President Biden on Tuesday announced $2.6 billion in funding to replace all lead pipes in the United States as part of a new EPA rule that will require lead pipes to be identified and replaced within 10 years using the new funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act.

  • wolfylow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    138
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    TIL that lead pipes carrying drinking water are still used in the States.

    Suddenly SO MUCH makes sense.

    • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Famously so in Flint, Michigan. Lead poisoning in water and air is no joke and does serious damage to cognitive ability. Average lead levels in air are still painfully high and it does not go away.

        • Voyajer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          2 months ago

          Iirc the issue with Flint was they changed water sources and with it the PH of the water, dissolving the mineral deposits that were insulating the water from the lead pipe itself.

          • linearchaos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yes, that is indeed what happened. But the detail of how it started becoming a bigger problem isn’t all that important. All that lead should have been gone by now whether it was actively leaking or not. It should have been the next great taxed based infrastructure project. Interstates? Wait till we stop poisoning ourselves with stupid juice.

            • AA5B@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              I mean, the interstate project started in the 1950’s and people didn’t start being concerned about lead water pipes until the 1970s. Clearly this will all be fixed by the 1980s, 1990s tops

      • nelly_man@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        When it comes to lead pipes, it is possible for them to safely carry water without the risk of leaching lead into the drinking water, but it relies on the pipes being properly maintained and the water being properly treated. This is where the issue came with Flint.

        Prior to 2014, the Flint River was a backup source for drinking water with the primary source being Lake Huron. However, Flint was facing a financial crisis and decided to switch their water supply to the Flint River. When they switched, they also chose to save money by not treating the new water source with the additional anticorrosion materials that would be necessary for the different properties of this water. This caused the existing lead pipes to corrode through the protective layer that had naturally formed previously, allowing lead to leach into the water supply.

        Aside from the dangers of lead contamination for the human body, there is another concern when it comes to water treatment. Lead reacts with chlorine, and chlorine is added to drinking water to protect against harmful bacteria. Since there was now a significant amount of lead leaching into the water, a notable portion of the chlorine was now bound to the lead and was not available to kill harmful bacteria. This created the initial problems that were identified by residents in Flint, MI, and it was later discovered that the water supply now had detectable levels of lead.

        So Flint exemplifies the issue well. Lead pipes are dangerous and should not be used, but that danger isn’t absolute. Because lead pipes can be safe, we’ve let this problem fester for decades. However, it takes a lot of care and attention to keep using these pipes safely, and, as can be seen in Flint, it is very easy for those precautions to be tossed aside. When that happens, it becomes a major crisis very quickly.

        • Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          Flint also exemplifies the issue well how the people that knowingly chose to poison a city faced zero consequences.

      • unexposedhazard
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The obama thing in flint is when i realized almost all politicians are fucking empathy lacking sociopaths. You just have to figure out and choose the ones that plan to win by doing the things that are the least deranged.

        After officials briefed Obama on the federal government’s response to the contamination and he addressed the news media, a reporter asked if he would drink the water in a glass on the table. The president said he usually avoids publicity stunts. But he took a drink, saying he wanted to show the water must be safe if he’s drinking it.

        “This used a filter,” Obama said of the water. “The water around this table was Flint water and it just confirms what we know scientifically, which is, if you’re using a filter, if you’re installing it, then Flint water at this point is drinkable.”

        The second part is technically correct but its still a very clear attempt at trying to make it seem like things were fine. And now we are where we are, many years later, and the pipes are still all fucked because it wasnt taken serious.

    • protist@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Lead pipes don’t leach lead into the water when the water’s properly treated. The problem is what happens when there’s a hiccup in the water treatment process, which happens too often. This is going to be a very difficult process to complete in some very old, often impoverished neighborhoods.

      Of note, I live in Texas, and we have very few lead pipes in the state, so you’re going to need another excuse for these people’s behavior.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s not exactly an easy fix. You’re talking about digging up entire cities and replacing their water pipes. Obviously, it needs to be done, but the cost and the logistics are a nightmare.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        In many places, the water mains have been replaced over the years, but no one wants to spend money on lines up to people’s houses

    • The Pantser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Which is why I only drink from my reverse osmosis filter. My brain still works, for now, those micro plastics are getting everywhere.

  • taiyang@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Typical Democrat, trying to reduce mental illness and therefore reduce Republican support.

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      The $2.6 billion is just the latest round of funding for this. Generally every once in a while, you’ll see one or two billion in funding announced for lead pipe removal.

      Edit: I just looked it up, and the state with the second-most lead pipes, Illinois, estimates $11.6 billion to get rid of their 667,000 known lead pipes, and there are over 800,000 whose material is unknown.

      Edit 2: it looks like $20 to $30 billion is the overall estimate.

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      The Fed isn’t earmarking the money to dig up and replace each pipe. It’s grant money for municipalities to apply for to fix their pipes. So maybe it’s gonna cost Citytown Ohio $24 million to swap their pipes. The city can issue a bond for $16 million, get a grant from the state for an additional $6 million, amd a federal grant for the remaining $2 million. Meanwhile, the federal government wont issue anymore funding for their water treatment facilities until all the lead pipes are removed. So Citytown can either get off their ass and start digging up pipes next month, or be SOL when their sewage treatment facility needs an overhaul in 8 years.

  • 5dh@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 months ago

    Is this regarding lead pipes in homes? Or are some pipes of whole neighbourhoods or cities also still made of lead?

    • SlippiHUD@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      2 months ago

      Generally the pipes inside your home and the service line (from the property line to your house) are your responsibility. So I would assume this is for Municipality owned pipes.

      My city is currently having residents report to the city what thier service line is made of, by having us make assessment following thier instructions and sending pictures of the water line connected to the water shutoff valve. While they’re not currently replacing them for us, they are helping residents connect with reputable plumbers.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Similar here. The city spent billions a couple decades ago to replace mains, and had assistance for lower income homeowners but the cost of the waterline to a house, and everything in the house, was always on the homeowner.

        Now they’re trying to create an inventory of what remains

        My house has a copper water line, plus all the water pipes inside are copper. However given the age of my house, I have to assume they were replaced at some point. Given the drain lines are a mix of iron and galvanized and look older than the water lines …. And that copper is likely old enough to use lead solder which is not as easily checked

  • underisk@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    You have ten years to do something you’ve known needed to be done for over twenty. My bet is in ten years they will be given another ten year “deadline”, if whatever mechanism Biden established to enforce this even exists at that point. Same dance they do with climate regs.

  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    So anyone with lead in their pipes has to continue to be poisoned for up to ten years before the government generously deems them worthy of clean water.