Just a moment...
apnews.com

A decade after the Flint, Michigan, water crisis raised alarms about the continuing dangers of lead in tap water, President Joe Biden is setting a 10-year deadline for cities across the nation to replace their lead pipes, finalizing an aggressive approach aimed at ensuring that drinking water is safe for all Americans.

Biden is expected to announce the final Environmental Protection Agency rule Tuesday in the swing state of Wisconsin during the final month of a tight presidential campaign. The announcement highlights an issue — safe drinking water — that Kamala Harris has prioritized as vice president and during her presidential campaign. The new rule supplants a looser standard set by former President Donald Trump’s administration that did not include a universal requirement to replace lead pipes.

Biden and Harris believe it’s “a moral imperative” to ensure that everyone has access to clean drinking water, EPA Administrator Michael Regan told reporters Monday. “We know that over 9 million legacy lead pipes continue to deliver water to homes across our country. But the science has been clear for decades: There is no safe level of lead in our drinking water.’’

    • bluGill@fedia.io
      231·
      1 month ago

      Lead has many amazing properteis in metalurgy.

      floride is NOT toxic in normal quantities. That is a myth you hear from the same people who spread anti vax garbage.

        • localhost443@discuss.tchncs.de
          81·
          1 month ago

          You are so confident in refuting so much peer reviewed research that disproves what you’re saying. I’m all for ‘fuck the corporations’ on most things, but this is Facebook level nonsense.

            • Blackbeard@lemmy.worldMEnglish
              42·
              1 month ago

              Leaded gasoline was peer reviewed and approved.

              Then please provide a source. Failing that, your comment will be removed for violating rule 8.

                • Blackbeard@lemmy.worldMEnglish
                  21·
                  1 month ago

                  A link to a historical analysis of lead is insufficient for substantiating an assertion that peer reviewed studies confirmed its safety a priori. It was “approved” by fossil fuel companies insofar as it was useful in providing anti-knocking protection in primitive internal combustion engines, but the dangers of tetra-ethyl lead were known within years of its widespread introduction into gasoline. Ergo it was not “peer reviewed and approved” in the sense you’re suggesting.

                  Your comment wasn’t removed before, but it is now.

    • chaosCruiser@futurology.todayEnglish
      8·
      1 month ago

      Now I’m kinda curious what happens to all the arsenic you usually get from gold mines. Do you still make skincare products with it?

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      1 month ago

      Lead is traditionally used in piping, it was only relatively recently that health concerns over lead became major. Not some “CORPORATIONS WERE PUSHING BIG LEAD” conspiracy.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          1 month ago

          You’ll notice that it says “to keep using” lead in plumbing and like applications, and that the early date cited for corporate pushback against health concerns for lead is 1923. Both of those back my assertion that the root cause of lead pipes is their traditional use, and that only relatively recently did health concerns over lead become major.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
          41·
          1 month ago

          “relatively recently” was the fucking Roman empire.

          “that health concerns over lead became major”

          But thanks for acknowledging that the use of lead in piping is ancient and has nothing to do with some glut of lead that the big mean corporations decided to poison Our Innocent Society™ with.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
              11·
              1 month ago

              Because our country has always been ruled by corporations and at one point we had a bunch of lead that companies couldn’t sell at a high enough price so the pushed it in all sorts of applications it should have never been in.

              Just reminding you what your argument was that I objected to. :)

                • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  2·
                  1 month ago

                  Yes and it’s a correct statement. The reason we used lead pipes instead of steel or iron or even wood is solely due to cost and corporate lobbying downplaying the dangers we have known about for 2000.

                  Ah yes, corporate lobbying in pre-market feudal Europe.

                  Romans didn’t use lead for pipes, by the way, not until the very end of the empire,

                  Jesus fucking Christ. It’s almost impressive how insistent you are on getting basic facts wrong.