WaterProfile Local

Utilities / Texas

Houston, TX water hardness

Houston Public Works publishes an average hardness of 135.5 mg/L for its system, in its Houston Water Quality Report 2025 (Main System, TX1010013). On the USGS scale that is hard water, though the utility's own range crosses more than one class — it spans soft, hard and very hard water from end to end.

Soft Moderate Hard Very hard 0 60 120 180 500+ 135.5 mg/L Houston, TX sits in the hard band mg/L as CaCO₃. Bands drawn equal width, so the axis is not linear.
Houston Public Works published an average of 135.5 mg/L, with a published range of 43.5 to 229 mg/L shown as the bar. The plotted point is the published average. Classification bands from the USGS Water Science School.

The published figure, exactly as it appears

This is the hardness line transcribed from the source, with nothing added:

Parameter / Substance (units) Detections (Sampled in 2025 unless noted) Recommended Levels (SMCL) Minimum Average Maximum […] Total Hardness as CaCO3 (ppm) NA 43.5 135.5 229

Houston Public Works, Houston Water Quality Report 2025 (Main System, TX1010013)

Units as published: ppm. What kind of figure it is: an average with a range. Retrieved 2026-10-26.

Houston hardness in mg/L and grains per gallon

Water-quality reports use mg/L (identical to ppm). Softener instructions and plumbing specifications use grains per gallon. Both are below. Where a figure is our arithmetic rather than the utility's own number, it says so.

Figuremg/L (ppm)Grains per gallonWhose number
Published average135.57.9mg/L published, gpg is our conversion
Low end of published range43.52.5mg/L published, gpg is our conversion
High end of published range22913.4mg/L published, gpg is our conversion
Plotted on the scale above135.57.9published average; the gpg here is our conversion at 17.1, so it can differ slightly from a utility’s own rounded gpg figure

The conversion, both ways: gpg = mg/L ÷ 17.1 and mg/L = gpg × 17.1. Worked for this system: 135.5 ÷ 17.1 = 7.9 gpg. The converter does °dH and °f as well, and why the factor is 17.1 explains where the number comes from.

What this figure does not tell you

Service area and source water

UtilityHouston Public Works
Public water system IDTX1010013
Service area as publishedThe Houston Main System (TX1010013). The same report covers separate Houston systems — Kingwood (TX1010348), Willow Chase (TX1011902), District 73 (TX1011585) and District 82 (TX1011593) among them — each with its own table; those are not described by this page.

Provenance of every number on this page

Source documentHouston Water Quality Report 2025 (Main System, TX1010013)
Source URLhttps://www.houstonpublicworks.org/sites/g/files/nwywnm456/files/doc/003_2025_houston_water_quality_report.pdf
Published byHouston Public Works
Report year2025
Year noteThe report covers January to December 2025; the hardness row is in the Main System table of secondary constituents, “Sampled in 2025 unless noted”.
Retrieved2026-10-26
Classification bandsUSGS Water Science School, retrieved 2026-10-16

Notes the report forces on this page

If you are sizing a softener for Houston water

At 7.9 gpg, the sizing arithmetic starts from your household's water use, not from the hardness alone. The calculator below is pre-filled with this system's figure and every other input is an editable assumption.

Whether a softener is worth installing at this hardness is a judgement, not arithmetic, and it is not one this site makes for you. Nothing here has been tested by the author.

Where Houston sits against other verified systems

Soft Soft 0–60
Moderately hard Moderate 61–120
Hard Hard 121–180
Very hard Very hard 181+
  1. Portland, OR 9 mg/L 0.5 gpg Soft
  2. Boston, MA 16 mg/L 1 gpg Soft
  3. Manchester, NH 17.9 mg/L 1 gpg Soft
  4. Seattle, WA 19.1 mg/L 1.1 gpg Soft
  5. Raleigh, NC 25 mg/L 1.47 gpg Soft
  6. New York, NY 32 mg/L 2 gpg Soft
  7. Charlotte, NC 32 mg/L 1.9 gpg Soft
  8. Memphis, TN 46 mg/L 2.7 gpg Soft
  9. Norfolk, VA 48 mg/L 2.8 gpg Soft
  10. Anchorage, AK 56 mg/L 3.3 gpg Soft
  11. Virginia Beach, VA 56 mg/L 3.3 gpg Soft
  12. Oakland, CA 68.4 mg/L 4 gpg Moderately hard
  13. Nashville, TN 77.3 mg/L 4.5 gpg Moderately hard
  14. Sacramento, CA 83 mg/L 4.9 gpg Moderately hard
  15. Fresno, CA 89.3 mg/L 5.2 gpg Moderately hard
  16. Saint Paul, MN 90 mg/L 5 gpg Moderately hard
  17. Austin, TX 93 mg/L 5.4 gpg Moderately hard
  18. Minneapolis, MN 94 mg/L 5.5 gpg Moderately hard
  19. Washington, DC 95 mg/L 5.6 gpg Moderately hard
  20. Baltimore, MD 97.5 mg/L 5.7 gpg Moderately hard
  21. Birmingham, AL 98 mg/L 5.7 gpg Moderately hard
  22. Kansas City, MO 100 mg/L 5.8 gpg Moderately hard
  23. Denver, CO 105 mg/L 6.1 gpg Moderately hard
  24. Detroit, MI 107 mg/L 6.3 gpg Moderately hard
  25. Aurora, CO 113 mg/L 6.6 gpg Moderately hard
  26. Tulsa, OK 114.5 mg/L 6.7 gpg Moderately hard
  27. Louisville, KY 115 mg/L 6.7 gpg Moderately hard
  28. Columbus, OH 120 mg/L 7 gpg Moderately hard
  29. Cleveland, OH 120 mg/L 7 gpg Moderately hard
  30. Philadelphia, PA 125 mg/L 7.3 gpg Hard
  31. Ann Arbor, MI 126 mg/L 7.4 gpg Hard
  32. Cincinnati, OH 133 mg/L 7.8 gpg Hard
  33. Chicago, IL 134.5 mg/L 7.9 gpg Hard
  34. Houston, TX 135.5 mg/L 7.9 gpg Hard
  35. Milwaukee, WI 137 mg/L 8.01 gpg Hard
  36. St. Louis, MO 138 mg/L 8.1 gpg Hard
  37. Grand Rapids, MI 142 mg/L 8.3 gpg Hard
  38. Fort Worth, TX 145 mg/L 8.5 gpg Hard
  39. Spokane, WA 159 mg/L 9.3 gpg Hard
  40. Honolulu, HI 162.5 mg/L 9.5 gpg Hard
  41. Wichita, KS 170 mg/L 9.9 gpg Hard
  42. Omaha, NE 170 mg/L 10 gpg Hard
  43. Los Angeles, CA 192 mg/L 11.2 gpg Very hard
  44. Lincoln, NE 192 mg/L 11.2 gpg Very hard
  45. Riverside, CA 197 mg/L 12 gpg Very hard
  46. Tampa, FL 220 mg/L 12.9 gpg Very hard
  47. Phoenix, AZ 237 mg/L 13.9 gpg Very hard
  48. Mesa, AZ 239.4 mg/L 14 gpg Very hard
  49. Round Rock, TX 258 mg/L 15.1 gpg Very hard
  50. Pflugerville, TX 267 mg/L 15.6 gpg Very hard
  51. San Diego, CA 276 mg/L 16 gpg Very hard
  52. Las Vegas, NV 280 mg/L 16 gpg Very hard
  53. Chandler, AZ 282.2 mg/L 16.5 gpg Very hard
  54. San Antonio, TX 299.3 mg/L 17.5 gpg Very hard
  55. Anaheim, CA 300 mg/L 18 gpg Very hard
  56. Henderson, NV 304 mg/L 18 gpg Very hard
  57. Indianapolis, IN 317 mg/L 19 gpg Very hard
  58. Madison, WI 324.9 mg/L 19 gpg Very hard
  59. Scottsdale, AZ 352.5 mg/L 20.6 gpg Very hard
  60. Salt Lake City, UT 353.5 mg/L 20.7 gpg Very hard

mg/L as calcium carbonate. Each classification band is drawn the same width, so the axis is not linear in mg/L.

Houston, TX is the highlighted row. Every other system on this chart has its own page with its own published figure and report date. Grains per gallon are the utility's own figure where it published one, and our conversion at 17.1 mg/L per grain where it did not.

Systems with similar published hardness

All 60 verified systems   How to find hardness in your own utility's report   If you are on a well instead