Live data from Hacker News

U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

reuters.com

101–110 of 413 posts

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#101
post #72
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that not correct? I don't recommend you drink tap water anywhere in Africa, China and India. People over there would envy water quality in the US.

I'm afraid that when you have to compare the "#1 world super power" to Africa, China and India to make a point you already lost the argument

I would be surprised if any developed country had meaningfully better water quality than the US, since by the very nature of being developed, they engaged in the same sort of polluting industries and stopped around the same time.

I have limited interest in the subject but a casual search provides evidence for this:

https://www.umweltprobenbank.de/en/documents/selected_result...

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#102
post #27

So next time I go to the US I should bring a LifeStraw? This is an actual question: How much do these filters help against the type of contamination that's in US drinking water?

Why do you think the problem is limited to the US?

>The chemicals were used in products like Teflon and Scotchguard and in firefighting foam. Some are used in a variety of other products and industrial processes, and their replacements also pose risks.

All of these chemicals are in common use throughout the developed world. This isn't just a case of evil corporations dumping industrial waste into impoverished children's drinking water, though corporate environmental pollution does play a role. They come from everyday use and wear of common products, and they are incredibly expensive to filter even by centralized plants once they've made it into the water supply through e.g. dish washing, clothes washing, and street runoff. And the issue is that they accumulate over years or possibly decades.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#103

It is constantly amazing to me that "cover up the existence of poisonous chemicals in your drinking water" is a viable position for a democratically-elected officeholder to have. What a world we live in.

Sure, but what about The Economy?

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#104
I live in one of the industrial "hot zones" for these chemicals. In the 1960's a local tannery was the main employer in the area, and commanded a great deal of local clout. As a result, they obtained permits to dump industrial waste in various (30+) small dump sites around the area. This waste contained a variety of industrial chemicals, not the least of which was the 3M product Scotchgard, which was used in large quantity to waterproof leather, contains PFAS, and was buried feet from the surface, generally in nondescript forest areas.

A few years ago, when our local water authority began testing for PFAS, they found unusually high numbers specifically around one well-head used to supply municipal water to the area. Instead of disclosing the issue, the authority chose to use that well head only when the demand was high, which excluded times in which the water was tested. If they timed their testing to times of low demand, the numbers were under the EPA recommendation.

With significant grass-roots pressure in the area, many pending lawsuits, and lots of reporting and investigation, the municipality is taking the issue somewhat seriously. GAC filters were installed on the municipal supply, the company considered largely at fault has agreed to pay for the extension of municipal water to some (not all) affected areas that are still served by well water, in which the danger is particularly high. Some cleanups are occurring, while other sites exist under what are now housing developments.

There's story after story here, of people (especially those located in areas served by well water) with a history of cancer after cancer after cancer affecting their entire families. These are folks who after having their water tested, confirmed some of the highest levels ever measured in a water supply.

In all, the whole ordeal has been a wake up call for me, regarding the level of cover-up that happened and in some cases continues to happen surrounding waste disposal, especially for large companies that are considered the "economic life blood" of a given area. Looking over records, people have found strong objections to the practice dating back to the time it happened (some of the warnings eerily prescient) multiple cleanups that were funded but never occurred in the decades that followed, and a continual failure to acknowledge any risk surrounding the practice and dump sites for decades. There was a constant drum beat of "very smart people say that everything is fine."

As for me, my (municipal) water is GAC and RO filtered. I pay close attention to things I would not have considered before, like air quality. It's made me reconsider the source of the foods that I eat. It takes little work to take these precautions, the potential upside is pretty big, and the downside small.

I wonder if in the years to come, we're going to find significant causal links between aspects of our environment and maladies we previously considered a mystery.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#105
post #85
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democracy is mostly a facade anymore, unfortunately. Don't get me wrong, we haven't gone completely south to a dictatorship--there are many protections in place to keep things from falling apart but nonetheless I feel as though we're in the decline in the respect of being democratic. The underlying failed assumption in our representative democracy was that representatives would represent their constituents' interests…

>Democracy is mostly a facade in the US anyway. But I agree, the US government isn't functioning 1) as originally intended or 2) for the benefit of the majority of the people it 'represents.' Although it's worth noting that 'as the forefathers intended' carries more weight than it typically should. Their intentions were mostly based on philosophical guess work, as they didn't have a whole lot of empirical data or exi…

I am not so sure it is far from its intentions. The founders knew and expected most politicians operating as fronts for various groups and making bad faith arguments and backroom deals. That is nothing new! Most of what they did was try to prevent the government from being wholly brigaded by one minority perspective, and if so it would be moved along after a short time.

So far, so good, despite warning signs to the contrary. Spielberg's "Lincoln" is particularly clear about displaying this dynamic at the country's most fractured moment.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#106

This problem has been brewing for a long time, and is likely worse than any of us can grasp. Here's an enlightening read: (warning: it's long) https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/welcome-to-b...

Wow, great article.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#107
post #85
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democracy is mostly a facade anymore, unfortunately. Don't get me wrong, we haven't gone completely south to a dictatorship--there are many protections in place to keep things from falling apart but nonetheless I feel as though we're in the decline in the respect of being democratic. The underlying failed assumption in our representative democracy was that representatives would represent their constituents' interests…

>Democracy is mostly a facade in the US anyway. But I agree, the US government isn't functioning 1) as originally intended or 2) for the benefit of the majority of the people it 'represents.' Although it's worth noting that 'as the forefathers intended' carries more weight than it typically should. Their intentions were mostly based on philosophical guess work, as they didn't have a whole lot of empirical data or exi…

>Their intentions were mostly based on philosophical guess work, as they didn't have a whole lot of empirical data or existing republics/democracies to base their new government on.

They had plenty of examples to base their design on; democracy had been invented more than a thousand years before the US was formed. Like the vast majority of social institutions though, it was in the end based on fallible guesswork -- people like Thomas Jefferson were explicitly aware of this.

What they could not have planned for was the industrial revolution, corporate proliferation/globalization, the information revolution of today, and the scale of it all.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#108
post #61
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would a reverse osmosis filter hooked up in the basement / under the sink compare to distillation? The good ones spit out water that is close to 0 PPM (in most municipal water systems tap water is closer to 60-200). Is PPM a good way of measuring the types of chemicals you mentioned?

Doesn't RO needs 3+ liters to get you 1L of purified water ? It doesn't look like this would be viable long term + it doesn't solve the root cause, just the symptoms.

You can get as good as 1:1 clean and waste water using.

Though as you stated it still doesn't solve root cause.

Re: U.S. drinking water widely contaminated with 'forever chemicals': report

#110

It is constantly amazing to me that "cover up the existence of poisonous chemicals in your drinking water" is a viable position for a democratically-elected officeholder to have. What a world we live in.

This sounds very much like something communist Russia did during the Chernobyl incident. Why are our governments so corrupt?

Nitpicking: Chernobyl happened in Ukraine, so initially communists in Ukrainian Soviet Republic covered things up, not Russian. But I imagine they did consult with Central Party Buro in Moscow.
Post reply on HN