accessed from the Standing Rock Fact Checker blogsite:
  • The pipeline is to be drilled more than 90 feet below the water table—separated from the river by many layers of clay and shale
  • The pipeline will have epoxy coatings to prevent corrosion, and its pressure will be monitored round-the-clock
  • The pipe will also be thicker under the lake, and there will be block valves at either end so the particular section in question can be isolated in a worst case scenario
From a safety perspective it would seem to make more sense to cross a river which is a water source further away from the highest populated area. However, according to beloved climate hawk Bill McKibben:

“This is the clearest example of environmental racism in action that you’d ever want to see.”

Is it? Since other tribes are transporting large quantities of their own produced oil via their own large volume pipeline(s) that cross bodies of water, does that mean they are committing racism on their own people? The oil profiting of the North Dakota tribes is well known and long-standing and I have not heard of any complaints from other tribes about this profiting. Are the other tribes biased specifically against pipelines that mainly benefit non-natives? If so, would that not be racist? Also I wonder if the Sacagawea Pipeline connects to the DAPL. Is this so-called “black snake” making profits for Native Americans? Likely it is and other “black snakes” most certainly are. I think there is some small amount of refinery capacity in North Dakota and there may be some small pipeline outlets to the north and west but much of the crude is moved via rail and truck, which is carbon and pollution intensive compared to pipelines and less safe in terms of number of leaks and incidents but pipeline leaks do tend to be of higher volume.

It is also true that not all of the Standing Rock Sioux are supporting the protest, which has inconvenienced local people, native and non-native. Chairman of the town of Cannonball, Robert Fool Bear is fed up with the protesters. He mentions that no one was interested two years ago when the public hearings were held. He is worried about things getting out of hand and people getting hurt. A horse has already been killed, people injured with rubber bullets and pepper spray, and a woman facing possible attempted murder charges for firing three rounds at police. Others are not worried about the threat to the water. 

By no means is the Bakken the only play involving Native American oil and gas investment and tribal oil and gas companies. There is the Arizona based Navajo Nation Oil & Gas Company active in the San Juan Basin and their Running Horse Pipeline midstream company that operates crude oil pipelines running through parts of Utah, Colorado, and New Mexico. The Navaho Nation is the largest Native American nation in the U.S. They note in the Midstream section of their website:

“So many of our daily activities are made possible by a vast underground network of steel pipelines that quietly delivers the fuels we need to drive our cars and heat our homes, as well as raw materials for making items as diverse as medicines and food containers.”

Their Running Horse Pipeline runs 87 miles pumping crude oil through three states and across four rivers. The company also operates coal-bed methane wells and paid the Navajo Nation $22 million in rent and bonuses in 2013. The company has been in business since 1993. According to their website they contributed $49.6 million in direct and indirect payments to the Navajo Nation economy in 2013. They also operate gas stations.

There is the Native American Energy Group which leases land for oil & gas, coal-bed methane, and wind farms. They are involved in oil development in Montana, including the Bakken, where they own a workover and well servicing rig. They are involved in coal-bed methane development in Alaska. However, it is unclear if the company is still active or even existent since the website press releases stop in 2011. As with the other companies they were striving to develop resources on Native American lands and provide jobs and economic opportunities for the tribes.

There is Native American Resource Partners with operations in Montana, Saskatchewan, and Alberta. Their focus seems to be on providing financing for projects on Native American owned lands with agreements structured to provide more revenue for the tribes than they had gotten in the past.

There are other companies as well that develop oil and gas resources on tribal lands for the partial benefit of the tribes. The Southern Ute Tribe operates several companies in the San Juan Basin of Colorado and invests in oil and gas development in Texas, Wyoming, and in the Gulf of Mexico. The Southern Ute Tribe Department of Energy and the Red Willow Production Company operates multiple oil and gas wells and pipelines and markets their assets. The Southern Utes operate 1600 wells across four states which makes them one of the wealthiest tribes. The Utes have been spending millions lobbying since 2012 for the federal government to ease restrictions on permitting, drilling, and fracking. Apparently the federal government has additional regulatory power for drilling and production operations on tribal lands stemming from outdated notions of tribal management abilities, say the Utes. Apparently the Bureau of Indian Affairs has a role in permitting which can delay projects significantly. A tribe drilling and operating wells and pipelines on land owned by the tribe offers the advantages of so-called fee acreage where they don’t have to pay royalties to landowners since they own the land. Since reservations take up large amounts of contiguous land that would require massive efforts to lease individual tracts to build an ‘acreage position’ such massive contiguous lands are ideal for development of wells and infrastructure. Typical landowner royalties range from 12.5 to 25% these days with 20% being common. In Canada 10% is more common. In much of the rest of the world the governments own the royalties. While one may hear stories about how Native Americans were cheated out of royalties and other payments and some of these may be true, the fact is that their massive land position gives them some great economic advantages in developing oil, gas, coal, timber, and other minerals. 

The Arctic Slope Regional Corporation is owned by 11,000 Inupiak shareholders and develops oil, coal, and minerals on the 5 million acres of land they own on Alaska’s North Slope. They too are involved in lobbying for less federal government interference in their operations. They have several subsidiary companies involved with energy services, refining, lubricants, and retail. 

In addition there are many Native Americans that are employed in the oil and gas industry. I suspect also that there are many more tribes/nations involved in oil and gas production and the proliferation of the “black snake.” These companies are providing revenue and opportunities for their people. This is an economic good.  

To declare oneself a “protector” is to subtly declare those protested against as transgressors. The Standing Rock spokespeople have noted that the very “extractive economy” is a continuation of the violence against them over the last 500 years. This is a declaration right out of Naomi Klein’s radical anti-capitalist playbook. She is a fellow board member at McKibben’s 350.org. The tribe is soliciting donations of money and supplies from a now supportive chunk of the public. They will send them things made of hydrocarbons that arrive by vehicles powered with hydrocarbons. They will also load up their gas tanks multiple times to make the drive out to support them. The first level of hypocrisy is simply the ubiquitous use of the products derived from the materials they seek to eliminate. The second level of hypocrisy is less obvious and actually hidden from most, the assumption that all Native Americans support the Standing Rock tribe and that this is predominantly a Native American issue. Neither is true, although at first I did think it was predominantly a Native American issue.
Another issue involving hypocrisy is the damage done by protesters, much in Iowa, such as burning vehicles and construction equipment, slashing tires, putting dirt in fuel tanks, and ironically even cutting fuel lines causing spills. Multiple fires were set in the Standing Rock’s claimed camp on Dakota Access property as well including burning multiple tires which causes toxic air pollution.
   
The Fort Berthold Reservation, which hosts many Bakken wells had the same complaints as the other tribes about BIA red tape (with industry assistance) but eventually got some really good lease terms with total payment of over $500 million (and that is from back in 2012). In addition, the Obama administration recently announced in mid-September a total payment of $492.8 million to 17 tribes for government mishandling of funds associated with native natural resources, some dating back a century. This is a big part of reparations so tribal issues are being dealt with by government. “Sovereignty by the Barrel” is another slogan of pro-oil Native American companies and tribes, who have made billions from the oil on their lands and continue to profit. And yet few if any articles about the Standing Rock dispute note any of this profiting and suggests that all tribes are in solidarity with their anti-oil stance  

References:

North Dakota Tribe to Drill Its Own Oil Wells – by Josh Wood, Associated Press. Nov. 4, 2014

Why Hollywood, Environmentalists, and Native Americans Have Converged on North Dakota – by Steven Mufson, in Washington Post, Oct. 28, 2016

A Tale of Two Tribes: Colorado’s Southern Utes Want to Drill as Sioux Battle Pipeline – by Katherine Traywick, Bloomberg News, In Denver Post, Oct. 15, 2016

Pipeline Route Plan First Called for Crossing North of Bismarck – by Amy Dalrymple Forum News Service, in Bismarck tribune, Aug. 18, 2016

Why Dakota is the New Keystone – by Bill McKibben, in New York Times (op-ed), Oct. 28, 2016

Estimated $10 Million in Damage Done to Construction Equipment by Dakota Access Protesters – by Rob Port, in Say Anything Blog, Sept. 14, 2016

US to Pay 17 Indian Tribes $492 Million to Settle Long-Standing Disputes – by Sari Horwitz, in the Washington Post, Sept. 26, 2016

The Other Bakken Boom: A Tribe Atop the Nation’s Biggest Oil Play – by Sierra Crane-Murdoch, Edited by Shawn Regan, Case Study
www.perc.org

Standing Rock Drinking Water Intake at Heart of  #NoDAPL Protests is Scheduled to Be Shut Down - by Rob Port, sept. 2, 2016, in Say Anything Blog
www.sayanythingblog.com/entry/standing-rock-water-intake-process-moved-away-dakota-access-pipelines/

Not All Standing Rock Sioux are Protesting the Pipeline - by Jessica Ravitz, CNN, Oct. 31, 2016
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/10/29/us/dakota-pipeline-standing-rock-sioux/index.html 
 
Paradigm Midstream

Sacagawea Pipeline

Missouri River Resources

Navaho Nation Oil and Gas Company

Native American Resource Partners

Red Willow Production Company

Arctic Slope Regional Corporation

The Global Solidarity Campaign
www.nodaplsolidarity.org

Standing Rock Fact Checker
www.standingrockfactchecker.org



 
















Saturday, October 29, 2016

Limiting HFCs and Replacing Them with Other Coolants, Often Natural Gas Liquids-Based Hydrocarbon Refrigerants



Limiting HFCs and Replacing Them with Other Coolants, Often Natural Gas Liquids-Based Hydrocarbon Refrigerants

The 1987 Montreal Protocol successfully banned the use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) as refrigerants, or coolants. CFCs were eating a hole in the stratospheric ozone layer as well as making a serious contribution to global warming since CFCs are an extremely powerful greenhouse gas. The phase-out of CFCs has indeed stopped the hole from growing and it has ‘healed’ some. Since then one of their main replacements was hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) which do not affect the ozone but HFCs are still a powerful greenhouse gas, though less so than CFCs. Climate scientist James Hansen once quipped that if we moved to another planet and wanted to create habitable temperatures we could create an atmosphere by increasing greenhouse gases and to do so we could just start a couple CFC-generating factories.

A new global agreement was recently reached on Oct. 15, 2016 in Rwanda to phase-out HFCs in favor of other refrigerants. This is necessary especially since electrification and subsequent refrigeration is increasing throughout the developing world and is expected to continue to increase. The main goal of the Rwanda deal is to bring usage of HFCs down 80-85% by 2047, which could theoretically prevent as much as 0.5 degree Celsius warming by 2100. The EU banned the use of HFCs in cars in 2011. Most HFCs are made by big Western chemical companies so phasing them out should be easy from the source. However, fast developing countries like China, India, and Pakistan have been expanding air conditioning and refrigeration massively and so have previously resisted attempts to phase out HFCs. The U.S., Japan, and Europe will begin phasing out HFCs in 2019 but India, Pakistan, and China have negotiated a later phase-out beginning in 2024 in China and 2028 in India. 

From the Guardian article:

“The new agreement is welcomed by many chemical and manufacturing companies because it gives them green kudos and market advantage over inferior products made in poor countries.”

“But it was much harder for India, China, and other developing countries to strike a deal. Their companies have relied on old refrigeration and coolant technologies, and will now have to invest in R&D and upgrade or replace factories and equipment.”

New alternatives to HFCs are widely available, safe, energy-efficient, and inexpensive.

Car air conditioners typically use HFO-1234yf and those molecules break down relatively quickly in the atmosphere drastically reducing the global warming potential (GWP) although there still is some. One replacement for freezers, R-134a, also has a much smaller global warming potential (GWP) than CFCs and HFCs. However, it also makes a freezer or refrigerator run less efficiently and when the extra energy use is added, much of the global warming advantages are cancelled out. Propane-based R-290A has been a successful replacement for R-134a as hydrocarbons like propane are very efficient. Hydrocarbons that trap less heat such as butane, isobutane, ethane, propane, propylene, and various blends, all derived from natural gas liquids or petroleum refining, are also used fairly extensively. They are projected to become the main alternative in the future for home and light commercial use and already are in much of the world. Their global warming potential is miniscule compared to the others and they do not affect the ozone layer at all. They are efficient and low cost for domestic and light commercial applications but higher cost for industrial refrigeration applications due to the need to safeguard against the higher explosion risk. There are some safety concerns due to their flammability but these are thought to be minimal, especially when potential ignition sources within appliances are properly avoided by good system design and when charged low so that if leaked they will not exceed the limits to flammability. Alternatives other than hydrocarbons are CO2, ammonia, and natural methods using air and water that are high in cost and take up too much space. R&D continues. CO2 and ammonia combinations are being used in large commercial apps although ammonia has toxicity issues. 

According to the Danfoss white paper (Danfoss is a world leader in HVAC/R system design) HFCs in North America are still the main refrigerant for household and light commercial applications compared to the rest of the world which uses hydrocarbons mainly. This is expected to change as the protocol is implemented in 2019 and by 2025 hydrocarbons are projected to be the main refrigerant for such applications in North America. Hydrocarbons are apparently less suitable for use as air conditioning coolants and so most of the transition from HFCs in this app is expected to be to other HFCs and HFOs with GWPs below 700, except in China where hydrocarbons are projected to be the main A/C refrigerant by 2025. The problem with using hydrocarbons (and some low GWP HFCs) in larger industrial applications and (presumably) A/C units is the need for higher charges which increases the flammability and explosion hazards. 

In the future there will even be bans on servicing equipment with high-GWP refrigerants. This will be part of the later phase-out process. 

References:

Wanted: New Ways to Chill Air Conditioners, Fridges – by Thomas Sumner, in Science News, Oct. 25, 2016

Kigali Deal on HFCs is Big Step in Fighting Climate Change – by John Vidal, in The Guardian, Oct. 15, 2016

Hydrocarbons – from www.refrigerants.danfoss.com 

Refrigerant Options Now and in the Future: a white paper on the global trends within refrigerants in air conditioning and refrigeration seen from a Danfoss perspective: Achieving sustainable HVAC/R through intelligent solutions, energy efficiency, and low GWP refrigerants – www.refrigerants.danfoss.com