Flint 11th

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:35 am

While all the crocodile tears have been shed over Flint and it's water problems, I just learned that there are 10 other counties where the lead levels in the water are higher than Flints is. Ever hear about it? Any movie stars sending bottled water to those counties people? Anyone accusing the Governor for the lead problems there? I suspect around this country there are lots of states that have lead in the water problems and no one cares.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/m ... /79438144/

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:41 am

moreover, it is worth noting that despite claims to the contrary, Snyder must have known something, as he provided bottled water in response to complaints by STATE EMPLOYEES for their office over 8 months before he started to consider assisting the public in Flint. More smokescreens from Woody. Yes, there is a problem, likely throughout most cities east of the Missisippi River, with aging pipes leaching lead. We have to deal with that, although little immediate risk is there for any municipal water authority that bothers to get the pH of the tap water up towards neutral.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 8:11 am

No, woody makes a good point, things like this should be used to bring this issue back into the public light…not used to make political hay.

If this or that official knew about the problem, then plenty of public officials across the country probably know about these things...so lets just fix the problems.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 8:12 am

Spidey wrote:No, woody makes a good point, things like this should be used to bring this issue back into the public light…not used to make political hay.

that I can agree with, but first and foremost, the people of Flint who got KNOWINGLY poisoned have to have justice.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 8:17 am

Not without criminal intent.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 8:22 am

Spidey wrote:Not without criminal intent.

when do you need 'criminal intent' for Criminal Negligence or Dereliction of Duties type charges? As can be easily seen by the fact that the State brought in bottle water for ITS employees months before admitting a problem to the public, there was clear dereliction of duty there. The courts will no doubt sort it out. I'm thinking civil action, by the way, far more than criminal. Those people deserve to get paid, and paid well, for what the leadership of their city and state did to them.
Now, as for the fact that similar might be happening elsewhere, let the chips fall where they may in those places as well. It's one thing to realize you have a widespread problem, another to deny it to the affected persons when you KNOW the problem is actually real.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:46 pm

I wonder if water coolers were put in state offices in the other counties where the lead pollution is even worse. And as I read, the water coolers were put next to the drinking fountains to give the employees a choice.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 9:05 pm

yes, if you read one memo....a choice was offered, given the speculation about the water. Too bad the folks in town didn't get a choice, eh?
I've read NOTHING to indicate that it was a statewide program and the email trail seems to be between the capital and Flint.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 7:42 am

Still, there are other cities in MI that have a worse problem with lead than Flint does. Since there is no big outcry over their problem I will assume the Flint situation is just a ploy by the Democrats to make political hay.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:12 pm

woodchip wrote:Still, there are other cities in MI that have a worse problem with lead than Flint does.

please, locate and identify those with an active use of corrosive water in lead pipes. I know of none. I know of a lot with the POTENTIAL for high lead leeching, but most have the sense to treat the incoming water and raise the pH.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:30 pm

If a customer base in America still has lead pipes, that in itself should be considered a crime committed by the utility.

Lead pipes should have been replaced years ago, I don't know for a fact, but most lead leeching at this point in history is probably from the solder used to sweat copper pipes, and certain types on fittings that contain lead.

I could be wrong, but if anybody in America is still drinking water distributed by lead pipes, they are crazy.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:52 pm

Spidey wrote:If a customer base in America still has lead pipes, that in itself should be considered a crime committed by the utility.

it is said that a rather large percentage of Eastern/Midwestern industrial cities do. Not assessing blame myself, but your assessment makes sense.

Lead pipes should have been replaced years ago, I don't know for a fact, but most lead leeching at this point in history is probably from the solder used to sweat copper pipes, and certain types on fittings that contain lead.

lead fittings on copper, plus lead pipes. We replace lead pipes on the house in Virginia about 10 years ago, but I can imagine at lot of similar aged(85-100 year old) pipes still in place, because no one wants to pay the rather substantial cost to replace when they can just pretreat the problem away.

I could be wrong, but if anybody in America is still drinking water distributed by lead pipes, they are crazy.

if I had to venture a guess, I'd estimate probably 40 million people drink water that passes through lead piping, either household or distribution.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Whelp, there’s that lack of consumer education I keep harping about, I started filtering my drinking water back in the 80’s then switched to bottled water for some time, now I distill my drinking water.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 6:23 pm

Spidey wrote:If a customer base in America still has lead pipes, that in itself should be considered a crime committed by the utility.

Lead pipes should have been replaced years ago, I don't know for a fact, but most lead leeching at this point in history is probably from the solder used to sweat copper pipes, and certain types on fittings that contain lead.

I could be wrong, but if anybody in America is still drinking water distributed by lead pipes, they are crazy.

Lead pipes are more common than you think. But as far as replacing them goes, it is impossible in the current political climate.

First, politicians in America are by and large vehemently opposed to investing in infrastructure, and replacing all the lead pipes is definitely a gigantic infrastructure investment. Spending that kind of money for the good of society is simply a no pass in corporate ruled America. If someone specific cannot profit directly from the project, it just doesn't happen. Find a way to make a couple gigantic banks richer by replacing the plumbing to your house, and maybe you could get it to work.

Then you get to the paying for it part, I can already hear the protests from all over about burning up our tax dollars replacing pipes that work perfectly fine. It gets really nasty when people figure out that on top of a tax increase to the whole village/town/city, it also generates a "special assessment" for every property where it is done. Which means the property owner gets directly billed as a line item on their taxes the $5000 or so it takes to dig up their beautiful yard and flower garden to replace said lead pipe. First you raise their taxes some X%, and then you put a $5000 line item on them on top of it?!?!?! Come tax season, they will be out with torches and pitchforks.

Plus closing the street in front of their house is generally a giant pain in the ass for months. People love shiny new streets and water systems that don't poison them, but they hate paying for anything and they hate actually living around street projects.

So even though lead free solder has been around for decades, and the use of lead and lead pipes has been banned for just as long, you still see them everywhere because people and politicians hate the inconvenience and the bill of paying for actually fixing it. So you see these hundred year old water and sewer systems all over the country, and they won't go away any time soon unless you can convince both the people and the politicians to collectively get their heads out of their asses and do something about it.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 6:24 pm

Spidey wrote:Whelp, there’s that lack of consumer education I keep harping about, I started filtering my drinking water back in the 80’s then switched to bottled water for some time, now I distill my drinking water.

well, 20 grand later, the pipes in the old Virginia home were replaced with copper and PVC. Disposal of the lead piping was a chunk of the cost. We filtered the water in Berks County PA when we lived there, due to high iron levels. Never had to filter the water here in Delaware, but I have had it tested every 3 years or so.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 6:26 pm

Krom, your points are all valid. I'd add what I mentioned before.....that, knowing neutralization of the water supply negates the lead leeching, most governments just choose to dump phophate salts into the water and ignore replacing lead lines.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 6:33 pm

Plus the majority of lead pipes in the US are within the residences or property lines of the residential housing, which means it is actually the responsibility of the homeowner. Imagine how much people would ★■◆● about invasive government if it was mandated that you had to replace the plumbing actually inside your house.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 7:33 am

yup, and as added, the replacement and removal are not cheap.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 9:47 am

I don’t believe mandating the removal of the entire system would be appropriate, but mandating a reverse flow valve be installed, is not a heavy burden, coupled to some good public education about all of the crap in tap water, and advocating the use of filters.

(the reverse flow valve would prevent contaminated water from getting back into the main system, should that and or other houses already be updated)

So in other words some good mitigation can be done, but it involves telling people the truth.

There is a hell of a lot more ★■◆● in tap water than just lead, nobody should be drinking unfiltered tap water…period! Anybody that believes tap water is safe to drink is wrong, and that is the fault of the government.

And yea, I understand all of the politics involved, so please don’t explain why a public education program will not happen, because I already know. (huge can of worms…etc)

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 10:10 am

Spidey wrote:There is a hell of a lot more ★■◆● in tap water than just lead, nobody should be drinking unfiltered tap water…period! Anybody that believes tap water is safe to drink is wrong, and that is the fault of the government.

Nonsense.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:17 am

Top Gun wrote:
Spidey wrote:There is a hell of a lot more **** in tap water than just lead, nobody should be drinking unfiltered tap water…period! Anybody that believes tap water is safe to drink is wrong, and that is the fault of the government.
Nonsense.

complete and utter nonsense. I have had my water tested in every home I've lived, and only found one with ANYTHING that required filtration. And, I had it tested for pH, metals, biological contamination and the like.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:19 am

He has his water tested…

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:54 am

Hell, I don't know about anyone else, but our local water authority puts out a yearly water quality report that lists the exact levels of everything in their water supply. (As far as I know they might be legally compelled to do so.) Our tap water's well below mandated levels of everything, and it tastes just fine too. Unless you live in Flint or the like, bottled water is just pissing your money away, not to mention terrible for the environment with all the plastic you're using.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:01 pm

Top Gun wrote: bottled water is just pissing your money away, not to mention terrible for the environment with all the plastic you're using.

I live in the country with a well. Water tastes bad so I use bottled water. What I do is have a 5 gallon jug that I reuse so don't worry about the small plastic bottles.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:09 pm

it sucks that you actually have a well, and still don't have drinkable water. What is the issue with the taste? High levels of iron, or some other issue?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:11 pm

Spidey wrote:He has his water tested…

right, I do. What is your problem with that? We got the same report mentioned above, but that only measures the source water, not what actually emerges at one's house.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:14 pm

callmeslick wrote:it sucks that you actually have a well, and still don't have drinkable water. What is the issue with the taste? High levels of iron, or some other issue?

Iron and coal dust along with a sulpherous taste/smell.

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:20 pm

Yeah, that could definitely do it too. I know full-home filtration systems can be a pretty penny, but have you looked into using an on-tap filter?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:23 pm

Yeah, but the cost for the replacement carbon filters is not cheap either. I do have a water softener and with the Iron removing salt, I can wash clothes, shower and everything else. Just don't drink it.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:33 pm

woodchip wrote:
callmeslick wrote:it sucks that you actually have a well, and still don't have drinkable water. What is the issue with the taste? High levels of iron, or some other issue?
Iron and coal dust along with a sulpherous taste/smell.

smell would be byproduct of the coal in your area.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:45 pm

callmeslick wrote:
Spidey wrote:He has his water tested…
right, I do. What is your problem with that? We got the same report mentioned above, but that only measures the source water, not what actually emerges at one's house.

I have no problem at all, I just don’t understand why a frugal government trusting person like yourself would feel the need to test government approved safe drinking water.

Because it might not be!

And TG in a few months when I change the pre filters on my distiller, give my your address, I will cut one of them in half and send it to you, then you can say if you feel ok about drinking tap water.

The city has been working on the system around this area for a few months now, and the water comes out of the tap brown, with a chlorine smell that will knock your socks off, yea, I bet that is safe.

As always, you guys take something I say and apply absolutes, that’s not really how I mean it, your water may be safe for the most part, but it is better prudent than sorry…when that toilet tank next door back charges a bunch of crap back into the system, it probably won’t show up on any random tests, and believe me…you don’t want to drink it. (note I said “tank” not “bowl”)

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:18 pm

Wow, that's some serious obsessive compulsive ★■◆● right there.

I drank the water at our old house, and there were dead bugs in the whole house filter we had to catch stuff like sand and dead bugs before they clogged up the softener...

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:22 pm

Spidey wrote:I have no problem at all, I just don’t understand why a frugal government trusting person like yourself would feel the need to test government approved safe drinking water.

first off, as I noted, testing the water that leaves the plant isn't quite as important as what comes out your taps, and I tend to prefer living in older houses. Second, you still don't quite GET me, despite several years of reading words from me. I trust NOTHING absolutely. I ONLY trust our system, which can indeed be robust, with consistent, involved and informed public oversight. I simply see the VALUE in government doing certain functions, and see the danger in allowing unregulated capitalism and unchecked greed control the trajectory of the economy.

as for misunderstanding your intent, this medium lends itself to that, but when you put an absolute like 'every' or 'all' into a sentence, it's safe to assume folks may think you mean it as absolute.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:27 pm

Spidey wrote:when that toilet tank next door back charges a bunch of crap back into the system, it probably won’t show up on any random tests, and believe me…you don’t want to drink it. (note I said “tank” not “bowl”)

uh, sewer lines and supply lines aren't tied into each other at any point whatsoever.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:27 pm

well slick...it's only a personal opinion anyway.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:29 pm

Ferno wrote:
Spidey wrote:when that toilet tank next door back charges a bunch of crap back into the system, it probably won’t show up on any random tests, and believe me…you don’t want to drink it. (note I said “tank” not “bowl”)

uh, sewer lines and supply lines aren't tied into each other at any point whatsoever.

you know....[removed] I added the.....(note I said "tank" not "Bowl")

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:33 pm

boy am I glad for living in Denver. Our water is awesome.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:42 pm

Krom wrote:Wow, that's some serious obsessive compulsive ★■◆● right there.

I drank the water at our old house, and there were dead bugs in the whole house filter we had to catch stuff like sand and dead bugs before they clogged up the softener...

You really think that its obsessive compulsive for someone with serious health issues to worry about such things?

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:01 pm

Yes, because your scenario would require a failure of totally unreasonable complexity. Not saying it is impossible, but you stand a dramatically better chance of winning the $1.5 billion jackpot.

Toilet tank valves are kept above the water line specifically for this reason. It would require a leaky toilet of epic proportions, like wide open with no valve installed at all to make this even possible.

There is a check valve at the street where the service line branches off from the main, right next to the street shutoff valve. Water is not allowed to flow back from a service into the mains.

It would require both of those to fail in conjunction with a significant loss of pressure in the main and nobody noticing the millions of cubic feet of water passing through the service with the leaky toilet.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:07 pm

Sure...I guess that is why some codes require a back check at the tank.

Besides…that was only a single possible way to get contaminated water…

A single example…get it?

.....................

Here... [removed]

http://nobackflow.com/toilet.htm

"no connection whatsoever"