Better-tasting water and safe water are judged in different ways. Keeping them separate leads to better specifications and clearer customer expectations.
Aesthetic and health considerations
The ADWG separates aesthetic characteristics, such as taste and odour, from health-related considerations. On taste and odour, the guideline states that drinking water "should not be offensive to most consumers" [1]. That is a different question from whether water meets health-based guideline values.
Common sources of taste and odour
The guideline notes that disinfectants such as chlorine can contribute taste or odour. Naturally occurring organic compounds in source water can too [1]. Where water is disinfected, a mild chlorine taste is usually a by-product of that treatment.
Where filtration fits
Activated carbon is widely used to improve taste and odour [1]. An improvement you can taste, though, says nothing about other aspects of water quality, positive or negative. Water can taste fine and still need assessment, and it can taste of chlorine and still meet the guidelines.
Setting realistic expectations
For mains water consult your supplier’s water-quality information and consider the building’s plumbing/storage conditions. Private sources such as bore or tank water need a water test, and the results should be assessed by a suitably qualified person. A filter should be chosen for a defined purpose and backed by evidence for that model.
Key buying implications
- Describe taste and odour benefits as aesthetic improvements.
- Don't imply that a better taste means safer water.
- For non-mains sources, start with a water test.
- Match performance claims to the evidence for that model.
Talk to us
Tell us your water source and what you want to improve. Contact Flowell.