A decade after the Flint, Michigan, water crisis raised alarms about the continuing dangers of lead in tap water, President Joe Biden is setting a 10-year deadline for cities across the nation to replace their lead pipes, finalizing an aggressive approach aimed at ensuring that drinking water is safe for all Americans.

Biden is expected to announce the final Environmental Protection Agency rule Tuesday in the swing state of Wisconsin during the final month of a tight presidential campaign. The announcement highlights an issue — safe drinking water — that Kamala Harris has prioritized as vice president and during her presidential campaign. The new rule supplants a looser standard set by former President Donald Trump’s administration that did not include a universal requirement to replace lead pipes.

Biden and Harris believe it’s “a moral imperative” to ensure that everyone has access to clean drinking water, EPA Administrator Michael Regan told reporters Monday. “We know that over 9 million legacy lead pipes continue to deliver water to homes across our country. But the science has been clear for decades: There is no safe level of lead in our drinking water.’’

  • Donebrach@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I cant beleive how political lemmy is. cant we just have our lead pipes in peace and not have to deal with the politics about the made up story that lead pipes are bad ??

  • MobileDecay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I mean Flint’s problems were caused by switching the water source to save money, not lead pipes. However, replacing lead pipes would be great as well. Most drinking water in America is very safe though. It just tastes like crap.

  • harmsy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    On the bright side, if Miami has any lead pipes, they’re about to get a head start on digging them out.

    • Doom@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 hours ago

      well we only have 50 years left so they only gotta push this off like three times and then it won’t matter

  • Tiefling IRL@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I expect SCROTUS to overturn this by saying Americans have the right to lead contaminated water, and if they don’t like it they can buy Nestle™ distilled water

    Coincidentally, all the conservative justices will be taking a 6 month long all expenses paid cruise around the world

    • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      15 hours ago

      they can buy Nestle™ distilled water

      Hah, they don’t waste the energy to distill it. They just pump it up from the ground on the other side of Michigan, filter it, and ship it back out. (As well as many other places where Nestle steals water.)

  • VubDapple@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Didn’t the corrupt supreme court just take away Chevron Deference? This needed rule will be disqualified by the captured courts.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Trump will mandate more lead pipes. “They took the sweetness out of the water! Water used to be sweet! It isn’t sweet anymore! We like sweet water, don’t we, folks?”

      • SeaJ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        That honestly would not surprise me if he did allow lead. He thinks asbestos is 100% safe and is only being removed because the mob lobbied for it to get the construction contracts.

        And let’s not forget that Reagan wanted to reverse banning the use of lead and had a study commissioned to show how much money it would save the economy. The person writing the report decided to add in the massive negative health and societal consequences of removing the ban which showed a huge cost to the economy by removing the ban.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      16 hours ago

      It’s expensive and time consuming to replace pipes. Many cities don’t have accurate maps of their pipes either. The actual danger from the existing pipes is extremely low under normal circumstances.

    • RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I always heard that Cook county Illinois has them MANDATED (yes, mandatory for the stretch of pipe that connects the trunk to the house) in the code because only union members have the training to work on them.

    • EtherWhack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      Along with the other reasons, people were relatively content with the excuse that the layer of buildup within the pipes would protect from the lead.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        People forget that the proximate cause of the lead contamination in Flint wasn’t the pipes themselves (which had been in use, relatively safely, for decades), but instead that locals in charge of the water system got forcibly replaced with an emergency manager appointed by the (Republican) governor, who ordered the system to be switched from sourcing water from Detroit (Lake Huron) to the Flint River to save money and failed to treat it with the usual corrosion-control additives that Detroit had been using.

        To blame the pipes is to let the Republicans off the hook for their miserliness, incompetence and systemic racism.

        https://www.nrdc.org/stories/flint-water-crisis-everything-you-need-know

        https://www.mlive.com/news/flint/2016/01/epa_official_says_he_was.html

        https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/chemical-study-ground-zero-house-flint-water-crisis-180962030/

        • EtherWhack@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 hours ago

          The argument isn’t just about acute or symptomatic exposure, but any exposure.

          Lead can bioaccumulate within our bodies and while we may not yet know to what extent of health issues it can pose, we do know it is a neurotoxic substance.

          What you are arguing is the equivalence of putting all of the blame on a construction team for lead/asbestos exposure when neither should have been used in the beginning. Yes, Flint should have been handled better, but the pipes also shouldn’t have been leaded in the first place.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            Okay but what you need to understand is that the EPA’s allowable level of lead for municipal water supplies is 15 parts per billion (PPB) (which is very low), and the standard doesn’t change based on what materials were used for the pipes. Getting below that threshold is not only achievable but expected even with lead pipes, if you treat the water properly. Flint’s problem was that it didn’t, because the Governor kicked out the people who knew what the fuck they were doing!


            As for your 20/20 hindsight, it’s just that: hindsight. A lot of these pipes date back to the early 1900s or earlier, when not only had plastic not yet been invented, even copper pipe barely existed because they hadn’t figured out how to efficiently manufacture it water-tight yet (source). That means the alternatives to lead pipes were really shitty, such as terracotta or wood, and even if they did manage to use early copper pipes or some other metal, guess what: the joints would all be soldered with lead anyway. Moreover, this was also back when they were so ignorant about the cumulative effects of exposure to lead that they still thought it was a good idea to put it in things like gasoline and paint, so why would they have concerned themselves with the relatively small risk from using it in plumbing?

            If Flint were a sunbelt city built mostly after 1950, then sure, using lead for the pipes would’ve been inexcusable. But Flint was already in decline by then, so most of it is older than that!

    • Erasmus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Big business pays off everyone from the top down to ignore that the issue is killing everyone, from the top down.

    • basmatii@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Because our country has always been ruled by corporations and at one point we had a bunch of lead that companies couldn’t sell at a high enough price so the pushed it in all sorts of applications it should have never been in. It’s the same reason we add fluoride to drinking water.

      • bluGill@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Lead has many amazing properteis in metalurgy.

        floride is NOT toxic in normal quantities. That is a myth you hear from the same people who spread anti vax garbage.

          • localhost443@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            You are so confident in refuting so much peer reviewed research that disproves what you’re saying. I’m all for ‘fuck the corporations’ on most things, but this is Facebook level nonsense.

            • basmatii@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Leaded gasoline was peer reviewed and approved. Why don’t you buy some and let your kids play in the fumes?

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Lead is traditionally used in piping, it was only relatively recently that health concerns over lead became major. Not some “CORPORATIONS WERE PUSHING BIG LEAD” conspiracy.

        • basmatii@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          “relatively recently” was the fucking Roman empire.

          Lead should have never been used near water, we’ve known the negative health effects since before any current country existed. We knew lead pipes were not safe going into the era of modern indoor plumbing. It was cheaper than the alternatives though, so it got installed.

          And to your conspiracy point, we used to put lead in gasoline despite knowing it was poisoning of people and crops, and there was a conspiracy to keep it in gasoline.

          • PugJesus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 hours ago

            “relatively recently” was the fucking Roman empire.

            “that health concerns over lead became major”

            But thanks for acknowledging that the use of lead in piping is ancient and has nothing to do with some glut of lead that the big mean corporations decided to poison Our Innocent Society™ with.

            • basmatii@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              Reread, try again. More importantly, yes corporations are out to fuck you over, fuck society over, just to make money regardless of what damage it does. Smoking tobacco is an ancient practice that was known to be harmful too, are you saying we should trust the peer reviewed science sponsored by Philip Morris and accepted as sworn testimony by Congress that smoking is completely safe and not habit forming?

              • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 hours ago

                Because our country has always been ruled by corporations and at one point we had a bunch of lead that companies couldn’t sell at a high enough price so the pushed it in all sorts of applications it should have never been in.

                Just reminding you what your argument was that I objected to. :)

      • chaosCruiser@futurology.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Now I’m kinda curious what happens to all the arsenic you usually get from gold mines. Do you still make skincare products with it?

  • SolarMonkey@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    My city just did the lead pipe replacement. I did not do my house feed because I can’t swing 16k 6 months after they announced plans to do it (that’s also fully 1/4 of what I originally paid for the whole house 10 years ago, and I’m still making payments on that -I’m in a very low COL area, 40k is really good pay here, I usually make around 30k when I’m able to work-, so that is a SUBSTANTIAL amount of money for me), cuz yeah the city doesn’t cover from the main line into the house… (I do have a reverse osmosis unit, however, because I’ve known about the lead pipes since I bought the place, and all my drinking or cooking water goes through that, so I’m not like consuming lead all the time, just microplastics…)

    When I told them I can’t afford it because I’m unemployed and disabled, they told me I should just take out a loan for it. Yeah, because that’s a great idea when you don’t have money or know when you might… increase your monthly money needs! Brilliant! They then said I’ll have to do it by 2028 or my water will be shut off… cool, that makes me feel a lot better about being fucking broke.

    So like I’m totally on board with replacing them, but holy fuck does it suck for the affected areas. To say nothing of 4 months of constant structure-shaking construction.

    • baru@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      15 hours ago

      In Rotterdam (Netherlands) they’re replacing the sewage system. People get a letter that they’re responsible for the bit on their ground. In practice the city also handled the line to the house.

      I don’t understand why in your area they’d not take care of that bit. With everything mostly open it should be much easier anyway.

      That the city doesn’t promise anything is likely for things like liability and unique/expensive exceptions. But not doing that in practice, so strange.

      • SolarMonkey@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        They decided to repair the sidewalks last year, just out of nowhere, and tacked the amount on to your property tax as a special assessment if you didn’t make arrangements of your own to have someone come out and fix it when they wanted it fixed by. Any little crack was enough for them to demand you rip out the whole slab, even though the sidewalks have been in disrepair for over a decade, so they clearly didn’t care before. It was not a fun surprise when the flyer came that basically said “these are the slabs we’ve decided to replace, this is what we are going to charge you, you have to pay the full amount this year.”

        And like, I know sidewalks are sort of a gray area, but I already take care of them (clear leaves, snow, etc) and stuff, I shouldn’t also have to privately pay for them to be maintained on my property when I can’t choose not to have them…

        So like my area is good for a lot of things, but that definitely isn’t one of them. I’m pretty sure because it’s a conservative area, the money is being intentionally funneled into specific companies doing the work, and they can’t charge nearly as much if the city picks up the tab. Probably friends with or bribing the people making decisions…

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 hours ago

          They decided to repair the sidewalks last year, just out of nowhere, and tacked the amount on to your property tax as a special assessment if you didn’t make arrangements of your own to have someone come out and fix it when they wanted it fixed by.

          I’d like to highlight for a moment just how fucking outrageous and unacceptable this actually is. The sidewalks are part of the street. It is ass-backwards to be treating pedestrians as second-class compared to drivers!

          And like, I know sidewalks are sort of a gray area

          Absolutely fucking not. They are 1000000000000000% just as much the responsibility of the government as the rest of the street is. You should be fucking pissed that the city is shirking its responsibility for them and saddling you with it instead!