Mike Thinks: What Is The National Price Tag For Everyone To Have 'Lead Free' Pipes For Clean Water?

Each of us has the right to have access to 'lead-free' water. Why would the government install pipes which leach high levels of lead into the water system? I am not saying that the government has intentionally installed pipes that would leach high levels of lead. With that being said, there are many miles of piping which span across the United States, carrying water to Americans each day. These pipes are delivering staggering levels of lead to Americans -- in some cases. A change is due. How much does that replacement cost to the average American?

Politico Agriculture recently sent out a brief discussing the price tag along with important issues surrounding policy:

EPA LOOKS TO CRACK DOWN ON LEAD IN WATER:

Administrator Andrew Wheeler unveiled a sweeping new drinking water rule in Wisconsin on Thursday. The proposal would tighten monitoring requirements for lead contamination in drinking water but extend the time that utilities have to replace corrosive lead service lines, Pro's Annie Snider reports . The EPA also rejected calls for wholesale replacement of the lead pipes across the country.

The rule is arguably the centerpiece of the Trump EPA's efforts to improve environmental protection — rather than roll back Obama-era regulations. The president campaigned on promises of "crystal clear water" and infrastructure investment, and Wheeler regularly mentions that the Obama administration never got an update to the lead rule across the finish line, despite having been at the wheel during the Flint, Mich., contamination crisis.

The details: The proposed rule wouldn't change the current "action level" of 15 parts per billion — the level at which drinking water utilities must replace lead service lines — even though the CDC has concluded there's no safe level of lead exposure. The proposal would add a new "trigger level" of 10 ppb that would require utilities to start planning how they would respond if lead levels rise to the action level.

The update is the first in nearly three decades, and it represents one of the most significant actions taken by the Trump EPA to proactively address environmental concerns. But while environmental and public health groups acknowledge the changes are an improvement, they say the benefits are outweighed by the slower rate at which the rule would require utilities to replace dangerously corrosive lines.

"Unless the lead lines come out of the ground, there's always a possibility for a similar crisis," said Dimple Chaudhary, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, in reference to Flint.

Wheeler argued on Thursday that complete replacement wasn't financially realistic, adding that his proposal would ensure "that those communities that have the worst lead in their pipes get those pipes replaced first."

How it works today: Currently, utilities are only required to replace water lines if they continually test above EPA's action level, and they have roughly 14 years to complete the replacement. Environmental advocates have pushed EPA to mandate that all lines be replaced, which would come with an estimated $1 trillion price tag.

If the government would like to create jobs in America, this project would qualify to employ many thousands of Americans for quite a long time. The project would make up some Americans careers. The time from for replacing the thousands of miles of piping is staggering. Although, the Trump Administration appears to be more robust than the Obama Administration of overall lead levels in pipes across cities in America.

What is the problem?

The time frame and cost. The time frame is unknown. The cost is 1 trillion dollars. Yes, $1,000,000,000,000.00 to replace all pipes across America. America spends an annual total of 3.5 trillion dollars on healthcare. What added costs for not acting to replace lead pipes will be added to the already growing cost of healthcare?

To kill multiple birds with one stone exists -- that is, grow jobs, shrink unemployment, reduce health problems, and ensure environmental regulations are increased rather than discarded -- the following change can be a fantastic opportunity for growth.

Related Blog Posts:

Business Leaders Are More Receptive To Climate Solutions!

Does Climate Change Really Impact National Security?

Mayor Garcetti Moves Los Angeles Away From Fossil Fuel Investment

Congress Intervenes And Asks For No More Oil Drilling Off Of Florida

President Trump Is Out Of Touch With The Transition Toward Renewable Energy

EPA Director Finally Realizes Reality Of Trying To Roll-Back Obama Era Clean Air Act Regulation

Environmental Groups Question Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Cuts

President Trump's Immigration Rhetoric Damages International Science Student Enrollment

What Promises Did President Trump Make Science Research During His Campaign?

Can The President Prevent The Public From Learning About Scientific Research???