# Addressing water quality - things to consider



## kennyboy993 (Jan 23, 2017)

Visiting BB yesterday and discussing bwt filter has got me thinking about water again.

My e61 HX is plumbed in and I'm using a c30 Brita filter.

I cooled down some brew water and tasted it - tastes ok but I want to be a bit more scientific and have the best water I can within my budget.

So I'd like to get some wisdom on here - I've just received a detailed report from Yorkshire water.

What water content aspects should I be quoting on here in order to get advice?

The report has all sorts on there eg calcium, magnesium, total hardness etc


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

https://coffeeforums.co.uk/threadloom/threadloom.php?do=process

That didn't work, how far down the rabbit hole do you want to go. Worth doing a search on a pc or MacBook and looking at existing threads.

I would suggest that you water for espresso wont taste sweet on its own , stuff in there is to pull stuff out of coffee not to drink as water it self .. @MWJB has done a few threads on this

Grindscience that @Xpenno does has some stuff on there too.


----------



## kennyboy993 (Jan 23, 2017)

I know you're right boots - I just being a bit naughty and seeing if anyone could suggest what aspects I should be looking at and within what range.

I'll have a good read when i get chance then.

I only want to have a single filter to replace the c30 and thought I'd better learn a bit in case a bwt I want to buy from BB might not make any improvement.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

kennyboy993 said:


> I know you're right boots - I just being a bit naughty and seeing if anyone could suggest what aspects I should be looking at and within what range.
> 
> I'll have a good read when i get chance then.
> 
> I only want to have a single filter to replace the c30 and thought I'd better learn a bit in case a bwt I want to buy from BB might not make any improvement.


 @Xpenno


----------



## John Yossarian (Feb 2, 2016)

kennyboy993 said:


> Visiting BB yesterday and discussing bwt filter has got me thinking about water again.
> 
> My e61 HX is plumbed in and I'm using a c30 Brita filter.
> 
> ...


Hi Kenny,

I would suggest looking at the levels of transition metal ions level, e.g. Zn, Fe, etc. They most likely would affect the taste of water as they seem to like binding to proteins a lot and can influence your taste buds. Ca and Mg are the obvious ones when it comes to descaling time span.

The taste is a very subjective thing and you can have thousand people with thousand opinions.

Good luck in finding the best water for your coffee!

Cheers

BTW did you solve your steam wand situation? You mentioned your intention to get BB looking at it.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

kennyboy993 said:


> I know you're right boots - I just being a bit naughty and seeing if anyone could suggest what aspects I should be looking at and within what range.
> 
> I'll have a good read when i get chance then.
> 
> I only want to have a single filter to replace the c30 and thought I'd better learn a bit in case a bwt I want to buy from BB might not make any improvement.


For machine health you're looking at:

Ca all figures with "Ca" or "Calcium" after them.

Mg

Total hardness as CaCO3

Alkalinity.


----------



## kennyboy993 (Jan 23, 2017)

Thanks John - do you know what specific measurement ranges I should be looking to get within?

Yeah BB are going to fit another o-ring, looks like I smothered too much silicone grease on to it!


----------



## kennyboy993 (Jan 23, 2017)

Ok cheers Mark

Here's what is quoted (mean figures):

Calcium: 47.25 mg Ca/I

Magnesium: 6.89 mg Mg/I

Total hardness: 58.6875 mg Ca/I

I think that's it - any I've missed you reckon?


----------



## DavecUK (Aug 6, 2013)

kennyboy993 said:


> Ok cheers Mark
> 
> Here's what is quoted (mean figures):
> 
> ...


A quote from my Lelit Mara review below. I assume the I you have put is meant to be an L



> It's important to get the calculation correct for estimating whether the mineral water is soft or not. It is only 2 minerals that cause hardness.
> 
> 
> MgCO3 (Magnesium Carbonate)
> ...


* Using this calculation I make the hardness using the figures you quoted to be 146...which is would be defined as hard.* Although I did believe water in yourkshire was soft, so perhaps they are not using the normal Mg per litre measurement and it is actually an "I" for whatever that means?


----------



## John Yossarian (Feb 2, 2016)

kennyboy993 said:


> Thanks John - do you know what specific measurement ranges I should be looking to get within?
> 
> Yeah BB are going to fit another o-ring, looks like I smothered too much silicone grease on to it!


Kenny this is what I found for the Zn

Organoleptic properties

Zinc imparts an undesirable astringent taste to water. Tests indicate that 5% of a population could

distinguish between zinc-free water and water containing zinc at a level of 4 mg/litre (as zinc sulfate).

The detection levels for other zinc salts were somewhat higher. Water containing zinc at concentrations in

the range 3-5 mg/litre also tends to appear opalescent and develops a greasy film when boiled (3). 4 mg/l correspond to 4 ppm (parts per million) which is very low level.

Water

In natural surface waters, the concentration of zinc is usually below 10 μg/litre, and in groundwaters, 10-

40 μg/litre (1). In tapwater, the zinc concentration can be much higher as a result of the leaching of zinc

from piping and fittings (2). The most corrosive waters are those of low pH, high carbon dioxide content,

and low mineral salts content. In a Finnish survey of 67% of public water supplies, the median zinc

content in water samples taken upstream and downstream of the waterworks was below 20 μg/litre; much

higher concentrations were found in tapwater, the highest being 1.1 mg/litre (8). Even higher zinc

concentrations (up to 24 mg/litre) were reported in a Finnish survey of water from almost 6000 wells (9).


----------



## John Yossarian (Feb 2, 2016)

kennyboy993 said:


> Thanks John - do you know what specific measurement ranges I should be looking to get within?
> 
> Yeah BB are going to fit another o-ring, looks like I smothered too much silicone grease on to it!


For Iron:

Organoleptic properties Iron (as Fe2+) concentrations of 40 μg/litre can be detected by taste in distilled water. In a mineralized spring water with a total dissolved solids content of 500 mg/litre, the taste threshold value was 0.12 mg/litre. In well-water, iron concentrations below 0.3 mg/litre were

characterized as unnoticeable, whereas levels of 0.3-3 mg/litre were found acceptable (E. Dahi, personal communication, 1991).

In drinking-water supplies, iron(II) salts are unstable and are precipitated as insoluble iron(III) hydroxide, which settles out as a rust-colour ed silt. Anaerobic groundwaters may contain iron(II) at concentrations of up to several milligrams per litre without discoloration or turbidity in the water when directly pumped from a well, although turbidity and colour may develop in piped systems at iron levels above 0.05-0.1 mg/litre. Staining of laundry and plumbing may occur at concentrations above 0.3 mg/litre (4).

Iron also promotes undesirable bacterial growth ("iron bacteria") within a waterworks and distribution system, resulting in the deposition of a slimy coating on the piping (4).

Water

The median iron concentration in rivers has been reported to be 0.7 mg/litre. In anaerobic groundwater where iron is in the form of iron(II), concentrations will usually be 0.5-10 mg/litre, but concentrations up to 50 mg/litre can sometimes be found (6). Concentrations of iron in drinking-water are normally less than 0.3 mg/litre but may be higher in countries where various iron salts are used as coagulating agents in water-treatment plants and where cast iron, steel, and galvanized iron pipes are used for water distribution.

For hardness:

http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/chemicals/hardness.pdf

On Standards:

http://www.anglianwater.co.uk/_assets/media/Standards_Current.pdf

One of the killers of taste is the chlorine. This is something that you do not have in bottled water but if plumbed and special care must be taken if the taste is overwhelming.


----------



## kennyboy993 (Jan 23, 2017)

DavecUK said:


> A quote from my Lelit Mara review below. I assume the I you have put is meant to be an L
> 
> * Using this calculation I make the hardness using the figures you quoted to be 146...which is would be defined as hard.* Although I did believe water in yourkshire was soft, so perhaps they are not using the normal Mg per litre measurement and it is actually an "I" for whatever that means?


Ok thanks Dave - I'll investigate the report further and confirm if that's an 'L'


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

kennyboy993 said:


> Ok cheers Mark
> 
> Here's what is quoted (mean figures):
> 
> ...


Alkalinity, or HCO3, or bicarbonate?


----------



## kennyboy993 (Jan 23, 2017)

Hmm non of those in the report unfortunately


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

kennyboy993 said:


> Hmm non of those in the report unfortunately


Shame, they're pretty important.

Assuming your GH:KH is around 1.2-1.3:1, your water would look pretty typical for UK water (hard).


----------



## kennyboy993 (Jan 23, 2017)

DavecUK said:


> A quote from my Lelit Mara review below. I assume the I you have put is meant to be an L
> 
> * Using this calculation I make the hardness using the figures you quoted to be 146...which is would be defined as hard.* Although I did believe water in yourkshire was soft, so perhaps they are not using the normal Mg per litre measurement and it is actually an "I" for whatever that means?


So for their report 1 mg/L = 1 part per million

Which means the l is an L and therefore a litre as a milligram is 1 millionth of a litre?

The report summarises my water (north Leeds) as moderately hard


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Yes 1mg/L & 1 part per million are the same in this case


----------



## kennyboy993 (Jan 23, 2017)

Are there recommended figures I could compare mine to in order to see what treatment/filtration I would need?


----------



## John Yossarian (Feb 2, 2016)

kennyboy993 said:


> Are there recommended figures I could compare mine to in order to see what treatment/filtration I would need?


Hi Kenny,

I posted a link on standards, I hope the levels are representative.

Here is another one:

http://dwi.defra.gov.uk/consumers/advice-leaflets/standards.pdf

And a more detailed one:

http://www.dwi.gov.uk/stakeholders/information-letters/2009/09_2009Annex.pdf


----------



## kennyboy993 (Jan 23, 2017)

Thanks John but i think there's a specific standard for water for coffee also - scaa? I'll have a look


----------



## DavecUK (Aug 6, 2013)

John Yossarian said:


> Hi Kenny,
> 
> I posted a link on standards, I hope the levels are representative.
> 
> ...


Reading the test results and serious water incidents is rather troubling, glad I use RO


----------



## John Yossarian (Feb 2, 2016)

DavecUK said:


> Reading the test results and serious water incidents is rather troubling, glad I use RO


Was it not RO causing trouble for the level probe due to low conductivity? I have read this on a forum discussion. You must have found a way around it.


----------



## kennyboy993 (Jan 23, 2017)

Looking at these standards: http://scaa.org/?page=resources&d=water-standards


CharacteristicTargetAcceptable RangeOdor 1Clean/Fresh, Odor free Color 2Clear color Total ChlorineO mg/L TDS 3150 mg/L75 - 250 mg/LCalcium Hardness4 grains or 68 mg/L1-5 grains or 17 mg/L - 85 mg/LTotal Alkalinity40 mg/LAt or near 40 mg/LpH7.06.5 - 7.5Sodium10 mg/LAt or near 10 mg/L

On the readings I've been given from Yorkshire Water my Calcium is well within range and quite close to target.

pH is 7.0 - so as target

Sodium is 13.35 so a bit above range.

I can't find TDS or 'total alkalinity' in the report.

But generally looks pretty good - one might even say a filter isn't required, surely it can't be that simple?


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

kennyboy993 said:


> Looking at these standards: http://scaa.org/?page=resources&d=water-standards
> 
> 
> CharacteristicTargetAcceptable RangeOdor 1Clean/Fresh, Odor free Color 2Clear color Total ChlorineO mg/L TDS 3150 mg/L75 - 250 mg/LCalcium Hardness4 grains or 68 mg/L1-5 grains or 17 mg/L - 85 mg/LTotal Alkalinity40 mg/LAt or near 40 mg/LpH7.06.5 - 7.5Sodium10 mg/LAt or near 10 mg/L
> ...


No it's not. The SCAA figures are "as CaCO3" and dovetail with all current advice on water for espresso machine boilers. Your water is normal UK water & slightly harder than normal US water, neither of these are anywhere near the SCAA/SCAE/Water for Coffee/Schulman/BH ranges.

Where the SCAA suggests 68-85mg/L as CaCO3 for calcium (actually Mg & Ca combined) your water is nearer 150mg/L as CaCO3, your bicarbonate will likely be 3-4

times more than the SCAA's suggestion of 40mg/L (40-60mg/L might be more realistic, but still way lower than you are likely to have).

Compare here (I have guesstimated your bicarbonate & TDS dry residue):

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sFlna9NfoA-DjU3zXJg2Byxp-Z37FzQwQ9TU-WqHdj0/edit?usp=sharing


----------



## simonsays (Jan 3, 2018)

I am living in London, with a CaCO3 of 272 ppm or 272mg/L. I am guessing this will not help the machine. Is there a treatment method anyone recommends. I think a compact undersink unit sub £200 would be in budget. Or am I dreaming?


----------



## John Yossarian (Feb 2, 2016)

simonsays said:


> I am living in London, with a CaCO3 of 272 ppm or 272mg/L. I am guessing this will not help the machine. Is there a treatment method anyone recommends. I think a compact undersink unit sub £200 would be in budget. Or am I dreaming?


A unit as you mention it should do the job nicely and you are right, the London water is on the hard side.

Welcome to the Forum!


----------

