Biden-Harris Administration Announces $3 Billion for Lead Pipe Replacement to Deliver Clean Drinking Water.

Users who are viewing this thread

ampacusa21

New Member
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Wood Cross
In a significant move to address the critical issue of lead contamination in drinking water, President Joe Biden’s administration has committed $3 billion to replace toxic lead pipes across the United States. This investment aims to ensure clean and safe drinking water for millions of Americans, particularly in vulnerable communities where lead exposure poses severe health risks.
 

Valveman

Cary Austin
Staff member
Messages
14,836
Reaction score
1,369
Points
113
Location
Lubbock, Texas
Website
cyclestopvalves.com
It is a total waste of money to make them look like they are trying to help the people. There is nothing wrong with lead pipes. I would and have been drinking water from them all my life and you have too. As long as the water is not hot or acidic, lead pipe has in internal patina that coats the pipe and water doesn't leach out any lead. Only when you have other smart people like the government in Flint that didn't know these simple things and switched to acidic water after a century of using lead pipes with no problem. The only reason lead got the blame is to take the monkey off the government officials who caused the problem to start with. That $3B should be spent on something constructive like paper ballots.
 

Fitter30

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,574
Reaction score
864
Points
113
Location
Peace valley missouri
1.7 million lines will be replaces nation wide. Guess lead was install after WW2 1945 when the gi's coming home started a housing boom. The only lead pipe I've seen was a waste line 1965 house. Lead water line could easily be 65 years old and older.
 

Valveman

Cary Austin
Staff member
Messages
14,836
Reaction score
1,369
Points
113
Location
Lubbock, Texas
Website
cyclestopvalves.com
I hope spending all that tax money gives everyone a warm and fuzzy feeling, but you might as well strike a match to it like most of the other money spent by this administration. I think those lead pipes in Flint are well over 100 years old. So, why all of a sudden is it a health risk? The only ones that would ever be a health risk are from being used by water system operators that don't know what they are doing like the ones in Flint. Those pipes have been used safely for over a hundred years. I think they are trying to use it as a scapegoat for the decline in intelligence these days. Sorry. But that is because of our school systems not the water systems.
 

wwhitney

In the Trades
Messages
6,728
Reaction score
1,904
Points
113
Location
Berkeley, CA
Eh, nobody would put in lead water laterals today. Clearly lead water laterals are a potential hazard--the hazard can be mitigated somewhat (fully?) with proper attention to water treatment and chemistry, but obviously that's just one more thing that can go wrong, like in Flint. Given that, and given that 100 year old pipes of any flavor are likely near their end of life, replacing lead water laterals seems like a worthy infrastructure investment.

Cheers, Wayne
 
Last edited:

Fitter30

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,574
Reaction score
864
Points
113
Location
Peace valley missouri
I hope spending all that tax money gives everyone a warm and fuzzy feeling, but you might as well strike a match to it like most of the other money spent by this administration. I think those lead pipes in Flint are well over 100 years old. So, why all of a sudden is it a health risk? The only ones that would ever be a health risk are from being used by water system operators that don't know what they are doing like the ones in Flint. Those pipes have been used safely for over a hundred years. I think they are trying to use it as a scapegoat for the decline in intelligence these days. Sorry. But
Who are u going to blame? System operators work under a supervisor so? Hundred year pipe when are they going fail?
 

Valveman

Cary Austin
Staff member
Messages
14,836
Reaction score
1,369
Points
113
Location
Lubbock, Texas
Website
cyclestopvalves.com
Eh, nobody would put in lead water laterals today. Clearly lead water laterals are a potential hazard--the hazard can be mitigated somewhat (fully?) with proper attention to water treatment and chemistry, but obviously that's just one more thing that can go wrong, like in Flint. Given that, and given that 100 year old pipes of any flavor are likely near their end of life, replacing lead water laterals seems like a worthy infrastructure investment.

Cheers, Wayne
Of course no one uses lead in any plumbing today, because it was made illegal. The word "plumb" in Latin means lead, and lead has been successfully used to make plumbing products for about 5000 years. When used in the right applications leaded brass is far superior to any other material that can be used. Leaded brass impellers and fittings were far superior to low lead brass, cast iron, or plastic. Those lead pipes were still working fine after 100 years, they may have been fine for another 100 years. But it is apparently better to make problems were there weren't any, so politicians can get credit for making solutions to problems that don't exist. Lead was just used as a scapegoat so the guilty parties didn't have to take the blame, and now all of us are paying the price for it.
 

Sylvan

Still learning
Messages
2,785
Reaction score
708
Points
113
Location
New York
In a significant move to address the critical issue of lead contamination in drinking water, President Joe Biden’s administration has committed $3 billion to replace toxic lead pipes across the United States. This investment aims to ensure clean and safe drinking water for millions of Americans, particularly in vulnerable communities where lead exposure poses severe health risks.
 

Sylvan

Still learning
Messages
2,785
Reaction score
708
Points
113
Location
New York
VERY OLD NEWS AS THIS WAS APPROVED DECADES AGO "Safe water drinking act" in the 1970's

I Hated to replace my 11/2 lead water main as I feel old lead has a protective film as the lead main was put in in 1920 until 2001

WAIT and see the law suits because of "Toxic plastic"
 

JohnCT

Still learning..slowly
Messages
662
Reaction score
211
Points
43
Location
Northeast
VERY OLD NEWS AS THIS WAS APPROVED DECADES AGO "Safe water drinking act" in the 1970's

I Hated to replace my 11/2 lead water main as I feel old lead has a protective film as the lead main was put in in 1920 until 2001

WAIT and see the law suits because of "Toxic plastic"

The men and women who put men on the moon in the 1960s were raised with lead pipe water supplies..

Meanwhile, colon cancer rates in young people are up 70% in the past few decades (I lost my younger brother in March to it). Surely some of that has to be better screening, but something else is going on. Maybe plastics are the cause?

John
 

John Gayewski

In the Trades
Messages
4,547
Reaction score
1,447
Points
113
Location
Iowa
So instead of ney saying what should be done? Lead pipe stays? What would your preferred administration do? Withhold money to replace 100 year old pipes? Let the tax payers keep paying out for lawsuits?
 

Valveman

Cary Austin
Staff member
Messages
14,836
Reaction score
1,369
Points
113
Location
Lubbock, Texas
Website
cyclestopvalves.com
I don't have a preferred administration. I just prefer the government do as little administering as possible. Privately owned water systems don't seem to have those kinds of problems. Private companies can't afford to be sued like the government can, so they test and do things as best as they can. The problem with government overseer's is they don't know as much as the people they are overseeing. A simple water test would have keep that problem from happening.

Sue the government and you are just suing yourself. Government surely doesn't care. It doesn't come out of their pockets. They get the golden parachute no matter how bad they screw things up. I just want government officials to have to take the blame when they screw things up instead of passing the buck to something else like lead pipes. Those 100 year old lead pipes were perfectly fine yesterday. The next day someone or group that wasn't educated enough for the job opened a valve they shouldn't have opened and lead pipes are all of a sudden the problem. I don't think so Tim.
 

John Gayewski

In the Trades
Messages
4,547
Reaction score
1,447
Points
113
Location
Iowa
I don't have a preferred administration. I just prefer the government do as little administering as possible. Privately owned water systems don't seem to have those kinds of problems. Private companies can't afford to be sued like the government can, so they test and do things as best as they can. The problem with government overseer's is they don't know as much as the people they are overseeing. A simple water test would have keep that problem from happening.

Sue the government and you are just suing yourself. Government surely doesn't care. It doesn't come out of their pockets. They get the golden parachute no matter how bad they screw things up. I just want government officials to have to take the blame when they screw things up instead of passing the buck to something else like lead pipes. Those 100 year old lead pipes were perfectly fine yesterday. The next day someone or group that wasn't educated enough for the job opened a valve they shouldn't have opened and lead pipes are all of a sudden the problem. I don't think so Tim.
As I understand lead exposure, it doesn't necessarily kill you in small amounts. It makes you dumber. Like literally there are estimates that the population as whole would be (how ever many) iq points higher without lead exposure.

Lead exposure can come from many sources so if your argument is the lead pipe didn't cause the exposure I could listen. But saying lead doesn't hurt I don't think it's backed up by studies.

It sounds like your saying the lead pipe didn't cause the exposure, it's that right?
 

Valveman

Cary Austin
Staff member
Messages
14,836
Reaction score
1,369
Points
113
Location
Lubbock, Texas
Website
cyclestopvalves.com
That is correct, the lead pipe did not cause the exposure. That pipe had a 100 year old patina or oxide coating the inside and water wasn't touching the lead. It was really the lead oxide that came loose and gummed up the works when they changed water sources. We get exposed to lead in the air and from paint, especially when demoing something painted with lead. But lead pipes are not the cause of exposure.
 

wwhitney

In the Trades
Messages
6,728
Reaction score
1,904
Points
113
Location
Berkeley, CA
That is correct, the lead pipe did not cause the exposure. That pipe had a 100 year old patina or oxide coating the inside and water wasn't touching the lead. It was really the lead oxide that came loose and gummed up the works when they changed water sources.
Using water chemistry to reduce (not eliminate) lead leaching into drinking water from lead pipes is a band-aid solution. The long term solution is replacement.

Cheers, Wayne
 

Sylvan

Still learning
Messages
2,785
Reaction score
708
Points
113
Location
New York
I don't have a preferred administration. I just prefer the government do as little administering as possible. Privately owned water systems don't seem to have those kinds of problems. Private companies can't afford to be sued like the government can, so they test and do things as best as they can. The problem with government overseer's is they don't know as much as the people they are overseeing. A simple water test would have keep that problem from happening.

Sue the government and you are just suing yourself. Government surely doesn't care. It doesn't come out of their pockets. They get the golden parachute no matter how bad they screw things up. I just want government officials to have to take the blame when they screw things up instead of passing the buck to something else like lead pipes. Those 100 year old lead pipes were perfectly fine yesterday. The next day someone or group that wasn't educated enough for the job opened a valve they shouldn't have opened and lead pipes are all of a sudden the problem. I don't think so Tim.
Plastic is a known carcinogen. Toxic smoke for example world trade center fires. Plastic allows toxic chemicals to leach into potable water.

So what does the government do to "thin the herd" they approve plastic and ban lead water lines that have been around for centuries . People who drank wine from lead goblets ended up with lead poisoning.

Anyone who thinks plastic is safe had better not read anything put out by Green peace or
That is correct, the lead pipe did not cause the exposure. That pipe had a 100 year old patina or oxide coating the inside and water wasn't touching the lead. It was really the lead oxide that came loose and gummed up the works when they changed water sources. We get exposed to lead in the air and from paint, especially when demoing something painted with lead. But lead pipes are not the cause of exposure.
Plastic is a known carcinogen. Toxic smoke for example world trade center fires. Plastic allows toxic chemicals to leach into potable water.

So what does the government do to "thin the herd" they approve plastic and ban lead water lines that have been around for centuries . People who drank wine from lead goblets ended up with lead poisoning.


DO NOT look up Green peace or OSHA warning regarding "plastic" especially PVC as it may change your mind which is more harmful plastic or lead
 
Top
Hey, wait a minute.

This is awkward, but...

It looks like you're using an ad blocker. We get it, but (1) terrylove.com can't live without ads, and (2) ad blockers can cause issues with videos and comments. If you'd like to support the site, please allow ads.

If any particular ad is your REASON for blocking ads, please let us know. We might be able to do something about it. Thanks.
I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks