water in Flint, MI

Sardonicus

nolaegghead said:

. . .To try to water down (hardy har har) the severity of the issue to obfuscate a completely unnecessary poisoning of a large proportion of a 100,000 population American city is disingenuous at best, and unpatriotic and inhumane. . . . 

And that's putting it politely!
  

nolaegghead

...waiting....waiting for "The Bison" aka BGE Joseph Goebbels to shut down a thread that informs the public of baby poisoning.  PEOPLEZ LIVE IN PLACES THAT DRINKZ WATER!!  HELP US!!! DONT BISON ME, BRAH!

nolaegghead

The elephant in the room is....why on earth are there people trying to say lead poisoning isn't bad?  Or this issue isn't terrible?  Are they evil...do they not have kids/empathy/patriotism/humanity/good/god/dog in them?  I am sofa king confused. 

pgprescott

nolaegghead said:

That's exactly what I've been saying.

edit - the Kettering report, not pgprescott's weird comment on it.  

Not quite what you said or how you said it. Nobody is happy this is happening. It's much easier to look back and see the errors, that's all. Whole thing Is horrible. Lead poisoning is a horrible thing. These people will have serious problems for the rest of their lives, no doubt.  

YukonRon

Maybe they think elevated levels, (1,600 percent higher) is not an indicator of an issue for safe drinking water for the population of Flint, Michigan?

I suppose the governor appointed EFM for Flint, was more concerned about limiting the cost exposure to the state government and not the health of those residing in the municipality. Sacrifices must be made, just keep paying your taxes though. I suppose this EFM was appointed, because the elected officials of Flint demonstrated a degree of ineptness financially, when it came to running the city and serving those whom they were voted in to office to protect?

Inalienable Rights in Michigan, must be solely about the health of the state government, and not its tax paying citizens the government of Michigan was created to protect.

Just My view from 450 driving miles away. The neglect appears to be criminal and intentional. What a mess. 

Homebrewguy

The most interesting fact is that the city of Flint's water department did not have a corrosion mitigation plan that could have prevented the issue.  The water from the river itself is not toxic or contaminated as has been implied and it is not the whole city that is affected.

It was a small portion of Flint that has been poisoned not a large one and aside from water chemistry this issue could also have been completely prevented if the supply lines to these homes had been replaced.

This wouldn't have happened in a city like Georgetown because it has been led well enough that it never became financially insolvent to begin with.

Griffin

I'm kind of in shock that this whole thing happened. Maybe its because I sit in a lab and run a machine (Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometer or ICP-MS) testing levels of metal in water all day long. We test upstream, we test downstream, we test plant inflow and outflow. We test industries, we test taps all across the city in public place. Hell, we'll even test your tap water if you ask us. How did the guy sitting in my chair in Flint not speak up? I know I would have said something. And if something wasn't done, I'd go higher up the chain until something was done. I know its a bigger issue than that, but where was that guy?

HeavyG

Homebrewguy said:

The most interesting fact is that the city of Flint's water department did not have a corrosion mitigation plan that could have prevented the issue.  The water from the river itself is not toxic or contaminated as has been implied and it is not the whole city that is affected.

It was a small portion of Flint that has been poisoned not a large one and aside from water chemistry this issue could also have been completely prevented if the supply lines to these homes had been replaced.

This wouldn't have happened in a city like Georgetown because it has been led well enough that it never became financially insolvent to begin with.

I too was surprised to read in that Kettering memo that Flint did not have any sort of corrosion control program in place. The feds have mandated that for many years. Perhaps that is part of the reason that the EPA's regional director resigned??

I know nothing about the demographics and neighborhoods of the city of Flint. If the problem was mostly limited to one part of the Flint water system and it happened to be an economically disadvantaged part of town my guess is that those neighborhoods likely have a larger percentage of empty and/or abandoned houses.

That would be an important factor in the sort of problems they are experiencing. If there are fewer people drawing water from a section of water mains the water in those pipes is not turned over as frequently as is ideal. The shorter the period of time water is in the system between leaving the treatment plant and leaving a customers faucet the better. When water is left to stagnate in piping that basically allows that water to "stew" and problems often result from that extended period. In addition to lead levels they also had high levels of trihalomethane. THM's are a byproduct of the disinfection process. The longer the period of time the water is "in the system" the more THM's are able to form. Many systems switch from chlorine as a disinfectant to chloramines which lessen the formation of THM's.

Changing the service lines certainly would have helped the lead problem but would not eliminate it. Another major contributor to lead is the internal piping and fixtures in older buildings. That can be managed to a degree by just running a faucet for awhile  to flush out the stagnant water before filling a cooking pot or drinking glass.

Aslo, replacing all the lead service lines would be a major expense and from everything I have read about the Flint water utility they are a system that was already in financial crisis. That was a major reason they were wanting to switch  their water source - to save money. They could simply not afford to embark on a complete service line replacement program. Nor would that really be necessary. If the plant operators had just done their job properly and adjusted their processing to reflect the different chemistry of the new water source this problem would likely not have occurred.

When a utility system experiences the sort of customer losses that the Flint water utility has they immediately run into financial problems. If you develop a system designed to support 200K people but due to a changing economy that population drops to 100K people a utility system still has all that infrastructure to maintain. However, the revenue coming in to support that obviously becomes insufficient to properly operate/maintain even with the best of management/leadership. 

Legume

Dunno Griffin - maybe testing has been cut back?  Or the samples they were testing didn't come from places where the corrosion was creating a problem - locations of higher volume usage where the water wasn't sitting as long, newer supply lines, etc?

HeavyG

Griffin said:

I'm kind of in shock that this whole thing happened. Maybe its because I sit in a lab and run a machine (Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometer or ICP-MS) testing levels of metal in water all day long. We test upstream, we test downstream, we test plant inflow and outflow. We test industries, we test taps all across the city in public place. Hell, we'll even test your tap water if you ask us. How did the guy sitting in my chair in Flint not speak up? I know I would have said something. And if something wasn't done, I'd go higher up the chain until something was done. I know its a bigger issue than that, but where was that guy?

From what I have read there were folks in charge that were aware of  certain test results indicating their problem but they decided to "cook the books" to avoid alarming the public and other regulatory agencies. I don't know if any of those players will face any criminal charges but at the very least they should lose their jobs.

Griffin

HeavyG said:

Griffin said:

I'm kind of in shock that this whole thing happened. Maybe its because I sit in a lab and run a machine (Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometer or ICP-MS) testing levels of metal in water all day long. We test upstream, we test downstream, we test plant inflow and outflow. We test industries, we test taps all across the city in public place. Hell, we'll even test your tap water if you ask us. How did the guy sitting in my chair in Flint not speak up? I know I would have said something. And if something wasn't done, I'd go higher up the chain until something was done. I know its a bigger issue than that, but where was that guy?

From what I have read there were folks in charge that were aware of  certain test results indicating their problem but they decided to "cook the books" to avoid alarming the public and other regulatory agencies. I don't know if any of those players will face any criminal charges but at the very least they should lose their jobs.

My point is if I was the guy running the tests and knew what the numbers were and what they were supposed to be and somebody "cooked the books", you can damn well be sure I'd be talking to somebody else about it. Their boss, the city manager, TCEQ (Texas Commission of Environmental Quality), EPA. And if all else failed, the media. Of course, even with whistle blower protection, I'd probably be out of a job shortly, but I'd rather look for a new job than know that I was responsible for kids getting lead poisoning. That's just me, though. Plus, I just like to bust people and see them pay fines for trying to get away with polluting the water.

jtcBoynton

Remember that the Flint utilities had been buying finished water from Detroit for a number of years.  They were in the water delivery business.  They did not have the experience of being in the raw water treatment business.   When they switched sources they added a new function to the government services being provided.  Considering the financial mess they were in, it is not surprising that the emergency manager was trying to do everything 'on the cheap'.  I imagine that utility staff were told to 'just get it done' even though they had no experience in the raw water business.  

nolaegghead

From the Kettering letter:

After the switch to river water, the City failed to treat the water for corrosivity by managing its chemistry, which lead to the erosion (and release) of lead-bearing pipe scale in supply lines and lead/copper galvanic corrosion of lead solder and lead copper joints in the distribution system. Because raw water quality varies across the US, federal law requires all municipal water systems to have a corrosion control plan to address this possibility; this regulation is known as the Lead and Copper Rule.  Flint unfortunately did not have such a plan in place when it switched the water source to the River

Griffin

And now my boss has come in and said that some lady is complaining and her kid tested positive for lead so I'm gonna be running extra samples next week to see if its in the water line by her house or from the tap inside her house or where. He wasn't sure where they are bringing samples in but I'll be doing it. I'm sure this is due to an over alarmed mom and the Flint thing.

Fred19Flintstone

I took my girls to our favorite diner for lunch.

Homebrewguy

Koty's West Side Diner!!!  I know it well.  I've had many a breakfast there with a dear friend and former professor (from Kettering).

Fred19Flintstone

Homebrewguy said:

Koty's West Side Diner!!!  I know it well.  I've had many a breakfast there with a dear friend and former professor (from Kettering).

Yes sir!  It's a great diner!  We are still here.

Homebrewguy

YukonRon said:

Maybe they think elevated levels, (1,600 percent higher) is not an indicator of an issue for safe drinking water for the population of Flint, Michigan?

I suppose the governor appointed EFM for Flint, was more concerned about limiting the cost exposure to the state government and not the health of those residing in the municipality. Sacrifices must be made, just keep paying your taxes though. I suppose this EFM was appointed, because the elected officials of Flint demonstrated a degree of ineptness financially, when it came to running the city and serving those whom they were voted in to office to protect?

Inalienable Rights in Michigan, must be solely about the health of the state government, and not its tax paying citizens the government of Michigan was created to protect.

Just My view from 450 driving miles away. The neglect appears to be criminal and intentional. What a mess. 

What about the inalienable rights of those that live outside Flint or other failing municipalities in the state that are being forced to bail them out with state tax dollars form the rest of us taxpayers?

If the elected officials of the city hadn't mismanaged it so badly that they were requiring a financial bail out from citizens/taxpayers that didn't get to vote on Flint issues then who is supposed to protect those taxpayers?

Homebrewguy

I shouldn't have to pay to bail Flint out when my city 60 miles away is well run and managed within its means.

nolaegghead

stfu

Homebrewguy

I shouldn't have to pay to bail Flint out when my city 60 miles away is well run and managed within its means.

Homebrewguy

Huh?

nolaegghead

Homebrewguy said:

I shouldn't have to pay to bail Flint out when my city 60 miles away is well run and managed within its means.

We're talking about governance...managing things based on laws that protect health.  The water chemistry was botched.  And you're bringing up how your tax dollars 60 miles away shouldn't help mitigate the poisoning of people, including helpless children.  Michigan has a fund for this.  My belief in humanity has slipped a bit, yet again.  Thanks for the idiocracy.

nolaegghead

If basic rules were followed, we wouldn't be spending any money (outside of normal water chemistry treatment) doing all this testing, sending people bottled water (OMG!  MY TAX FKN DOLLARZ!).

Homebrewguy

Read the quote and my response to it.  The "inalienable" rights of these people do not allow them to violate my inalienable rights to the democratic process either. That is the point.

Flint was on the road to insolvency and people made poor decisions.

I'm not saying we shouldn't do anything to help the people or the city to fix it at this point. The point was regarding how Flint and the situation got to where it is today.

To your point about laws for governance regarding health...the whole situation could have been avoided by the Flint Water authority treating the water correctly when the knew the issue existed.  It would have been a lot cheaper then than it is now.

nolaegghead

The point of this thread is about the fiasco with the water quality in Flint.  Not about the sad economic state of Flint.  Flint, like many cities, sprang up around a single company - Chevrolet, in this case.  When they moved out/shut down in the '80s, as expected there was a negative economic turn.  This is life on one side of the bell curve.  Sadly, when the dust settles, there is poverty.  Enter you, bitching about your tax dollars and inalienable rights.  Appropriate?  You must be a problem solver.

HeavyG

Homebrewguy said:

I shouldn't have to pay to bail Flint out when my city 60 miles away is well run and managed within its means.

Well, keep that thought in mind when, heaven forbid, some calamity (natural or manmade) happens to your fine city in the future. 

I'm sure all your fellow citizens wouldn't dare to seek help (aka $$$) from state or federal agencies.

Except they probably would. 

Who can forget failed Presidential hopeful Sen. Lindsey Graham, who was opposed to federal aid for damage resulting from Hurricane Sandy a few years back, exclaiming that after the major flooding in his state of South Carolina a few months ago that the feds should spend "whatever it costs, it costs. We just need to get thru this thing".

We're all in this together you know.

Darby_Crenshaw

I'm just hoping someone will make it simple and tell me which president to blame it on

Homebrewguy

This wasn't a result of a natural disaster. The city leadership was corrupt and inept, so the city was taken over by the state.  Not to mention a one company town and the workers pissed off that company (due to a highly antagonistic union) and that company reduced its workforce there by 75%.

The people of Flint created the circumstances for this situation to occur. 

The really bad part here is that the whole situation could have been avoided on so many different levels along the way.

Homebrewguy

Bush, of course.