Why is the pipeline directed over the Missouri River twice?

[Quixote1818]

Why not go SE from Stanley and miss he Missouri River completely? Does anyone know about the geography of the region and why they would go West and then East hitting the Missouri twice?

[uppityperson]

1. West of the Missouri is dryer, cattle country. East is more agriculture, crops.

I don't know if that's the reason for heading west at the north end.

[Travis_0004]

2. Shortest path

The top horseshoe area (and a bit more) are gathering pipeilines. That had to be built to collect oil from the oilfields.

At that point the shortest path is the southern route.

[jmowreader]

3. It looks like they're trying to load oil into it at Williston as well as Stanley

Williston is the center of the Bakken play, and the current method of getting oil out of there is to load it on trains. But looking at the map, it seems more logical to start the pipeline in Williston, run it through Stanley to Minot, then drop it essentially straight down to where this map shows it crossing the ND/SD border. This way you miss both the river AND the two reservations, and you save quite a bit of materials.

[MiniMe]

4. It was supposed to go through Bismarck...

but Bismarck sued because they were worried that their water supply would be polluted. So it wouldn't have crossed the river at all if they didn't re-route the pipeline because Bismarck sued.

[madokie]

5. I want to know why

when a pipeline crosses a sensitive area such as a river, swamp etc they are required to have a pipe in a pipe. As is required for our fuel tanks now.
Be easy to put monitors in the outer pipe to warn when a rupture happens in the inner pipe. Hell the ships that transport the crud have a double hull just for that reason.

[pinboy3niner]

6. Pipeline route plan first called for crossing north of Bismarck

Amy Dalrymple Forum News Service Aug 18, 2016

An early proposal for the Dakota Access Pipeline called for the project to cross the Missouri River north of Bismarck, but one reason that route was rejected was its potential threat to Bismarck’s water supply, documents show.


Now a growing number of protesters are objecting to the oil pipeline’s Missouri River crossing a half-mile north of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, which they argue could threaten the water supply for the tribe and other communities downstream.


Early in the planning process, Dakota Access considered but eliminated an alternative that would have crossed the Missouri River about 10 miles north of Bismarck instead of the route currently under construction.


The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers evaluated the Bismarck route and concluded it was not a viable option for many reasons. One reason mentioned in the agency’s environmental assessment is the proximity to wellhead source water protection areas that are avoided to protect municipal water supply wells.


In addition, the Bismarck route would have been 11 miles longer with more road crossings and waterbody and wetland crossings. It also would have been difficult to stay 500 or more feet away from homes, as required by the North Dakota Public Service Commission, the corps states.


The Bismarck route also would have crossed an area considered by federal pipeline regulators as a “high consequence area,” which is an area determined to have the most significant adverse consequences in the event of a pipeline spill.

...

A map included in the Dakota Access application has a May 2014 date on the Bismarck route. The proposed route was changed in September 2014 to cross the Missouri River near the Standing Rock reservation, according to dates on the PSC documents.

...

http://bismarcktribune.com/news/state-and-regional/pipeline-route-plan-first-called-for-crossing-north-of-bismarck/article_64d053e4-8a1a-5198-a1dd-498d386c933c.html