13 ms·

Firefighting foam leaves toxic legacy in Californians’ drinking water

mschuster91 7y ago
> The Air Force delivered free five-gallon jugs of water to the Mendez home for more than two years. In 2018, it paid to have the house connected to the municipal water system. Ruben Mendez said he now pays $100 a month for water he used to get for free. Sorry, what? 100$ a month for residential water? Either this guy is running a farm operation or something is seriously broken.
- honopu 7y ago
  I live in Sarasota Florida, my water and sewer bill is 100.
  - brixon 7y ago
    Sewer is usually twice the price of water, so 33 water and 66 sewer.
- hanniabu 7y ago
  He might be up in the mountains
- not_a_cop75 7y ago
  In your bigger cities 100 dollars a month is about average or even low for a family. Unless he has almost no use I don't see the issue.
- rixrax 7y ago
  As incredible as it is, $100 appears to be below average monthly cost nowadays for a 4 person family[0] using 150 gallons / person / day [based on a random study that quick search found]. I am not sure who would use 150 gallons a day though. Even 50 gallons (~189 liters) seems a lot to me. If you factor in irrigation system, etc. then maybe you would get to these gallon volumes. [0] https://www.circleofblue.org/2018/water-management/pricing/price-of-water-2018/ https://www.circleofblue.org/2018/water-management/pricing/p...
  - ghaff 7y ago
    My town has a floor that's about 100 gallons per day that I'm always under. My bill, with no sewer, is more than $20/month. $100/month for water seems high in that, anecdotally, electrical and oil bills are a much bigger deal for most people than water. OTOH, $100/month doesn't seem out of the realm of reasonableness either.
    - kodt 7y ago
      Meanwhile I pay $630 every six months for water no matter how much or little I use. So $100 a month seems right on to me.
      - ghaff 7y ago
        I confess to being a bit surprised but, based on the comments, it certainly seems as if $100/month is within the normal range for water bills, even for light use.
  - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
    I pay nothing (monthly). But I am rural, and have my own well and septic system. Which cost, if I remember right, $5000 decades ago when built. Which amortizes to maybe $20/month.
    - ping_pong 7y ago
      Do you test your water for impurities and chemicals?
      - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
        Sure. But the water is from 111' down, and got there 10,000 years ago. So probably not an issue.
  - TylerE 7y ago
    The big consumers are stuff like toilets (~2 gallons/flush), showers (2-3 gallons/minute), and lawn care. So you have 3 people who take a 10 minute shower, and flush the toilet 4 times each, that's 112 gallons/day right there.
- bubbalovesapps 7y ago
  $25 a month for water in KY
- bluGill 7y ago
  Putting pipes in the ground is not cheap, and it needs to be paid for. There are also pumps, treatment, and maintenance that needs to be paid for. When you have a dense city that isn't a big deal because your share of the above isn't very expensive. However when you have a sparse rural area your share goes up. In a city public water systems are cheaper than drilling a well, but in rural areas a private well is cheaper - but if the ground water isn't safe to drink the treatment can be out of reach.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  Nobody running a farm is wasting expensive municipal water on irrigation when they have a perfectly functional well on the property. I'm not sure it's even possible to run an economically solvent farming operation off municipal water in the US for any crop other than maybe indoor weed.
  - bluGill 7y ago
    Many farms in the US run off a municipal water supply. Only in the west do farms have irrigation systems. When you get east of the Missouri river there is enough rainfall to water the crops and so you don't have any irrigation needs (I don't know why the climate changes so drastically on this line but it does). Even if you have a well, if you are east of the river it is only for household and livestock use, not irrigation.
    - opencl 7y ago
      I live in the midwest and irrigation is definitely used around here. Not for all crops but there has been a huge increase in the usage of irrigation over the past decade. There's usually enough rain but irrigation still helps make yields a lot more consistent.
- situational87 7y ago
  You likely pay more than $100/month for water, but if your bill is only $20/month or whatever it's just because your local government is subsidizing the cost in one way or another. Socialism in action.
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    It's gonna depend enormously on where you're located. Here in Rochester, NY we just tap Lake Ontario and a few of the Finger Lakes. Minimal treatment required, plenty of it, etc. My bill's about $60 every three months. If you live in Phoenix, AZ, water's a little more scarce.
  - ghaff 7y ago
    Especially in smaller municipalities there isn't a lot of money slopping around to subsidize just about anything. The vast bulk of the moneys my town brings in are from property taxes and the vast bulk of that goes out to the school systems. So things like town water need to pretty much pay their own way.
- stronglikedan 7y ago
  My actual water/gas usage fee is just a few dollars a month, but there's a "base station fee", for what I presume to be infrastructure, that pushes my bill to just over $100 per month.
- jeanvaljean2463 7y ago
  https://kfor.com/2019/09/03/im-just-frustrated-edmond-residents-angered-by-skyrocketing-water-bills/ https://kfor.com/2019/09/03/im-just-frustrated-edmond-reside... Where I live people's bills are going from $100 to over $600 a month. I saw someone's post on Nextdoor saying that their bill was $2700. Ours was $963 up from about $270 with no change in usage. I would be thrilled to pay $100 a month for water.
  - mikestew 7y ago
    The person in the article said he was watering his lawn for $40/month previously. The fact that it jumped to $250 while maintaining his watering habits does not garner much sympathy from me. Were it $250 so that he might hydrate his children and maintain a reasonable standard of living, well that's another thing. But just so your grass doesn't go dormant? Here, water your grass with my tears. In summary, I think some poor examples were chosen.
    - asdf21 7y ago
      People's overall quality of life matters, and it's nice to have a lawn... Also, you realize plant life is an important carbon sink, right? Is watering backyard trees worthy of your spite as well? >Here, water your grass with my tears. Perhaps you're on the wrong site, with this sort of attitude.
- rayiner 7y ago
  Municipalities kept water and sewer rates too low for decades, and now we need to spend $1 trillion over the next 25 years to upgrade systems and catch up with deferred maintenance: https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/drinking_water/ https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/drinking_w...
- zippergz 7y ago
  LOOOL I wish my residential water bill (for a normal sized house and very small yard) wasn't $100+, but it has been for MANY years.
hanniabu 7y ago
I was always told that this foam wasn't toxic
- tomatotomato37 7y ago
  The problem seems to be that just because it isn't acutely toxic non-chemist military personal treated it like it wasn't also chronically toxic.
- opwieurposiu 7y ago
  Well if the choice is between getting sprayed with burning jet fuel or sprayed with fluorinated foam I will take the foam every time. Maybe we should save the good stuff like halon and PFAS foam for emergencies and use something more eco for training.
  - jabl 7y ago
    In principle, but otoh it makes a lot of sense to train with the same stuff you use for real. That being said, recently non-flourinated firefighting foams have been developed (based on some sugars IIRC), so there's hope these will be able to replace the old stuff.
lorenzhs 7y ago
The same problem exists with PFC foam used at military and civilian airports in Germany (and probably around the world): https://www.tagesschau.de/investigativ/report-muenchen/bundeswehr-pfc-101.html https://www.tagesschau.de/investigativ/report-muenchen/bunde... (in German)
- hammock 7y ago
  It's a worldwide problem. I would safely guess just about every airfield in America is dealing with this issue, even if there hasn't been a specific article written about it yet.
  - jb775 7y ago
    There have been many articles written about it, google "PFAS contamination". I moved into a new house last year near 2 closed down USAF military bases (known to have been previously contaminated by firefighter foam) and did a ton of research on the issue since the house water comes from a well (free water!). I ended up getting a professional water filtration system installed in our basement (carbon tanks, UV light filter, reverse osmosis). Cost me $5k+ for install and ~$1500 year to swap out the tanks and service the system. It's pricey but you can't put a price on clean water.
    - Scoundreller 7y ago
      There’s gotta be a cheaper ongoing way to do this. For the carbon, should be possible to buy it by the barrel. Germicidal UV lights should be cheap (they’re mainly uncoated fluorescent lamps) and dunno about the RO membranes...
  - dwd 7y ago
    There was a cancer cluster at the CFA Fiskville training facility in Victoria, AUS. My uncle was station chief there for many years and recently died of complications after surgery to remove tumors. He was suffering back pain for a while and was diagnosed with spinal cancer. No one in the family was aware there was a cluster reported.
- 7y ago
jen_h 7y ago
Filter your water if you live anywhere near an airport or military base anywhere, it's not just California. In Satellite Beach, Florida, the contamination from Patrick AFB was discovered after a group of Satellite Beach High alumni realized they all developed cancer around the same time and decided to start digging. [https://pfasproject.com/2018/08/08/satellite-beach-florida-finds-cancer-causing-chemicals-in-groundwater/ https://pfasproject.com/2018/08/08/satellite-beach-florida-f...] They dumped everything in a trench...not realizing there was an underground waterflow there. :/
- hanniabu 7y ago
  > not realizing there was an underground waterflow there I'm amazed whenever I see this. (A) what makes it okay to just dump stuff in a ditch? (B) are these people really clueless that no leaching through soil occurs?
  - heavyset_go 7y ago
    > what makes it okay to just dump stuff in a ditch? Lack of accountability. They did a calculation, and decided the risk of lawsuits several decades down the line is worth not paying to properly dispose their waste today.
    - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
      There's a big difference between accountability and having to base your actions around what makes you the least sue-able and I think we can all agree that the latter has some serious side effects.
  - jen_h 7y ago
    See also: "burn pits."
  - MisterTea 7y ago
    The various secret government programs did whatever it took to protect our precious bodily fluids from foreign contamination. Visible hazardous waste disposal is a great indicator that something interesting going on. So you hide it in a hole and pretend it's for the greater good of whatever dogma you sold your soul to. Lord knows how much hazardous waste has been carelessly buried under orders from dogmatic maniacs obsessed with "winning" at all cost, including our future.
hanniabu 7y ago
Sad that we live by the contaminate now and see what happens later montra
fake_satire 7y ago
Cant we just make an anti-firefighting foam pill? That should work, right?? :|
inlined 7y ago
I’m grateful to those who have fought and sacrificed for our rights. I think somewhere up the chain things get wonky. With our astronomical military budgets it should be easy to earmark two things: veterans’ benefits and ecological cleanup
isthispermanent 7y ago
This kind of reminds of when we dump tons of salt on the roads when winter storms come around the east coast. It solves one problem but what other problems is it causing? It would be incredibly naive to think dumping all these chemicals on the ground wouldn't cause some type of negative externality.
- eloff 7y ago
  It rusts cars for one. It could make the soil too salty for growing if runoff accumulates in one place, but usually it will be diluted too much to matter. I don't know if chemicals other than salt are used commonly on roads, that could cause other issues.
  - analog31 7y ago
    Calcium chloride is also used -- it is more effective per pound and is thus cheaper to transport, plus it works at lower temperatures. And it rusts cars even more aggressively.
  - sgc 7y ago
    Zeolites are one of the widely used alternatives developed specifically to replace salt use. They are an oil derivative, so I am not hopeful of their long term effects. They are also very expensive comparatively.
    - hammock 7y ago
      Zeolites? Oil derivative?
    - philipkglass 7y ago
      Zeolites are used as catalysts in processing oil, but they're not oil derivatives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeolite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeolite
      - sgc 7y ago
        Yes, I was wrong due to lack of research. I knew someone who had worked a lot on them at Chevron when i was a kid and just presumed.
philips 7y ago
Can someone recommend a consumer water testing kit that covers things like this?
- Scoundreller 7y ago
  The problem with tests is that they look for what you know to look for at one point in time. If you’re going to go down that road, better to just get carbon filter and R/O filtering setup.
- LeifCarrotson 7y ago
  No, you can't test for PFAS with consumer kit, it's dangerous at 70 parts-per-trillion levels and is tricky to handle without contamination. The test itself is expensive, too. I'm in the part of Rockford, Michigan contaminated by Wolverine/Hush Puppies/Caterpillar shoe leather tannery scraps, and they've paid Rose & Westra GZA to send techs to my house every 6 months. A friend just outside the supposedly affected area paid $300 to have a test performed, which came back with <5ppt (to my house's 35-45ppt). And that's just one possible issue. You can't feasibly test for every possible exotic contaminant. In my case, however, a pair of 48"x10" granular activated carbon filters (with auxiliary sediment filters, water softener, and UV light) have proven completely effective at removing PFAS from my water.
  - skeptical900067 7y ago
    Those sound like big filters. Where are they installed, and how often do you replace? Or is that just pitcher volume?
    - hadlock 7y ago
      Typically the filter is a tube with connectors on end. Most soda fountain machines have a pair of inline 36" x 6" filter for activated charcoal and water softeners mounted on the wall somewhere.
    - LeifCarrotson 7y ago
      They're in my unfinished basement. Culligan (on Wolverine's dime) handles the service, had one replacement in almost 2 years. They just disconnect,install refurbished units, and bring my old ones back to contain the chemical waste and repack with fresh carbon.
rhacker 7y ago
I feel like everyone thinks Flint and Erin Brockovich were the only two water incidents in the country. If you look for water pollution news - you'll find that places near garbage dumps are coming up highly toxic, all over the country. Everyone seems to think the administration has it under control. They don't. There is benzene, hexavalent chromium and thousands of pollutants found in our water all over the country. There are literally millions of properties on well water in the country that are not checked but once every 20 years (if that). The only fix is rain catchment, before it goes into the ground. Soil remediation and stopping people from contaminating!!!! In all political parties groundwater and soil contamination is going to come to a head soon.
- adolph 7y ago
  The risk of getting sick from rainwater may be different depending on your location, how frequently it rains, the season, and how you collect and store the rainwater. Dust, smoke, and soot from the air can be dissolved in rainwater before it lands on your roof. Roofing materials, gutters, piping, and storage materials can introduce harmful chemicals like asbestos, lead, and copper to the water, though building standards minimize some of this. Dirt and germs can be washed into collected rainwater from the roof, especially when rain follows several days of dry weather. https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/rainwater-collection.html https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/rainwater-...
- chuck8088 7y ago
  I would also like to add Willow Grove Airforce Base to this list. There is a cancer ring around Horsham thanks to this foam.
- ramphastidae 7y ago
  Agreed. There are nearly 4,000 sites in the U.S. with double the lead levels of Flint: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-lead-map/reuters-finds-3810-u-s-areas-with-lead-poisoning-double-flints-idUSKBN1DE1H2 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-lead-map/reuters-find...
- gurumeditations 7y ago
  Our future has really been stolen from us. Decades of pollution from greed and decadence and excess, as Thunberg says “fantasies of eternal economic growth”, have totally destroyed our future (speaking as a young person). Climate change robs us of a stable world, robots rob us of our livelihoods, and decades of ‘economic growth’ have poisoned our bodies and minds from birth through polluted water, air, and food. Everything is an ecosystem. You can’t have wild growth without paying for it, and the people of the past 75 years have stolen our bright futures from us and stuck us with the bill. Your comment reminded me of just how fucked up everything is. I think the 21st century will be consumed by the efforts to clean up the giant mess the 20th century left us. Goodbye economic growth. They stripmined the timeline and left us nothing.
ubertoop 7y ago
I grew up approximately 2.5 miles from a major rocket manufacturer. We're talking R&D and manufacturing of jet propulsion and rocket systems since the 80s. They totally polluted the water tables in the area with by-products of rocket fuel and other industrial chemicals used to clean engines. They were fined in the 90s and supposedly worked with local water authorities to setup a filtration system... but decades later, they're still finding the pollutants are actually SPREADING to adjacent water tables in communities miles from the original location. Even worse... many women from the community I grew up in have developed strange autoimmune disorders in their 40s and 50s. Like, a truly abnormal number of them. Many of these women are upper middle class, health conscious, non-smokers, including many athletes. Among those disorders, one of the common ones is issues with their thyroid. Turns out that one of the major byproducts of rocket combustion - if consumed - is known to fuck up your thyroid. Am I saying that I know for sure that the pollution of the water tables caused all these women to develop these strange disorders? I can't say for sure. I respect the scientific process and I certainly don't want to jump to any unfair or drastic conclusions, but it seems likely. As recently as 2011 the area was again hit with a $60 million fine for cleanup. A slap on the wrists for the level of ecological damage they've caused. The water basin in this area is permanently damaged, and seems (even after decades or rain fail) to still be seeping into surrounding areas. EDIT: For those wanting more specifics... Aerojet / Rocketdyne is the company. Rancho Cordova is the city. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerojet#EPA_Superfund_sites https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerojet#EPA_Superfund_sites
- CarVac 7y ago
  They did all kinds of crazy stuff in the name of rocket science. Nothing like HF as an exhaust gas... Or injecting liquid mercury into an already carcinogenic nitrogen tetroxide/hydrazine-burning chamber to boost the thrust...
  - AndrewStephens 7y ago
    For anyone interested in knowing more about the bonkers rocket research that went on in the 60s and 70s, I recommend the book Ignition! by John D Clark. Publisher's Site: https://www.rutgersuniversitypress.org/ignition/9780813595832 https://www.rutgersuniversitypress.org/ignition/978081359583... My Review: https://sheep.horse/2019/3/book-_ignition%21_by_john_d_clark.html https://sheep.horse/2019/3/book-_ignition%21_by_john_d_clark...
jayess 7y ago
This is a big deal here in Michigan as well, due to various other industries using PFAS-laden chemicals in industrial settings. Around here it's mostly tanneries that used these chemicals and then wantonly dumped them in municipal dumps or the companies bought land and just dumped the chemicals there. Entire communities are now being discovered to be polluted.
jcrawfordor 7y ago
Contamination concerns surrounding Air Force and other military sites span far beyond PFAS as well. Disused military sites fall under the purview of the Defense Environmental Recovery Program/Formerly Used Defense Sites (DERP FUDS, what an acronym) administered by the Corps of Engineers, which has a long list of sites (hundreds per state generally) and is not very transparent about the disposition of these sites, with the records usually being shipped to the district ACE headquarters from which they can be difficult to retrieve. The sheer number of sites is also a challenge to effective public oversight. Active sites generally fall under the purview of an environmental permitting program, so there are dual problems that the level of rigor to which the operation is held varies by the permitting authority (state environment department or EPA depending) and that the military branches in general and it seems Air Force in particular have drug their feet and, in general, gotten away with the least effort possible to satisfy their permit obligations (which are virtually always negotiable with the permitting authority, a negotiating process in which the Air Force holds a large portion of the power). Other common groundwater contamination concerns around Air Force installations include jet fuel (often leaked from underground tanks and piping and may have gone undetected for decades) and residues of high explosives resulting from munitions testing and disposal. Smaller groundwater plumes may result from photographic processing chemicals and solvents used in cleaning aircraft parts. Generally all of these will be grouped into one or more "operable units" or OUs for administrative purposes and a series of reports issued as the contamination is characterized and a remediation program is designed and implemented. Depending on the regulating agency, these reports may be more or less difficult to find. For DERP FUDS it usually requires a FOIA to the correct USACE HQ wih a lot of followup as they frankly don't seem to have their records in order internally and take a while to find them - the FOIA officers are generally helpful but will keep coming back to you needing more info/clarification as they try to track down the right OU and reports. Fortunately I have never had them ask for a fee, even when their "secure file transfer" solution was broken for months and they had to mail me burned CDs. Permitting processes and the DERP program both require public information meetings and a (modest) public outreach program. If you live near a military site, pay attention to notices in the newspapers and posted around the community for these meetings, and contact the public information office of the relevant military branch to inquire. The public meetings often include a surprising amount of technical detail on the concern and remediation plans, and because they are also attended by permitting officials represent an opportunity to put some city council meeting-style public pressure on the process.
xioxox 7y ago
It reminds me of the flame-retardant chemicals used widely in furniture in the UK: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49000966 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49000966
ralphosphorous 7y ago
NE Michigan is suffering from the pollution of PFAS as well. Been aware of it for about 9 years now but really only in the past year, maybe two, has the cleanup and awareness gained traction. It's still used in firefighting foam and any area near an Air Force or Army base likely has high risk of exposure to it.
aledalgrande 7y ago
How can people in the US live with this level of poison in the water? I would think that the government would pick up on it and get it fixed. It is an essential element for life. Even before we start talking to damage to the environment.
- trockbort 7y ago
  The US government is the biggest polluter of them all. The US government does not care about human health or environmental preservation. Yet Americans in general cling to some deep belief that their government cares for them, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
  - StreamBright 7y ago
    This is the argument that I use against more taxation. If you pay more taxes it will be spent by these guys who as many example shows will commit enormous crimes against humanity without real consequences.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - asdf21 7y ago
      Exactly. It's mind boggling to constantly hear, "The Government does so many bad things! We need to give them more money so they'll stop!" Huh?? Case in point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gI-RbqHEKQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gI-RbqHEKQ
  - aledalgrande 7y ago
    Is that why most people are inactive in showing their opinion to the government? There have been nice developments in the last years, but there probably should be more initiatives.
ChuckMcM 7y ago
The EPA fact sheet on PFAS : https://www.epa.gov/pfas/basic-information-pfas https://www.epa.gov/pfas/basic-information-pfas Can be filtered out of your drinking water with a reverse osmosis filter. If you live in the Bay Area its a useful thing to have, and if you're concerned about your tap water you can send a sample here: https://torrentlab.com/drinking-and-storm-water-quality-test-kit/ https://torrentlab.com/drinking-and-storm-water-quality-test...
JoblessWonder 7y ago
Well, I wasn't expecting to see the airport I'm sitting at in the news today... Slightly related, but there is a big issue with new aircraft hangar fire suppression systems because of the regulation of foam now. Regulators don't want anyone to use foam but there isn't a better solution out there yet.
Apocryphon 7y ago
So does this mean San Franciscans should avoid drinking tap water?
- annamargot 7y ago
  I don’t see why anyone anywhere would risk drinking tap water when filtration systems are relatively cheap. Get an RO system and a water bottle.
- mntmoss 7y ago
  City of San Francisco is one of the exceptional ones since it secured the best water from Hetch-Hetchy many generations ago, and the worst that is likely to ever happen is bad pipes, and possibly contaminants in the specific areas that saw military use(i.e. Hunter's Point, Treasure Island, Presidio). Other towns in the Bay Area have something bigger to worry about, OTOH, even tech workers at the major SV campuses. The South Bay is dotted with industrial Superfund sites and there are a lot of unknowns about when and where they'll leak out.
  - sjg007 7y ago
    You basically need to keep your windows open in SV. That and live up in the hills.
- sjg007 7y ago
  SF water comes from Hetch Hetchy so it's probably ok. I would worry about lead maybe..
jug 7y ago
This happened here in Sweden too. Same chemical, same problem. A huge scandal especially among concerned parents where children had grown up with it. In our case it happened due to its use on a nearby Air Force base.
neonate 7y ago
http://archive.is/HXsuL http://archive.is/HXsuL
semerda 7y ago
EPA Superfund sites --- ok I did not know about this until this thread... omg! I just recently found out the Shoreline Park in Mountain View used to be a landfill for most of bay area and SF. Today it is open to enjoy like it's some natural bird sanctuary.. yet there are pipes underground extracting methane 24x7 and I think I found a methane release valve last weekend right next to a jogging path... Can anyone confirm plz? => https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq3CnXU5OtU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq3CnXU5OtU
- DrScump 7y ago
  Methane outgassing is a known issue within the Shoreline Amphitheatre itself! It's built on a former dump. During the earliest events there in the 1980s, concertgoers seated on the lawn set it afire when trying to smoke! (And, yes, it's misnamed. It's a theatre, not an amphitheatre.) There are EPA Superfund sites all over the valley. One of the worst was across the street from the Ice Center and Spartan Stadium.

> The Air Force delivered free five-gallon jugs of water to the Mendez home for more than two years. In 2018, it paid to have the house connected to the municipal water system. Ruben Mendez said he now pays $100 a month for water he used to get for free. Sorry, what? 100$ a month for residential water? Either this guy is running a farm operation or something is seriously broken.

honopu 7y ago
I live in Sarasota Florida, my water and sewer bill is 100.
- brixon 7y ago
  Sewer is usually twice the price of water, so 33 water and 66 sewer.
hanniabu 7y ago
He might be up in the mountains
not_a_cop75 7y ago
In your bigger cities 100 dollars a month is about average or even low for a family. Unless he has almost no use I don't see the issue.
rixrax 7y ago
As incredible as it is, $100 appears to be below average monthly cost nowadays for a 4 person family[0] using 150 gallons / person / day [based on a random study that quick search found]. I am not sure who would use 150 gallons a day though. Even 50 gallons (~189 liters) seems a lot to me. If you factor in irrigation system, etc. then maybe you would get to these gallon volumes. [0] https://www.circleofblue.org/2018/water-management/pricing/price-of-water-2018/ https://www.circleofblue.org/2018/water-management/pricing/p...
- ghaff 7y ago
  My town has a floor that's about 100 gallons per day that I'm always under. My bill, with no sewer, is more than $20/month. $100/month for water seems high in that, anecdotally, electrical and oil bills are a much bigger deal for most people than water. OTOH, $100/month doesn't seem out of the realm of reasonableness either.
  - kodt 7y ago
    Meanwhile I pay $630 every six months for water no matter how much or little I use. So $100 a month seems right on to me.
    - ghaff 7y ago
      I confess to being a bit surprised but, based on the comments, it certainly seems as if $100/month is within the normal range for water bills, even for light use.
- JoeAltmaier 7y ago
  I pay nothing (monthly). But I am rural, and have my own well and septic system. Which cost, if I remember right, $5000 decades ago when built. Which amortizes to maybe $20/month.
  - ping_pong 7y ago
    Do you test your water for impurities and chemicals?
    - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
      Sure. But the water is from 111' down, and got there 10,000 years ago. So probably not an issue.
- TylerE 7y ago
  The big consumers are stuff like toilets (~2 gallons/flush), showers (2-3 gallons/minute), and lawn care. So you have 3 people who take a 10 minute shower, and flush the toilet 4 times each, that's 112 gallons/day right there.
bubbalovesapps 7y ago
$25 a month for water in KY
bluGill 7y ago
Putting pipes in the ground is not cheap, and it needs to be paid for. There are also pumps, treatment, and maintenance that needs to be paid for. When you have a dense city that isn't a big deal because your share of the above isn't very expensive. However when you have a sparse rural area your share goes up. In a city public water systems are cheaper than drilling a well, but in rural areas a private well is cheaper - but if the ground water isn't safe to drink the treatment can be out of reach.
dsfyu404ed 7y ago
Nobody running a farm is wasting expensive municipal water on irrigation when they have a perfectly functional well on the property. I'm not sure it's even possible to run an economically solvent farming operation off municipal water in the US for any crop other than maybe indoor weed.
- bluGill 7y ago
  Many farms in the US run off a municipal water supply. Only in the west do farms have irrigation systems. When you get east of the Missouri river there is enough rainfall to water the crops and so you don't have any irrigation needs (I don't know why the climate changes so drastically on this line but it does). Even if you have a well, if you are east of the river it is only for household and livestock use, not irrigation.
  - opencl 7y ago
    I live in the midwest and irrigation is definitely used around here. Not for all crops but there has been a huge increase in the usage of irrigation over the past decade. There's usually enough rain but irrigation still helps make yields a lot more consistent.
situational87 7y ago
You likely pay more than $100/month for water, but if your bill is only $20/month or whatever it's just because your local government is subsidizing the cost in one way or another. Socialism in action.
- ceejayoz 7y ago
  It's gonna depend enormously on where you're located. Here in Rochester, NY we just tap Lake Ontario and a few of the Finger Lakes. Minimal treatment required, plenty of it, etc. My bill's about $60 every three months. If you live in Phoenix, AZ, water's a little more scarce.
- ghaff 7y ago
  Especially in smaller municipalities there isn't a lot of money slopping around to subsidize just about anything. The vast bulk of the moneys my town brings in are from property taxes and the vast bulk of that goes out to the school systems. So things like town water need to pretty much pay their own way.
stronglikedan 7y ago
My actual water/gas usage fee is just a few dollars a month, but there's a "base station fee", for what I presume to be infrastructure, that pushes my bill to just over $100 per month.
jeanvaljean2463 7y ago
https://kfor.com/2019/09/03/im-just-frustrated-edmond-residents-angered-by-skyrocketing-water-bills/ https://kfor.com/2019/09/03/im-just-frustrated-edmond-reside... Where I live people's bills are going from $100 to over $600 a month. I saw someone's post on Nextdoor saying that their bill was $2700. Ours was $963 up from about $270 with no change in usage. I would be thrilled to pay $100 a month for water.
- mikestew 7y ago
  The person in the article said he was watering his lawn for $40/month previously. The fact that it jumped to $250 while maintaining his watering habits does not garner much sympathy from me. Were it $250 so that he might hydrate his children and maintain a reasonable standard of living, well that's another thing. But just so your grass doesn't go dormant? Here, water your grass with my tears. In summary, I think some poor examples were chosen.
  - asdf21 7y ago
    People's overall quality of life matters, and it's nice to have a lawn... Also, you realize plant life is an important carbon sink, right? Is watering backyard trees worthy of your spite as well? >Here, water your grass with my tears. Perhaps you're on the wrong site, with this sort of attitude.
rayiner 7y ago
Municipalities kept water and sewer rates too low for decades, and now we need to spend $1 trillion over the next 25 years to upgrade systems and catch up with deferred maintenance: https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/drinking_water/ https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/drinking_w...
zippergz 7y ago
LOOOL I wish my residential water bill (for a normal sized house and very small yard) wasn't $100+, but it has been for MANY years.

hanniabu 7y ago

I was always told that this foam wasn't toxic

tomatotomato37 7y ago
The problem seems to be that just because it isn't acutely toxic non-chemist military personal treated it like it wasn't also chronically toxic.
opwieurposiu 7y ago
Well if the choice is between getting sprayed with burning jet fuel or sprayed with fluorinated foam I will take the foam every time. Maybe we should save the good stuff like halon and PFAS foam for emergencies and use something more eco for training.
- jabl 7y ago
  In principle, but otoh it makes a lot of sense to train with the same stuff you use for real. That being said, recently non-flourinated firefighting foams have been developed (based on some sugars IIRC), so there's hope these will be able to replace the old stuff.

lorenzhs 7y ago

The same problem exists with PFC foam used at military and civilian airports in Germany (and probably around the world): https://www.tagesschau.de/investigativ/report-muenchen/bundeswehr-pfc-101.html https://www.tagesschau.de/investigativ/report-muenchen/bunde... (in German)

hammock 7y ago
It's a worldwide problem. I would safely guess just about every airfield in America is dealing with this issue, even if there hasn't been a specific article written about it yet.
- jb775 7y ago
  There have been many articles written about it, google "PFAS contamination". I moved into a new house last year near 2 closed down USAF military bases (known to have been previously contaminated by firefighter foam) and did a ton of research on the issue since the house water comes from a well (free water!). I ended up getting a professional water filtration system installed in our basement (carbon tanks, UV light filter, reverse osmosis). Cost me $5k+ for install and ~$1500 year to swap out the tanks and service the system. It's pricey but you can't put a price on clean water.
  - Scoundreller 7y ago
    There’s gotta be a cheaper ongoing way to do this. For the carbon, should be possible to buy it by the barrel. Germicidal UV lights should be cheap (they’re mainly uncoated fluorescent lamps) and dunno about the RO membranes...
- dwd 7y ago
  There was a cancer cluster at the CFA Fiskville training facility in Victoria, AUS. My uncle was station chief there for many years and recently died of complications after surgery to remove tumors. He was suffering back pain for a while and was diagnosed with spinal cancer. No one in the family was aware there was a cluster reported.
7y ago

jen_h 7y ago

Filter your water if you live anywhere near an airport or military base anywhere, it's not just California. In Satellite Beach, Florida, the contamination from Patrick AFB was discovered after a group of Satellite Beach High alumni realized they all developed cancer around the same time and decided to start digging. [https://pfasproject.com/2018/08/08/satellite-beach-florida-finds-cancer-causing-chemicals-in-groundwater/ https://pfasproject.com/2018/08/08/satellite-beach-florida-f...] They dumped everything in a trench...not realizing there was an underground waterflow there. :/

hanniabu 7y ago
> not realizing there was an underground waterflow there I'm amazed whenever I see this. (A) what makes it okay to just dump stuff in a ditch? (B) are these people really clueless that no leaching through soil occurs?
- heavyset_go 7y ago
  > what makes it okay to just dump stuff in a ditch? Lack of accountability. They did a calculation, and decided the risk of lawsuits several decades down the line is worth not paying to properly dispose their waste today.
  - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
    There's a big difference between accountability and having to base your actions around what makes you the least sue-able and I think we can all agree that the latter has some serious side effects.
- jen_h 7y ago
  See also: "burn pits."
- MisterTea 7y ago
  The various secret government programs did whatever it took to protect our precious bodily fluids from foreign contamination. Visible hazardous waste disposal is a great indicator that something interesting going on. So you hide it in a hole and pretend it's for the greater good of whatever dogma you sold your soul to. Lord knows how much hazardous waste has been carelessly buried under orders from dogmatic maniacs obsessed with "winning" at all cost, including our future.

hanniabu 7y ago

Sad that we live by the contaminate now and see what happens later montra

fake_satire 7y ago

Cant we just make an anti-firefighting foam pill? That should work, right?? :|

inlined 7y ago

I’m grateful to those who have fought and sacrificed for our rights. I think somewhere up the chain things get wonky. With our astronomical military budgets it should be easy to earmark two things: veterans’ benefits and ecological cleanup

isthispermanent 7y ago

This kind of reminds of when we dump tons of salt on the roads when winter storms come around the east coast. It solves one problem but what other problems is it causing? It would be incredibly naive to think dumping all these chemicals on the ground wouldn't cause some type of negative externality.

eloff 7y ago
It rusts cars for one. It could make the soil too salty for growing if runoff accumulates in one place, but usually it will be diluted too much to matter. I don't know if chemicals other than salt are used commonly on roads, that could cause other issues.
- analog31 7y ago
  Calcium chloride is also used -- it is more effective per pound and is thus cheaper to transport, plus it works at lower temperatures. And it rusts cars even more aggressively.
- sgc 7y ago
  Zeolites are one of the widely used alternatives developed specifically to replace salt use. They are an oil derivative, so I am not hopeful of their long term effects. They are also very expensive comparatively.
  - hammock 7y ago
    Zeolites? Oil derivative?
  - philipkglass 7y ago
    Zeolites are used as catalysts in processing oil, but they're not oil derivatives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeolite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeolite
    - sgc 7y ago
      Yes, I was wrong due to lack of research. I knew someone who had worked a lot on them at Chevron when i was a kid and just presumed.

philips 7y ago

Can someone recommend a consumer water testing kit that covers things like this?

Scoundreller 7y ago
The problem with tests is that they look for what you know to look for at one point in time. If you’re going to go down that road, better to just get carbon filter and R/O filtering setup.
LeifCarrotson 7y ago
No, you can't test for PFAS with consumer kit, it's dangerous at 70 parts-per-trillion levels and is tricky to handle without contamination. The test itself is expensive, too. I'm in the part of Rockford, Michigan contaminated by Wolverine/Hush Puppies/Caterpillar shoe leather tannery scraps, and they've paid Rose & Westra GZA to send techs to my house every 6 months. A friend just outside the supposedly affected area paid $300 to have a test performed, which came back with <5ppt (to my house's 35-45ppt). And that's just one possible issue. You can't feasibly test for every possible exotic contaminant. In my case, however, a pair of 48"x10" granular activated carbon filters (with auxiliary sediment filters, water softener, and UV light) have proven completely effective at removing PFAS from my water.
- skeptical900067 7y ago
  Those sound like big filters. Where are they installed, and how often do you replace? Or is that just pitcher volume?
  - hadlock 7y ago
    Typically the filter is a tube with connectors on end. Most soda fountain machines have a pair of inline 36" x 6" filter for activated charcoal and water softeners mounted on the wall somewhere.
  - LeifCarrotson 7y ago
    They're in my unfinished basement. Culligan (on Wolverine's dime) handles the service, had one replacement in almost 2 years. They just disconnect,install refurbished units, and bring my old ones back to contain the chemical waste and repack with fresh carbon.

rhacker 7y ago

I feel like everyone thinks Flint and Erin Brockovich were the only two water incidents in the country. If you look for water pollution news - you'll find that places near garbage dumps are coming up highly toxic, all over the country. Everyone seems to think the administration has it under control. They don't. There is benzene, hexavalent chromium and thousands of pollutants found in our water all over the country. There are literally millions of properties on well water in the country that are not checked but once every 20 years (if that). The only fix is rain catchment, before it goes into the ground. Soil remediation and stopping people from contaminating!!!! In all political parties groundwater and soil contamination is going to come to a head soon.

adolph 7y ago
The risk of getting sick from rainwater may be different depending on your location, how frequently it rains, the season, and how you collect and store the rainwater. Dust, smoke, and soot from the air can be dissolved in rainwater before it lands on your roof. Roofing materials, gutters, piping, and storage materials can introduce harmful chemicals like asbestos, lead, and copper to the water, though building standards minimize some of this. Dirt and germs can be washed into collected rainwater from the roof, especially when rain follows several days of dry weather. https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/rainwater-collection.html https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/rainwater-...
chuck8088 7y ago
I would also like to add Willow Grove Airforce Base to this list. There is a cancer ring around Horsham thanks to this foam.
ramphastidae 7y ago
Agreed. There are nearly 4,000 sites in the U.S. with double the lead levels of Flint: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-lead-map/reuters-finds-3810-u-s-areas-with-lead-poisoning-double-flints-idUSKBN1DE1H2 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-lead-map/reuters-find...
gurumeditations 7y ago
Our future has really been stolen from us. Decades of pollution from greed and decadence and excess, as Thunberg says “fantasies of eternal economic growth”, have totally destroyed our future (speaking as a young person). Climate change robs us of a stable world, robots rob us of our livelihoods, and decades of ‘economic growth’ have poisoned our bodies and minds from birth through polluted water, air, and food. Everything is an ecosystem. You can’t have wild growth without paying for it, and the people of the past 75 years have stolen our bright futures from us and stuck us with the bill. Your comment reminded me of just how fucked up everything is. I think the 21st century will be consumed by the efforts to clean up the giant mess the 20th century left us. Goodbye economic growth. They stripmined the timeline and left us nothing.

ubertoop 7y ago

I grew up approximately 2.5 miles from a major rocket manufacturer. We're talking R&D and manufacturing of jet propulsion and rocket systems since the 80s. They totally polluted the water tables in the area with by-products of rocket fuel and other industrial chemicals used to clean engines. They were fined in the 90s and supposedly worked with local water authorities to setup a filtration system... but decades later, they're still finding the pollutants are actually SPREADING to adjacent water tables in communities miles from the original location. Even worse... many women from the community I grew up in have developed strange autoimmune disorders in their 40s and 50s. Like, a truly abnormal number of them. Many of these women are upper middle class, health conscious, non-smokers, including many athletes. Among those disorders, one of the common ones is issues with their thyroid. Turns out that one of the major byproducts of rocket combustion - if consumed - is known to fuck up your thyroid. Am I saying that I know for sure that the pollution of the water tables caused all these women to develop these strange disorders? I can't say for sure. I respect the scientific process and I certainly don't want to jump to any unfair or drastic conclusions, but it seems likely. As recently as 2011 the area was again hit with a $60 million fine for cleanup. A slap on the wrists for the level of ecological damage they've caused. The water basin in this area is permanently damaged, and seems (even after decades or rain fail) to still be seeping into surrounding areas. EDIT: For those wanting more specifics... Aerojet / Rocketdyne is the company. Rancho Cordova is the city. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerojet#EPA_Superfund_sites https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerojet#EPA_Superfund_sites

CarVac 7y ago
They did all kinds of crazy stuff in the name of rocket science. Nothing like HF as an exhaust gas... Or injecting liquid mercury into an already carcinogenic nitrogen tetroxide/hydrazine-burning chamber to boost the thrust...
- AndrewStephens 7y ago
  For anyone interested in knowing more about the bonkers rocket research that went on in the 60s and 70s, I recommend the book Ignition! by John D Clark. Publisher's Site: https://www.rutgersuniversitypress.org/ignition/9780813595832 https://www.rutgersuniversitypress.org/ignition/978081359583... My Review: https://sheep.horse/2019/3/book-_ignition%21_by_john_d_clark.html https://sheep.horse/2019/3/book-_ignition%21_by_john_d_clark...

jayess 7y ago

This is a big deal here in Michigan as well, due to various other industries using PFAS-laden chemicals in industrial settings. Around here it's mostly tanneries that used these chemicals and then wantonly dumped them in municipal dumps or the companies bought land and just dumped the chemicals there. Entire communities are now being discovered to be polluted.

jcrawfordor 7y ago

Contamination concerns surrounding Air Force and other military sites span far beyond PFAS as well. Disused military sites fall under the purview of the Defense Environmental Recovery Program/Formerly Used Defense Sites (DERP FUDS, what an acronym) administered by the Corps of Engineers, which has a long list of sites (hundreds per state generally) and is not very transparent about the disposition of these sites, with the records usually being shipped to the district ACE headquarters from which they can be difficult to retrieve. The sheer number of sites is also a challenge to effective public oversight. Active sites generally fall under the purview of an environmental permitting program, so there are dual problems that the level of rigor to which the operation is held varies by the permitting authority (state environment department or EPA depending) and that the military branches in general and it seems Air Force in particular have drug their feet and, in general, gotten away with the least effort possible to satisfy their permit obligations (which are virtually always negotiable with the permitting authority, a negotiating process in which the Air Force holds a large portion of the power). Other common groundwater contamination concerns around Air Force installations include jet fuel (often leaked from underground tanks and piping and may have gone undetected for decades) and residues of high explosives resulting from munitions testing and disposal. Smaller groundwater plumes may result from photographic processing chemicals and solvents used in cleaning aircraft parts. Generally all of these will be grouped into one or more "operable units" or OUs for administrative purposes and a series of reports issued as the contamination is characterized and a remediation program is designed and implemented. Depending on the regulating agency, these reports may be more or less difficult to find. For DERP FUDS it usually requires a FOIA to the correct USACE HQ wih a lot of followup as they frankly don't seem to have their records in order internally and take a while to find them - the FOIA officers are generally helpful but will keep coming back to you needing more info/clarification as they try to track down the right OU and reports. Fortunately I have never had them ask for a fee, even when their "secure file transfer" solution was broken for months and they had to mail me burned CDs. Permitting processes and the DERP program both require public information meetings and a (modest) public outreach program. If you live near a military site, pay attention to notices in the newspapers and posted around the community for these meetings, and contact the public information office of the relevant military branch to inquire. The public meetings often include a surprising amount of technical detail on the concern and remediation plans, and because they are also attended by permitting officials represent an opportunity to put some city council meeting-style public pressure on the process.

xioxox 7y ago

It reminds me of the flame-retardant chemicals used widely in furniture in the UK: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49000966 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49000966

ralphosphorous 7y ago

NE Michigan is suffering from the pollution of PFAS as well. Been aware of it for about 9 years now but really only in the past year, maybe two, has the cleanup and awareness gained traction. It's still used in firefighting foam and any area near an Air Force or Army base likely has high risk of exposure to it.

aledalgrande 7y ago

How can people in the US live with this level of poison in the water? I would think that the government would pick up on it and get it fixed. It is an essential element for life. Even before we start talking to damage to the environment.

trockbort 7y ago
The US government is the biggest polluter of them all. The US government does not care about human health or environmental preservation. Yet Americans in general cling to some deep belief that their government cares for them, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
- StreamBright 7y ago
  This is the argument that I use against more taxation. If you pay more taxes it will be spent by these guys who as many example shows will commit enormous crimes against humanity without real consequences.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - asdf21 7y ago
    Exactly. It's mind boggling to constantly hear, "The Government does so many bad things! We need to give them more money so they'll stop!" Huh?? Case in point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gI-RbqHEKQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gI-RbqHEKQ
- aledalgrande 7y ago
  Is that why most people are inactive in showing their opinion to the government? There have been nice developments in the last years, but there probably should be more initiatives.

ChuckMcM 7y ago

The EPA fact sheet on PFAS : https://www.epa.gov/pfas/basic-information-pfas https://www.epa.gov/pfas/basic-information-pfas Can be filtered out of your drinking water with a reverse osmosis filter. If you live in the Bay Area its a useful thing to have, and if you're concerned about your tap water you can send a sample here: https://torrentlab.com/drinking-and-storm-water-quality-test-kit/ https://torrentlab.com/drinking-and-storm-water-quality-test...

JoblessWonder 7y ago

Well, I wasn't expecting to see the airport I'm sitting at in the news today... Slightly related, but there is a big issue with new aircraft hangar fire suppression systems because of the regulation of foam now. Regulators don't want anyone to use foam but there isn't a better solution out there yet.

Apocryphon 7y ago

So does this mean San Franciscans should avoid drinking tap water?

annamargot 7y ago
I don’t see why anyone anywhere would risk drinking tap water when filtration systems are relatively cheap. Get an RO system and a water bottle.
mntmoss 7y ago
City of San Francisco is one of the exceptional ones since it secured the best water from Hetch-Hetchy many generations ago, and the worst that is likely to ever happen is bad pipes, and possibly contaminants in the specific areas that saw military use(i.e. Hunter's Point, Treasure Island, Presidio). Other towns in the Bay Area have something bigger to worry about, OTOH, even tech workers at the major SV campuses. The South Bay is dotted with industrial Superfund sites and there are a lot of unknowns about when and where they'll leak out.
- sjg007 7y ago
  You basically need to keep your windows open in SV. That and live up in the hills.
sjg007 7y ago
SF water comes from Hetch Hetchy so it's probably ok. I would worry about lead maybe..

jug 7y ago

This happened here in Sweden too. Same chemical, same problem. A huge scandal especially among concerned parents where children had grown up with it. In our case it happened due to its use on a nearby Air Force base.

neonate 7y ago

http://archive.is/HXsuL http://archive.is/HXsuL

semerda 7y ago

EPA Superfund sites --- ok I did not know about this until this thread... omg! I just recently found out the Shoreline Park in Mountain View used to be a landfill for most of bay area and SF. Today it is open to enjoy like it's some natural bird sanctuary.. yet there are pipes underground extracting methane 24x7 and I think I found a methane release valve last weekend right next to a jogging path... Can anyone confirm plz? => https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq3CnXU5OtU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq3CnXU5OtU

DrScump 7y ago
Methane outgassing is a known issue within the Shoreline Amphitheatre itself! It's built on a former dump. During the earliest events there in the 1980s, concertgoers seated on the lawn set it afire when trying to smoke! (And, yes, it's misnamed. It's a theatre, not an amphitheatre.) There are EPA Superfund sites all over the valley. One of the worst was across the street from the Ice Center and Spartan Stadium.