In this post, I do a back-of-the-envelope calculation on salt in my drinking water.
Is the road-salt-driven spike, in salt in my drinking water, likely to be big enough that I can detect it with a cheap total-dissolved-solids (TDS) meter?
If not, this is a fool’s errand.
Spoiler: Yes, the increase in ions (here, part of total dissolved solids), from this hypothetical “salt spike” in the drinking water, as a result of the road salt washing off the roads, should be more than big enough to be detected using just a cheap TDS meter.
All I really need to do is stick that meter into a freshly drawn glass of water, once a day. And record the results. No muss, no fuss, almost no effort.
If there’s no “spike” in ions — interpreted by the meter as a sharp rise in TDS — then that’s that. No matter what I thought I tasted in the water.
As a bonus, I get to use grains of water hardness in a calculation involving metric units.
Chapter 1: Wherein Sodium and Chlorine, who had been bound together as Rock Salt for hundreds of millions of years, are now Released, and Go Their Separate Ways.
One of the stranger twists in this whole road-salt-life-cycle saga is that the sodium and chlorine ions from the road salt now permanently part ways. Or, at least, in the typical case, do so.
This is usually expressed as “the sodium does not travel as far”. In hindsight, I think this means that if you filter the salt water through dirt, the sodium ions will preferentially stick to the dirt. I vaguely sense that “ion exchange” is at work here.
This tendency for the sodium to “stay put” is also why the sodium is fingered as the cause of the localized damage to vegetation. Apparently, that’s why rock salt (NaCl) “burns” lawn at the edge of salted sidewalk, but not so (or as much) calcium chloride (CaCl2).
For all intents and purposes, magic happens. What begins as simple salt water ends up passing along just the chloride ion, out of the salt (NaCl).
Presumably, that chloride ion is now dragging along god-knows-what ion-of-the-street with it. Something it picked up in the dirt, no doubt. Calcium, maybe, from the soil it passed through. Apparently, it doesn’t matter, or something, because I can’t find a ready discussion of what takes sodium’s place.
In any case, so the story goes, what starts off as salt does not end up as simple dilute salt water. Stuff happens along the way. I suspect that contact with the dirt plays a major role in that.
So Chloride ion travels, but Sodium ion stays at home. Or so they say.
Except sometimes? Flashy urban environment.
I noted that much of the research on road salt in the water was done in New Hampshire where a) they apparently use a lot of road salt, and b) the issue is contaminating water wells. So that research is clearly talking about well water, which is most assuredly water that has percolated extensively through soil. (Although, in fairness, they also manage to salt up quite a few lakes and streams.)
Here in NoVa, by contrast, I think we’re at the opposite end of the percolation spectrum. Around here, it’s road runoff to culvert to storm sewer, to clay-banked “flashy” urban stream. To the Potomac. In my mind, I’m not seeing a lot of filtration of any sort take place. As a result, I’d bet that what starts out as salt water mostly ends up salt water, sodium intact, in the Potomac.
But I don’t really know.
All I know is that, as with many divorces, the tale you’ll be told about the breakup of Sodium ion and Chloride ion can’t possibly be the full story. Ions have charge, and charge must balance. So that the only way chloride can drop its ex — the sodium ion — is to pick up a suitable replacement. I can only guess that, somehow, whatever that replacement ion is just doesn’t much matter. So nobody talks about it.
They dump on the ex (sodium) for killing the vegetation at the site of application. But nobody bothers to name Chloride’s current partner.
Either that, or I fundamentally misunderstand something about this.
Grains of hardness should set my TDS baseline.
Horsepower. Tons of cooling. British thermal units. Teaspoons.
Grains of water hardness.
There’s just something about crazy old units of measurement that simply refuse to die.
At any rate, here’s where this stands.
I’ve ordered a cheap TDS (total-dissolved-solids) meter. Assuming it works, it’ll give me good information on the density of ions on my drinking water. Expressed in parts-per-million (ppm).
I’m going to draw daily samples of water for the next N days (like, 14 or boredom, whichever comes first). By samples, I mean fill a mason jar with water and give it a labeled plastic top. Kitchen faucet (so I know it’s well-used every day).
Plus, no at-home science project is really complete if it doesn’t use a mason jar.
Then I’m going to do the obvious things. Test the water, using the meter. And, with the aid of my wife, taste the water, blinded as to which mason jar is which. Hoping that “ion count is up” and “tastes like salt” days a) exist, and b) coincide.
This, assuming that TDS is normally slow-varying, and doesn’t just like spike at random times all year long. (Or, for that matter, does not spike following rainfall, regardless of salt on the pavement, something I would in theory need to test for. These are things that I hope are true — basically, that my water’s TDS does not normally have short-term intense spikes of ions. But this is something that I hope is true, not something that I know or have shown to be true.
But how big a blip can I reasonably expect? Will I even be able to register it, with this cheap meter?
That’s what this post is about.
The commonly-stated standard for drinking water taste is that water should not exceed 250 ppm (parts per million) chloride ions. At least, this seems to be what Google’s AI tells me, expressed as 250 milligrams chloride per liter of water. Above this level, a salty taste is evident. (To some, I guess. Salt sensitivity varies across individuals and over time, but 250 ppm is what gets cited as a common standard for avoiding salt taste in the drinking water.)
So if I can taste the salt in my water, that ought to correspond to that level of chloride, or higher, in the water.
That’s going to add to the total dissolved solids that are routinely in my water, that is, my “baseline” TDS. Which my town’s legally-mandated annual water quality report helpfully lists as being in the range of 5 to 10 grains of hardness. By weight, I believe that’s almost entirely calcium carbonate.
And 10 grains of hardness works out to be 640 mg of dissolved minerals (mostly harmless calcium carbonate) per gallon of water.
(So “a grain” is weight, now equal to about 64 milligrams. The answer above is what you’ll get from Google’s AI. And a grain of water hardness is a grain of dissolved minerals, per gallon of water.)
The term grain comes from exactly where you’d think. Its supposed to be the weight of an idealized grain of wheat. Or so they say. But it is widely listed as equaling 1/7000th of a common (avoirdupois) pound, and so it doesn’t play nicely with standard U.S. units. Aside from the fact that a grain is tiny, I think this explains why grains are not used in the U.S. (outside of ammunition and water hardness, and I guess alchemical receipts. But never in the day-to-day.
To put those two numbers on common footing, note that a gallon is four liters. So ten grains of water hardness is (640 mg/4 liters =~) 160 ppm dissolved solids.
Or close enough. (When I ask Google, it helpfully tells me that a grain of hardness works out to be 17.1 ppm, or ten grains of hardness is just over 170 ppm. Plenty close enough to the prior estimate, for this work.
And, because, by weight, calcium carbonate makes up the vast majority of what’s dissolved in my drinking water, that should be my baseline TDS reading.
Which means that the expected minimum taste-able chloride spike (250 ppm) should easily show up on top of my background TDS of around 170 ppm (10 grains of hardness).
Things could still go wrong. Perhaps the day-to-day TDS level of my drinking water is erratic, spiking up and down all the time. Perhaps it kicks up after every significant rainstorm (so that the expected coming spike might have nothing to do with salt.) Perhaps this $6 meter is so unreliable that random meter errors will swamp the expected salt-driven increase in TDS.
But if none of that is true, then if I can taste the salt in the water, the concomitant jump in ion concentration in the drinking water should easily register on a cheap TDS meter.
Conclusion
So far, this is not a fool’s errand.
A cheap TDS meter should be good enough to document the expected salt spike in my drinking water.
Addendum: Initial impression of cheap TDS meter.
My $6 TDS meter arrived. Worked right out of the box. At any point in time, it seems to give a consistent reading.
But glasses of water drawn three hours apart differed almost 10% in their measured TDS. I don’t know whether that’s the native uncertainty of the meter, poor water-draw technique on my part, or actual hour-to-hour variation in my tap water’s TDS.
After a little poking about, I find a few things.
First, weirdly enough, there are different procedures for drawing water to test the water, as opposed to drawing water to test the plumbing. If you’re testing the (incoming) water, common advice is to let the tap run full-on for five minutes, then take a sample. By contrast, if you’re (e.g.) testing for lead in the pipes, apparently, you want to catch and test what’s sitting in the pipe, and you don’t want to flush the pipe at all.
I’m only letting the kitchen tap run 30 seconds. (But, honestly, if the difference across readings is due to stuff coming out of my pipes, I’d kind of like to know that.) I may try some five-minute flushes to see if that gives me more consistent readings.
In any event, change of plan. I’m just going to measure the TDS of my kitchen tap water several times a day, over the next couple of weeks, and record the results.
With luck, my $6 meter will last the full two weeks.