Best Emergency Water Storage Containers for Your Home
Water is an essential resource for human survival, making it crucial to have an adequate supply in times of crisis or disaster. Whether you are facing a natural disaster, a pandemic, or simply preparing for unforeseen events, storing water in your home can make all the difference. This article explores the best emergency water storage containers for your home, taking into consideration factors such as size, durability, material, and portability.
- WaterBrick Stackable Water Containers
- Scepter Military Water Can
- Saratoga Farms Stackables
- Legacy Premium Collapsible Water Container
- Best Container for Most People: Reliance Rhino 5.5 Gal Water Container
- Best Overall Can: Scepter 5 Gal Military Water Can
- Budget-friendly Pick: Reliance Aqua-Tainer 7 Gal
- Ease of Use
- Materials
- More Detailed Reviews
- Competition
- Conclusion
To be adequately prepared, it is crucial to store a minimum of two weeks’ worth of water in your household. Surprisingly, the majority of Americans have less than a 12-hour water supply in their homes, despite the fact that human survival is compromised after only three days without water.
When individuals begin prioritizing emergency preparedness, these containers are often among the first items they purchase. This is due to the significant impact of having readily accessible stored water, making it a cost-effective and straightforward measure to take.
The notable distinction between these smaller jerry cans and larger water tanks or barrels is their portability. They are designed to be carried by an average adult on foot when filled with water. Even if you possess larger tanks for water storage, it is highly recommended to have these smaller containers on hand for situations where you need to travel for refills or other purposes.
1. WaterBrick Stackable Water Containers
WaterBrick containers are a versatile and popular choice for emergency water storage. Made from high-density polyethylene (HDPE), these containers are BPA-free and FDA approved for long-term water storage. The unique interlocking design allows for easy stacking, helping you save space in your home. WaterBricks are available in 3.5-gallon and 1.6-gallon sizes, and their durability ensures they can withstand harsh conditions.
Price: $115.99
2. Reliance Products Aqua-Tainer
The Aqua-Tainer by Reliance Products is a tried and tested option for water storage. With a 7-gallon capacity, this container is perfect for those who want to store a significant amount of water without compromising on portability. The rugged design and opaque material prevent algae growth, and the built-in handle allows for easy transportation. The Aqua-Tainer also features a reversible spigot for convenient dispensing.
Price: $47.11
3. Scepter Military Water Can
Originally designed for military use, the Scepter Military Water Can is a heavy-duty option for emergency water storage. Made from BPA-free, food-grade materials, these cans boast a 5-gallon capacity and have been field-tested for durability. The single handle design makes for easy transportation, while the slim profile allows for efficient storage.
Price: $55.00
4. Saratoga Farms Stackables
Another stackable option, the Saratoga Farms Stackables offer a unique, space-saving design. Each container holds 5 gallons of water, and their rectangular shape allows for easy stacking. Made from BPA-free, food-grade materials, these containers are durable and designed to last. The included spigot makes dispensing water a breeze, while the built-in handle ensures easy transportation.
Price: $21.95
5. Legacy Premium Collapsible Water Container
The Legacy Premium Collapsible Water Container is a convenient option for those with limited storage space. This container is made from durable, BPA-free material and has a 5-gallon capacity. When not in use, it can be easily folded and stored away. The built-in handle and included spigot make for easy transportation and dispensing, while the opaque material prevents algae growth.
Price: $159.99
Best Container for Most People: Reliance Rhino 5.5 Gal Water Container
If you are seeking a single container to fulfill your most crucial emergency water storage needs, the 5.5-gallon Reliance Rhino offers excellent value. With a typical price of around $20, it is reasonably priced, just slightly more expensive than the commonly chosen Aqua-Tainer (our budget recommendation). The additional cost provides a sturdier and thicker container that can withstand events like earthquakes and accidental drops more effectively than its cheaper counterparts.
Among the containers we tested, the Rhino proved to be one of the easiest to carry. It boasts a user-friendly pouring mechanism and a superior screw cap with an airflow vent, in contrast to the inexpensive push-pin style plugs found in many other similarly-priced options.
The Rhino also features a semi-stackable design incorporated into its side walls. While not suitable for long-term stacked storage, it serves as a convenient feature for short-term usage such as transportation in your vehicle. It’s worth noting that in the $10-25 price range, it is common for these containers to experience slight leakage around the cap when held upside down or on their sides. If you desire better manufacturing quality and minimized leakage, an upgrade to a higher-priced option may be necessary.
Price: $23.80
Best Overall Can: Scepter 5 Gal Military Water Can
For an upgrade option, we highly recommend the Scepter 5-gallon Military Water Can (MWC). These containers proved to be the toughest among those with a capacity of over five gallons in our testing. The MWCs offer a range of military-tested and practical features, including a spacious 4″ filling hole, a locking ring to prevent accidental loosening, a smaller 1″ pour spout with no movable or reversible parts, and molded stability feet.
While they come with a higher price tag of around $50 (including shipping), the Scepter MWCs are worth the investment. They are twice as expensive as the Reliance Rhino and three times as expensive as the budget-friendly Reliance Aqua-Tainer. However, we believe this upgrade is well worth it, as these containers will prove invaluable during a crisis and are built to last for up to 20 years. In the long run, they can save you money. We have personally incorporated these Scepter MWCs into our own emergency preparations.
Price: $51.39
Budget-friendly Pick: Reliance Aqua-Tainer 7 Gal
For those on a tight budget, our recommended choice is the Reliance Aqua-Tainer with a capacity of 7 gallons. This option is widely available in various stores and typically costs around $20. While the plastic used in this container is less durable and more susceptible to dents and cracks, we were pleasantly surprised by Reliance’s ability to deliver a well-performing and affordable option.
If you have budget constraints, purchasing two of these containers per person is a cost-effective way to meet your two-week water supply needs. The cube shape of the Aqua-Tainer allows for convenient storage, and it can be easily placed on a tabletop edge, thanks to the included reversible bottom side water spigot. Although it didn’t pass our rigorous drop and crush tests, it should withstand gentle in-home use without any issues.
Price: $19.88
Space-saver Pick: WaterBrick 3.5 Gal
For those looking to maximize space efficiency, our recommended choice is the WaterBrick. These water containers are designed to be ultra-stackable and durable, allowing you to fit the most water in the smallest possible space. It’s important to note that they are more expensive compared to other options. A set of four WaterBricks, totaling 14 gallons, will cost approximately twice as much as alternative containers, and you will need to purchase an additional water spigot and cap separately. If you’re buying for two people, the 8 Pack may provide better value.
While we found the WaterBricks to be slightly disappointing in terms of storing and using water, they performed exceptionally well in our durability tests. Their compact design allows them to fit into various pockets of space around your home, making them a practical choice for optimizing storage efficiency.
Price: $159.97
Best Overall Bang for Your Buck: Mix Multiple Containers
Considering that each person requires a minimum of 15 gallons of water and most households will need a total of 30-45 gallons, it is necessary to purchase multiple 5-7 gallon containers.
While our recommendation for the best overall container stands strong if you choose to buy multiples of that particular product, it’s important to note that certain containers have features that excel in specific situations or serve as excellent budget options, despite not being universally ideal.
For instance, the Reliance Aqua-Tainers are a popular choice due to their affordable price of $20 and satisfactory performance. However, they did not meet the criteria to be our top pick primarily because they are made of thinner plastic that is more prone to dents and cracks compared to our main choices. Nevertheless, they can still serve well if kept stationary in your home and not subjected to rough handling. Additionally, their advantage lies in their ability to sit comfortably on the edge of a countertop with a convenient bottom spigot.
Our Ideal Mix for a Home of Two People:
- Two Military Water Cans (Scepter 5 gallon) with the additional spigot hose, providing a total capacity of 10 gallons.
- Two Reliance Rhinos (5.5 gallon each), offering a total capacity of 11 gallons.
- One Reliance Aqua-Tainer (7 gallon).
Best Budget Mix for a Home of Two People:
- Two Reliance Rhinos (5.5 gallons each), providing a total capacity of 11 gallons.
- Three Reliance Aqua-Tainers (7 gallons each), offering a total capacity of 21 gallons.
When working with a limited budget, it is advisable to invest in one or two of the highly durable Military or Rhino cans instead of purchasing five of the cheapest option available. While it may seem tempting to save $40 by opting for the cheaper containers, the risk of water leakage or contamination during emergencies outweighs the cost savings. Cheaper options are more prone to cracking and may require replacement every few years, resulting in additional expenses over time. Prioritizing durability and reliability is crucial for long-term preparedness.
Why You Should Trust Us
After dedicating more than 34 hours to comprehensive research and extensive testing, complemented by over a decade of experience using various products in survival and camping scenarios, we have curated this list of recommendations. Our thorough evaluation involved reviewing over 20 different containers and conducting hands-on testing of more than 10 of them. The main author of this article possesses valuable expertise in researching, purchasing, installing, and maintaining off-the-grid water systems, including cisterns with capacities of up to 2,500 gallons. It is worth noting that we personally rely on these recommended products in our own households, recognizing the critical role water plays in ensuring our family’s well-being. With our utmost trust placed in these products, we confidently present our findings to assist you in making informed decisions for your own preparedness.
Store a Minimum of 15 Gallons Per Person
The Prepperwebsite strongly recommends having a minimum of two weeks’ worth of supplies stored in your home. This guideline is based on the rule of thumb that each person should have approximately one gallon of water per day, amounting to about 15 gallons per person for the two-week duration.
The shift from the previous recommendation of 72 hours’ worth of supplies to two weeks is due to the realities observed in actual disasters. In such events, it has taken emergency responders up to 8-9 days to reach and provide assistance to all affected individuals.
Numerous examples highlight the importance of this extended water supply. The Flint, Michigan water crisis serves as a stark reminder, with residents enduring months without access to clean utility water. Similarly, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, FEMA struggled for a full week to distribute drinkable water to all those in need.
A notable case is the 1994 Northridge earthquake in Los Angeles, which caused extensive damage amounting to approximately $25 billion. In its wake, 50,000 homes experienced water cutoffs lasting at least five days, and some estimates indicate that even after nearly two weeks, around 12,000 homes still lacked access to water. These incidents demonstrate the necessity of being adequately prepared with ample water supplies for extended periods.
Water Must Be Ready to Use at All Times
Having an adequate supply of water for emergencies is crucial, and it’s essential to ensure you have at least a two-week minimum supply without the need for additional effort or unnecessary risks. Emergency water should be readily available and easily accessible at all times.
By being prepared with a proper emergency water storage, you eliminate the need to search for water, go through the process of filtering or boiling, filling up the bathtub, rushing to buy bottled water from stores, or relying solely on the limited water capacity of your water heater. Additional water resources such as water filters in bug out bags, on-site wells, the bathtub, or long-term water purifiers can serve as valuable backup options.
Avoid Shortcuts Like Bottled Water, Milk Jugs, and Office Jugs
There are certain aspects of prepping where you can rely on DIY solutions or rotating stock to save money. However, when it comes to water, it’s important not to compromise.
Avoid using containers that previously held non-food items. Although it may be possible to clean out containers like milk or juice cartons, it’s not worth the risk of potential bacteria contamination. Additionally, these cartons are often biodegradable and not designed for long-term storage.
Two-liter soda bottles are slightly better than milk or juice cartons due to the acidic nature of soda, but they still have limitations. They are transparent and not very durable. If you must use off-the-shelf containers, consider using sturdy and semi-opaque Arizona Green Tea jugs.
While some people opt for a rotating system, where they continuously replenish their stock of bottled water, this approach has its drawbacks. Experts agree that real-life circumstances can easily catch you off guard without an adequate water supply.
Challenges with normal bottled water include:
- Single-use nature: These water containers may need to be used for longer than two weeks.
- Prone to crushing, cracking, and breaking.
- Inefficient use of space: Storing 15 gallons of bottled water takes up more room compared to proper containers.
- Difficult to move in bulk: Transporting large quantities of small bottles is more cumbersome than carrying a few larger containers.
- Costlier in the long run: Tap water is free.
- Excessive plastic waste.
- Shorter shelf life: Bottled water has shorter expiration dates and may lack the same level of chemical treatments as tap water.
Office jugs, such as the large upside-down ones, share similar issues. They are often transparent, challenging to handle, and not designed for long-term storage or emergency situations. Furthermore, resealing them or managing them without the base part can be problematic.
Quick Tips on Water Storage
- Water can be safely stored for 3-5 years with the right container, water source, and storage conditions. However, it is recommended to rotate the water every 2-3 years to ensure freshness.
- Not all types of plastic are suitable for water storage. Look for the number inside the recycle symbol on the container. Plastics numbered 2, 4, and 5 are generally considered safe for storing water, while plastics numbered 1, 3, 6, and 7 are not recommended.
- Plastic #2, also known as HDPE, is typically regarded as the best choice for water storage.
- Be cautious about storing water containers on cement garage floors or surfaces that may contain harmful substances, as plastics can absorb chemicals.
- When it comes to storing water, it’s important to protect it from light, heat, and bacteria, as they can degrade water quality over time.
- Avoid reusing everyday items like soda bottles or milk jugs for water storage, unless they are thoroughly cleaned beforehand.
- Keep in mind that water expands when frozen, so if you anticipate freezing temperatures, it’s advisable to fill containers only to about 85% of their capacity to allow room for expansion.
How to Clean a Water Container
To clean the water container, begin by filling it with warm water and adding a small amount of dish soap. Close the cap securely and shake the container to remove any visible debris. Then, drain the soapy water and rinse the container thoroughly.
Next, fill the container with approximately a quart of water, which is equivalent to about 15 seconds of normal faucet flow. Add a teaspoon of unscented household chlorine bleach to the water. Close the cap tightly and wait for 30 seconds. Shake the container well and wait for another 30 seconds.
Afterward, drain the bleach solution from the container and rinse it thoroughly with clean water. You can either let the container air dry or fill it immediately with clean water for storage.
You Don’t Need To Chemically Treat Water Before or After Storing
In most cases, tap water from a properly treated water system is already safe to store in a clean and well-maintained container. Water treatment facilities use approved chemicals, such as chlorine, in regulated amounts to ensure water safety.
If you have properly cleaned and stored your water container, filling it with tap water should keep it safe for at least a year.
For an extra layer of caution, you can consider using a water preserver. While we have not conducted a comprehensive chemical lab test on water preservers yet, popular options like Water Preserver or a small amount of unscented household bleach (5.25% sodium hypochlorite) – about five drops (1/8th of a teaspoon) per gallon – can be used.
If your water source is untested or untreated, such as well water, using a chemical preserver is recommended.
To maintain water purity, it’s important to avoid introducing contaminants. Wash your hands thoroughly before handling the equipment, and clean the lids, caps, spouts, and inside of the container using soap or chlorine.
How We Picked
To ensure a comprehensive evaluation of water storage options, we embarked on an extensive research process. We delved into numerous legitimate product reviews, forum discussions, and informational guides related to water storage. Drawing from both our findings and personal experiences, we established a clear understanding of the key qualities we sought in water storage containers.
Next, we scoured popular online platforms and stores including Amazon, Walmart, REI, Cabelas, and prepper-focused ecommerce stores and forums. From the wide array of available products, we carefully selected 10 options for in-person testing. Here is the list of containers we evaluated:
- WaterBrick: We tested two packs, each containing 3.5-gallon containers with included spigots.
- Reliance Aqua-Tainer: A 7-gallon water container.
- Reliance Rhino Pak: A 5.5-gallon water container.
- Reliance Desert Patrol: A 6-gallon water container.
- Reliance Jumbo-Tainer: A 7-gallon water container.
- Saratoga Farms Stackables: A set of four 5-gallon water containers.
- Scepter USGI Military Water Can: A 5-gallon water container.
- Scepter Water Can: A 5-gallon water container.
- Igloo Cargo II 1402 Water Can: A 6-gallon water container (not pictured with the group but tested separately).
- Ace Roto-Mold Water Storage Tank: A 10-gallon water storage tank.
Pricing, Availability, and Brands
The water container market has experienced pricing and availability inconsistencies, partly due to factors such as large orders from the military and increased demand during rescue operations following natural disasters like the 2017 hurricanes and wildfires. These circumstances have created a backlog in production and distribution for some manufacturers.
Notably, many manufacturers in this industry do not directly sell their products on major platforms like Amazon, as their primary focus is often on serving the military market. Instead, they rely on distributors who have the flexibility to set prices based on supply and demand. As a result, we have observed occasional fluctuations in prices when inventory levels become low. For instance, the Scepter Military Water Can has been listed on Amazon at prices significantly higher than the manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP).
When we provide links to purchase products, rest assured that we have carefully selected the stores based on fairness and consistency. This may include popular platforms like Amazon or specialized military sales websites, depending on the specific product.
It’s worth noting that certain brands in the outdoor, camping, or emergency preparedness space simply rebrand existing water containers and charge higher prices. For example, the Ozark Trail-branded container is essentially a Reliance Desert Patrol can with a different label, as evidenced by the visible Reliance name in the product photo.
While Reliance is a prominent brand with popular options like the Aqua-Tainer and Jumbo-Tainer, it’s important to remember that appearing on the first page of Amazon search results with high ratings does not guarantee the suitability of a product for your needs.
While we made efforts to explore other brands such as Coleman and Igloo, we encountered difficulties in finding complete product information or reliable availability.
Additionally, there are tanks designed for restaurant or industrial use that may be suitable for water storage purposes, but they often prove challenging to purchase due to outdated websites, high markups, and expensive shipping costs.
Capacity vs. Weight vs. Risk: Use Containers Under Seven Gallons
Instead of relying on a single large container, we focused on options that hold 10 gallons or less for short-term water needs. The most common sizes we considered were 5, 6, 7, and 10 gallons.
This choice was made with practicality in mind, as there may be situations where you need to move the containers. Whether it’s bringing them up from a flooded basement, lifting them onto a countertop, or carrying them to your vehicle for evacuation, mobility is a key factor.
It’s important to recognize that water is heavy. A gallon of water weighs more than eight pounds, so even a small five-gallon container will exceed 40 pounds when full. Many people underestimate the weight of water containers, and we found that even seven-gallon containers become challenging to move (~56 pounds) for most individuals with just one hand.
However, we did include a seven and ten-gallon container in our testing to assess the weight issue with a diverse range of people.
Another advantage of having multiple smaller containers is to reduce the risk of a single point of failure. By distributing three containers of five or six gallons each in different locations such as the pantry, closet, and garage, the likelihood of at least one container surviving an earthquake or tornado is increased. Our cautious approach always prioritizes preparedness for short-term water needs.
While we appreciate larger, long-term water storage containers and plan to review them extensively in the future, such as the 55-gallon barrel options, they serve a different purpose. It’s important to note that moving a 450-pound water tank would be impractical.
Although there were enticing options like the 15-gallon water barrel from Emergency Essentials, we did not include it in our testing due to its weight of 125 pounds.
Toughness and Durability
When it comes to storing water for a long time, it’s crucial to have reliable and durable containers that can withstand potential hazards like earthquakes or floods. You shouldn’t have to worry about cheap containers that may crack, dent, leak, or fall apart easily, nor should they be susceptible to normal wear and tear that occurs during camping activities.
To ensure practicality and durability, we automatically excluded flimsy or collapsible containers. While they may be suitable for camping, they are not designed to meet the requirements of long-term water storage. This is also why we discourage the use of milk jugs, as they are not intended for long-term use and tend to degrade over time.
One common issue that arose from customer reviews on platforms like Amazon was leaks and cracks. Unfortunately, many popular water containers in the $10-$50 price range have received feedback mentioning these problems. However, we didn’t immediately disqualify them from consideration, especially since the alternatives are pricier, ranging from $70 to $130 per container.
Based on our previous experiences, we aimed to avoid containers that utilize push-plug style caps for the airflow hole. These caps tend to be less durable with frequent use, are prone to breakage and loss, and can lead to leaks. Nonetheless, for the sake of providing a comprehensive assessment, we tested some of the most popular containers that feature this type of plug.
Ease of Storage
When evaluating water containers for survival needs, we eliminated tanks with unconventional designs like cone-bottom stands from Plastic Mart. We encountered various types of containers, including tall and slender “jerry” cans, cubes, and tall circular tubes.
Some containers were specifically designed for storing in truck beds or other specialized situations. However, we disqualified any containers with excessively odd shapes that would be difficult or inefficient to store in a typical home, such as cone-bottom tanks that facilitate water removal but are impractical for home survival purposes.
The concept of stackable containers appealed to us, as they provide added durability and efficient use of space by allowing vertical expansion and requiring less floor space. Unfortunately, there were limited options available for containers specifically designed for stacking or snugly fitting together. The stackable containers we found tended to be significantly more expensive due to this feature.
A week’s worth of water for a single person, which amounts to approximately seven gallons, occupies about one cubic foot of space. Even if you have limited storage capacity in your home, allocating two cubic feet of space for two weeks’ worth of water is a reasonable measure for such a crucial resource. Two cubic feet is only slightly larger than a standard carry-on bag for air travel.
Ultimately, we considered stackability as a desirable but not essential criterion. This was partly because we didn’t come across any stackable containers that truly impressed us and partly because the practicality of stacking became challenging beyond two layers.
Ease of Use
When evaluating water containers, three primary activities come to mind: filling, moving, and removing water from the container.
Certain containers feature peculiar caps that necessitate the use of a specialized “bung” wrench to open. Others may require the purchase of additional components or specific spigots for filling and dispensing water.
While the requirement of extra pieces or tools did not automatically disqualify a product, we did exclude containers that had confusing, proprietary, or fragile components. The top-performing products were those that offered simplicity and could be utilized without the need for special tools. This ensured that in a crisis, one could easily unscrew the cap by hand and swiftly access the water. To determine user-friendliness, we even applied the “ten-year-old child” test, considering whether a normal ten-year-old could operate the container unassisted.
Materials
While plastic is commonly used for water storage, it is important to consider some factors:
- Sanitization: Plastic containers can be more challenging to sanitize compared to other materials.
- Different types of plastic: There are various types of plastics available, and not all of them are suitable for water storage. Identifying the specific material of a product can sometimes be difficult.
- Vulnerability to cracking: Plastic containers are more prone to cracking compared to other materials.
- Absorption and leaching: Plastics have the ability to absorb harmful substances, which can then leach into the stored water. For instance, if a plastic jug comes into contact with cleaning chemicals on a cement floor, those chemicals can be absorbed into the container.
Plastics can absorb chemicals and odors from their surroundings. It is advised to avoid plastics labeled as #7, as they may contain BPA, which can leach into the water.
Due to the ongoing debate surrounding the absorption and leaching of plastics, we opted for a cautious approach. We excluded products that were not guaranteed to be BPA-free or made from food-grade materials.
The safest plastics for water storage are polyethylene-based plastics, specifically plastics #1, #2, and #4. Food-grade plastics are typically made of High-density polyethylene (HDPE) #2. However, it is important to note that not all products made from HDPE #2 are necessarily food grade.
While materials like glass and stainless steel have advantages, such as easier decontamination, they are often considered impractical for water storage due to their likelihood of breaking, heavier weight, increased light penetration, and higher cost.
Shelf life, Safety, and Container Colors
Tap water can remain safe in most common containers when stored in a dark and cool place for approximately 2-3 months. However, it becomes impractical to replace stored water every few months. Our objective is to ensure water safety for a minimum of 12 months, and ideally 2-3 years.
In addition to the concerns of plastic leaching, the choice of container material and transparency can impact the quality of stored water.
While water itself does not go bad, it can become stale due to a lack of oxygen. This can easily be remedied by gently shaking or swirling the water.
The primary concern lies in the growth of bacteria and contamination. Heat, light, and bacteria are the three main factors that pose a threat to water storage. To address this, reliable water storage options often utilize materials that are UV-resistant and darker in color, such as solid blue plastics commonly used in 55-gallon water drums.
Similar to the use of dark beer bottles, exposure to light can negatively affect the taste and shelf-life of water. Interestingly, the practice of adding a lime to Corona beer is a marketing strategy aimed at masking the undesirable taste resulting from the use of clear bottles.
The universally recognized color for potable water is a fresh blue shade. Some available products use this color for easy identification. While we consider containers in this color preferable when all other factors are equal, it is not a crucial criterion. However, it is essential to clearly label your potable water containers to prevent any risk of cross-contamination.
How We Tested
In addition to conducting basic tests on product quality and identifying any obvious leaks, we conducted thorough and rigorous assessments to evaluate the containers’ durability and performance under challenging conditions. Our tests included simulating emergencies and subjecting the containers to various forms of abuse. Furthermore, we assessed their ease of storage and user-friendliness to ensure a comprehensive evaluation of each product.
Filling and Draining
The containers we evaluated showed a significant variation in their performance when it came to their primary function of receiving and dispensing water. We encountered containers with peculiar caps, some of which could only be sealed once and then needed replacement, while others had spigots prone to clogging or failure.
To assess the user-friendliness of the containers, we conducted tests involving individuals of different age groups, including a 10-year-old, a 17-year-old, and two adults. These participants were tasked with twisting on and off caps and accessories, as well as performing the standard process of filling and draining the containers, all without any instructions.
In response to customer reviews highlighting difficulties in draining all of the water from certain containers, we specifically tested their drainage capabilities in their natural resting positions. We also assessed the ease of using one hand to maneuver the container and/or spigot while using the other hand to hold a cup for filling.
Considering the importance of water conservation during emergencies, we examined how effectively the containers allowed control over the pouring speed. Additionally, we paid attention to the quality of the pour, such as whether it spread or sprayed, split into multiple streams, or exhibited other undesirable behaviors. We aimed to identify three controllable pouring speeds for each container: a small trickle for filling a shot glass without spilling, an average flow for filling a Nalgene-style water bottle, and the maximum flow achievable for filling a cooking pot.
Storing
To assess the ease of storage, we took into consideration that it is crucial to keep the water containers in a climate-controlled, accessible, and secure area, rather than an outdoor shed that may experience freezing temperatures for extended periods. Our goal was to simulate the process of storing the containers in logical locations within a house or apartment.
In three different households, we enlisted individuals who were not experienced survival planners to determine where they would store the containers based on their own judgment. We observed the level of logic or frustration involved in their decision-making process and assessed whether the containers fit conveniently in common areas such as pantries, closets, and other suitable spaces.
Carrying a Full Container by Hand
We conducted tests to evaluate the portability of fully filled emergency water containers, considering that each gallon of water weighs eight pounds. Our aim was to assess how easy it is to carry these containers with one hand during an emergency situation.
Three individuals participated in the tests: a strong adult man, an adult woman with average fitness, and a teenage boy with average fitness for his age group.
The tests involved carrying each container in a specific sequence: up a flight of stairs, down a flight of stairs, across 100 feet of flat ground, and finally loading it into the trunk of a car. Participants were allowed rest periods between each carry. It’s worth noting that not all participants were able to complete the entire sequence with the 7-gallon container, and none could complete it with the 10-gallon container (which lacked a carry handle).
Leak Tests
To assess the containers’ sealing capabilities, we conducted a test where the filled and sealed containers were laid flat, exerting reasonable internal water pressure against the seals. They remained in this position for three days, during which we closely monitored for any signs of leaks.
In order to evaluate their ability to prevent the entry of external contaminants, we subjected a container to a submerged test. The container was fully immersed in a bathtub filled with water for a duration of 10 minutes, while we observed for the presence of bubbles. To enhance detection, we added a dark brown gardening chemical to the bathtub water, enabling us to identify any discoloration or unpleasant taste in the potable water.
Following the test, we thoroughly cleaned the exterior of the container and examined the internal water for any indication of discoloration, comparing it to a control sample.
Crush Tests
It is surprising to find that some of the commonly purchased containers on Amazon lack sturdiness. Even after filtering out the obviously subpar ones during our research, some of the containers we purchased for our field test already had dents and dings in their plastic walls due to shipping.
To assess their durability, we conducted two different crush tests. The first test was more realistic, simulating a scenario where you might stack two full containers of water on top of each other. For instance, a jerry can can be laid flat on its broad side with another full jerry can placed on top. Although they are not typically designed for this, it is a plausible situation. The container on top was filled with five gallons of water, weighing approximately 40 pounds.
In the second crush test, we applied more extreme pressure by having an adult woman weighing 150 pounds stand on the strongest and weakest parts of the container. We carefully examined each container for any leaks, cracks, or signs of warping and distress in the plastic.
Drop Tests
To assess the impact resistance of the water containers, we conducted several drop tests from different heights onto a concrete surface. These tests aimed to simulate real-life scenarios where the containers may accidentally tip over or be dropped while being carried.
In the first test, we focused on the container’s stability by attempting to knock it over from a normal standing position onto a hard floor.
The second test replicated a situation where the container is being carried and accidentally slips from the hand. We carried each container as one normally would, typically in one hand by the side of the thigh, and while walking at a regular pace, we purposely lost our grip and dropped the container onto the concrete surface. We repeated this test three times for each container.
For a more rigorous drop test, we pushed the container off a standard kitchen countertop height, which is approximately three feet. This test aimed to simulate a more extreme drop scenario. We repeated the countertop drop test three times for each container.
These drop tests helped us evaluate the containers’ resilience and their ability to withstand accidental impacts.
More Detailed Reviews
Best Container for Most People: Reliance Rhino 5.5 Gal Water Container
Price: $23.80
Our top choice for the best emergency water container for most people is the Reliance Rhino 5.5-gallon can. It offers exceptional durability and practical features at a slightly higher price range compared to other options.
In our tests, the Rhino proved to be the most robust container under $30 and ranked third overall among all portable containers we evaluated, falling behind only the more expensive USGI military cans and WaterBricks.
During the crush tests, the Rhino displayed no signs of warping, cracks, or plastic distress. However, we did notice a temporary dip in the plastic when 150 pounds of weight were inadvertently placed on a weak spot in the side wall.
The Rhino performed admirably in our drop tests, consistently landing upright when dropped while walking. Its slender and tall design allows for comfortable carrying against the thigh.
While not explicitly marketed as a stackable container, the Rhino features stacking capabilities with a male-female pattern on opposite side walls. Although we observed some bowing in the side walls with stacking features, the Rhino stacked relatively well. However, it’s important to note that this stacking arrangement is not intended for long-term storage.
When stacked horizontally and filled with water, we did observe minor drip leaks from the main cap and airflow vent due to internal pressure against the seals. While this was a common occurrence in cans of this style when subjected to heavy loads, the leaks were relatively mild and acceptable considering the price and other factors.
The Rhino utilizes a reversible water cap and spout, which are included with the purchase. While this method is not our preferred option due to potential contamination, it is more sanitary compared to the spouts found on the Scepter 5 Gallon containers.
Twisting the caps tightly enough to prevent leaks when the can is laid on its side or suspended upside down proved slightly challenging but manageable.
Thanks to its 5.5-gallon capacity, tall and narrow frame, and topside carrying handle, the Rhino received positive feedback from our reviewers, who found it to be one of the easiest containers to carry, except for the lightweight 3.5-gallon WaterBrick. Its natural fit against the thigh during carrying sets it apart from bulkier options like the 7-gallon Aqua-Tainer cube.
It is also much easier to carry than other containers.
One area where the Rhino could be improved is the airflow vent. While the twist-style cap is preferable to push pin-style plugs, the plastic connection piece that prevents the cap from being lost was found to be flimsy and prone to twisting against the main body when opening the air valve. However, even if this piece were to break or be intentionally removed, the threaded cap is unlikely to be lost.
One area where the Rhino could be improved is the airflow vent. While the twist-style cap is preferable to push pin-style plugs, the plastic connection piece that prevents the cap from being lost was found to be flimsy and prone to twisting against the main body when opening the air valve. However, even if this piece were to break or be intentionally removed, the threaded cap is unlikely to be lost.
Upgrade: Scepter USGI 5 Gallon Military Water Can
Price: $51.39
Great add-on: USGI Military Water Can Extra Spigot Hose
The US Government Issue (USGI) military-spec water containers are highly regarded for their durability and practical design, as they are actively used by the US and Canadian militaries. These containers have been refined through years of practical field use and offer several advantages over other options.
Two companies, Scepter and LCI, manufacture the USGI cans. Scepter, the original and higher-quality manufacturer, is based in Canada. LCI cans, often sold under the Skilcraft brand, are made in America as part of a program that employs disabled and blind individuals. While there may be slight differences between the two, we believe the Scepter cans are of higher quality and worth the slightly higher price compared to LCI cans. However, if you’re looking for the most budget-friendly military-style can, you can purchase directly from LCI (with an additional $10 shipping fee).
The Military Water Can is incredibly tough and has a lifespan of 10-20 years. It meets mil-spec standards, which require a minimum wall thickness of 0.1 inches or 2.5 mm, resulting in a noticeably sturdy construction. While it is not recommended to drop the can from a significant height, it is designed to withstand rugged field conditions and is considered the most trustworthy option in the jerry can style.
The main 4″ hole of the USGI can is large, allowing for quick filling and draining, which is especially useful in situations like firefighting. The cap is easy to tighten by hand, although you have the option to use a bung wrench for additional torque. The main cap features a built-in child lock mechanism, requiring manual lifting of a plastic tab over a bump to unscrew it. This feature may be initially overlooked but can be easily understood, even by a 10-year-old child.
The primary 4-inch orifice is considerably large, allowing for efficient filling and swift drainage, making it particularly useful in urgent situations such as extinguishing fires. Securing the cap is a breeze, as it can be easily tightened by hand. However, for added leverage, a bung wrench can be purchased separately. To ensure safety, the main cap incorporates a built-in “child lock” mechanism consisting of a plastic tab that needs to be manually lifted over a protrusion in order to unscrew the cap. Although it may go unnoticed initially, even the youngest participant we tested, a 10-year-old child, was able to figure it out within approximately one minute.
Unlike cheaper jerry cans, the USGI can has two separate caps. The main cap covers the large fill hole, while a smaller 1″ twist cap is positioned on top of the main cap for pouring. There is no need to reverse or add an extra spout, eliminating parts that come into contact with your hand or are exposed to the outside and subsequently come into contact with the water.
The .5″ airflow vent is also a small twist cap integrated into the main cap. However, we did encounter a small leak in the airflow cap with the first unit we received, which appeared to be a manufacturing issue. Fortunately, a replacement resolved the problem. It’s important to note that leaks and cracks can occur with any water container on the market, so it’s advisable to always check your containers after purchasing.
We didn’t encounter any significant problems in this regard, but it’s worth noting that virtually every water container available in the market has been reported to have instances of leaks and cracks. Therefore, it becomes a matter of luck when purchasing such containers. It is always advisable to thoroughly inspect your containers upon purchase.
An additional accessory we purchased for $28 is a flexible tube about one foot long with a spigot at the end, which screws onto the smaller drain spout of the USGI can. While the can functions perfectly fine without this accessory, we found it highly useful and recommend it. Storing it in a dry ziplock bag alongside the container is recommended.
The USGI can passed all of our crush, drop, and submerge tests without any issues. However, in the “dropping it while walking” test, the canister never landed upright. This is due to the off-center carry handle, causing the can to tilt slightly from front to back during carrying.
One significant complaint we have is regarding the indexing on the main screw cap, which can be frustrating. When tightened by hand, the spout does not align exactly where one would expect it to. While this does not seem to affect pouring, it is an oversight by the manufacturer that could have been avoided.
Best Budget Pick: Reliance Aqua-Tainer 7 Gallon Container
The Reliance 7-gallon Aqua-Tainer is a popular choice due to its affordability and widespread availability in stores like Walmart. Despite its low price, Reliance has managed to create a decent option that performs well within its price range.
At $20, the plastic and construction quality of the Aqua-Tainer are better than some of the options tested at $30. However, there are noticeable warping and inconsistencies in the walls, particularly when the container is full. It exhibits a bloated bladder effect, pushing out against the sides.
The Aqua-Tainer has a distinctive design, resembling a stout cube with a handle and spigot on top. It can be tipped on its side so that the spout is at the bottom of the tank, allowing for easy use by simply turning the spigot. This design provides stability and convenience, enabling the container to be used over a few days without the need for additional setup.
Due to its design, the Aqua-Tainer is more prone to getting banged up compared to other types of containers. Normal day-to-day use, such as walking around corners, can result in significant dents in the corners.
There are numerous reports in Amazon reviews of leaks and cracks with the Aqua-Tainer. While leaks and cracks are common issues with various containers, the cheaper Aqua-Tainer is more likely to require replacement compared to the Rhino, for example, which is more durable.
Although the seven-gallon capacity may seem like an advantage over other 5-6 gallon options, most reviewers found that a smaller six-gallon size would have been preferable. The extra weight and storage space required for the additional gallon make a meaningful difference in terms of ease of carrying and use. Moreover, the larger side walls of the Aqua-Tainer are more susceptible to bending or breaking.
The Aqua-Tainer comes with a reversible spigot. When stored, the spigot is screwed inside the cap, coming into contact with the water. To use it, you remove the cap, unscrew the spigot, flip it to the other side, and screw it back in. The screw cap style cover for the airflow vent is a positive feature.
Considering its price, the caps and pieces of the Aqua-Tainer are reasonably well-built, and there were no reports of leaks around the connection points. However, there have been reports on Amazon of the white plastic spigot and cap cracking over time.
One potential issue is the contact with the spigot during the process of twisting it on or off, which then sits back into the water when stored. Additionally, when the spigot is stored inside the cap, the internal tube of the spigot is exposed to the outside environment, potentially allowing dirt and bacteria to enter the tube and flow out of the spigot when in use.
While not a significant concern, it’s worth noting that the Aqua-Tainer is best suited for non-critical water use in situations where it will not be moved around frequently. For example, it is well-suited for scenarios where it can be opened, placed on a table, and the spigot can be kept on the outside while the water is used over a few days in a home setting.
Best Space Saver: WaterBrick 3.5 Gal
For those prioritizing space efficiency, the WaterBrick is worth considering, despite its higher cost. We purchased a set of two with one water spigot for approximately $65. Alternatively, you can opt for sets of 4 or 8 bricks with one spigot priced at $110 and $185, respectively. Each set of four bricks provides a total of 14 gallons, equivalent to a two-week supply for one person.
WaterBricks are specifically designed for stacking purposes. With a capacity of 3.5 gallons per brick, they serve as versatile containers capable of storing various items such as dog food and beans, in addition to water, as advertised by the company.
The default cap used for each container is a simple flat cap without water-specific features. While the mouth is wide, it isn’t practical for water usage unless you purchase the additional water spigot cap. Sometimes, stores may bundle sets of 2, 4, or 8 bricks with one water spigot cap, but not one for each individual container.
As a result, it can become a bit of a hassle to handle the containers. If you have a stack of four WaterBricks filled with water and want to use one, you need to attach the carry handle, remove the container from the stack, stand it vertically, remove the carry handle again, replace the storage cap with the water cap, and proceed with usage.
Unfortunately, it is not possible to use the carry handle and the water spigot simultaneously. Although the handles provide convenience and enable easy vertical carrying, their removable nature can lead to unintentional detachment, causing frustration during testing.
The quality of the spigot itself is average. Since the container lacks a separate airflow vent for pouring assistance, the spigot is designed to allow water out while letting air in simultaneously, resulting in an unusual chugging noise and water flow.
When in use, the spigot is positioned halfway up the container. Consequently, once the water level drops below 50%, tilting the brick becomes necessary while operating the spigot or holding a cup with the other hand. There are no built-in handles or practical gripping areas, making this maneuver a bit awkward.
Upon examining the water cap and spigot, we had concerns regarding certain seals, particularly the one between the plastic cap and the spigot housing that passes through the middle of the cap. The assembly process of pairing the cap and spigot together is not as well executed as in comparable options like the more affordable $20 Reliance Aqua-Tainer.
During our tests, we did not observe any significant leakage when storing the water brick on its flat side while it was filled with water, the water cap was closed, and the spigot was shut. However, long-term storage in this position could potentially cause issues. Since the cap is positioned on a vertical side wall, it is the only container under seven gallons in our testing that experiences the weight of the internal water exerting pressure on the seals during regular storage.
It is reasonable to assume that the soft rubber gaskets used may degrade over time due to constant water pressure and contact. This concern is echoed in some Amazon reviews.
Overall, these design oversights by the company seem rather trivial. By improving the quality of the water cap and spigot, these issues could be avoided.
In terms of container durability, the WaterBrick proves to be highly sturdy, quite possibly the most solid-feeling option among containers under seven gallons that we tested. With a capacity of 3.5 gallons per brick, the reduced surface area of the walls minimizes warping. The plastic used is thick due to its intended stackability, and the container features specially designed support struts. We conducted a test where we placed a 150-pound weight on top of the WaterBrick container, and it remained unaffected by the pressure.
The true strength of the WaterBrick lies in its intended use: stacking multiple containers to maximize space efficiency. It outperforms all other stackable options we’ve encountered, allowing for stable stacking three or four levels high. By interlocking them in alternating directions, you can enhance stability. These bricks can even be utilized to construct makeshift structures or defensive walls that provide bullet resistance.
Regrettably, the WaterBrick falls short in terms of crucial aspects such as ease of use and spigot quality. With slight improvements in these areas, it could have been our top recommendation.
If you reside in a space-limited home, investing extra money in WaterBricks might be worthwhile. These containers can fit into smaller spaces than any other alternatives, or you can stack them together for the most space-efficient storage of 15 gallons per person. Just remember to purchase additional water caps and keep them securely stored in a sealed Ziploc bag.
Competition
Scepter 5 Gallon Water Container. Priced at $25 and impressed us during testing, coming close to being our top choice in both the overall and budget categories. While it has a few flaws that prevented it from claiming the top spot, it serves as an excellent alternative if you cannot find the Aqua-Tainer or have concerns about size and durability.
Scepter is well-regarded for producing high-quality water cans and is among the few manufacturers that offer our recommended upgrade pick, the USGI military-style jerry cans. This more affordable option from Scepter competes with Reliance products and provides a wider base that tapers towards the top, lending it increased stability compared to narrow cans like the Reliance Rhino. It proved to be the sturdiest option in the $20 price range. Additionally, the airflow valve cover and serrated teeth on the main spout cover were notable features that facilitated easy tightening and opening of the cap without the need for additional tools.
In terms of pouring, the Scepter container delivered the most pleasant experience among all the containers we tested, regardless of price range, except for the USGI can with an optional accessory spigot. The exceptional pour is attributed to the unique dual pipe design in the unusually long spout. However, the spout itself exhibited flimsiness, with the plastic edges starting to fray even during our testing.
It’s worth noting that the spout is flexible, featuring accordion folds in the middle. While this provides flexibility, we have reservations about long-term storage due to the difficulty of cleaning all the crevices and corners, which can potentially harbor bacteria. We also prefer a shorter spout since, with reversible designs, every time you remove, use, and return the spout, there is a risk of contact with your hands or other contaminants that could then come into contact with the water. One minor annoyance we encountered was that the neck hole of the container was the narrowest among all the options we tested when filling it.
One minor annoyance we encountered was that the neck hole of the container was the narrowest among all the options we tested when filling it.
Saratoga Farms Stackables.
The Saratoga Farms 5-gallon stackable water containers are available at a price of $100 for a four-pack. However, our experience with these containers left us feeling greatly disappointed. The plastic material used is of low quality, and we noticed that the containers were already warped and dented just from the shipping process. While it seems that the product designers had long-term storage in mind, the execution fell short. One notable issue was the airflow vent, which arrived without a pre-made hole. This meant that users had to puncture the hole themselves, which, in theory, helps reduce contamination and leakage risks but could be inconvenient during an emergency situation.
Furthermore, the caps of these containers were poorly designed. They featured a saw-tooth ratchet mechanism that locks in place after the initial tightening. However, once the cap is opened, the ratchet ring breaks away and cannot be used again, similar to a new soda bottle cap. The containers’ supposed key feature, stackability, was disappointing as well. We did not feel confident stacking them even two levels high. The interlocking design lacked robustness and only prevented shifting along one axis. Pushing in the other direction would cause the containers to slip right off, making the stacking feature almost laughable.
Reliance Desert Patrol 6 Gallon. Priced at $30, the Desert Patrol is a widely recognized water container that has gained popularity among campers and offroaders, including our own successful experiences with it. However, we quickly ruled it out for survival purposes. Despite featuring a standard single-handle jerry can design and a reversible water cap and spout, it falls short when compared to its counterpart, the Rhino. The plastic used in the Desert Patrol feels thin and susceptible to warping, and it doesn’t stack well. In our drop tests, it performed poorly, with the back wall collapsing inward. Additionally, it utilizes a traditional push-pin style plug for the airflow hole, which we consider a significant drawback. This type of plug is too flimsy and prone to water leakage an potential contamination, making it unsuitable for survival situations.
Reliance Water-Pak 5 Gallon. At a price of $27, we made the decision to exclude the Water-Pak from our field testing due to reports indicating a flimsy and challenging carrying handle, as evident in the provided images. However, considering the disappointment we encountered with certain other products during our field test, as well as the Water-Pak’s distinctive tall cube shape, we may consider including it in our testing in the future.
Reliance Aqua-Pak 5 Gallon. Priced at $25, the Reliance Aqua-Pak caught our attention as an affordable alternative to the Aqua-Tainer. It appeared to offer better durability and was marketed as stackable. However, it was promptly disqualified due to its push-pin style airflow plug and reports of cracking when stacked. Despite this, we may consider conducting future testing on the Aqua-Pak to explore its performance further.
Reliance Jumbo-Tainer 7 Gallon. With a price tag of $37, the Jumbo-Tainer stands out as a superior option compared to its sibling, the Desert Patrol. However, it was swiftly disqualified due to its push-pin plug for the airflow vent, which raised concerns about its reliability. Despite this drawback, we appreciated the inclusion of dual handles and a reversible spigot, similar to its sibling, the Aqua-Tainer. While the Jumbo-Tainer boasted better rigidity than the Desert Patrol, it fell short in terms of stackability when compared to the Rhino.
Igloo Cargo II / Rubbermaid 6 Gallon Water Containers. Priced at $20, the Igloo container was not initially included in our field tests. However, we were able to acquire one for evaluation purposes. Igloo’s product offerings have been somewhat unclear, with numerous confusing SKUs listed on platforms like Amazon and Walmart. It seems that the older Rubbermaid designs have been incorporated into the Igloo line. While we personally tested the Rubbermaid six-gallon container and found it to have appealing features such as a robust design, dual handles, and molded stability feet, the new Igloo containers introduced a push-pin style airflow plug, which automatically disqualified them from consideration.
Ace Roto-Mold 10 Gallon Water Storage Tank. Priced at $150, including shipping, we decided to include a 10-gallon tank in our testing despite our initial skepticism. We wanted to properly evaluate it against the more popular short-term options. This particular tank features a tall and cylindrical design with a large twist cap on top and an industrial ball valve at the bottom. While containers like this have the potential to be strong contenders, their size and lack of mobility posed significant drawbacks. Once filled with water, they become stationary unless multiple individuals or a wheeled cart are used for transportation. The immobility also makes it challenging to utilize the spigot at the bottom unless the tank is elevated. Furthermore, the oversized top cap is not well-suited for residential use, increasing the risk of contamination. Finally, the overall price of $150 was deemed too expensive, leading to its disqualification from our recommendations.
Midwest Can Company 6 Gal. During our research, we encountered a product priced at $15 that was disqualified due to inconsistencies in the manufacturer’s messaging regarding the type of plastics used. This lack of clarity raised concerns, particularly when knowledgeable Amazon reviews indicated that the can was labeled as flammable plastic #7, suggesting the potential presence of BPA (Bisphenol A). Consequently, this product did not meet our criteria for inclusion.
Wedco Briggs & Stratton 5 Gallon Water Can. Priced at $25 that was disqualified due to several reasons. Firstly, it had a poor quality spout, which negatively impacted its functionality. Additionally, it featured a push cap style airflow vent cover, which raised concerns about its effectiveness and potential for leakage. While the wide base provided stability and the dual handles were a convenient feature, the product was found to be inefficient in terms of space utilization compared to similar options. Considering these drawbacks, it did not meet our standards for inclusion.
Hudson Exchange 5 Gallon Plastic Hedpack. Priced at $17 that was disqualified due to various reasons. One major concern was the numerous reports of durability problems associated with this product. Despite being made from good-grade plastic, it was noted to be overly transparent, indicating that it may be intended for shorter-term storage purposes, such as restaurant or transportation use, rather than long-term survival or emergency scenarios. Considering the reported issues with durability and its likely suitability for different storage needs, it did not meet our criteria for inclusion in the field tests.
Tolco Heavy-Duty HDPE 5 Gallon Plastic Dispenser Carboy. During our research, we came across a product priced at $42 that was disqualified from our field tests for several reasons. First, it was described as being too transparent, which can be a concern for long-term water storage as light exposure can potentially affect the quality of the water. Additionally, there were numerous reports of leaks associated with this product, indicating a lack of reliability and potentially compromising the stored water. Finally, considering its price point, it was deemed to be too expensive for what it offered in terms of quality and features. As a result, it did not meet our criteria for inclusion in the field tests.
Coleman 5 Gallon Water Carrier. Priced at $21 that was disqualified from our field tests due to inventory availability concerns. We found inconsistent stock levels of this product in major stores like Amazon and Walmart, which indicates potential issues with availability and reliability. As a result, we did not include it in our field tests as we prioritize products that are widely accessible to consumers.
AquaPodKit 65 Gallon Bathtub Emergency Water Storage. We came across a water storage bag priced at $20 that we found interesting as a backup option for emergency situations. These bags are designed to be filled up inside your bathtub, providing an additional water storage solution. However, we consider them more as a nice-to-have bonus rather than a primary option for a two-week water supply. They can be a convenient addition to your emergency preparedness kit, but it’s important to have more substantial and reliable options for your main water supply needs.
Conclusion
When it comes to emergency water storage, it is crucial to choose containers that are durable, easy to transport, and made from food-grade materials. The options listed above cater to a range of needs and preferences, ensuring that you can find the perfect solution for your home. By investing in high-quality water storage containers, you can ensure that you and your family have access to clean, safe water in times of crisis.