Just cause I'm thinking about it...

[Big Bad Boo]

I was thinking about how much it would cost to bring water into a city in case the water supply is contaminated with something like lead. Does anyone know?

[Noclevername]

It would depend entirely on things like which city, how close the nearest alternative supply is, whether the contamination came from the city's main pipes or an outside source, what alternate pipelines were available, etc. If you're asking can enough water be shipped in by truck or something, for a city of any decent size the short answer is probably not.

[sarongsong]

...and don't forget to factor in a corruption tax: http://www.bautforum.com/images/icons/icon10.gif...On 58 occasions, Lipsey Mountain billed the government for using the same truck multiple times to deliver water – resulting in US$774,000 in questionable payments...US$6.5 million for cargo flights that cost the company only US$4.9 million...doubled its money on US$72,000 in transportation costs, billing the government US$149,000...increased its price to ship water by air from 39 cents per liter to 49 cents, but then transported the water mainly by ground...
Water Integrity Network (http://www.waterintegritynetwork.net/page/375/#_edn5)(Where've you been, BBB, we've missed your "Adventures of..." series! :))

[Big Bad Boo]

(Where've you been, BBB, we've missed your "Adventures of..." series! :))

Been working like a dog. Ask BigDon, I hardly ever see him anymore.

[Big Bad Boo]

It would depend entirely on things like which city, how close the nearest alternative supply is, whether the contamination came from the city's main pipes or an outside source, what alternate pipelines were available, etc. If you're asking can enough water be shipped in by truck or something, for a city of any decent size the short answer is probably not.

The thing I'm reading says about 25,000 people, river is the main source, and the lead stuff is coming from an outside source (mining by-product storage ponds.)

This appears to be my sister's chemistry project from last year.

[Noclevername]

For 25,000 people that's 15,625* gallons per day drinking water in a temperate climate. That's bare minimum for survival, not counting washing, toilets, any industries that might use water, etc.



*I have no faith in my math abilities, it's late and I'm tired.

[sarongsong]

Been working like a dog. Ask BigDon, I hardly ever see him anymore.Ah---good for you---hope you get a time-out soon! (BD's been curiously absent here, too.)

[Larry Jacks]

If the water supply is contaiminated with lead, it might still be usable for certain things but not for others. You certainly wouldn't want to drink or cook with it. You might not even want to use it for laundry if the concentration is high enough. You could use it for flushing toilets, washing cars, etc.

With a population of 25,000, you'd need to count on bringing in at least a few gallons per person per day. Just for the sake of round numbers, let's say 4 gallons per person per day for 100,000 gallons total. A large tanker truck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_truck) might be able to bring in 5000 gallons or more per trip, so you'd need up to 20 tanker loads per day.

Now, how far does the tanker have to go to refill? If it's just a few miles, then it should be able to make several trips per day - allow time to fill, travel, empty, travel, and refill. If each tanker truck could make 4 trips per day, then you'd need 5 trucks to carry that water load each day. The greater the distance, the more trucks would be required due to longer travel times so the costs would increase.

You could operate this way for while but in the long run, you'd be better off installing the equipment needed to remove the lead from the water. The topic is discussed here (http://www.ianrpubs.unl.edu/epublic/pages/publicationD.jsp?publicationId=479).