Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefighting foam leaves toxic legacy in Californians’ drinking water

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 145 posts

Re: Firefighting foam leaves toxic legacy in Californians’ drinking water

#21

Post by ceejayoz »

situational87 wrote: post #17
mschuster91 wrote: post #2

> 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.

[flagged]

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.

Re: Firefighting foam leaves toxic legacy in Californians’ drinking water

#22

Post by ghaff »

situational87 wrote: post #17
mschuster91 wrote: post #2

> 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.

[flagged]

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.

Re: Firefighting foam leaves toxic legacy in Californians’ drinking water

#23

Post by JoeAltmaier »

rixrax wrote: post #7
mschuster91 wrote: post #2

> 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.

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/…

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.

Re: Firefighting foam leaves toxic legacy in Californians’ drinking water

#24

Post by xedeon »

lorenzhs wrote: post #9

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/bunde... (in German)

Same with U.S. Air Force bases using PFAS all over the country.

https://www.ewg.org/research/pfas-chemicals-contaminate-us-m...

Just to add some anecdotes. Two of my friends who lived in U.S. Air Force Bases where PFAS contamination was confirmed, had both of their firstborns suffer from congenital birth defects.

Which supports the study below published in 2014, though the issue was ONLY brought to light in 2018. Meaning the DoD waited 4 years.

Perfluorooctanoate Exposure and Major Birth Defects

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4117925/

Re: Firefighting foam leaves toxic legacy in Californians’ drinking water

#25

Post by jen_h »

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-f...]

They dumped everything in a trench...not realizing there was an underground waterflow there. :/

Re: Firefighting foam leaves toxic legacy in Californians’ drinking water

#26

Post by hanniabu »

jen_h wrote: post #25

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-f... ] They dumped everything in a trench…

> 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?

Re: Firefighting foam leaves toxic legacy in Californians’ drinking water

#28

Post by jb775 »

hammock wrote: post #18
lorenzhs wrote: post #9

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/bunde... (in German)

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.

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.

Re: Firefighting foam leaves toxic legacy in Californians’ drinking water

#29

Post by TylerE »

rixrax wrote: post #7
mschuster91 wrote: post #2

> 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.

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/…

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.

Re: Firefighting foam leaves toxic legacy in Californians’ drinking water

#30

Post by heavyset_go »

hanniabu wrote: post #26
jen_h wrote: post #25

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-f... ] They dumped everything in a trench…

> 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?

> 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.

Post reply on HN