Obtaining Water in the Desert

Isreals Water Project:

To bring in more water, and create much needed energy through hydroelectricity, Isreal in a joint venture with other countries may embark on a two billion dollar project pumping water from the mediteranian or red seas to the dead sea.

An alternative to stand-alone plants for desalination in the near future lies with the renewed interest in Med–Dead or Red–Dead proposals to bring seawater from either the Mediterranean Sea or the Red Sea and convey it by means of tunnel and canal to the Dead Sea (see Figure 1 on p. 6). Because of the 400-m difference in elevation, the projects were originally conceived as a means of generating electricity (and replacing water in the rapidly diminishing Dead Sea basin). Although part of the electricity generated would be required to pump water across the Judean Hills (in the case of Med–Dead) or along the Jordanian border (in the case of Red–Dead), the plans alleged that enough would remain to power a substantial agroindustrial complex and thus make the projects viable. Plans for the Med–Dead Canal have now been reconceived so

that all of the electricity generated would be devoted to desalination, thus reducing by about two-thirds the external energy requirements (Gur 1985). Viability would be enhanced by the supply of fresh water to potential agricultural land and industrial plants. The estimated cost of this project is $2 billion, with a series of hydroelectric stations (costing $340 million each) generating electricity and producing desalinated water at half the current cost (Moore 1993). The Italian government has expressed interest in participating in the project.

Although recent discussion has focused on the Red–Dead Canal (Kally 1993), each of the two routings has advantages and disadvantages. The Red–Dead Canal would be twice as long and have to climb twice as high before beginning its descent, but would avoid populated areas and the need to tunnel through the Mountain Aquifer. Although the Med–Dead route has a perceived advantage for some, because it could be built largely or entirely within Israel, others find the Red–Dead Canal appealing because it would have to be binational and, therefore, could solidify a peace treaty with Jordan. As a practical matter, either project probably requires agreement among Israelis, Palestinians, and Jordanians because the Jordan River and the Dead Sea are shared international waters. Jordan has clearly indicated its preference for the Red–Dead option (Mideast Mirror, 31 March 1994, p. 12). Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres also seems to favour the Red–Dead option (Mideast Mirror, 29 June 1994). Both nations see it as a key to developing their southern frontier regions from the Red Sea along the Arava Valley to the Dead Sea.

Currently, a variation on the Med–Dead Canal, known as the “Gur Plan,” has been attracting the most attention. According to this plan, fresh water from springs feeding the Upper Jordan River would be diverted to recharge the Coastal Aquifer to restore its original level and quality. This water would be replaced by desalinated water, which would be pumped back up to Lake Kinneret and would have the added benefit of improving water quality in the Lower Jordan (which is now too saline even for most agricultural uses).

Energy:

The big problem even in the middle east rich in energy resources (generally) is the huge amount of energy it takes to obtain water. In poor countries such as Jordan, this brings the cost of water to an almost intolerable price for the people of the slums.

Energy is required to make use of all but the most local surface and shallow underground water. Most importantly, today energy is used for pumping water, both vertically from underground sources and horizontally from place to place. Farms tend to be located in valleys, which limits pumping costs, but this is not true of cities. For centuries, based on military, cultural, and environmental considerations, cities have historically been placed on hills or mountains, which increases pumping costs. Furthermore, wastewater must be removed (in this case, the elevation of cities is a minor advantage) and treated, both of which require energy. Wastewater treatment can refund some of that energy through the recovery of methane, but in most cases only enough is captured to operate the treatment plant itself. If water must be treated further before it can be used, still more energy will be required. As indicated in the foregoing, if desalination is contemplated, energy and capital costs become the dominant variables.

Currently, Israel uses 12% of its electricity just to pump water (Schwarz 1992). In Jordan, the proportion is almost 20%. The proportion of electricity used in Israel to pump water used to be 20% but has declined as a result of increases in total electricity use. Most of this electricity is used to pump water up from Lake Kinneret, which lies 209 m below sea level, to the National Water Carrier, which operates at and above sea level. Detailed figures are not available, but estimates suggest that as much as one-third of urban electricity use is for water treatment and pumping. In contrast to the Israeli population, which is concentrated along the coast, the Palestinian population is, with the exception of Jericho, concentrated in the highlands, which increases net pumping costs. In Israel today, it takes 1 kWh (3.6 MJ) to deliver one litre of water.

Water Info Comparisions:

(Israel, Central Bureau of Statistics (1992) and WRI (1992). GDP, gross domestic product.)

Works Cited:


Year, By The. "Chapter 3. Water Supply and Demand: International Development Research Centre." INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH CENTRE | CENTRE DE RECHERCHES POUR LE DÉVELOPPEMENT INTERNATIONAL. Web. 02 Nov. 2010. http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-29775-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html.

Jamie Banks- 08/11/2010