Can you drink softened water?

Gary Slusser said:

We have to drink/ingest A LOT of water to get any benefits from minerals etc. in the water, and too much water will kill you. We get minerals and vitamins from food, not so much from water.

Click to expand...

I am using that calcuim+magnesium thing to talk myself out of an RO unit.

Regarding taste, bottled distilled water generally does not taste as good as bottled "drinking water".

My post-filters analysis:
Arsenic nd
Iron nd
Manganese nd
Lead nd
Mercury nd
Copper nd
Chromium nd
Potassium 22.6
Nickel nd
Sodium 33.5
Total Alkalinity 186
Color (units in PCU) <1
Conductivity (units in mho) nd (huh? What would nd mean? I am sure my water conducts, so I am thinking they skipped that test)
Fluoride 1.85
Hardness (CaCo3) 300
Nitrates nd
Total Dissolved Solids 259
Turbidity <1
pH 7.25
It also tested "nd" for 85 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOC).

So while I would not hesitate to drink RO water, and it would be handy for some cleaning, I think my filtered well water may be as good or better than RO for drinking. I can buy bottled distilled for cleaning. i currently drink my softened water from the tap without tasting anything, I am thinking it may be worthwhile running a pre-softener line to a kitchen tap.

Reach4 said:

I am using that calcuim+magnesium thing to talk myself out of an RO unit.

Regarding taste, bottled distilled water generally does not taste as good as bottled "drinking water".

So while I would not hesitate to drink RO water, and it would be handy for some cleaning, I think my filtered well water may be as good or better than RO for drinking. I can buy bottled distilled for cleaning. i currently drink my softened water from the tap without tasting anything, I am thinking it may be worthwhile running a pre-softener line to a kitchen tap.

Click to expand...

Obviously taste is a personal preference. You're test results don't seem to indicate the use of a softener as you have CaCO3. You might want to try a taste test with your filtered well water vs softened water vs RO water. That is really the only way to tell what you like. My family's and my experiences have been that we don't like the taste of chloraminated hard municipal water or de-chloraminated softened water compared to RO water. But your experience may vary.

RO is not that expensive, does not taste like distilled water (typically still has 10 - 30 PPM of TDS), and is convenient to have around for drinking and uses that require demineralized water. BTW, bottled "drinking water" is very often RO water with trace minerals added back in. As Dittohead stated, a carbon post-filter is typically used to make RO water taste pretty good.

Increasing your Ca++ and Mg++ consumption by drinking hard water is really not a consideration. We get minerals through our food.

lifespeed said:

Obviously taste is a personal preference. You're test results don't seem to indicate the use of a softener as you have CaCO3.

Click to expand...

The test numbers are from before the softener and after my filters. My filters are a backwashing Centaur Carbon filter selected for iron and sulfur removal, and a couple of Big Blue polypropylene cartridges selected somewhat by guess...

And I definitely agree that RO makes sense for many. I had planned for one. But since I have nd (none detected) on my filtered well water for the bad stuff, for me I am currently thinking no RO for me. That differs from my thinking a week ago. I am considering the calcium and magnesium a small bonus, but, as you know, many people add those after their RO membrane ("6-stage RO unit for example). I may change my mind on this again.

I have wondered what is being removed by the post-RO-membrane carbon filter. I have also wondered what is being removed in chemistry labs when they follow an RO filter with a deionization filter. I guess, in the case of the labs, it is that remaining TDS. For the home carbon post-filters it seems that it is some kind of smell or taste.

Regarding cost of a home RO unit, I agree-- quite reasonable. The price of my water test would have paid for most of an RO unit. However the RO unit does bring about an added annual chore of replacing filters and shock-chlorinating the unit. Those filters are also reasonably priced, considering that they are usually only an annual expense and maybe 2 years for the membrane. I now have an annual chore of replacing my whole-house BB polypropylene cartridges, although they looked like they would have been good for another few years when I did my first annual change-out. An RO filter would seem to be a clearer choice for a community water system.

Reach4 said:

However the RO unit does bring about an added annual chore of replacing filters and shock-chlorinating the unit. Those filters are also reasonably priced, considering that they are usually only an annual expense and maybe 2 years for the membrane. I now have an annual chore of replacing my whole-house BB polypropylene cartridges, although they looked like they would have been good for another few years when I did my first annual change-out. An RO filter would seem to be a clearer choice for a community water system.

Click to expand...

It sounds like your carbon filter is catching any particulates if the BB filters are staying clean.

I had an RO years before installing a Centaur carbon backwashed filter and softener. The RO pre-filters would foul up pretty good in a years time with the municipal water delivered through rusty steel pipes. Now that I have new, clean copper pipes and filtering for my whole house (carbon and softener only, no separate particulate filter) the RO pre-filters appear to stay clean indefinitely. I will still change them, perhaps stretching the interval to 18 months. The membrane itself can easily go 5 years or more when fed filtered, softened water.

I would still recommend a taste test, perhaps using a local bottled water as a proxy. For my water it is night and day. For yours it may not make as much of a difference.

Reach, a permeate pump does not increase the pressure on the membrane, it eliminates back pressure on the membrane from the pressurized storage tank. And yes, we do sell lots of systems with both permeate and booster pumps.

The idea behind a permeate pump is that the membrane will produce the same amount of water when the tank is empty or full. Without the permeate pump, water production decreases as the differnetial pressure decreases due to the pressurized storage tank. A permeate pump will allow an RO to operate the same as if it were filling an atmospheric tank.

Hope this helps explain the difference.

nd means not detected. And that usually means it is below the detection levels of their testing equipment.

Gary Slusser said:

nd means not detected. And that usually means it is below the detection levels of their testing equipment.

Click to expand...

For most items they gave me their threshold for detection levels, which I did not post. But for conductivity the did not give such a number.

I figure a cheap ohmmeter could detect conductivity in my water, so "not detected" seems odd for that item.

Reach4 said:

I figure a cheap ohmmeter could detect conductivity in my water, so "not detected" seems odd for that item.

Click to expand...

LOL , You are funny.

I Don't Think water will give any reading, unless you can crank the voltage up


Have a happy Holiday.

Conductivity is not important in residential water testing unless you're checking an RO's operation and then the TDS level is much more important and what is used. You test TDS (Total Dissolved Solids) with a TDS meter and they use the conductivity of the water to convert to TDS. All waters conduct unless you get real deep into DI (deionized) water.

DonL said:

LOL , You are funny.

I Don't Think water will give any reading, unless you can crank the voltage up

Click to expand...

Did you understand we are talking about well water? If I stick ohmmeter probes into the water about a cm with the probes about a cm apart, I get under 2 Mohm with a cheap digital VOM. A lab device should be at least as sensitive, I would think.

How will know if you are serious some time?

Gary, I agree that the reading was not important, especially since they gave a TDS number. Rather than nd, they should have printed nt (not tested) or na (not applicable) or left it blank IMO.