Call for NJ Water Chem Stats - Page 3

nostalgia · 02-24-2010, 09:56 PM

I mailed out my sample Saturday and got my results via e-mail today! That's 3 working days.

Anyway, results from my well in Port Murray, NJ, Hunterdon County.

Code:

pH 7.4
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) Est 233
Electrical Conductivity, mmho/cm 0.39
Cations / Anions, me/L 3.7 / 3.3
ppm
Sodium, Na 10
Potassium, K < 1
Calcium, Ca 46
Magnesium, Mg 11
Total Hardness, CaCO3 161
Nitrate, NO3-N 1.3 (SAFE)
Sulfate, SO4-S 6
Chloride, Cl 14
Carbonate, CO3 < 1
Bicarbonate, HCO3 146
Total Alkalinity, CaCO3 120
Fluoride, F 0.04
Total Iron, Fe < 0.01
"<" - Not Detected / Below Detection Limit

So what's that mean? Awesome beer for me?

I'll punch it into a spreadsheet and see...

-Joe

Mischief_Brewing · 03-04-2010, 02:46 PM

I'm so lost when it comes to this, but I just received Sayreville's water analysis from last summer:

Contaminant Name - mg/L
Antimony - .002
Arsenic - .002
Barium - .026
Beryllium - .001
Cadmium - .002
Chromium - .003
Cyanide - .01
Fluoride - .2
Mercury - .0005
Nickel - .002
Sulfate - 41
Selenium - .01
Thalium - .002
Sodium - 13
ABS/L.A.S. - .1
Alkalinity - 66
Aluminum - .049
Chloride - 28
Color - 2
Copper - .013
Corrosivity - -.31
Hardness (CaCO3) - 130
Iron - .05
Manganese - .002
Odor - 1
pH - 7.8
Silver - .002
Total Dissolved Solids - 195
Zinc - .014

Now how to understand this and figure out what my filter is doing to it is a complete mystery to me.

**Bobby_M** · 03-04-2010, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drat

I'm so lost when it comes to this, but I just received Sayreville's water analysis from last summer:

Contaminant Name - mg/L

Sulfate - 41

Sodium - 13

Alkalinity - 66 (total alkalinity as CaCO3?)

Chloride - 28

Missing Calcium (Ca) and Magnesium (Mg)

Mischief_Brewing · 03-04-2010, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby_M

Missing Calcium (Ca) and Magnesium (Mg)

It's very limited report...

They list hardness as CaCO3 at 130

I guess I'll need to send some of my filtered water to the labs to get a real profile...

pkeeler · 03-10-2010, 02:44 AM

This is a great idea. But I would caution everyone on something. These big NJ water companies have multiple wells/sources of water. While someone in Princeton and someone in Cranford will be getting water from Elizabethtown, the sources of that water will be different. Many large towns (and most in NJ are large) will have 5-6 wells just for that town. I doubt all this water is being pumped to a central location to be blended and sent back out homogenized. So, call the water company and get their results for your house. You are paying for them to run the tests anyway.

**Bobby_M** · 03-10-2010, 04:45 AM

We've found that when a city is listed as on the same system, the stats are VERY close. That's not all of "Elizabethtown", it's a subset on the same system. Of course the sample size is small so far but I've been urging fellow club members to pony up the $17 and get the test done.

pkeeler · 03-10-2010, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby_M

We've found that when a city is listed as on the same system, the stats are VERY close. That's not all of "Elizabethtown", it's a subset on the same system. Of course the sample size is small so far but I've been urging fellow club members to pony up the $17 and get the test done.

Is the $17 for an outside test?

**Bobby_M** · 03-11-2010, 06:32 PM

Yes, wardlab.com

**artbrau** · 03-12-2010, 12:01 AM

Should we expect a seasonality component to the results, as well?

**Bobby_M** · 03-12-2010, 04:19 PM

I suspect yes. Maybe I'll take one for the team and send another sample myself this month.