President Joe Biden announced Thursday $3 billion toward identifying and replacing the nation’s unsafe lead pipes, a long-sought move to improve public health and clean drinking water that will be paid for by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
President Joe Biden announced Thursday $3 billion toward identifying and replacing the nation’s unsafe lead pipes, a long-sought move to improve public health and clean drinking water that will be paid for by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
Biden unveiled the new funding in North Carolina, a battleground state Democrats have lost to Donald Trump in the past two presidential elections but are feeling more bullish toward due to an abortion measure on the state’s ballot this November.
…
The Environmental Protection Agency will invest $3 billion in the lead pipe effort annually through 2026, Administrator Michael Regan told reporters. He said that nearly 50% of the funding will go to disadvantaged communities – and a fact sheet from the Biden administration noted that “lead exposure disproportionately affects communities of color and low-income families.”
I don't get a chance to be happy with Biden often, but this is one of the rare times.
Lead poisoning doesn't just hurt people's health, it makes the stupid and belligerent. Like, those are the actual effects of it.
There's a reason the benefits of banning leaded gas takes decades, it's not helping those who already have lead poisoning, it's just waiting for a new generation to grow up without it.
This is like one of those "best time to plant a tree" things.
The benefits are really far away, but doing it is a huge investment in our future as a society.
It's reassuring to know society overall will be more sane when I'm old.
Sadly, this is barely enough to scratch the surface. We need a lot more money put into this, and it’s not like the presidents before Biden didn’t know about it. They just didn’t even do this much. It’s disgraceful.
Kind of true, but some lead pipes just aren't an immediate issue. Like asbestos in a building that isn't disturbed, it doesn't hurt anyone until it starts to come loose.
It's in conjunction with state and local funding as well. Your local municipality might be abke to aquire $4 million to replace the main lines through local bonds, while getting $2 million from the state and another $10 million from this federal program.
"Tonight on Hannity: Liberals want to take your Lead away!! The Romans used lead everywhere and they were a gigantic empire! Leave it to stupid liberals to think they know better than our ancestors! Take Back Our Lead!"
I think it'd be interesting to look at a worldwide map of lead pipes. Not that such a map can even necessarily exist; here in Liège, BE, the director of the water distribution company got fired a couple years ago for severely underreporting the amount of lead pipes left in the network. I can personally attest that lead pipes are still common in the nearby housing.
Lead pipes, like asbestos, were used so liberally that they are basically impossible to fully get rid of without spending a very significant portion of the GDP on it. So we just wait until we have to fully rebuild the street to replace the pipes.
It will have an effect in decades. The people that got affected are unlikely to get better. The biggest damage is being exposed to lead during childhood.
I think we're starting to see this effect from the lead we removed throughout the 80s, everything from crime to religion has been falling for the past 2 decades.
I don't think it was all lead, but I think it's playing a decent part.
Yeah, but decades is a blink of the eye, as these things are measured. And honestly, I don’t think a fair amount of Congress has even one more decade left in them.
I doubt it. While lead isn't ideal for delivering water, it's not as bad as you think. Once scale builds up in the pipe it didn't leech lead. The problem Flint had is they switched water sources and destroyed the scale so it went back to bare lead.
I wouldn't install new lead pipes but my point is that many old lead ones are probably fine. Ones that aren't fine so need to be replace though.
I've seen this comment before. My counter: can you assure me that, for example, a new homeowner that doesn't know better won't disturb the scale? They won't have a leaky faucet and mess with the pipes? Or something like Flint doesn't happen ever again where necessary infrastructure changes necessitate disturbing the scale?
This 'solution' only 'works' if you leave it completely alone and never touch it. So don't get new appliances, never have a plumber fix some things, never update that water main that's gonna break down any time now. It's a very short sighted 'solution' to the problem. I'd hazard it's a good argument for triage. Cities that need new infrastructure anyway go first kind of thing. But fobbing it off as 'its fine' isn't ok.
Yes. 😕 They were originally coated on the interior so there wasn't direct exposure of the lead to the water. But lack of funding (in some cases deliberate, see Flint, MI) for maintenance leads to the coating wearing away, resulting in contamination of the water. There's plenty of Starving The Beast going on with things like this (also see bridges collapsing and public schools failing) by conservatives to try and grift on replacing public infrastructure with private ownership. Pretty disgusting.
Purely pedantically: the coating isn't applied to the pipes, it forms there from a reaction between the water and the pipe material.
It's not something that maintained by directly putting it on the pipes, but by managing the composition of the water supply, which they can't not do.
The issue in Flint wasn't that they cut maintenance funding, but that they cut water supply funding and so the utility switched from Detroit water (fine, stable and nice to pipes) to local river water which had a different acidity which destroyed the coating.
I agree with all your conclusions, just wanted to let you know why we're not constantly digging up pipes to fix the coating. 😊
It's actually not uncommon in industrialized countries, and a lot of countries have similar active projects to phase them out. Flint was a wake-up call to places outside the US as well, so everyone has been accelerating their efforts, since there's a good example of how bad a "normal" error can make things.
Other countries don't often have to advertise that their governments are doing their jobs as much as the US has, since they don't have as much "all public spending is waste" rhetoric.
It's OK, they're only in places like Flint which is full of black people that nobody cares about, or Florida where everyone is already too brain damaged for anybody to really notice the difference.
Nope, they're actually still pretty common across the industrialized world. It's not just a US thing.
We recognized the potential for harm decades ago, but for the most part it's not a critical issue due to some minutiae of how lead pipes work in practice.
Incidents like Flint made it clear that the consequences of messing up that minutiae are big enough that we really, really shouldn't be relying on them.
So this isn't billions of dollars in emergency response, it's billions of dollars in preventative maintenance, which is even better. 😊
We stopped using lead in the 80s - the existing pipes are mostly still there and working just fine. If you are in a building or city built before 1985 assume there is lead in the plumbing someplace and take action. The more important thing you can do is let drinking water run for a minute before drinking (or install a RO drinking water system that will remove lead - regular filters will not - RO is most common of that that will).
With a little care (much of it chemistry - meaning your water department - not much lead will leach from your pipes and you are okay. Okay should not be confused with good, 0 lead is what you want. However it isn't feasible to replace all pipes in a day and so step one is doing as little damage as possible, then we reduce even that.
People will get one for their whole house, which is great unless your home has leaded pipes...
It sounds like something people would think of, but they often don't.
If your house has leaded pipes, you can get a small RO either by your sink, or before the hose that connects to your fridge is a better plan. It doesn't have to be by your fridge, it can be where the hose meets pipe which is usually out of the way.
The real solution is replacing the piping, but that shits gets expensive.
A small RO to your fridge is doable even when renting, and if you get tests done and it's high, some landlords would pay it just to show they're not liable and did something to address the issue if it's high.
They're all sealed theoretically, but shit goes wrong like in Flint, still having the lead pipes with sealers is theoretically not dangerous but is considered a bit of a ticking time bomb.
Like, to actually do it? Or for companies to pocket the money and give up on it soon after, like with the infrastructure upgrade we should already have?
60 billion being the upper estimate is kind of wild to as while it's an unfathomably large amount of money in terms of US government spending it ain't even all that much. Baffling that this hasn't been done before and just fixed the problem.
AFAIK this is an additional $3B. The BIL has already been funding projects for 2 years, and every state is already in the process of identifying all of their lead service lines. Each waterworks is required to at least have an inventory by October.
And that's in addition to multiple other infrastructure projects from this administration, including ARPA.
Like, it feels like this should be the kind of money to put a real dent in the problem......but I worry that the corruption of local governments and the associated contractors will probably soak up a lot of this on tangential things (e.g. lead pipes crosses under this really old road at one point; guess we'll need to tear up the road for 10 miles in each direction of the cross under point and then repave the whole thing, just to be sure)
So, that's not actually corruption or diversion of funds for this problem, that's basically what you have to do.
A lot of pipes we know are lead, but even more are unknown because they were installed long enough ago that we're just operating under the assumption that they're either lead, old style clay, or wood.
It's entirely expected that cities will say "there's a water main under this road from 1901, so we're ripping it up and replacing the pipe and road", because that 1901 is entirely sufficient to say that pipe is shit.
You fight lead pipes by replacing all the old pipes, not by trying to selectively only get the lead ones.