Table 3
Reasons why households with a municipal water supply
treated their water before using it, by Canadian municipalities, 2007
Archived Content
Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please "contact us" to request a format other than those available.
| Treated water prior to consumption 1 | Reasons for treating 2 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| To improve appearance, taste or odour | To remove water treatment chemicals such as chlorine | To remove metals or minerals | To remove possible bacterial contamination | Other reasons | ||
| percent | ||||||
| All Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) households 3 | 56 | 58 | 50 | 41 | 45 | 12 |
| St. John's, CMA | 67 | 43 | 47 | F | F | F |
| Charlottetown, Census Subdivision (CSD) 4 | 49 | F | F | F | F | F |
| Halifax, CMA | 52 | 58 | 50 | F | F | F |
| Moncton, CMA | F | F | F | F | F | F |
| Fredericton, Census Agglomeration (CA) 4 | F | F | F | F | F | F |
| Saint John, CMA | F | F | F | F | F | F |
| Saguenay, CMA | F | F | F | F | F | F |
| Québec, CMA | 29 | 63 | 56 | 36 | 38 | F |
| Sherbrooke, CMA | F | F | F | F | F | F |
| Trois-Rivières, CMA | F | F | F | F | F | F |
| Montréal, CMA | 43 | 48 | 51 | 45 | 43 | 10 E |
| Ottawa - Gatineau, CMA | 51 | 72 | 49 | 45 | 32 | F |
| Ottawa - Gatineau, CMA (Quebec part) | F | F | F | F | F | F |
| Ottawa - Gatineau, CMA (Ontario part) | 55 | 72 | 45 | 42 | 32 | F |
| Kingston, CMA | 59 | 74 | F | F | F | F |
| Peterborough, CMA | 67 | 76 | F | F | F | F |
| Oshawa, CMA | 64 | 74 | 49 | F | F | F |
| Toronto, CMA | 70 | 61 | 49 | 46 | 49 | 10 |
| Hamilton, CMA | 64 | 61 | 45 | 22 | 31 | F |
| St. Catharines, CMA | 68 | 69 | 48 | F | 42 | F |
| Kitchener, CMA | 80 | 57 | 50 | 38 E | 30 E | F |
| Brantford, CMA | 51 | F | F | F | F | F |
| Guelph, CMA | 57 | F | F | F | F | F |
| London, CMA | 53 | 57 | 40 | 36 | 31 E | F |
| Windsor, CMA | 57 | 62 | 57 | F | 51 | F |
| Barrie, CMA | 62 | F | F | F | F | F |
| Greater Sudbury, CMA | 50 | F | F | F | F | F |
| Thunder Bay, CMA | 60 | 60 | 46 | 34 | 35 | F |
| Winnipeg, CMA | 55 | 74 | 50 | 32 E | 44 | F |
| Regina, CMA | 61 | 68 | 38 E | F | 52 | F |
| Saskatoon, CMA | 35 | 62 | 64 | 51 | F | F |
| Calgary, CMA | 63 | 65 | 56 | 44 | 49 | F |
| Edmonton, CMA | 48 | 50 | 54 | 46 | 48 | F |
| Kelowna, CMA | 70 | F | F | F | F | F |
| Abbotsford, CMA | 59 | 81 | 75 | F | F | F |
| Vancouver, CMA | 67 | 50 | 50 | 40 | 55 | 10 |
| Victoria, CMA | 46 | 59 | 45 | F | 43 | F |
As a percentage of households with a municipal
water supply reporting that tap water was used.
Relates only to households reporting that tap
water was used.
These values include only households in CMAs.
Households in Charlottetown CSD and Fredericton CA are not included.
Not included in "All Census Metropolitan Area
(CMA) households".
Source(s):
Statistics Canada, Environment Accounts and Statistics Division, Households
and the Environment Survey, 2007 (survey no. 3881).
- Date modified: