217
from Atlit to Naharayim–Bakura.
8 The total cost of the desalinated water in
Naharayim–Bakura is therefore the desalination cost, which will soon approach
USD 0.5/m
3 (see Tsur 2014 ).
From Naharayim–Bakura, the water fl ows to the Dead Sea along the lower
Jordan River route. The total cost of water discharge in the Dead Sea of the Atlit–
Naharayim Project is therefore solely the cost of desalination of about USD 0.5/m
3 ,
which is higher than the comparable costs under the Red Sea–Dead Sea (pipeline)
or Mediterranean–Dead Sea (tunnel) Projects (see Figs. 14.3 and 14.5 ). However,
the water fl ow from Naharayim–Bakura to the Dead Sea contributes to the (partial)
restoration of the lower Jordan River, which has an economic value of its own (see
Gafny et al. 2010 for a description of the current situation of the lower Jordan River
and restoration options). Estimates of regional (Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian
Authority) willingness to pay (WTP) for partial restoration of the lower Jordan
River were recently calculated by Becker et al. ( 2014 ). Considering different fl ows
(220 × 10
6 m
3
/year and 400 × 10
6 m
3
/year) and two levels of water quality (highquality natural and recycled), these authors estimate the WTP between USD 0.23/
m
3 and USD 0.87/m
3 , with the good quality (natural) water receiving the higher
values (see Becker et al. 2014 , Tables 2–3).
9 Based on these fi ndings, it is not
implausible that the benefi t due to (partial) restoration of the lower Jordan River is
high enough to cover most (if not all) of the cost of the Atilit–Naharayim–Bakura
Project, leaving very little (if any) cost to the Dead Sea reclamation.
To sum up, high damage due to risk of leakage rules out the possibility of conveying seawater from the Mediterranean (near Atlit) to Naharayim–Bakura and
requires desalination along the Mediterranean coast. The cost of desalination is
approaching USD 0.5/m
3 . The cost of conveying the desalinated water from Atlit to
Naharayim–Bakura can be fully covered by the profi ts of a pumped energy plant
near Kaukab-el-Houa (Belvoir). From Naharayim–Bakura, the (desalinated) water
fl ows to the Dead Sea along the lower Jordan River, contributing to the partial restoration of the lower Jordan River along the way. Preliminary estimates of the benefi t (in terms of WTP of the local population) associated with partial restoration of
the lower Jordan River range between USD 0.23/m
3 and USD 0.87/m
3 , with the
good quality water receiving the higher values. The cost left for the Dead Sea reclamation is the cost of desalination (USD 0.5/m
3
) minus the benefi t of lower Jordan
8 The cost of conveyance from Atilt to Naharayim–Bakura was calculated based on Coyne et
Bellier’s ( 2014 ) data with the appropriate modifi cations needed to fi t to the different situation.
These data, together with the peak-load pricing schedule of the Israeli grid, were used to calculate
the profi t of the pumped energy plant near Koukab-el-Houa (see Appendix of Allan et al 2014 for
details).
9 These estimates are obtained by dividing the total WTP corresponding to scenarios S3 and S4 by
the restoration fl ow of 400 × 10
6 m
3 /year (see Becker et al 2014 , Tables 2–3). It should be noted that
these estimates are based on WTP of the local population and do not include WTP for Dead Sea
reclamation (only lower Jordan River restoration was considered). Adding WTP of the international community and WTP for Dead Sea restoration (on which no data are yet available) will
increase the WTP for allocating recycled water for environmental restoration of the lower Jordan
River and the Dead Sea.
14 Reclaiming the Dead Sea: Alternatives for Action
from Atlit to Naharayim–Bakura.
8 The total cost of the desalinated water in
Naharayim–Bakura is therefore the desalination cost, which will soon approach
USD 0.5/m
3 (see Tsur 2014 ).
From Naharayim–Bakura, the water fl ows to the Dead Sea along the lower
Jordan River route. The total cost of water discharge in the Dead Sea of the Atlit–
Naharayim Project is therefore solely the cost of desalination of about USD 0.5/m
3 ,
which is higher than the comparable costs under the Red Sea–Dead Sea (pipeline)
or Mediterranean–Dead Sea (tunnel) Projects (see Figs. 14.3 and 14.5 ). However,
the water fl ow from Naharayim–Bakura to the Dead Sea contributes to the (partial)
restoration of the lower Jordan River, which has an economic value of its own (see
Gafny et al. 2010 for a description of the current situation of the lower Jordan River
and restoration options). Estimates of regional (Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian
Authority) willingness to pay (WTP) for partial restoration of the lower Jordan
River were recently calculated by Becker et al. ( 2014 ). Considering different fl ows
(220 × 10
6 m
3
/year and 400 × 10
6 m
3
/year) and two levels of water quality (highquality natural and recycled), these authors estimate the WTP between USD 0.23/
m
3 and USD 0.87/m
3 , with the good quality (natural) water receiving the higher
values (see Becker et al. 2014 , Tables 2–3).
9 Based on these fi ndings, it is not
implausible that the benefi t due to (partial) restoration of the lower Jordan River is
high enough to cover most (if not all) of the cost of the Atilit–Naharayim–Bakura
Project, leaving very little (if any) cost to the Dead Sea reclamation.
To sum up, high damage due to risk of leakage rules out the possibility of conveying seawater from the Mediterranean (near Atlit) to Naharayim–Bakura and
requires desalination along the Mediterranean coast. The cost of desalination is
approaching USD 0.5/m
3 . The cost of conveying the desalinated water from Atlit to
Naharayim–Bakura can be fully covered by the profi ts of a pumped energy plant
near Kaukab-el-Houa (Belvoir). From Naharayim–Bakura, the (desalinated) water
fl ows to the Dead Sea along the lower Jordan River, contributing to the partial restoration of the lower Jordan River along the way. Preliminary estimates of the benefi t (in terms of WTP of the local population) associated with partial restoration of
the lower Jordan River range between USD 0.23/m
3 and USD 0.87/m
3 , with the
good quality water receiving the higher values. The cost left for the Dead Sea reclamation is the cost of desalination (USD 0.5/m
3
) minus the benefi t of lower Jordan
8 The cost of conveyance from Atilt to Naharayim–Bakura was calculated based on Coyne et
Bellier’s ( 2014 ) data with the appropriate modifi cations needed to fi t to the different situation.
These data, together with the peak-load pricing schedule of the Israeli grid, were used to calculate
the profi t of the pumped energy plant near Koukab-el-Houa (see Appendix of Allan et al 2014 for
details).
9 These estimates are obtained by dividing the total WTP corresponding to scenarios S3 and S4 by
the restoration fl ow of 400 × 10
6 m
3 /year (see Becker et al 2014 , Tables 2–3). It should be noted that
these estimates are based on WTP of the local population and do not include WTP for Dead Sea
reclamation (only lower Jordan River restoration was considered). Adding WTP of the international community and WTP for Dead Sea restoration (on which no data are yet available) will
increase the WTP for allocating recycled water for environmental restoration of the lower Jordan
River and the Dead Sea.
14 Reclaiming the Dead Sea: Alternatives for Action