Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe461
Could you elaborate on that?
First, why don't you recommend filters? Even if minimally effective, wouldn't they still provide _some_ benefit?
If you don't stay on top of them, wouldn't filters be less effective and allow more chlorine (and other contaminants) through?
Why would ending up with zero chlorine be a very bad thing?
Not arguing - I'm genuinely curious as these claims seem counter-intuitive.
|
Filters turn brown, you buy more filters. Water on Long Island is from underground aquifers which are typically loaded with iron (brown!). Filter companies love ground water for this reason alone. The vast majority of people do not have an adverse reaction to iron, although more and more companies are removing as much as then can for aesthetic reasons. The aquifers are naturally filtered by the earth before the water is brought to the surface. Once drawn up, it's treated with chlorine after any nasty volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are removed. The chlorine is there to protect the consumer from anything that may enter the 'clean' water supply once it leaves the pumping stations. All water suppliers must meet or exceed state and federal regulations and are monitored constantly. Zero chlorine allows for bacteria growth, a very bad thing! Not keeping up with monthly filter changes leads to a breakdown of the filter material, your water pressure will suffer, and all the chlorine entering the filter will stay there to kill the bacteria you're now growing.
As for the other poster above, who is your water supplier? I've never heard of charges for a negative reading after an odor complaint. In my district, I WELCOME these calls as they often lead us to noticing a slight drop in chlorine residual from the source. We actually rely on the consumer to let us know anytime they believe there's a drop in quality.