• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Check your tap water- a new database shows you the water quality via zip code

K

Kaako

Felium Defensor
This is very very relevant to my interests. Thanks for posting.
Edit: All I see is cancer, god damnit!
 
W

witchedwiz

Member
whelp, would be fun to have it in italy..
in my hometown the water is AT LEAST at the eye crystal clean..
where i live currently (outskirt of milan).. let's just say that when you put more water in a contained with other water (so that it's more visible) the water seems to produce some sort of white-ish residue inside..
i'm buying bottled water for both drinking AND cooking..
using it only for washing dishes and showering..

sigh...

look at the netherlands for example.. they are like 1st in water quality and yet they have "concerns" for improvements..
granted, their major cities have air pollution problem, rest of the netherlands? not so much :|

when I leave again my hometown in 6 days, I'll miss the clean air, the green areas, the water, and I will have to embrace again the milan lifestyle...
oh wel.. :/
 
G

Grym

Member
Doominated said:
The real takeaway I have from this is why do so many of you drink fucking tap water???
Click to expand...

because fuck Nestle and the other big business bottled water companies screwing with our wetlands and watertables.


I've also heard people argue about the carbon footprint associated with transport, bottling, plastics, etc. in conjunction with the EPA barely regulating it so is it may not even be healthier for you. But though it makes sense to me, I have no idea if that is true.
 
S

SpecX

Member
Guess I'm dead
  • Arsenic cancer
  • Bromodichloromethane cancer
  • Chloroform cancer
  • Chromium (hexavalent) cancer
  • Dibromochloromethane cancer
  • Dichloroacetic acid cancer
  • Radiological contaminants cancer
  • Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) cancer
  • Trichloroacetic acid cancer
 
T

TalonJH

Member
Good to see I'm only drinking a little bit of cancer juice and not anywhere near the national average. Could lower some of that chlorine though. I wonder how well my water pitchers filter some of these contaminants.
 
A

Al-ibn Kermit

Junior Member
Al-ibn Kermit said:
FYI, this should be added to OP:



First, I should disclose that I work in the Water Quality department of a major California water company so I am literally defending myself here but this site seems to be tracking your water quality versus the Public Health Goal (PHG), which is intended to be an ambitious goal that is often below the detection limit in the laboratory (meaning there isn't a laboratory method that measures that low). I just did a quick glance to confirm that the numbers on the website do match what you'd find in the publicly available Consumer Confidence Report but just comparing against the PHG and not the legal limits seems to be confusing for the consumer.....

What you should actually be worried about is if you water quality is above the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) which does not seem to be listed on this site. While the PHG is the level at which they can confirm that there is no health risk at all, the MCL is tje limit at which if you drink that water everyday for 80 years then you have about a 1 in a million chance of developing cancer from it. The MCL is also the limit that is enforceable.

And for the poster that mentioned being safe due to having a well, unfortunately that's going to have worse water quality due to not being treated, tested, etc. We get almost all our water from wells and it's usually pretty nasty in its raw form.
Click to expand...

Quoting for a new page. Seriously people, calm down and do real research on your water quality.

Everybody water utility has to have a Consumer Confidence Report on their website. Use that or consult with your state agency that regulates water.
 
D

daveo42

Banned
Looking at what was detected, it's at least nice to know that most were below the National average. The bad part, which is actual cancer, is that Radium-228 was found in the city's drinking supply in 2014. At least there's none in 2015?
 
D

Dead Prince

Banned
just 5

Arsenic
Chloroform
Dichloracetic Acid
Radiological Contaminants
Total Trihalomethanes

14

Barium
Chromium
Cobalt
DEHP
Fluoride
HAA5
Magnase
Molybdenum
Nitrate and Nitrite
Selenium
Strontium
Trichloroacetic Acid
Vanadium

not bad.
 
T

TheLetdown

Member
Mikey Jr. said:
90210

The only American Zip code I know.
Click to expand...

It's actually the only American zip code.

We are, in fact, all microcosms of the set of the show that we misunderstand greatly. For instance, I tell myself, "I'm Dylan."

But I'm no Dylan. How could I be? Brandon? I mean, I try to be good, do good. Could this be me?

I'm not David. Christ, one look in the mirror before leaving the door tells me in big letters "NOT DAVID." No, not him at all. Steve Sanders... no... my upbringing was, forever, a climb. I may still be climbing. It's hard to tell these days.

But if I'm not them, who am I? What am I? Where am I?
 
L

Lubricus

Member
Al-ibn Kermit said:
FYI, this should be added to OP:



First, I should disclose that I work in the Water Quality department of a major California water company so I am literally defending myself here but this site seems to be tracking your water quality versus the Public Health Goal (PHG), which is intended to be an ambitious goal that is often below the detection limit in the laboratory (meaning there isn't a laboratory method that measures that low). I just did a quick glance to confirm that the numbers on the website do match what you'd find in the publicly available Consumer Confidence Report but just comparing against the PHG and not the legal limits seems to be confusing for the consumer.....

What you should actually be worried about is if you water quality is above the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) which does not seem to be listed on this site. While the PHG is the level at which they can confirm that there is no health risk at all, the MCL is tje limit at which if you drink that water everyday for 80 years then you have about a 1 in a million chance of developing cancer from it. The MCL is also the limit that is enforceable.

And for the poster that mentioned being safe due to having a well, unfortunately that's going to have worse water quality due to not being treated, tested, etc. We get almost all our water from wells and it's usually pretty nasty in its raw form.
Click to expand...

I added it, thanks for the clarification.
 
W

watershed

Banned
Welp, my water has been in violation of legally mandated federal standards for 3 straight years. Thank god I filter everything.
 
N

nabe_shogun

Member
Mesa, Arizona.

I mean, I guess it could be worse.

k2bL7oY.jpg
Click to expand...
 
S

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
I believe the data, but I'm a little frustrated that when you click "how do I filter this stuff out?" you get links to outrageously expensive reverse osmosis systems being sold on Amazon.
 
E

evilpigking

Member
I'mma take this website with multiple grains of salt given how prominent the links to buy filters are, makes one wonder where some of the funding is coming from.

They should also be including common bottled water brands if they are trying to make a point about water purity since a lot of those are based on tap anyway and likely aren't all that much better.
 
C

ChubbyHuggs

Member
  1. Bromodichloromethane - cancer
  2. Chloroform - cancer
  3. Chromium (hexavalent) - cancer
  4. Dibromochloromethane - cancer
  5. Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) - cancer

Oh, that's nice, I guess.
 
L

Lubricus

Member
Stumpokapow said:
I believe the data, but I'm a little frustrated that when you click "how do I filter this stuff out?" you get links to outrageously expensive reverse osmosis systems being sold on Amazon.
Click to expand...

EWG (Enviromental Working Group) is a non-profit. I guess they get a commission from the seller of the filter.

This one is $200 and has a 5 star rating.
One reviewer said,"I bought this system to replace the pre-installed water filter in my new home. The builders system was installed by a local company, filters are proprietary and $125-150 per pair, every 6 months. Instead of paying that much for a two stage filter replacement every 6 months, I looked for alternatives. I decided on the APEC after the glowing reviews and Built in USA tagline. What isn't immediately clear is that only 3 of the filters in this system need replacing every 6 months, for around $25 in total. The other 2 only need to be replaced every 2-3 years. Not bad in my opinion."

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00I0ZGOZM/ref=asc_df_B00I0ZGOZM5094975/?tag=hyprod-20&creative=394997&creativeASIN=B00I0ZGOZM&linkCode=df0&hvadid=193156951420&hvpos=1o4&hvnetw=g&hvrand=17954309325209283916&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9011093&hvtargid=pla-310562461134
 
X

xKilltheMx

Member
Al-ibn Kermit said:
FYI, this should be added to OP:



First, I should disclose that I work in the Water Quality department of a major California water company so I am literally defending myself here but this site seems to be tracking your water quality versus the Public Health Goal (PHG), which is intended to be an ambitious goal that is often below the detection limit in the laboratory (meaning there isn't a laboratory method that measures that low). I just did a quick glance to confirm that the numbers on the website do match what you'd find in the publicly available Consumer Confidence Report but just comparing against the PHG and not the legal limits seems to be confusing for the consumer.....

What you should actually be worried about is if you water quality is above the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) which does not seem to be listed on this site. While the PHG is the level at which they can confirm that there is no health risk at all, the MCL is tje limit at which if you drink that water everyday for 80 years then you have about a 1 in a million chance of developing cancer from it. The MCL is also the limit that is enforceable.

And for the poster that mentioned being safe due to having a well, unfortunately that's going to have worse water quality due to not being treated, tested, etc. We get almost all our water from wells and it's usually pretty nasty in its raw form.
Click to expand...

I work for a state regulatory agency and can confirm this post is accurate. Don't worry so much, look up your local DEP websites using DEP IDs for your water systems if you want to know everything. It's confusing at first but you'll know every little problem with your water systems following post above and mine.

TLDR
MCLs are the ones to worry about, op link isn't listing MCLs (afaik) and therefore no agency will do anything.
 
E

Empyrean Heaven

Member
Wow, Chloroform in my water.

Now I know why it makes me sleepy sometimes.

Either way, based on the above it looks to me that this might be a marketing ploy by Brita or another water filter company.
 
S

sangreal

Member
This site does not match up with the report I have in front of me from my water bureau, and it bases its warnings on California's ultra-strict carcinogen "public health goals" while burying compliance with national standards
 
Meicyn

Meicyn

Gold Member
Websites like this infuriate me. The numbers used for comparison are draft public health goals but are presented in a manner that generates mistrust in the public drinking water system. The drinking water system I'm using has TTHM levels listed as above limits per a federal or state authority according to the website, yet the reality is that the measured levels of TTHMs is significantly lower than state or federal MCLs. All the information is available, but if you don't understand what you're reading, it's easy to draw a misleading conclusion.
 
A

arigato

Member
MLCodest said:
5 contaminants sounded very bad at first, but when looking at the amount, they are way below state/national levels, and only a little over the health guideline. That makes me feel a little better personally, but something needs to be done about the US's water infrastructure.
Click to expand...
Don't hold your breath for anything to be done about their "water" infrastructure. Crystal City and Flint were only two cases out of many others that go unreported or pulled under the rug.
 
S

Sonicbug

Member
This site seems.... like it's trying to sell people fear and or a product sold out of fear.

My mother worked at a water testing lab for 25 years so I know our well water has high nitrate levels (from people's lawns being fertilized) and it's hard as fuck. I also knew where the problem spots in towns all around here where. (Also... they tested soft serve ice cream there too and... yikes. I'm way more concerned about getting sick from that... or pools. Pool companies and skeevy.)
 
S

shandy706

Member
Levels of everything where I live are good. Below National and state averages. The town I'm working in right now, however, is absolutely horrid.

I noticed something was up the first time I was here and got water out of a fountain with a white Styrofoam cup. Never touched the water in this town again LOL.

The water smells strange and has a brown tint to it.
 
M

Mudcrab

Member
Al-ibn Kermit said:
FYI, this should be added to OP:



First, I should disclose that I work in the Water Quality department of a major California water company so I am literally defending myself here but this site seems to be tracking your water quality versus the Public Health Goal (PHG), which is intended to be an ambitious goal that is often below the detection limit in the laboratory (meaning there isn't a laboratory method that measures that low). I just did a quick glance to confirm that the numbers on the website do match what you'd find in the publicly available Consumer Confidence Report but just comparing against the PHG and not the legal limits seems to be confusing for the consumer.....

What you should actually be worried about is if you water quality is above the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) which does not seem to be listed on this site. While the PHG is the level at which they can confirm that there is no health risk at all, the MCL is tje limit at which if you drink that water everyday for 80 years then you have about a 1 in a million chance of developing cancer from it. The MCL is also the limit that is enforceable.

And for the poster that mentioned being safe due to having a well, unfortunately that's going to have worse water quality due to not being treated, tested, etc. We get almost all our water from wells and it's usually pretty nasty in its raw form.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting!
 
C

commedieu

Banned
Al-ibn Kermit said:
FYI, this should be added to OP:



First, I should disclose that I work in the Water Quality department of a major California water company so I am literally defending myself here but this site seems to be tracking your water quality versus the Public Health Goal (PHG), which is intended to be an ambitious goal that is often below the detection limit in the laboratory (meaning there isn't a laboratory method that measures that low). I just did a quick glance to confirm that the numbers on the website do match what you'd find in the publicly available Consumer Confidence Report but just comparing against the PHG and not the legal limits seems to be confusing for the consumer.....

What you should actually be worried about is if you water quality is above the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) which does not seem to be listed on this site. While the PHG is the level at which they can confirm that there is no health risk at all, the MCL is tje limit at which if you drink that water everyday for 80 years then you have about a 1 in a million chance of developing cancer from it. The MCL is also the limit that is enforceable.

And for the poster that mentioned being safe due to having a well, unfortunately that's going to have worse water quality due to not being treated, tested, etc. We get almost all our water from wells and it's usually pretty nasty in its raw form.
Click to expand...

Where do I find out about MCL online for my water? 90032.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Guerrilla releases new images showing Horizon Forbidden West: Burning Shores
News
0
760
Draugoth replied
[Atlantic] America Has a Drinking Problem
2 3
149
18K
Hawking Radiation replied
Penis Size Is Shrinking Due To Environmental Pollution
2
87
7K
SF Kosmo replied
CNN: Desperate Puerto Ricans are drinking water from a hazardous-waste site
24
5K
sturmdogg replied
  • Locked
The water crisis in Flint, Michigan
5 6 7 8 9
424
72K
Particle Physicist replied
Top Bottom