Steven L. Larson sadly, I agree with you. I would have said before the Flint Michigan water contamination scandal that the western world has enough knowledge of the risks of lead that Flint could not happen. Obviously, I was wrong.

brigid

In the city where I lived most of my adult life, many of the older houses still had lead pipes connecting them to the water supply. Every few years the city would send letters informing residents of this and the potential hazard, recommending that the water be tested and the connection to the street's main pipe be replaced. However, the city would not pay for testing and would only pay for excavation and replacement from the street to the property line, and as this was a major expense, few people had it done unless there was some other reason requiring excavation like a break. Presumably the deposits lining the pipes after many decades were a fairly effective barrier to lead leaching, since no health issues ever came to light. Still, there was a mishap waiting to happen and I think many cities are in a similar situation. I received my first advisory letter from the city after my child had already been drinking the water for most of his life. I had his blood tested for lead (negative) and that cost nothing, thanks to Canadian medicare.

That's the issue. No one wants to pay for something that does not seem to effect them but once it does, it is too late to buy back health and the lawyers come crawling out of the woodwork.

brigid

Well, part of the issue. Fairness is another part, as well as ability to pay upfront. City councils routinely spread capital costs over the community via taxation and I'm sure there wouldn't have been many protests if tax revenues had been used to cover and/or spread the costs over several years via small property tax surcharges. Repairing cracks in sidewalks in front of homes isn't typically charged to the individual homeowner, and I think the health of members of the community is likewise a public good.

I agree completely with you Karl Pfeifer I am just mad because I think of all the waste in government. These are the types of programs that should receive grants to help do the necessary infrastructural improvements.

brigid

In all countries I think. However, this is not taken in concentration unless its effect is registered as cases of health damage.

Regards

It is still a problem in the "rich" countries. During demolition of old structures if they discover that lead was used in pipes or in other places there are strict environmental regulations as to how to decontaminate the area and dispose of lead wastes. Some pottery from Central and South American countries still use lead in their paints and thus those vessels(pots) could not be used for cooking.

Dear Balqees Al-Musawi

I agree, I just think that by now this problem should be avoidable.

brigid

Dear Israa Burhanuddin Abdurrahman and Srini Vasan

I deeply apologize for not thanking you for your contribution to this thread. Your concern for this topic is appreciated. Thank you for your thoughtful comments. The world is indeed a small place and we are affected by the problems in one part as Covid 19 is demonstrating. I can

understand that in countries where resources are limited that lead poisoning can be devastating. That wealthy countries choose to ignore infrastructure is wrong. Yes there are many rural areas that do not have the taxpayers necessary to pay for necessary upkeep. The problem with that argument is the money wasted on things like election campaigns for example, maybe that money should be channeled into actually helping the citizens.

brigid

Lead remain a serious problem in many developing and developed countries of the world.

Please also take a look at the following PDF attachment.

Its problem of both developed and developing countries.

It still could be a problem in “rich countries” as it could be the heritage of past industrial activities when no one was concerned about heavy metal pollution

" Are there still countries that are able to protect their citizens but choose not to?"

I can only offer you answers on two: UK and HK, and a view on countries in the EU. The UK water companies are required to monitor for lead, and do so. I am not aware of any company that tries to avoid this, and I know of several that go beyond their legal requirements. There is an issue if the use of randomised sampling detects every one at risk, but unlike Flint there is not a bias by sampling in areas where lead pipes are known not to be an issue.

HK had a problem where the government was not putting in enough effort. This came to light with a public inquiry in 2015 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Hong_Kong_heavy_metal_in_drinking_water_incidents. Since then they have been proactive in control measures, and are now taking this further in checking to see if the adoption of a control and monitoring system adopted from UK/EU approaches needs changes to reflect their environment.

Finally, the EU requires reports from the various countries on compliance with the legislation on lead, and has chosen that in 10 years time the lead standard will be reduced from 10 ug/l to 5 ug/l. The 10 year horizon is to give water suppliers time to make whatever changes they need to meet this new standard. There will be EU reports on compliance, but I can't remember the country-by-country details; the reports also include assessments of different approaches to sampling. The new standard has changed the interpretation from an average of 10 ug/l to a maximum of 5 ug/l, and I think will mandate RDT rather than leaving sampling approaches unspecified.

Dear

I believe that lead contamination is related to its sources, which are represented by the factories

And auto exhaust

Frequent traffic congestion is an indication of increased pollution

As for lead contamination in poor areas, I am surprised to consider it more polluted

Can you explain the sources of lead contamination in poor areas?

best regards

It is so easy to make more stringent standard for compliance, but not so easy to provide methods to meet the requirements. Research work is needed to reduce lead poisoning as in all types of pollution control. Unfortunately, HK has very little means to do research?

Following

Dear Naser Jawad Kadhum ,

Thank you for your question and insights. I do not mean to be insulting.

If I am correct, lead has been removed from gasoline at least in Canada and the US for years if not decades. The same with paint, especially regarding children's furniture and schools. Lead pipes have been replaced with copper and more commonly plastic.

I did not mean to sound superior, the lawsuit happy Western World has moved lead out of many things. In this case, I approve since it makes people safer. I was thinking though how cities have not kept up with infrastructure repairs so disasters like Flint Michigan happen. It is one thing for it to happen when people are doing the best that they can, but the literature is there, Flint should not have happened.

https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/programs/default.htm

This link is from the WHO, it contains a few more sources like mining. My point was that poor areas in order to attract and keep industries jobs will not push for legislation limiting population.

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/lead-poisoning-and-health

brigid

Dear Jeremy Dudley

Thank you for your marvelously detailed response and contribution to the discussion. I apologize for not being a better at maintain my threads. I confess that Covid has taken most things off my radar.

brigid

Dear Arvind Singh

THANKS so much for the links and your participation in the discussion. I appreciate your concern for this issue. I apologize that I did not respond sooner.

brigid

Dear Johnny Lee , Jean-Pierre Jost , Muhammad Abdullah Avais, and Mundher Alsaaidi منذر السعيدي ,

Thank you for your thoughts and participation in this serious discussion.

brigid

The issue with lead pipes is who pays to replace them? The UK banned them in c. 1970s, so older properties may have them. Germany banned them in the 1930s.

The UK, like many places, has chosen phosphate dosing to control lead in drinking water. Where properties are detected with lead above the legal limit then action is taken. What action is taken depends upon the water company. Some pay to replace the lead pipes. Some offer to pay 1/2 the cost. A few leave the onus on the householder, and advise flushing if they won't - with leaflets about the health risks. The majority are offering to pay something towards it.

Flint was in part that the bulk of the lead compliance sampling was done in areas known not to have a lead problem. In the UK I understand that that is not permitted - if you know an area has no lead pipes you may not use data from that area in reporting compliance. You may still need to sample, in case of brass fittings that leach lead, and to take action.

Although the UK has banned lead paint there are still alerts where imported products are found to have lead paint - or, at least, lead above permitted levels. This can be caused by everyone assuming that the supply chain is following the requirements and not checking.

There are still lead products - collectible figurines labelled not for children. Once out of the box at some point second-hand sales may get them to children. No one has yet announced a ban on lead figurines. But the obvious targets have been addressed - some, such as in petrol, against the assurances of the relevant industry that they were a minor contribution to overall lead intake.

Your starting question: can countries protect their citizens but choose not to - is, I think, that few countries are in that position. Flint is likely to see prosecution because laws were broken. Some countries may not adequately enforce their laws, but that is not the same as choosing not to (in law) protect their citizens.

Dear Jeremy Dudley,

Again, you stun me with the thorough discussion of the subject. I am a reactionary contributor to this site. Flint residents getting sick from water piped through a system that was not maintained is deplorable. I do not know all the reasons. The second mortgage scandal that crippled a lot of municipalities around that time is not an excuse. When the economy was strong, Public Utility Commissions should have been acquiring funds and making the necessary repairs. There are a lot of cities in the U S that are in a similar position, disaster just has not struck yet. IT ALSO is disgusting that lawyers will get rich suing the cities, Flint in this case, when that money should have been used to do the repairs

As an unrelated case, but an example of ineptitude, a small Ontario, Canada town had a water testing problem. The staff checked the water out of the same "safe" tap instead of doing spot checks. So, manure run-off that contaminated the water system was not caught until people got sick and died. Many people ended up on dialysis, there is a cluster of children, now adults with digestive problems. The government stepped in and provided bottled water. The town water could only be used for non food purposes.

Thank you for your information and insights. I admit to not even being a novice on the subject. You definitely are knowledgeable.

brigid .

In both countiers dont not responce to orders of dectors

Dear Ghufran Aljuburi

The sad fact of life is that until disaster strikes, no one believes it will happen, so taxes are not raised to prepare for problems, action plans are not thought of and when disaster happens like Covid, city water poisoning, Ebola, or flooding or water shortages or any number of serious issues, we are not ready to react intelligently.

Dear Jeremy Dudley

Instead of rambling, I should have said WE the taxpayer have to pay and WE the taxpayer need to be watchdogs that the contractors are not overcharging or providing shoddy workmanship (whistleblowing should be considered honorable)

brigid

Whistleblowing is considered honourable, but whistleblowers are not given sufficient protection. The USA seems to do more than most countries, with President Trump being unhappy that his particular whistleblower was protected in law.

In the UK all the engineering institutions have made it a disciplinary offence to not whistleblow. How they enforce that is open to question. If you do whistleblow, and are then penalised (losing your job and being blackballed within your sector), my own engineering institution has come clean and said that they will do nothing to support you.

The US EPA, at least abroad, has (had) a reputation for trying to do the right thing, and has been criticised (recently, among some circles) for putting too much weight on the environment and society and not enough on industry and profits - but it was that approach that made the US EPA be accepted as a leader outside the USA in environmental regulation and control.

While Flint was terrible, it did seem to result in the parts of the EPA involved with lead regulation asking not just how did it happen, but how did they allow the problems to get missed and how can they learn from them to minimise the risk of this happening again. We look extensively at the work that Michael Schock of the EPA publishes to understand the science. Jennifer Tully seems to be taking over his mantle, so both would be worth following if you are interested in lead & drinking water.

Dear Jeremy Dudley

Thank you so much for your great recommendations. The EPA is a bunch of old ladies because they believe in silly things like controlling pollution which hinders the business community. The current administration does seem to have a dim view of anything that impedes MONEY.

We grew up with artesian well water. It was incredible. One of the first news stories I heard when we moved to Las Vegas was about water and what was an acceptable concentration of jet fuel in the water. I remember screaming NONE at the tv. That was ~ 30 years ago. I still shake my head. Water contamination is a

serious problem, but when it happens because laws aren't made to protect the public it is a CRIME!

But , yes, I will check out those sources. Thanks again for your very informative post. You add a great deal to this thread.

brigid

Jeremy, do u mean they will do nothing less to support u?

Johnny Lee The water companies do randomised daytime sampling, so many properties are sampled. You can also request that they sample your property. The legal limit for lead at the moment is 10 ug/l, with the possibility that the UK will follow the EU and require a maximum of 5 ug/l after 2029.

If you have high lead the response of the water companies varies. Some companies treat 'high' as in excess of 10 ug/l. At least one treats 'high' as in excess of 5 ug/l. Once high lead is found then they have to help bring it within the legal limit - and that again varies from company to company. Most will offer some financial help with replacing lead pipes/fittings, and some will pay all the cost. At least one offers nothing other than advice.

However, if a water company has a high incidence of lead - I'm not sure what the figure is - then they are required to take steps to bring that incidence within the permitted levels. At that point they would have to consider paying for replacement at 'hot spot' properties. It's academic as no company is in this area. There is research on identifying areas which would benefit from increased sampling, so as to better understand the risks.

New York requires that high lead also be reported to NY's health authorities, but that is not needed here - and presumably not in most places in the USA. Those areas of the US that (proactively) publish the work that they do come across as exemplary.

" If you do whistleblow, and are then penalised (losing your job and being blackballed within your sector), my own engineering institution has come clean and said that they will do nothing to support you. " I just want to clarify if you had missed a "less" in the last sentence, i.e. your institution does support whistleblowing? Thanks

Dear Johnny Lee ,

Thank you for your insights and participation in this question. HORRIBLE to mention but the Chinese Dr who blew the whistle was jailed and of course died later from the virus. So, I think that while whistle blowing is applauded, in some countries , it is akin to treason in others. And, even here, in the US there is official support but punishment/consequences for anyone brave enough to do it. I worked with a whistleblower who was told quit or evidence will be found to fire you. It was difficult for the person to get another job as well.

brigid

The institution supports whistleblowing. If it knew that I should have blown the whistle, and didn't, I would lose my membership.

If I did blow the whistle, and lost my job, it would do nothing to help. Other than perhaps run a story about how what was done was a good thing.

Caught between a rock and a hard place, poor whistleblower!

With both

I just read that Lead contamination of drinking water was a problem identified in space travel.

Geoff Pain Is it this? Article Establishment of Exposure Guidelines for Lead in Spacecraft ...

That blood lead might increase because of loss of bone mass under low gravity, releasing lead stored in bones into the bloodstream?

Geoff Pain Or this? https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/jsc_63414_final_with_signature.pdf

Setting a standard for drinking water of 9 ug/l - in line with the EU 10 ug/l, and lower than the US 15 ug/l.

Thanks very much Jeremy Dudley , I saw mention of the Lead issue when examining the work of Joyce S Tsuji who is being paid by the USEPA to defend the organization in the current US Federal Court trial brought about by their failure to cease Fluoridation under TOSCA. As you well know Fluoridation increases the Lead content of drinking water.

https://www.uscourts.gov/cameras-courts/food-water-watch-inc-et-al-v-environmental-protection-agency-et-al

Dear Jeremy Dudley

Thank you continuing to give me more great information and issues to ponder. Lead has no benefit to me physically. Fluoridation is controversial but most agree that it improves dentation. So, is it simply cost that keeps us from eliminating lead from the water and not merely an acceptable level? Also, because lead gets into the body, most efficiently via inhalation, is it considered senseless to try and remove it totally from water (i mean that as a justification for why thee are acceptable levels standards)?

I am learning so much from your posts

brigid

Dear Geoff Pain

Thank you so much for joining the conversation and for your link. I did not realize the scope of the question having grown up when the focus was on lead free paint and products used around children. Jeremy Dudley and your discussion adds greatly to this link by providing easily accessible information. It prods me to read more about lead poisoning.

brigid

In both without exption

I picked up Geoff's work when trying to understand high lead values in tap water. But the region of the UK I was looking at does not fluoridate, so I parked it for the time being.

Read Geoff's wider work for another view on the health aspects of fluoridation.

Space cosmonauts use a lot of fluoridized water that contains excessive lead content?

Lead in space travel and fluoridation are, as far as I know, unrelated issues other than that they may have been looked at by the same people. Geoff Pain can provide us with more detail.

Dear Jeremy Dudley

That is interesting about fluoridation. I thought that everyone used it. Do you know whether not having it has affected dental issues in kids? I know off topic ;-{

brigid

Geoff Pain will know more than me.

My understanding:

The original benefits were observed with calcium fluoride naturally present in water. Sodium fluoride was added in areas with high tooth decay to try and get the same benefits. It may have had benefits a long time back, but now most toothpaste is fluoridated, and applied topically, dosing water is more open to question.

For the UK I think it is mostly the area called the Midlands that is dosed.

Wikipedia gives you a quick overview.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoridation_by_country

So for the UK around 14% of the population have fluoridated water, including those who have it naturally, and for Europe the level is around 2%. The US seems to be the biggest adopter, around 74% of the population connected to municipal water supplies.

Dear Jeremy Dudley ,

Thank you so much for your generosity. You make me think, something that /i try to avoid. now I am going to have to look up natural fluoridation I suppose because water quality fascinates me on a very novice level, the lead poisoning issue has spawned into different water quality threads. I really appreciate your participation in this thread, even though you do all the heavy academic lifting.

Take care, stay well, find joy,

brigid

Trying to find more about Fluoride in space Johnny Lee I found this interesting article. Note that Russia does not Fluoridate and most of USA and all its military bases except Okinawa ( are there others that have ceased?) do add the industrial waste Fluoride to their water supply. I would like to know about US aircraft carriers that can be at sea for 6 months or more. Interesting that NASA encourages their astronauts to swallow or spit their toothpaste laden saliva into a towel to conserve daily water draw.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/26/us-astronauts-recycled-urine-international-space-station

Tea is a source of Lead and other toxic metals Brigid Conroy

For assessing intake, the standard water consumption value is 2 litres for an adult per day. The UK DWI quotes 1 litre a day, of which 0.7 litres is drunk in the form of hot drinks.

Lead consumption is complicated by needing to assess what is bioavailable.

Black tea may be less of a problem for lead update than the figures indicate because of the tannin, which can inhibit uptake.

Good answer

The U.S. still has a problem with lead paint being in older houses and buildings.

Dear Geoff Pain ,

Thanks for giving me the hebe jebes, I am drinking extra tea to help my mood while I am in school. Very interesting, but it doesn't mesh with dad who probably drank 3-4 liters a day of tea. I try to say his low range because people have trouble believing that he would drink that much tea and be busy. Thank you for adding to the conversation and for some unsettling info.

brigid

Dear Jeremy Dudley

Thanks for coming to the rescue of tea drinkers. I think that the tannins definitely help the body in numerous ways, add one more,

brigid

Dear Chuck A Arize ,

Thank you for adding to the discussion. With the speed by which old homes and buildings are torn down in Vegas, I forget that there are a lot of buildings that are old and still in use.

brigid

It is also a problem in many rich countries where some specific industry do not master yet the air and water pollution with Pb. Moreover soils and some rocks may have naturally high content of Pb hence a high risk of water pollution with this heavy metal.

Dear Jean-Pierre Jost ,

Thank you for your valuable information, i do not think of lead as naturally occurring. I appreciate your inputs.

brigid

Hello Brigid Conroy I wrote this review for a member of the Irish parliament in 2015. Technical Report Plumbosolvency exacerbated by Water Fluoridation

And, re the effects of Lead on teeth, please seeTechnical Report Global Decline in Tooth Decay correlates with reduced Airbor...

Fluoride industrial waste added to drinking water often contains 100 grams of Lead per tonne.

Here's another one for you, Brigid. Greater risk of lead from private wells than piped mains water - at least in North Carolina.

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/07/01/2002729117

Restoration of Norte dame may involve some lead work i heard....

Dear Jeremy Dudley

Why would that be, is there a pollution source that could cause that much trouble?

You never disappoint, your comments always have interesting information.

We had old plumbing. The house was built in 1867, I think that the indoor toilet and plumbing would be from the 20's or 30's but while the pipes were insulated with asbestos, I think that the drinking water was in copper pipes. The house was heated by a boiler and I imagine there was lead involved. We had lead pipes in the barn for the cattle.

I just have a hard time imagining that the pipes in the house could cause that much damage.

brigid

Dear Geoff Pain

Thanks for scaring me again. But, even people who do not like fluoridated water used toothpaste, so doesn't that figure into the numbers? I am not a fan in the water and even less based on your first article.

Dear Johnny Lee ,

I do not want to be a hypocrite, but it is NOTRE DAME and given the use of lead in paint, the stained glass windows and other sources, I have no doubt it was an environmental disaster for many reasons not just the lead.

brigid

Brigid Conroy The paper was based on one US state, and gave as the main reason poor maintenance. It's not in the water, so you are looking at properties with lead *or older brass* fittings where lead could be then leached out. Mains water is more likely to have phosphate added to inhibit leaching, or pH adjustments for the same reason. Your comment on your boiler reinforces what children are taught - never fill a kettle with water from the hot tap.

There is a tendency to think that mains water is less wholesome than water from 'more natural' sources - look at the bottled water market (and read up on Coke's Dansani blunder in the UK) - and the paper is making the point (as water companies in many places do) that mains water is usually more wholesome.

Dear Jeremy Dudley ,

I still find it hard to believe that a house's plumbing would be that dangerous in terms of lead. I would have thought that city water --Flint, Michigan--as an example was more likely to be a danger. Obviously, most cities have adequate maintenance or we would hear of more disasters. As i said in the previous post, you always have something interesting to bring to the conversation. Thank you,

brigid

Flint was dangerous because the water change promoted leaching of lead from pipes, not from being intrinsically in the water. Had they added phosphate to the water it would have reduced the risks. Had they increased the pH then I think that would also gave helped. I can't remember if Flint's municipal water pipes still had lead.

Flint created the problem through cost cutting. The monitoring failed as it was focused on areas that had no issues with lead pipe. If you are not on mains water you may never have any monitoring to know what risks are involved.

Some data on Lead poisoning in New South Wales Brigid Conroy

More from NSW. The Country Women's Association helped the researchers gather drinking water samples and have them analyzed. The researchers failed to measure Fluoride levels, which would have been useful.

Dear Jeremy Dudley,

This correlation with lead and phosphates is fascinating to me. I have a weird tangential thought because i am a nurse. Patients on dialysis have to watch phosphorus levels but I have never heard of one being told to drink filtered water. I say that because Colas tend to have high phosphorus levels for taste?? Coke used to have high Potassium and the old nurse tale with chest pain vs indigestion was drink a coke, if you burp and the indigestion goes away good, if it doesn't, call 911, the potassium is good for your heart****UNLESS, you are on dialysis( What does phos taste like--no one likes to take the fizzy supplements in the hospital. ) SORRY for the sidebar

I realize that the lead was in the pipes, i didn't know how it leached out, i thought it was a natural degradation, after all the Romans weren't putting anything in the water, but the pipes were pure lead weren't they?

Thanks again for the great info. You make this thread interesting.

Thanks again for the great info. You make this thread interesting.

brigid

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/more-sports/new-map-shows-where-lead-water-pipes-remain-in-flint/ar-BB15YiiV

Dear Geoff Pain

Thanks for the interesting link. I appreciate your participation in this thread,

brigid

Phosphorus concentration in coke 170 mg/l. In water typically 1-2 mg/l. In aquifers

Unfortunately, it is still a problem even in Germany.

Here is the link to a German news article from today (you may use the google translator for English):

https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/panorama/blei-vergiftung-belastung-mechernich-100.html

Here, Brigid, we do have the first example, at least at a local level, of a country seeming to blatantly ignore lead risks, presumably for economic reasons.

At least it is not in the water! Germany banned lead pipes around 1935; the UK in the 1970s.

The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) estimated that in 2017, lead exposure accounted for 1.06 million deaths and 24.4 million years of healthy life lost (disability-adjusted life years (DALYs)) worldwide due to long-term effects on health. The highest burden was in low- and middle-income countries. IHME also estimated that in 2016, lead exposure accounted for 63.2% of the global burden of idiopathic developmental intellectual disability, 10.3% of the global burden of hypertensive heart disease, 5.6% of the global burden of the ischaemic heart disease and 6.2% of the global burden of stroke

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/lead-poisoning-and-health

Thousands of U.S. Areas Afflicted with Lead Poisoning beyond Flint's. In each location, it was easy to find people whose lives have been impacted by lead exposure. While poverty remains a ...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/thousands-of-u-s-areas-afflicted-with-lead-poisoning-beyond-flints/

Lead poisoning is still a problem in both developing and developed world; and also in underdeveloped countries.

In developed countries, people with low levels of education living in poorer areas are most at risk for elevated lead. In the US, the groups most at risk for lead exposure are the impoverished, city-dwellers, and immigrants. African-American children and those living in old housing have also been found to be at elevated risk for high blood lead levels in the US. Low-income people often live in old housing with lead paint, which may begin to peel, exposing residents to high levels of lead-containing dust.

Poor children in developing countries are at especially high risk for lead poisoning. Of North American children, 7% have blood lead levels above 10 μg/dL, whereas among Central and South American children, the percentage is 33 to 34%. About one fifth of the world's disease burden from lead poisoning occurs in the Western Pacific, and another fifth is in Southeast Asia.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_poisoning

Dear Jeremy Dudley

Wow, you always give such great information. So, if phosphorus is being used to stabilize leaching where there are still lead pipes or pipes that have lead soder, the phosphorus level remains low? Or is that water in the average city person's tap?

Thank you for your continued attempts to educate me, i appreciate it greatly.

brigid

Dear Dietrich Büsselberg

Thank you so much for joining in the conversation. Not being very tech savvy, I will have to work on the link. It bothers me that developed countries still have lead poisoning issues. We should be able and willing to protect our vulnerable populations.

brigid

Dear Chinaza Godswill Awuchi

Your articles tell horrifying tales. I did not know that lead poisoning claimed that many lives. Thank you for adding to the conversation and the links. I feel embarrassed that I born when and where I was. I remember that mom had dad stripping the paint off any furniture in the house that she thought might contain lead. He did it, without a mask, but that was the time, only wimps wore masks. Now, we recognize that intelligent people wear masks, but that is another topic.

brigid

The 1-2 mg/l is where phosphate is dosed for lead control. Where the phosphate reacts with lead to form insoluble lead phosphate - and a film on the surface off the lead pipe that is (usually) more resistant to corrosion or erosion than lead - there is a small reduction in the phosphate concentration, but usually small (with lead being in the ug/l level). There is therefore scope to reduce the phosphate dose, but the uncertainties involved in water chemistry and the different other metals that could react with phosphate mean that it is rare to go below 1 mg/l as a dose, and rare to need to go above 1 mg/l as a dose.

Some regions may have no phosphate dose, in which case the phosphate level may be down at the aquifer level (or river level, depending on the water source). Most UK towns have areas that still have lead service pipes (the bit that you own, rather than the water company) so dose phosphate.

The EU has new legislation that requires that the maximum permissible lead level in drinking water be halved, to 5 ug/l, by 2030. The UK is assessing if the economics will best be served by water companies replacing lead pipe in customers' properties, rather than try and increase the phosphate dose - also affected by concerns over the long term availability of phosphate. In 2000 there were papers being written than there were 20 years of reserves left. The pessimistic estimate is still 20 years of reserves left. (The optimistic estimate is 300 years - see Wikipedia for Peak Phosphorus.) The UK companies have yet to reach a decision - I don't know what other EU countries are considering to meet the higher standard. I haven't seen discussions about health effects of phosphate, but looking at cola drinks I think I can see why!

Dear Jeremy Dudley

You are too cool. Thank you so much for the added info. I will look at the link. On a side note, It is the inconsistencies or rather the data variances that make environmental issues so difficult to plan and adjust to. How can the phosphorus supply issue be so divergent. Scare tactics have stopped working because the "end is nigh" cry keeps passing by. Now, when the cry goes out, even though it is

accurate, it is ignored.

brigid

Michigan will pay $600 million to compensate Flint residents whose health was damaged by lead-tainted drinking water after the city heeded state regulators’ advice not to treat it properly, an attorney involved in the negotiations told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

Details will be released later this week, according to the attorney, who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak about it ahead of an official announcement. The settlement was first reported by The Detroit News, MLive.com and WXYZ-TV.

It is intended to resolve all legal actions against the state for its role in a disaster that made the impoverished, majority-Black city a nationwide symbol of governmental mismanagement, the attorney said.

The offices of Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel have been negotiating for more than 18 months with lawyers for thousands of Flint residents who have filed suits against the state.

Ryan Jarvi, a spokesman for Nessel, declined to confirm the reports of a deal Wednesday night.

“We and the other parties are bound by a federal court order to maintain the confidentiality of detailed settlement and mediation communications until we reach a certain point,” Jarvi said. “We have not yet reached the point where we can discuss a potential settlement.”

Flint switched its water source from the city of Detroit to the Flint River to save money in 2014, while under control of a state-appointed emergency manager. State environmental regulators advised Flint, located about about 70 miles (112.65 kilometres) north of Detroit, not to apply corrosion controls to the water, which was contaminated by lead from aging pipes.

Residents of the city with a population of nearly 100,000 people used bottled water quickly began complaining that the water was discolored and had a bad taste and smell. They blamed it for rashes, hair loss and other health concerns, but local and state officials insisted it was safe.

Researchers with Virginia Tech University reported in summer 2015 that samples of Flint water had abnormally high lead levels. Shortly afterward, a group of doctors announced that local children had high levels of lead in their blood and urged Flint to stop using water from the river.

Then- Gov. Rick Snyder eventually acknowledged the problem, accepted the resignation of his environmental chief and pledged to aid the city, which resumed using Detroit water.

Residents used bottled water for drinking and household needs for more than a year. Researchers said in late 2016 that lead was no longer detectable in many homes.

Lawsuits against the state are being overseen by U.S. District Judge Judith Levy, who would have to approve the settlement.

Under the deal, the state would establish a $600 million fund and Flint residents could file claims for compensation. The amount awarded per applicant would be based on how badly they were harmed, the attorney told AP.

It calls for devoting 80% of the money to people who were under age 18 during the period when Flint was using river water, the attorney said.

If approved, the settlement would push state spending on the Flint water crisis over $1 billion. Michigan already has pumped more than $400 million into replacing water pipes, purchasing filters and bottled water, children's health care and other assistance.

Other suits are pending against Flint, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and private consultants that advised the city on water issues.

Dear Johnny Lee

Thank you for the update on this terrible example of indifference and ignorance. This should never have happened, but once it happened, it should have been fixed RIGHT away. My question now is how much are the lawyers getting out of it?

Thank you for your continued interest in this thread.

brigid

Depending on the natural composition of soil and rocks Pb could be slowly eluted and contaminate sources and this regardless of the wealth of a country

Dear Jean-Pierre Jost

You make a very valid point, I think that our understanding of acid rain/air/water/soil pollution has made people in wealthier countries like me arrogant. I expect countries that need industry to turn a blind eye to pollution for the economic benefit to their citizens. BUT, I also expect wealthier countries to restrict pollution. Then I read about the laudable research done by people like

Dr Parisa Ziarati regarding plants to leach lead from soil and realize that wealthier countries can learn from poorer ones. That being said, there is no excuse for allowing money to over-ride common decency. Flint, Michigan residents should never have been told that the contaminated water was safe to drink. THIS is a disgusting example of putting money ahead of people. The State or federal governments should have been able to help. Now they are going to waste money on lawyer and court fees that would have been better spent remedying the problem. CHEAPER TOO!

Thank you for your continued interest and valuable insights Jean-Pierre

brigid

Yes, poisoning by lead occurs in approximately all countries in the world.

Chicago, the American city with the most lead pipes, has begun the process of pipe removal under a voluntary, multiyear program from the city's department of water management and Mayor Lori Lightfoot.

“Chicago’s lead service lines are a legacy issue we need to start meaningfully confronting by moving in the right direction in a responsible way,” Lightfoot said at a news conference announcing the program September 9. “The new Lead Service Line Replacement Program stands as our equity-forward approach to providing residents the support they need, all while providing a foundation to continuously building on our commitment to addressing this important issue for the long term.”

In 2021, Chicago plans to replace 750 of the roughly 400,000 lead service lines that connect homes to street mains. The mains were replaced by other types of pipe during the administration of Mayors Richard M. Daley and Rahm Emanuel.

The voluntary line service replacement program will require passage of an ordinance by the Chicago City Council which Lightfoot said she expects will happen in November. Homeowners that make less than about $72,000 a year for a family of four, with water tests that show consistent lead concentration at 15 parts per billion, can apply for a free replacement. $15 million in grant funding next year will cover the 2021 replacements, but the program is unfunded beyond that. Homeowners that choose to hire a contractor to do the work are eligible for a permit waiver of about $3,000. Mayor Lightfoot said officials estimate it will be an $8.5-billion program.

“We have been replacing miles of aging water and sewer mains for years, some almost a century old. When we open the ground we frequently encounter unanticipated issues. This is why a project involving water main and lead service line replacement performed at the same time is so important,” said Water Management Dept. Commissioner Randy Conner. “It is enormously helpful to understand what other cities have learned in their programs, but each city and its infrastructure are different.”

Congress banned lead water pipes in 1986, but previous mayors and the Chicago City Council have been reluctant to replace the service lines with Emanuel, Daley and, until recently, Lightfoot insisting that a corrosion-inhibiting chemical coating introduced into the water system for decades coated off the interior of the lead service lines and took care of the problem of lead leaching off of them and getting into drinking water.

There is no federal standard for the amount of lead in tap water that can be allowed from individual homes. Utilities are considered to be in compliance with EPA regulations as long as 90% of the homes tested in a city have lead levels below 15 ppb, according to the agency's lead and copper rule, which was first set in 1991. The agency believed, at the time, that lead pipes could be managed with corrosion-inhibiting chemicals like the ones used in Chicago, although there have been revisions to the rule since.

Virginia Tech Professor Marc Edwards showed how cherry picking which homes were tested in both Washington, DC, and Flint, Mich. could create an inaccurate picture that doesn't show how many are truly in violation of the 15-ppb standard. After Edwards' work in Flint, the statewide standard in Michigan was lowered to 10 ppb.

"We have learned the hard way that nobody drinking water from a lead pipe is safe— I applaud Chicago for taking the first small step on what will be a very long journey," Edwards says. Edwards and his team from Virginia Tech have sampled in Chicago, particularly on the South Side, and found that routine flushing does not reduce lead there as it does in other cities.

In an October 2016 white paper, the EPA admitted the standard is inadequate to protect consumers, not only because of the 15-ppb threshold but also because the rule itself is so complicated and testing is so complex that it gives utilities too much leeway in proving that the 90% part of the standard has been met.

Chicago conducts tests in just 50 homes every three years — the minimum required by the EPA. Most of the homes tested are owned by water management department employees or retirees living on the northwest and southwest sides. Results from some of Chicago's free testing kit program tests show lead-contaminated water has been found in at least one home in all 77 community areas in Chicago.

“The current structure of the rule compels additional protective actions on the part of a water system only after a potential problem has been identified, which may create a disincentive for utilities to identify potential problems with lead and copper in the drinking-water system,” the EPA said in the 2016 white paper.

Mayor Emanuel spent more than $475 million throughout his three terms as mayor from 2011 to 2019 replacing water mains in Chicago. He also doubled water rates to pay off debt accrued by the projects, but consistently stopped short of replacing the service lines. It's not known exactly how many homes in Chicago have lead service lines, but it's believed to be close to the 400,000 number the department of water management estimates. For comparison, 125,000 homes have them in Detroit.

Dear Johnny Lee

Thank you for this update, I am glad that Chicago is being intelligent about this serious issue.

brigid

Dear Bayan Khalaf

Thank you for joining this serious thread.

brigid

Pb poisoning can have natural sources as well. In the Alps, for example, there are few cases where excessive Pb contamination of water was due to the mobilization of the heavy metal from rocks and not from the industry.

Dear Jean-Pierre Jost

Thank you so much for your update, I really appreciate the excellent information and the generosity of experts like yourself.

Stay safe, hopefully, this horrible virus will leave us or at least be tamed so that we can return to some semblance of normalcy.

brigid

Dear Brigid Conroy. Than you for your message.

In the past the chemical industry of our country (Switzerland) has contributed to the pollution of soil with heavy metals and other chemicals. These companies are now cleaning up the mess of the past generation. It’s an expensive enterprise but necessary if we want to prevent the contamination of ground water. “We do not inherit the land from our past generations but borrow it from the new one”...

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/08/lead-poisoning-affects-one-in-three-children-worldwide/

It is evident that Pb poisoning is man made disaster, however it may exist naturally also, irrespective of any discrimination!!!

Dear Jean-Pierre Jost

I find the research of using plants to clean the soil of pollutants interesting. But I wonder if the pollutants just end up damaging other soil after the plants die?

Thank you again for your interest in this topic.

brigid

Dear Brigid Conroy. No the plants are collected after a certain time, dried and processed in a special way in order to recuperate the heavy metals without polluting the air. Such experimental processing plants are working already in France.

Regards

jp

Dear Jean-Pierre Jost ,

Thank you for that clarification, I wondered how the pollutants were taken care of.

brigid

Dear Brigid Conroy, the pollutants like Pb and other heavy metals (more precious than Pb) were recuperated for further use by some industry who need such heavy metals. jp