3 ms·
I'm no expert on water engineering, but my understanding is as follows: The Flint river water was safe to drink after treatment, but with a slightly lower pH th
by a_puppy 11y ago
I'm no expert on water engineering, but my understanding is as follows: The Flint river water was safe to drink after treatment, but with a slightly lower pH than normal. This caused the pipes to corrode which allowed lead and iron from the pipes to contaminate the water. If Flint's water engineers had followed standard practices to control corrosion (e.g. by adding orthophosphate to the water) then there would never have been any problem. Corrosion control would have cost peanuts -- about $100 per day [0].
Of course, it's hard to find unbiased sources, and I could easily be mistaken. Do you have a source for your claim that making the water safe would be expensive, or are you just speculating?
[0] http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/who-poisoned-flint-michigan-20160122?page=9 http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/who-poisoned-flint...
- analog31 11y agoSpeculating. I was thinking of something akin to desalination, but I now realize that the pollutant doesn't need to be removed but just neutralized. Replacement of the lead pipes would seem to be a pretty important safeguard, in any event. All of the lead was replaced in the town where I live.
- ams6110 11y agoIt's an old city, with a lot of old infrastructure that was never updated, corrupt government, and no money. Have you seen some of the stories about the Detroit public schools? No heat, leaking roofs, infested with rodents and cockroaches, etc. The place has so many problems that it's hard to focus on any one of them.