Ed Fallon Walking to Oppose Pipeline in Iowa

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.
Ed Fallon walking the Dakota Access Pipeline Route (Roger Riley WHO-HD)

Ed Fallon walking the Dakota Access Pipeline Route near Cambridge (Roger Riley WHO-HD)

CAMBRIDGE, Iowa- Ed Fallon of Des Moines is walking across the State of Iowa to highlight his opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline. Energy Transfer Partners are proposing the underground pipeline to cross Iowa diagonally from the northwest corner of the state to the southeast corner of Iowa, 18 counties total. The line would move crude oil from the Bakken Oil Fields in North Dakota to a pipeline terminal in Illinois, eventually connecting to refineries.

Fallon is a former state legislator, and environmental activist who last year walked on the Great Climate March across America, is on another walk. Fallon’s current 40 day walk is to cover the 400 mile pipeline route across Iowa. Fallon began the walk near Donnellson in southeast Iowa, and is in Story County near Cambridge on Monday.

“This pipeline has no benefit to the people of Iowa,it’s not like a road or a water line,” said Fallon.  “A lot of the people I’m meeting have never heard from anybody but a pipeline representative, the only people they’ve heard from are the ones who want this pipeline.”

Fallon highlights his walk with daily emails on people he meets along the way.  He also calls into a radio talk show he founded and hosts, except when he is walking. Fallon also walks to talk with people about other concerns.

“I talk about climate change, about water quality, we already have water quality problems in Iowa if a pipeline breaks it’s gonna make it a lot worse,” said Fallon.  The activist also talks about eminent domain.   “That’s something I worked a lot on as a state lawmaker,” said Fallon. “I worked on 3 different eminent domain bills,every one of them tried to  give property owners more protection.”

“The focus is to put the brakes on a bad idea, the proposed pipeline,” Fallon wrote at the start while walking. “I’ve not even taken my first step of my walk, and I’m already meeting landowners opposed to the Bakken Oil Pipeline,” wrote Fallon.

The proposed pipeline has been promoted by Laborers International  Union workers of Des Moines as it is projected to bring 4000 jobs during construction to Iowa. Fallon counters that argument, “I’ve met one person who thinks it’s okay to take someone’s land to give somebody else a job.”

Fallon has had days where he encountered bitter cold, and aching limbs, but yet he presses on.   “One’s life has to be about some bigger purpose I can’t think of a more important cause right now,trying to stop this pipeline.”

4 comments

  • John Smith

    I find it fascinating that certain business concerns who wish to build pipelines to refineries never seem to think of building refineries where their oil fields are. Surely the US isn’t overburdened by unused refinery capacity, is it? Seems like every time a refinery shuts down for routine maintenance and cleaning-up, the price of gasoline at the pumps goes up, with that one refinery’s shut down given as the reason.

    • John B.

      Yes, it would make sense to build refineries closer to the oil producing regions but because of extremely stringent environmental regulations there hasn’t been a major oil refinery built in the U.S. since 1976.

      • John Smith

        Thanks, that would certainly seem to be one explanation. I also know that a few refineries have been taken out of production over the years, due primarily, I think, to their age. So, again, I am not seeing a lot of refineries that are complaining about lacking lack of product.

        It just seems to layman me that transporting already-refined petroleum products my involve less potential environmental implications.

  • minna

    Has anyone else noticed that projects that have the potential to damage or foul the air/water/food supply are always owned by people who live elsewhere? This pipeline that could seriously damage the environment in 4 Midwest states is owned by a company in Texas.

Comments are closed.