> The one less ideal thing is that it's made of lead of course.
https://www.nrdc.org/resources/lead-pipes-are-widespread-and...
> The one less ideal thing is that it's made of lead of course.
https://www.nrdc.org/resources/lead-pipes-are-widespread-and...
One GAO report says,
As we reported in 2017, based on the available data, the majority of the 68,000 water systems subject to the Lead and Copper Rule at the time of our review had not been required to replace lead service lines and therefore were not required to conduct complete inventories.
In other words, no one knows.
So while it's not false to say that "Lead pipes are still used in every US state" it's also not provably true. Right?
A good question would be, "why aren't they required to replace lead service lines?" This would be a health benefit beyond any possible doubt.
If you do have lead pipes, however, it only takes a shift in pH to pull the lead into solution.
My spouse was on the leadership team of a municipal water district. They knew at the block level where lead (or even wood & lead) service were likely to be, and had prioritized inventories of infrastructure like valves, etc that required replacement. They weren’t pioneers in this area, every water utility does this. As breaks were repaired or other ground work (sewer remediation, new storm drains, etc) they had a capital fund to make replacements. The main remaining place where lead is present is between the water main/service valve and people’s homes. That pipe is usually the financial responsibility of the homeowner, and it’s an expensive job - $5-15k.
The other factor is that the lead issue, like asbestos, is overblown. As long as the civil engineers responsible for the infrastructure aren’t bypassed by criminally negligent political leadership (aka what happened in Flint, MI), there’s no meaningful risk. If you’re using an untreated well, different story.
OP's reference said that many states don't provide estimates. You said
> There’s a difference between knowing the status of every pipe and knowing what the system is generally made up of.
So the states don't bother asking the cities, or refuse to aggregate and estimate it, or what?
Your last paragraph also doesn't jibe with the second. If it's the homeowners' responsibility, then where does the "criminally negligent political leadership" come in?
The criminal negligence in Flint was that, to save money, the state appointed leadership of the City water system knowingly obtained water from an alternate source whose water chemistry caused the lead pipes in Flint to leach out and expose people to the lead in the water. Had they treated the water appropriately, or not changed the water supply, the oxidation in the pipes would have prevented the leaching of lead into the water, as it had for a century.
All of this is well documented.
All you'd need to do to prove the statement is find one in-service lead pipe in each state. Not exactly a high bar. Not sure what the point of nitpicking this is?
Finding one in-service lead pipe in each state IS a pretty high bar.
A more rational approach would be to look at testing for lead levels in tap water, which we can assume probably does get done by the EPA and other agencies.
Stating that lead pipes are relatively widespread isn't hysteric. In most cases, lead pipes are harmless, although if the chemical composition of the water changes, that can lead to dangerous lead leaching (see Flint, MI).
The current source of lead seems mostly (maybe almost entirely?) from "lead service lines," which is the pipe between the street and the home. And, new installations of those lines has been illegal since 1986 in the US.
News to me. Do you have a citation for that?
In the San Jose area we get junk mail almost monthly imploring us to buy insurance against the cost of replacing our water lines, because of their age. So I would have assumed that they all get replaced every 50 years or so.
PVC can get brittle, and PE pipe has notorious problems with connectors corroding/failing.
A lot of older sewer lines are clay or cast iron, and they also crack or rust through.
Like wiring, eventually it makes sense to replace them.
https://www.waterworld.com/drinking-water/distribution/artic...
Drinking huge volumes of water on the order of a gallon per day is important for general health and water is the main way most people ingest carcinogens due to sheer volume.
I don't believe that is true, and excess water can be dangerous by causing hyponatremia.
What carcinogens are you worried about in average tap water?