Well Water Quality Indicator(s)?

Published on by in Academic

What water quality parameter(s) could be monitored in a private water well as an indicator that water quality has changed and further laboratory analysis is warranted?

Much literature points to pH, conductivity and TDS as good indicators.

We're mostly concerned about changes in health-related parameters such as naturally-occurring arsenic and manganese, and nuisance parameters such as iron and hardness.

Taxonomy

13 Answers

  1. There are lots tests you can do, but it's not reasonable to do all of them.Firstly, You should assess the location of wells and then based on the gained geological and suspicious places (like industries) information about the location, decide to do distinct tests.

    But generally nitrite, nitrate, TDS and microbial test are the most common tests which are recommended. 

  2.  While some of the previous comments have merit, in my experience I have seen well water change dramatically in a period of several months. By all means get an accredited laboratory Drinking Water Analysis, and if in an area is prone to major contaminants such as Arsenic, Radon, Uranium, or other; have that tested for as well. The contaminants that will kill you have no taste, odor, or are visible to the naked eye! Once the well is established and in operation, I would recommend a retest of the water quality.

  3. We are a private well water quality management company. We do water quality testing (baseline tests include "standard" drinking water quality parameters (bacteria and nitrates, inorganic chemicals, pH, hardness, etc.), plus radon and VOCs - done at certified laboratories). We encourage annual re-testing, but are considering developing a simple monitor that would track an indicator parameter - such as TDS - that, if changed significantly (e.g., 20%), would indicate that something in the water quality has changed and warrants further re-testing (again, at a lab).

  4. Dear Elizabeth,

    Before the question can be answered, the resources at your disposal need to be known; what can you afford to do?

  5. Yes pH and TDS/EC are good overall indicators of chemical quality

    you should consider pathogenic bacteria testing as well for health impacts

    also recommend a full macro and micro chemical range as an initial test to profile your groundwater characteristic, you can then identify any parameters that may require additional monitoring

    Also, be alert to physical changes in smell, taste and colour - this will clearly indicate change in quality

    hope this assisted

     

     

  6. Wonderful question and answer lies within. Most of us concerned about the quality of well water. One have to understand following things very carefully:

    1. Geographical belt of any elements like Ferrous or Arsenic or fluoride. 

    2.Well water is very steady. So there is very less change in quality of water except nutritional contamination from external environment. 

    3. Understanding chemistry: pH turbidity n conductivity gives idea of range of quality not the change. If any water sample is seasonally monitored, then may change be observed but it is not necessary. 

    In well exactly if it is in the belt of toxic elements geographically then it will be possible of containing these elements in ionic form in that water. So there is need of analysis of these parameter. At primary level, one analyses the basic parameters i.e. pH EC turbidity n then Na K NO3^-2 and SO4^-2 Cl- PO4 and then if quality is not balanced ionic , one can opt to do analysis repeat. 

    One more thing I would like to mension is that the analysis of heavy /toxic elements in drinking water analysis is costlier than nornal basic parameters as suggested. So, if one is ready to spend some money dor analysis it is possible.any govt and non govt water quality testing laboratories are doing these job..

    Have safe drinking water!

     

  8. A change in water quality of a well is due to some immissions into the well or into its ground water aquifer. Faeces (human or non-human) contain considerable amounts of nitrogen, beside the potential input of bacteria. So test for ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate are reasonable.

    Concerning toxic inorganic compounds such as arsenic, you have to test for the element. Health related concentrations are too low to be detected by other means. So you need to test arsenic, manganese and so on.

    For preliminary assessments you can use rapid assays that give a plausible range of concentration by a colour change of the test kit. Very easy to use even for non educated persons. Of course you need laboratory analysis by more sophisticated methods in case the preliminary test indicates a possible contamination. There are test kits by Merck and Hach and probably from some others.

  11. I agree with David and his views on considering microbial contamination.  In our rural areas in Tamilnadu, India, our rural and indigenous communities use Phyllanthus emblica (Indian Goosberry) to purify water in wells. 

    Branches of Phyllanthus emblica (dumped in wells for purification of water and for removing salinity in water). Woods of Phyllanthus emblica are capable of reducing the hardness of water and the amount of magnesium and sulphate in drinking water. Our ancestors used the woods of this tree in all drinking water wells, ponds and tanks in villages invariably.

  13. Basically you must consider microbial contamination. There is a wide range of ‘pond side’ tests which will detect the presence of microbiological, contamination making the water unfit for human consumption.

    Physical parameters are important especially heavy metals.

    Water testing is not rocket science but realistic assessments are important.

    i am happy to discuss, david.loveTeri Arri 

    1 Comment

    1. I agree with what has been said...but, addition tests should depend on the locality, geology, and historical records of and from nearby wells.