
Whistle-blower reveals N Dakota leak of 11M gallons of gas condensate in 2015 - howard941
https://www.desmogblog.com/2019/08/19/north-dakota-regulators-oil-gas-spill-exxon-valdez
======
hirundo
> “In North Dakota we do not regulate based on volume,” Suess added. “Whether
> we put a 10 there, a 100 there, a 1,000 there is not going to change our
> response to the spill, it is not going to change what the responsible party
> has to do, not going to change their remediation, it is not going to change
> anything other than your curiosity.”

That's a very self serving opinion Mr. Suess, since if word gets out that
_millions_ of gallons were spilled under your agency's watch, yet reported as
10 gallons, that will create a lot of political pressure to change more than
curiosity. That difference is a little more than "nothing to see here, move
along".

~~~
munk-a
Officially underlisting the volume, even if the state privately responds in an
appropriate manner[1], ends up being misleading to the public and downplaying
the environmental damage that's on-going. During the Keystone protests it was
often repeated how small most spills are - now I'm curious if these small
spills are just being under-reported.

1\. Which I have _extreme_ doubts about, but I'll just ignore that for a
moment.

------
SeyelentEco
This is why we participated in the protest against the pipeline that went over
the Missouri and through tribal lands a few years ago. A crack over the river
would be devastating to the surrounding communities. The claims that it is
unlikely we're bogus as it's been shown time after time. Worse yet, we can't
trust the officials to do the right thing. It's more likely they'd hide or
downplay it than make sure it's properly taken care of.

~~~
kortilla
>The claims that it is unlikely we're bogus as it's been shown time after
time.

What are the stats on gallons spilled from pipelines vs trucks vs trains?

~~~
moate
They're all greater than the amount of gallons spilled by not extracting and
transporting it in the first place and instead finding alternative sources of
energy supply.

FOH with that strawman.

~~~
s_y_n_t_a_x
Those alternative sources currently cannot replace fossil fuels entirely.

~~~
adrianN
Yeah, that's just not true. With appropriate investment alternative energy
technology today can replace all fossil energy sources. You just have to build
the wind turbines and the solar panels, and the batteries, and the power-to-
gas facilities. It's expensive to change the entire energy supply, but its
doable.

------
apo
The draft document here:

[https://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/G...](https://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Garden%20Creek%20Spill%20Remediation%20Document%2C%20Verifies%20Spill%20at%2011%20Million%20Gallons.pdf)

appears to be incomplete. Specifically, pages 3-7 appear to be missing.

From the article:

> Suess [the state’s Spill Investigation Program Manager] defended his
> agency’s methods. “What I believe the North Dakota public wants to know is
> not how big is it, but is this spill a risk to me,” he said. “Personally, I
> have actually been told by others that we are one of the most transparent
> agencies out there. My boss is the North Dakota taxpayer, and my door is
> always open, any citizen can walk in at any time and talk to me.”

That statement sets off all kinds of alarm bells. Forget the facts. You can
count on us to tell you what you need to know.

~~~
jbattle
> “Personally, I have actually been told by others that we are one of the most
> transparent agencies out there”

Are there really voting-age citizens that are persuaded by a comment like
this?

~~~
vkou
The comment isn't supposed to persuade anyone, it's supposed to be a fig leaf
for people who already support the political party in question, to cite in
defense of their party.

This shifts debate into an unanswerable questions - whether or not the
official in question is lying.

------
iron0013
Native American anti-pipeline protesters were endlessly demonized and
criminalized, violently opposed by both police and privately-funded thugs, yet
their concerns were clearly absolutely valid.

~~~
ilikehurdles
It disgusted me how places like reddit were absolutely, positively swarming
with pro-pipeline accounts during that time, defending it as the more cost-
effective and environmentally-friendly option.

~~~
criddell
> defending it as the more cost-effective and environmentally-friendly option

Is that not true? What's the best option for transporting oil and gas?

~~~
toomuchtodo
Not transporting it. A better solution can still be a bad solution.

If you absolutely are going to burn it (sigh), burn it on site for electrical
generation. Transmission lines don’t leak methane, and HVDC cables can be
buried in a similar fashion to a pipeline. Methane extraction aligns well with
geographies that have strong renewable growth and need combined cycle gas
turbine backing until battery replacement can occur.

Now, if you’re trying to export it and need it in original form, this doesn’t
work and you’re going to try to avoid externalities of transport, which is
what regulation is for.

~~~
Aperocky
You can suffer 60% loss on HVDC long range transmission alone, and that's
assuming you have the tech for it.

There's a reason why coal is hauled to power station, instead of being burned
near mines.

~~~
adrianN
According to the Wikipedia HVDC losses are below 3% per 1000km. To have 60%
loss you'd need to transmit the power halfway across the globe.

~~~
Aperocky
I stand corrected.

------
40acres
My two cents: how are the regulators funded? Is it self funded like the CFPB
through fines on the entities it regulates or through the state / federal
government? Self funding, while difficult and not applicable to all agencies,
seems to inoculate regulatory capture somewhat.

Second, what's Mr. Suess resume look like? His LinkedIn profile only shows his
work as a regulator, was he in the industry in a previous life? The revolving
door between industry and regulation at the highest levels seems to be a
precursor to "oversights" like this.

~~~
hwillis
> Self funding, while difficult and not applicable to all agencies, seems to
> inoculate regulatory capture somewhat.

I would absolutely want to see statistical evidence of that before I supported
it. Regulatory agencies are destroyed from within. If you tie funding to
prosecution, a few corrupt appointees can cripple an agency for years. Simply
by passing on a few big cases they would destroy the funding flow and lose
critical employees _even if they didn 't intend to_.

If there is an external funding supply, it can be cut off but at least the
agency will survive bad appointees. The US government in particular is built
on checks and balances; betting everything on the agency keeping itself afloat
is not balanced.

------
_hyn3
Where is the proof or evidence? Are we so captive by our own belief systems
that we no longer require a single shred of evidence that anything even close
to this ever occurred?

Since this is a blog, it doesn't even have the benefit of built-in (although
perhaps suspect these days) credibility of investigative journalists and
editorial vetting at the NYT, Guardian, WSJ, etc. One would imagine that such
outlets would have reporters on flights immediately. A spill larger than the
Valdez would certainly be news-worthy!

There are no photos of this spill in the article, except for a photo of some
tainted water that could be anywhere and an irrelevant photo of salt-water
contamination. I'd think that a spill of this magnitude would have highly
visible proof from drone or even satellite photos, on the ground, etc. Did all
of the gas condensate, and evidence, seep into a massive hole in the ground?

The sole piece of "evidence" is what appears to be an email with all
identifying information, logos, etc removed. Even the alleged company or
investigating agencies are redacted. It doesn't appear to be an official form,
purchase order, etc. It could have been completely fabricated in ten minutes
in Google Docs. No deep fakes necessary.

In fact, @mods, the HN headline should probably be changed from the
submitter's _Whistle-blower reveals N Dakota leak of 11M gallons of gas
condensate in 2015_ to the actual _Did North Dakota Regulators Hide an Oil and
Gas Industry Spill Larger Than Exxon Valdez?_ Even the blog's headline is a
question and not an answer.

As hackers/scientists/intellectuals, we should be asking for facts, hard data,
and photographic evidence.

~~~
ptaffs
Since you mention drones, this Browns University exhibition (#NoDAPL Movement)
in Providence, RI is fascinating,
[https://www.brown.edu/research/facilities/haffenreffer-
museu...](https://www.brown.edu/research/facilities/haffenreffer-museum/drone-
warriors-art-surveillance-and-resistance-standing-rock) and a talk makes some
content available to those not in RI: [https://www.brown.edu/academics/race-
ethnicity/events/sioux-...](https://www.brown.edu/academics/race-
ethnicity/events/sioux-surveillance-drone-warriors-and-nodapl-movement) seeing
the footage is interesting for hackers/scientists/intellectuals, but I link
these because the establishment made it hard to get that evidence.

------
ta1234567890
> over 11 million gallons of condensate that leaked through a crack in a
> pipeline for over 3 years

These companies are making way too much money if they can survive for 3 years
leaking that much oil.

~~~
ApolloFortyNine
At the current price of oil, a gallon of oil comes out to $1.34.

That's about $15 million, which though not 0, is not going to have an effect
on the vast majority of oil companies.

~~~
spectrum1234
It would be nice if this price for accounting, not just for consumption,
always included the negative externalities. At least this number would then be
2-5x+ as high.

------
asdf333
who this hurts most is north dakotan residents and their kids who will be
drinking this and bathing in it as it seeps into the aquifer

~~~
chabes
It’s on a native American reservation. Has there ever been a time in the
history of North Dakota that the state has held any sort of priority for its
natives? Even without the oil industry being involved?

The state of North Dakota has direct financial incentive from the oil
industry. The profit margin is great enough that they can afford to lose
millions of gallons of oil over a few year period and still have resources to
cover it all up.

I don’t foresee the state changing its priorities anytime soon. I believe
fixing this will take federal oversight or intervention of some kind.

Edit: This particular spill was not on a reservation, but the article talks to
people on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation who have been affected by
spills on many occasions. Many of my sentiments remain.

~~~
ewhanley
The spill was in Watford City, which is not on a reservation.

~~~
chabes
You’re correct. I was confusing another part of the article that talked to
folks on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation

------
spodek
I can't think of a more compelling illustration of the need for leadership at
every level of government, business, and society promoting environmental
stewardship, including each of us who can reduce consumption, vote, and lead
others to follow suit.

We can't rely on a Swedish 16-year-old with autism any more.

~~~
NeedMoreTea
We have to rely on a 16 year old because governments are not providing any
sort of environmental stewardship. Or any sort of leadership at all for a few
decades.

It's no wonder people arrive at adulthood with the impression the lunatics are
running the asylum and there's no alternative to their own direct action.

Why is her autism relevant?

------
whenanother
the reason why you have to stop this kind of thing is because the people who
are responsible are the same people behind the destruction of unions, public
transportation, universal healthcare, etc. they think they are outsmarting us
by getting away with crimes and stealing from us.

if you don't punish the criminals they will keep committing crimes. and no
getting rid of laws (deregulation) will not stop criminals from committing
crimes.

------
ceejayoz
This is appalling, but the comparison is a bit disingenuous.

It's not crude oil, and it's not in the ocean where it spreads to coat an
entire coastline.

~~~
habnds
right, it's in the ground water that people are drinking.

~~~
ceejayoz
That does seem likely, and is another reason the comparison isn't great. The
nature and impact of the two situations are wildly different in various ways.

------
mistrial9
alt link to referenced paper:
[http://www.saltedlands.org/images/uploads/news/Vengosh_Brine...](http://www.saltedlands.org/images/uploads/news/Vengosh_BrineSpills_UnconventionalOilDevelopment_NorthDakota.pdf)

------
dbg31415
Native North Dakotan here... and this really pisses me off.

------
colmvp
On a sidenote, I find it odd this story has a lot upvotes in such a short
amount time, yet it's dropped from the top story to now the 15th result on the
frontpage below stories that are older with fewer votes?

~~~
dbg31415
Woah, WTF.

It had more votes than any story above it, except one, and the votes to
comments to time ratio was all better on this article.

Someone at HN really hates North Dakota, doesn't feel like a coverup is
something techies should be talking about. Frustrating.

23th place and falling.

[https://imgur.com/a/yRz9FrW](https://imgur.com/a/yRz9FrW)

~~~
kortilla
Or maybe it’s people flagging it because it’s unsubstantiated so far.

~~~
dbg31415
Seems like a metric that should be made visible, no? I mean... if we see
votes, we should see flags... otherwise, flags are just a way to secretly
control what people can see on the site.

------
lota-putty
Now, how is US different from China again?

Edit:

What will you do different tomorrow?

Why did it take a whistle-blower to break this news?

Why did he/she refused to give out their identity?

Again, how is US different from China in "covering up" you know what _.

    
    
        * national embarrassments

~~~
kortilla
China is a country in Asia, the US is a country in North America. There are
many other differences that you will be able to find if you put a small amount
of effort into researching such a question.

------
pnutjam
simply awful

------
lmilcin
There is a difference between a coverup and not informative reporting.

From the article:

"That is despite the fact that a North Dakota regulator has acknowledged the
spill was much larger, and even the official record, right after stating the
spill was 10 gallons, notes that the area was “saturated with natural gas
condensate of an unknown volume,” and thus may have been larger."

Hardly a coverup if they immediately stated the area is "saturated".

~~~
ceejayoz
Reporting it as a ten gallon spill isn't mere incompetence.

> Suess readily acknowledged that the officially listed spill size was too
> low. “We know it is significantly bigger than 10 gallons. We have known that
> since Day One,” Suess continued. Yet he defended the state’s decision to
> continue to list the spill as just 10 gallons.

~~~
pacoWebConsult
As someone that is familiar with the software which powers a lot of the Oil
and gas regulatory bodies in the US, this is not uncommon. It is basically all
up to inspectors and regulators to determine and enter this data, with no tie
back to actual measurements or integration to sensors that track well output
or detect leaks/spills. Inspectors are typically former industry workers and
may have perverse reporting incentives. Places like ND and WV are rife with
corruption between wealthy drilling corps and regulatory bodies.

~~~
chabes
> Inspectors are typically former industry workers and may have perverse
> reporting incentives. Places like ND and WV are rife with corruption between
> wealthy drilling corps and regulatory bodies.

This is a major part of the wider issue. Regulatory bodies are financially
incentivized to not work as intended. There needs to be a restructuring of the
current incentives, so as to balance the priorities of the people and the
planet.

Unfortunately, the rule makers are the profit takers, so don’t expect them to
self regulate..

