210
pre-diversion state, involve conveyance of large quantities of seawater from the
Mediterranean or from the Red Sea (see Vardi 1990 ; Beyth 2007 for overviews on
past proposals and www.worldbank.org/rds for the ensemble of studies associated
with recent “Red Sea–Dead Sea Conveyance Study Program”). These sea-to-sea
conveyance alternatives involve large-scale infrastructure projects and require large
upfront investment, raising doubts about their feasibility. In the next section, we
briefl y summarise one Red Sea–Dead Sea Project and two Mediterranean Sea–Dead
Sea Projects considered in the abovementioned World Bank studies.
14.3 Water Conveyance from the Red Sea
and the Mediterranean Sea
Our cost calculations are based on the most recent data available from Coyne et
Bellier’s ( 2014 ) feasibility study. This feasibility study considers a comprehensive
project with the dual goal of reclaiming the Dead Sea and increasing the supply of
potable water in the region: upon completion, the project will convey 2,000 × 10
6 m
3 /
year from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea, desalinate 850 × 10
6 m
3 /year that will be
delivered mostly to Amman and discharge 1,150 × 10
6 m
3
/year of brine in the Dead
Sea. As we focus on the Dead Sea reclamation, the cost of seawater–brine discharge
in the Dead Sea reported here pertains to the cost of a project, the sole purpose of
which is to stabilise the Dead Sea water level. This involves the conveyance of up to
1,150 × 10
6 m
3
/year seawater from the Red Sea or the Mediterranean to the Dead
Sea exploiting the elevation difference to generate hydropower.
5 We discuss water
conveyance from the Red Sea and from the Mediterranean Sea in turn.
14.3.1 Red Sea–Dead Sea Water Conveyance
The feasibility study of the Red Sea–Dead Sea alternative (Coyne et Bellier 2014 )
considered two basic alignments that vary according to the method of water conveyance: surface (buried) pipelines or tunnelling. The advantage of the pipeline
approach is that it can be implemented in phases over time (by adding pipelines as
needed); the disadvantage is that it requires lifting the water to an altitude of 220 m
before letting it fl ow downward to the Dead Sea (at 390–400 mbSL), and this
(pumping) operation adds on to the running costs. The tunnel option, on the other
hand, does away with the need to lift the conveyed water, but requires complete
investment of the entire infrastructure upfront. Due to environmental risks (associated with possible stratifi cation, gypsum crystallisation and algae bloom), it is
strongly recommended that the quantities of seawater (or brine) discharge in the
5 A detailed explanation of how the cost of Dead Sea reclamation is calculated, based on Coyne et
Bellier’s ( 2014 ) data, can be found in Allan et al ( 2014 ).
A.I.H. Malkawi and Y. Tsur
pre-diversion state, involve conveyance of large quantities of seawater from the
Mediterranean or from the Red Sea (see Vardi 1990 ; Beyth 2007 for overviews on
past proposals and www.worldbank.org/rds for the ensemble of studies associated
with recent “Red Sea–Dead Sea Conveyance Study Program”). These sea-to-sea
conveyance alternatives involve large-scale infrastructure projects and require large
upfront investment, raising doubts about their feasibility. In the next section, we
briefl y summarise one Red Sea–Dead Sea Project and two Mediterranean Sea–Dead
Sea Projects considered in the abovementioned World Bank studies.
14.3 Water Conveyance from the Red Sea
and the Mediterranean Sea
Our cost calculations are based on the most recent data available from Coyne et
Bellier’s ( 2014 ) feasibility study. This feasibility study considers a comprehensive
project with the dual goal of reclaiming the Dead Sea and increasing the supply of
potable water in the region: upon completion, the project will convey 2,000 × 10
6 m
3 /
year from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea, desalinate 850 × 10
6 m
3 /year that will be
delivered mostly to Amman and discharge 1,150 × 10
6 m
3
/year of brine in the Dead
Sea. As we focus on the Dead Sea reclamation, the cost of seawater–brine discharge
in the Dead Sea reported here pertains to the cost of a project, the sole purpose of
which is to stabilise the Dead Sea water level. This involves the conveyance of up to
1,150 × 10
6 m
3
/year seawater from the Red Sea or the Mediterranean to the Dead
Sea exploiting the elevation difference to generate hydropower.
5 We discuss water
conveyance from the Red Sea and from the Mediterranean Sea in turn.
14.3.1 Red Sea–Dead Sea Water Conveyance
The feasibility study of the Red Sea–Dead Sea alternative (Coyne et Bellier 2014 )
considered two basic alignments that vary according to the method of water conveyance: surface (buried) pipelines or tunnelling. The advantage of the pipeline
approach is that it can be implemented in phases over time (by adding pipelines as
needed); the disadvantage is that it requires lifting the water to an altitude of 220 m
before letting it fl ow downward to the Dead Sea (at 390–400 mbSL), and this
(pumping) operation adds on to the running costs. The tunnel option, on the other
hand, does away with the need to lift the conveyed water, but requires complete
investment of the entire infrastructure upfront. Due to environmental risks (associated with possible stratifi cation, gypsum crystallisation and algae bloom), it is
strongly recommended that the quantities of seawater (or brine) discharge in the
5 A detailed explanation of how the cost of Dead Sea reclamation is calculated, based on Coyne et
Bellier’s ( 2014 ) data, can be found in Allan et al ( 2014 ).
A.I.H. Malkawi and Y. Tsur