1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Water useage comparison

Discussion in 'Home and Garden' started by cyber69, May 17, 2019.

  1. jellybeard999

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Feb 7, 2004

    Posts: 7,516

    Location: Co Durham

    Must be. I'm in Teesdale/Weardale side of Co Durham.
     
  2. The Craig

    Soldato

    Joined: May 4, 2007

    Posts: 7,483

    Location: Warwickshire

    Having lived in glasgow, and worked in london, yes.

    The difference isnt that significant.
     
  3. Sasahara

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 12, 2009

    Posts: 3,721

    Don't confuse taste with quality. You'll tend to like what you have become accustomed to drink.

    In general hard water is better for most people as contributes a supplementary contribution to total calcium and magnesium intake, but too much can have negative effects for some people. The effects are relatively small either way.

    As for quality you'd have to see the lab reports on your local source to compare. Water being hard or not won't be the main concern for quality.

    Surface water held in reservoirs and taken from river have a higher chance for contamination compared to groundwater sourced.

    BTW Seaham water only barely classes as hard, damn northern pansy's. :p You need to come down to Kent to taste the really hard stuff!
     
  4. Haggisman

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 6, 2004

    Posts: 12,662

    Location: Birmingham

    We pay £27/month to severn trent, 2 adults 1 child, showers every day, bath a couple of times a week, jetwash the car every couple of weeks, also have an inflatable hot tub which gets refilled 3-4 times a year, plus we flush a couple of hundred litres down the drain every month making RODI for the fish tank... Your bill seems high compared to that?