206
water loss of about 262 × 10
6 m
3 /year due to the potash industries of Israel and
Jordan (Zbranek 2013 ). The Dead Sea water level is currently at about 428 m
below sea level (mbSL), some 30 m lower than its 1960 level, and continues to
decline by more than a metre annually on average (Rawashdeh et al. 2013 ). The
progressive decline in the water level and the ensuing retreat of the shore line
have given rise to sinkholes, mud fl ats and landslides with serious damage to
infrastructure and irreversible damage to habitat of unique species. The estimated direct costs range between USD 73 million per year and USD 227 million
per year (Becker and Katz 2009 ).
1
Stabilising the Dead Sea at its current level requires an additional water infl ow of
700–800 × 10
6 m
3 /year, while fully restoring the Dead Sea to its historical level (of
395–400 mbSL) would mean increasing the infl ow by more than 1,100 × 10
6 m
3 /
year (Malkawi et al. 2010 ; TAHAL and GSI 2011 ). Reclaiming the Dead Sea, thus,
necessitates substantial additional infl ows, which raise three interrelated questions:
from where (i.e. what are the possible sources of the additional infl ow), at what cost
and how to pay for the reclamation? The fi rst and second questions have been analysed in a number of studies, and the main fi ndings of these studies will serve as a
benchmark and a point of departure for this effort.
2 The third question, regarding
who should pay for the Dead Sea reclamation, has not been properly addressed and
will receive special attention in this chapter.
To put the Dead Sea reclamation problem in context, we begin in the next section with a brief summary of the current water situation in the Jordan River Basin
comprised of Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority – the three riparian parties to the Dead Sea. Section 14.3 discusses the Dead Sea reclamation alternatives
involving seawater conveyance from the Red Sea or from the Mediterranean, drawing mainly on the study of alternatives to the Red Sea–Dead Sea Water Conveyance
Project (Allan et al. 2014 ), giving special attention to the costs of the different
alternatives. Section 14.4 elaborates on an alternative, fi rst offered in the
abovementioned study of alternatives, which takes a long-term perspective (3–4
decades) by combining measures that will be implemented incrementally over
time. Section 14.5 discusses the issue of how to cover the costs of Dead Sea reclamation and Sect. 14.6 concludes.
1 These estimates are based on the local population’s willingness to pay to prevent further decline
of the Dead Sea level. However, the unique characteristics of the Dead Sea imply that the benefi t
of its preservation extends beyond the region and includes the international community as a whole.
The total benefi t of preventing the declining of the Dead Sea is therefore likely to be larger than the
above range.
2 See Vardi ( 1990 ) and Beyth ( 2006 , 2007 ) for overviews of past proposals and the recent ensemble
of studies coordinated by the World Bank available at http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/
EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/MENAEXT/EXTREDSEADEADSEA/0,,contentMDK:21827416~p
agePK:64168427~piPK:64168435~theSitePK:5174617,00.html .
A.I.H. Malkawi and Y. Tsur
water loss of about 262 × 10
6 m
3 /year due to the potash industries of Israel and
Jordan (Zbranek 2013 ). The Dead Sea water level is currently at about 428 m
below sea level (mbSL), some 30 m lower than its 1960 level, and continues to
decline by more than a metre annually on average (Rawashdeh et al. 2013 ). The
progressive decline in the water level and the ensuing retreat of the shore line
have given rise to sinkholes, mud fl ats and landslides with serious damage to
infrastructure and irreversible damage to habitat of unique species. The estimated direct costs range between USD 73 million per year and USD 227 million
per year (Becker and Katz 2009 ).
1
Stabilising the Dead Sea at its current level requires an additional water infl ow of
700–800 × 10
6 m
3 /year, while fully restoring the Dead Sea to its historical level (of
395–400 mbSL) would mean increasing the infl ow by more than 1,100 × 10
6 m
3 /
year (Malkawi et al. 2010 ; TAHAL and GSI 2011 ). Reclaiming the Dead Sea, thus,
necessitates substantial additional infl ows, which raise three interrelated questions:
from where (i.e. what are the possible sources of the additional infl ow), at what cost
and how to pay for the reclamation? The fi rst and second questions have been analysed in a number of studies, and the main fi ndings of these studies will serve as a
benchmark and a point of departure for this effort.
2 The third question, regarding
who should pay for the Dead Sea reclamation, has not been properly addressed and
will receive special attention in this chapter.
To put the Dead Sea reclamation problem in context, we begin in the next section with a brief summary of the current water situation in the Jordan River Basin
comprised of Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority – the three riparian parties to the Dead Sea. Section 14.3 discusses the Dead Sea reclamation alternatives
involving seawater conveyance from the Red Sea or from the Mediterranean, drawing mainly on the study of alternatives to the Red Sea–Dead Sea Water Conveyance
Project (Allan et al. 2014 ), giving special attention to the costs of the different
alternatives. Section 14.4 elaborates on an alternative, fi rst offered in the
abovementioned study of alternatives, which takes a long-term perspective (3–4
decades) by combining measures that will be implemented incrementally over
time. Section 14.5 discusses the issue of how to cover the costs of Dead Sea reclamation and Sect. 14.6 concludes.
1 These estimates are based on the local population’s willingness to pay to prevent further decline
of the Dead Sea level. However, the unique characteristics of the Dead Sea imply that the benefi t
of its preservation extends beyond the region and includes the international community as a whole.
The total benefi t of preventing the declining of the Dead Sea is therefore likely to be larger than the
above range.
2 See Vardi ( 1990 ) and Beyth ( 2006 , 2007 ) for overviews of past proposals and the recent ensemble
of studies coordinated by the World Bank available at http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/
EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/MENAEXT/EXTREDSEADEADSEA/0,,contentMDK:21827416~p
agePK:64168427~piPK:64168435~theSitePK:5174617,00.html .
A.I.H. Malkawi and Y. Tsur