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.”

140 points
*

My city got rid of lead pipes decades ago, and now I’m mad other cities are getting free money to replace them.

(This post is about student loans)

permalink
report
reply
19 points

I hate scientists because they figured out the cure for cancer before my meemaw died. All my homies hate scientists. It probably makes you gay anyway.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Oh noes, others get help now while I did not? I hate everybody

permalink
report
parent
reply
128 points

This is huge…

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.

permalink
report
reply
25 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

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.

Getting the worst of it solved is a good step.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

The issue with not dealing with problems immediately, is that people have a tendency to push them down the line over and over until it’s not just immediate, it’s an emergency over a decade ago. Flint still doesn’t have clean water. This should have been a good first step Obama did, like he promised he was going to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Your mood is a disgrace.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

I’m sorry, sir. I’ll lick the boot harder, I promise!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

Lead poisoning doesn’t just hurt people’s health, it makes the stupid and belligerent. Like, those are the actual effects of it.

Dosage matters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

It takes a very low dosage to see effects, and it stacks.

So, you’re right. But it just feels like you were trying to disagree with me, when you were reinforcing my point that even a little is harmful.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-15 points

But it just feels like you were trying to disagree with me, when you were reinforcing my point that even a little is harmful.

Again this arrogant stupidity.

It takes a very low dosage to see effects, and it stacks.

Define “low” and explain how would you make that something objective for this your sentence to not look awfully stupid.

permalink
report
parent
reply
81 points

republicans now replacing their nonlead pipes with lead pipes

permalink
report
reply
60 points

“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!”

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Feels like they did that years ago.

permalink
report
parent
reply
75 points
*

Um… You guys are replacing them… Now?

That actually explains quite a lot.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

It’s especially bad in poor areas

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Canada will get to it eventually

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
1 point

Yeah, I don’t live in the EU.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Scotland still has lead pipes too. Hardly a water quality utopia compared to the EU or US.

https://www.scottishwater.co.uk/en/Your-Home/Your-Water/Lead-and-Your-Water

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You have no idea.

Also, leaded gas was a thing for, like, most of a century. And it’s still used in avgas.

permalink
report
parent
reply
43 points

It’ll be interesting to see all these lead pipes replaced, and watch the amount of religious people take a nosedive afterwards.

permalink
report
reply
48 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I don’t think they were saying that we shouldn’t replace them, but rather that it’s unlikely to have a marked impact on things like religious adherence.

For the most part, the concerning lead is in the municipal portion of the water supply, not in the areas a homeowner can disturb. (Not all of course, but it was largely phased out of home construction in the 30s). Replacing appliances or having a plumber work aren’t going to cause issues, and since the 80s having a service line or municipal water main break is a quick way to get non-lead installed.
Lead doesn’t contaminate water super fast, the water needs to be in contact with it for a bit before concentrations start to rise to immediately actionable levels. That’s why the biggest source of concern for contamination are municipal water mains and home service lines: water doesn’t flow as quickly so it can accumulate more contamination, and there’s a larger volume making it harder to flush the contaminated water. (If you have lead household plumbing, letting the water run for a minute or two will reduce the concentration below actionable levels. You can’t do that if the contamination is from the water main)

You are entirely correct that pipe scale is not a “solution”.
There’s no safe concentration of lead, which is why we need to replace all the pipes, a process that started in the 80s. Usually doing it as part of routine maintenance is fine because it’s not usually an emergency. The original plan to be done by the 2060s made a lot of assumptions about infrastructure maintenance being done on time, and people not making short sighted dumbfuck choices like the Flint emergency financial manager.

So we need to fix it as quickly as is reasonable, but we don’t need to freak out over it, and we probably won’t really see many marked changes like we did with leaded gas, just “no huge catastrophe”, and average water lead levels dropping from 3 parts per billion to 1 or less.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I don’t see how a homeowner could affect pipes upstream like that. I have been under the assumption they are talking about replacing city/count/state pipes and not pipes that landowners are responsible for. The article doesn’t state either way.

And there is no guarantee shit won’t get fucked up. But actually listening to people when they say what you want to do will fuck up the pipes sure helps. So, the opposite of what Flint did.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 476K

    Comments