Hacker News Reader

Comment by semi-extrinsic | Hacker News Reader

Same but for Washington DC: https://www.dcwater.com/about-dc-water/media/news/dc-water-r...

As a European visiting DC this August, I was shocked (among other things) by a) the city being so empty it felt like a zombie apocalypse, b) advertisements for this map to check if your water contains lead, like you are in a developing country.

View on HN

If anything, lead pipes are a sign of a country that has been developed enough to provide mass water services to the population for a very long time (decades).

Lead hasnt been used for new pipes in years, but old pipes still exist. Paris, France for example has a similar issue: lead pipes used up to 1970, finally banned in 1995, but still needs testing:

https://www.ac-environnement-paris.com/old_concentration-plo...

Those advertisements are a sign someone cares. If you don't have them in your country you should suspect that the locals don't care not that you are better - until proven otherwise. Water quality is something that needs to be monitored regularly, even if you water is safe today if you don't pay attention someone can introduce problems tomorrow.

I was in DC in July and it was miserably hot. Looks like August wasn't as bad, but Congress was in recess all of August, and campaigning was in full swing, so there was a lot of reason for people to be elsewhere.

I have to imagine lead in pipes is less of an issue in developing countries. Many of them have very little water infrastructure and what infrastructure is in developing countries tends to be more recent, so it's should be more likely to have used other materials than lead pipe.

Developing countries are a mix. Some of them have cities that have been around for centuries and at some point someone put in water (not always for the whole city). Worse, since they don't have strong safety standards you cannot be sure that pipes put into today don't have lead in them unless you check (though odds are if it was done today they used plastic which is cheaper, though better depends on if they used a good plastic or not which you can't really know)

> I was in DC in July and it was miserably hot.

That's the regional climate I'm afraid. You get used to it. Doesnt help that downtown is built on a low lying swamp, theres a giant river as a moisture source, and concrete everywhere. Dont let it put you off!

Aug is recess season which matters more than campaign season in terms of emptiness. It also means the entire class of lobbyists, analysts, journos and hangers on evaporate too. Its a good time of year for us locals not in that space.

Central DC often empties out when the legislature is in recess. It's a great time to visit because the restaurants are empty and the hotels are cheaper.

Where were you in DC? IME the combination of tourism and (arguably) acceptable transit makes it feel quite vibrant

The wide boulevards and huge open spaces in some of the touristy areas can feel empty even when there are a normal number of people there. Common problem with planned cities, they have way too much empty space and feel abandoned even when not.

Our house was built in 1931, when they didn't pay attention to that sort of thing. The District has long since replaced the mains, and now household can get the pipes replaced at the city's cost.

People do tend to stay in air conditioning in late summer.

DC—particularly the tourist parts—are extremely exposed. I live outside of DC and I couldn't spend more than an hour there before abandoning it to go back home due to the heat. There were weeks straight of ~95-105°F weather.

Its interesting to see the contrast between DC and say London. London has, like DC: dense traffic along a relatively small number of major thoroughfares, a huge number of heat masses like concrete office blocks, a subway spilling heat onto the street, etc. What really saves London are the vast number of remarkably large parks and tree cover. You really see the difference walking the city. DC has one big blob of mall with little to no tree cover.

Cities are going to have to look at what kinds of shade the future is going to need for their populace if summers continue to get hotter. Interesting article from the NYT on this topic:

Summer in the City Is Hot, but Some Neighborhoods Suffer More https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/09/climate/city-...

> What really saves London are the vast number of remarkably large parks and tree cover.

I don't disagree that shade is a good idea. But what really helps London is it's vastly milder climate [0] caused by the Gulf Stream.

[0] https://weatherspark.com/compare/y/20957~45062/Comparison-of...

Lead piping still far too common in the UK.

https://www.ft.com/content/7107f067-43d5-4030-afbc-123da2313...

My boomer neighbours laugh it off - "never did me any harm".

Given the historical trend of blood lead levels, they're probably right. Airborne lead is more problematic and it wasn't boomers it was Gen X who were poisoned the most.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com