Remember “RRP?” The massive imposition of regulations on the trades, all “for the children?” You know, the ones that get contractors charged massive fines for not giving their customers the ‘right’ pamphlet?
This was supposedly to address the issue of lead in childrens’ blood. Of course it was the contractors’ fault – how else could lead get in the blood, if not from old paint, paint that has been painted over dozens of times with ‘safe’ paint over time?
Well, the ongoing drama in Flint. Michigan appears to give us a different villian: government.
That’s right: the same folks who wanted to ‘solve’ the problem by punishing the smallest contractors, serving the poorest folks, turn out to be the cause of the problem. Government agents, “experts” all, have been putting lead in the tap water and then lying about it to each other.
Amazingly enough, this appears to be the problem in many other older cities as well. Older pipes, more acidic water, lead in the water. Imagine that.
What’s not being pointed out is that every one of these cities has been run by Democrats for years – the very same folks who never cease to ‘solve’ problems by creating more government. Note that they never actually address the real problem; they only place obstacles in our way.
If the Flint mess follows the pattern, there not be any repeal of RRP. No, there will, instead, be much more intrusive regulation of the general public …. and the apparatchiks who have been lying about the lead, who have been failing to upgrade equipment, who have been taking dirty water into the system …. they will get promotions, bonuses, and disappear into the woodwork. Lead will remain in the water. Cities that have similar problems, but are out of the spotlight, will do nothing.
Replies
Compared to a couple of decades ago, lead levels in children are down significantly. And the federal rules/guidelines for lead in drinking water have generally helped prevent problems such as the Flint situation. What happened was that the city was pressured to "reduce costs" by switching water supplies without the "solution" being thoroughly researched. Several agencies screwed up.
Of course, lead pipes are an old and well-known problem, but keeping the pH of the water high greatly (but not completely) eliminates problems. The pH of the "borrowed" water was not appropriate for the Flint system.
Now I'm sure one could start a campaign to tear out all old lead water pipes, including both water mains and lead pipes in individual homes. But the expense would almost certainly require federal assistance. Are you advocating that taxes be raised to do this?
(It's important to understand here that the lead levels being discussed are sufficient to permanently lower the IQ of children by 10 points or so. This not only makes them "less advantaged" in terms of learning and earning potential, it makes them more apt to experience behavioral problems. It is a problem which this country can't afford.)
I was poking around and turned up this water quality report from the Flint River water plant. They say the pH was 7.41-8.49 which is really not that low.
Either something changed or they lied in the report.
https://www.cityofflint.com/wp-content/uploads/CoF-Water-Quality-Report-Summary-Dec.-2014.pdf
The dangers of lead pipe have been well known for 150 years. I agree, they should have replaced them when Flint was fat with auto money.
Greg,
The pH is lower than the water from Lake Huron and much more saline because of deicing salts. This combination ate the scale off the pipes that was protecting the lead from leaching.
KK
The more I dig around I find that they are saying the problem was that the Flint water managers were not adding a corrosion inhibitor to the water. A salinity of 4 PPM is not going to cause that much trouble and the pH of 7.4 to over 8 should not be a problem either. 7.4 is typical of most city water systems where they say the water is good, like DC or New York.
Yep,
They didn't add phosphate to bind any lead. What I don't understand is which supply pipes are leaching. Are these big copper city owned lines or lines from the street to houses?
KK
I understand it to be lead distribution lines on the city side. I also wonder if they had lead in the water all along and they just figured it out. There may also be lead leaching out of the solder in the copper piping inside the house.
Lead is fairly persistant in the body so it might be interesting to test kids who moved away in 2013 and now live in a place with no lead in the water.
Why?
Why would city supply lines have lead? All the old lines down here are steel with the newer ones being concrete lined or PVC.
Seems like there sould be a big push to install water filters at least for drinking.
KK
Greg,
You made me curious and since I was rained out today I did some research. This thread on Reddit answered a bunch of questions I had.
https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3x7wr7/flintwaterstudy_the_independent_research_team/
KK
Why would city supply lines have lead?
Do you know what "plumber" means literally? It means "lead worker". There are many cities in the US with lead water mains, and many more with (as Flint has) lead service lines. At one time lead was cheaper and easier to work with than any of the alternative materials. (Some theorize that lead pipes were the cause of the downfall of the Roman Empire.)
When Flint was "fat with auto
When Flint was "fat with auto money" do you think the auto makers were anxious to pay more taxes to replace all those lead service lines? Wouldn't they have argued that "There's no need -- the water is alkaline enough that the lead is not a problem"?