Report on the Israeli Water Economy: General Description and Data

 

 

Introduction and General Background

Existing Conditions of Israel’s National Water Economy

The Israeli water economy is in the midst of a severe crisis whose main features are:

1.       Freshwater[1] deficit: Emanating from a decline in sources (Sea of Galilee, Mountain aquifer, Coastal aquifer) to levels that disallow pumping and production. Consequently, there is an increasing shortage of water for agricultural purposes (which is flexible) and even for industrial and domestic consumption. Israel has very belatedly commenced the processes for the desalination of saline water and seawater and therefore, additions to the water resources will only be tangible in the years to come. The agricultural sector’s transition from freshwater to recycled wastewater is rather slow. As a result, in the short term it will be incumbent on Israel to drastically reduce the supply of freshwater for agricultural purposes. This will have significant consequences on the agricultural sector and its recovery in the future is uncertain. In the event of drought in the coming two to three years, supplying water for domestic and industrial needs will also be in jeopardy.

2.       Deterioration of water quality: Continual salination of the coastal aquifer due to seawater intrusion caused by over-pumping. The over pumping caused a severe decline in the water levels. This is particularly prominent in the Sea of Galilee. Qualitatively, it is most noticeable in the highly saline coastal aquifer. Hydrologists and planners are debating whether the aquifer can be rehabilitated or, if under the prevailing deficit conditions, it is better to continue reducing the water levels and accept the aquifer’s salination, in turn mandating future desalination of the water prior to its use. This debate also reflects the issue of the burden that will befall future generations.

3.       Environmental crisis: The rivers and the Sea of Galilee basin are drying up and/or being contaminated by untreated effluent and garbage. Among the many factors contributing to the crisis (some overlap and they are not listed in order of importance):

·   Over-pumping of the aquifers, resulting in water level decline and salinity.

·   Some decline in the natural renewal of the aquifers due to climatic changes in the eastern Mediterranean region. The observed phenomena include:

1.       Increase in extremes and differences: More drought years, more very rainy years, and fewer years with average precipitation.

2.       Reduction in precipitation in northern Israel (including the Sea of Galilee basin) and an increase in the annual average rainfall in southern Israel. There is still no accepted scientific explanation for these phenomena, but meteorological forecasts predict that these trends will intensify.

4.       "Hydropolitics” – The Israel water system is very vulnerable to public-political pressure, with the agricultural lobby in the forefront.

5.       Population growth and economic development, resulting in increased domestic and industrial consumption. These demands are rigid and have not been accompanied by an increase of sources and/or a reduction of the more flexible needs of the agricultural sector.

6.       Increase in the demands of neighboring entities following political agreements (Jordan and the Palestinian Authority (PA)).

7.       Public-political-economic debate regarding water allocation and pricing: Essentially, the debate is divided between the economic approach (Ministry of Finance) that calls for allocation based on a price system that includes the shadow price of water on the one hand, and the agricultural sector that requests quota-based allocations and water price adjustments based on ability to pay, i.e., subsidy, on the other hand. In practice, a combined and non-uniform allocation system developed, based on tiered prices and quotas.

8.       Continuing impotence of the regulator – the Water Commission (linked to hydropolitics). In 1996 the Water Commission was transferred from the Ministry of Agriculture to the Ministry of Infrastructure. The purpose of this transfer, inter alia, was to reduce sectoral considerations on the water economy. The move had limited effect and did not prevent the crisis.

9.       Noncompetitive structure of the system for allocating water to consumers – the strong centralized system of the government company, Mekorot, and its powerful workers’ committee. Mekorot supplies more than half the water in Israel.

10.   Divergence among the government and the public authorities that control the water economy (with obvious conflict of interests arising among them).

11.   Lack of synchronization of the different needs that the water economy has to fulfill.

12.   Neglect, apathy, lack of awareness and minimal enforcement regarding environmental-ecological concerns.

An analysis of the processes that characterize Israel’s water-shortage problem and strategy illustrates that:

·         The main quantitative expression of the crisis is the severe reduction in the ability to produce freshwater from the aquifers (approx. 500MCM) without operating additional wastewater reclamation systems and desalination plants.

·         The agricultural sector bears the brunt of the cuts (since the demand of the other sectors is rigid). Its allocation was recently reduced by about 40%.

·         The strategy for stabilizing the water economy is based on intensifying desalination of seawater and reclaiming wastewater for agricultural purposes. At the same time, hydrological rehabilitation of the natural aquifers (reduction of the hydrological deficits) will not allow increased pumping as was customary prior to the crisis, and apparently one of its causes.

·         These processes have implementation limitations. Consequently, in the medium term the water mix at the disposal of the agricultural sector will be altered (which will influence its geographical distribution) and its overall consumption will not increase.

·         In the long term, assuming that reasonable quantities will be desalinated, the agricultural sector will only revert to its pre-crisis size.

·         The significance for the agricultural sector is a sharp drop in fresh water allocated for export crops, particularly:

Citrus	120 MCM
Cotton	70 MCM
Avocado and others	10 MCM
Total reduction	200 MCM

These crops use mainly recycled wastewater. The water made available by reducing these crops can be redirected for growing vegetables for the local market and feed for dairy farming.

As a result of the population growth and the stagnation of crop yields (in comparison to the pre-crisis years), fresh vegetable food imports will probably increase.

 

A brief description of Israel

 

Physical characteristics

Israel is located on the Eastern Shore of the Mediterranean Sea (Figure 1, Figure 2). Israel is bounded on the north by Lebanon, on the northeast by Syria, on the east by Jordan, and on the southwest by Egypt. Its southernmost tip extends to the Gulf of Aqaba, an arm of the Red Sea. Israel covers 21,946 sq. km (8473 sq. mi.).

Map No. 1. Geographic location of Israel

Israel occupied the Gaza Strip, the West Bank region, and the Golan Heights area of southwestern Syria. However, Palestinian self-rule took effect in the Gaza Strip and parts of the West Bank following a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

 

Land and Resources

Israel has an extreme length of about 420 km and a width that varies from about 16 to 115 km; it can be divided into five major topographical areas (Figure 3 – topography): the highlands of Galilee, the Plain of Esdraelon (also called the Plain of Jezreel), the Judean and Samarian hills, the coastal plains, and the Negev.

The hills of Galilee dominate the northern section of Israel, extending east about 40 km from a narrow coastal plain across to Lake Tiberias (also called Sea of Galilee or Lake Kinneret). Israel's highest point, Mount Meron (1208 m), is in this area. To the south of the highlands of Galilee lies the Plain of Esdraelon, about 55 km long and about 25 km wide, running across Israel from the vicinity of Haifa on the Mediterranean coast to the Jordan River. Formerly a malarial swampland, the valley has been drained and is now a densely populated and productive agricultural region.

Extending about 195 km along the Mediterranean, the coastal plains range from a width of less than 1 km to a maximum of about 32-km. They consist of the Plain of Zevulun, extending about 16 km north of Haifa along the Bay of Haifa; the Plain of Sharon, extending south from the vicinity of Haifa to Tel Aviv; and the Plain of Judea, from Tel Aviv to the city of Gaza. The coastal plains contain most of Israel's large cities, industry, and commerce. The Judean Hills, and north of them the Samarian Hills, form a barrier running north and south throughout most of Israel.

The Negev is a desert region to the south. The desert extends north from the Gulf of Aqaba to a line from the southern end of the Dead Sea to the Mediterranean, passing just south of Beersheba.

The chief river of Israel is the Jordan. It descends from Mount Hermon on the Lebanon-Syrian border to Lake Kinneret, some 209 m below sea level and ultimately into the Dead Sea, approximately 395 m below sea level, the lowest point in Israel.

The coastline of Israel has few indentations. The only natural harbor on the Mediterranean is Haifa, on the Bay of Haifa. A new port, Ashdod, has been created in the south.

 

Climate

The climate of Israel is subtropical, with rainfall generally limited to the winter months. In January, temperatures average 9° C in Jerusalem and 14° C in Tel Aviv. In July, the average temperature is 23° C in Jerusalem and 27° C in Tel Aviv. Rainfall is poorly distributed, varying from about 1000 mm annually in Galilee to about 550 mm in Tel Aviv and approximately 25 mm at the southern port of Eilat.

Climatic Indicators

 

Region	Average temperature (°C)		Precipitation (mm rain)
	Winter	Summer	1998-1999
Coastal:  1. North  2. Center  3. South	13° 14° 15°	27° 27° 27°	534 284 157
Mountain:  4. Upper Galilee  5. Jerusalem	9° 9°	25° 26°	453 264
Valleys:  6. Jezreel  7 Hula  8. Beit Shean	15° 15° 17°	28° 28° 30°	345 261 106
Southern:  9. Beer-Sheva  10. Eilat	17° 22°	28° 32°	64 25

 

Population

Population data

(Source: New Master Plan for the Water Economy of Israel, January 2002, hereinafter: (1) )

 

Geographic distribution of population

Source: Statistical Abstract of Israel, 2001. Division based on Ministry of the Interior districts (See Map No. 2).

District	Population		Area of District
	(Thousands)	%	Sq. kilometers	%
1. Jerusalem	711	11	652	3
2. North	1042	16	4478	21
3. Haifa	840	13	863	4
4.Center	1530	24	1276	6
5. Tel Aviv	1301	20	171	1
6. South	841	13	14231	65
7. Judea & Samaria*	172	3
TOTAL	6437	100%	21671	100%

* Jewish population only

 

Distribution of population by type of settlement

Type of Settlement	Population (in millions)
	Millions	%
3 metropolitan areas (Pop. exceeding 200,000)	1.5	23
9 big cities (Pop. 100,000-200,000)	1.4	21
Mid-sized cities (Pop. 20,000-100,000)	1.7	26
Small towns and cities (Pop. 2,000-20,000)	1.2	19
Villages and communities	0.7	11
TOTAL	6.4	100%

 

Economic Indicators

 

General characteristics

The Israeli Economy – Facts and Figures*, 1986 to 2001

(Source: Bank of Israel Report, 2001 –based on the Central Bureau of Statistics)

 

	1986-1989	1990-1992	1993-1996	1997-1999	1999	2000	2001
Average population (thousands)	4407	4911	5473	5974	6121	6283	6437
Population growth rate (%)	1.6	4.3	2.6	2.5	2.5	2.6	2.4
Employed Israelis (thousands)	1420	1573	1900	2083	2137	2221	2270
GDP (in billions of NIS, 2001 prices)	260	307	373	429	429	468	465
GDP growth rate (%)	3.6	6.4	5.5	2.9	2.6	6.4	-0.6
GDP/capita (in thousands of US$, current prices)	8.7	12.1	15.1	17.1	16.7	17.9	17.2
Unemployment rate (%)	7.1	10.5	7.8	8.3	8.9	8.8	9.3
Inflation rate (over the year, %)	18.2	15.0	11.1	5.6	1.3	0.0	1.4
Current account deficit (% of GDP)	0.2	1.1	4.8	2.7	2.9	1.2	1.5
Foreign currency balances (in billions of $)	5.2	6.2	8.6	22.3	23.2	23.8	24.1
Net foreign debt (% of GDP)	47.0	28.5	24.2	12.2	9.9	6.4	3.9

* Annual averages

 

The business sector in Israel

Source: Bank of Israel Report, 2001

Sector	Percentage of GDP
Industry	23.9%
Agriculture and gardening	3.3%
Transportation and communications	12.2%*
Construction	6.6%
Commerce and services	51.2%
Electricity and water	2.8%*
TOTAL	100.0%

* Infrastructure sectors

 

Division into Water Regions

In principle, Israel can be examined as a single geographic entity for a few reasons:

 

Freshwater

The National Water Carrier (NWC) connects all major sources of freshwater into a single network (see Map 3). Water can be transferred from one region to another, so that water from one aquifer may be used in a different geographical region. In addition to the NWC which transfers water from the Sea of Galilee in the north to the center and the south of the country (Negev), there are some additional major pipelines:

·         Connection of the coastal aquifer (in the west) to the Jerusalem metropolis,

·         Connection of the NWC to the Northern Coastal Plain and Western Galilee (in the north), and

·         Connection of the Hula Valley (near the source of the Jordan River) to the Mountains of Galilee.

 

Recycled water

The Shafdan, a plant for the treatment of urban and industrial effluent of the greater Tel Aviv metropolitan area (which includes more than 30% of the country’s population), is responsible for transferring recycled water to the southern region (Western and Northern Negev) for agricultural use.

Two large additional networks convey recycled effluent from the Jerusalem metropolis to the Negev Plain and from the Haifa metropolis to the Western Jezreel Valley, respectively.

 

Pricing policy

Water prices by quality and sector (agricultural, industrial, urban) are more or less uniform throughout the country.

However, for the sake of convenience only two sub-regions, Tel-Aviv and the Arava, were selected for the current study. Detailed description of these regions is presented in section G below.

 

Water institutions

According to the Water Law of 1959, all water in Israel is public property. Accordingly, water administration is highly centralized, with utilization controlled by the Water Commission.

Some 65% of the water in Israel is supplied by the national water company, Mekorot, (wholly owned by the government) which is also the sole owner of the National Water Carrier and the Shafdan.

A small number of regions are not linked to any of the aforesaid water systems. They are mainly in the east, and include the Beit Shean Valley, the Harod Valley, the Jordan Rift and the Arava (see Map 3). Therefore, although the country can be considered a single region, the demand and supply data will distinguish between these two sub-systems, denoting them the National System and the Peripheral System.

 

Water Demand and Supply

 

Water Demand

 

Domestic Demand for Water (MCM/year) ⁽¹⁾

 

Year	m3 / capita	National System Demand	Peripheral System Demand	Total Demand
1998	115	669	25	694
2000	110	659	25	684
2002 Estimate	108	655	25	680
2010 Projected	120	844	31	875
2020 Projected	130	1080	40	1120

 

Industrial Demand for Water (MCM/year)⁽¹⁾

Year	Freshwater			Saline Water	Recycled Water	Total
	National System Demand	Peripheral System Demand	Total Demand
1998	91	2	93	36	0.2	129
2000	93	2	95	37	0.2	132
2002 Estimate	92	2	94	37	0.4	131
2010 Projected	107	3	110	44	13.0	167
2020 Projected	126	4	130	51	16.0	197

 

Agricultural Consumption

Background

a.       The agricultural sector bears the brunt of the drastic cuts in water supply mandated by the water crisis and the decline in freshwater supply from 1998 to 2002. (1998 represents an average year, and data for 2002 reflect the situation after several drought years.)

b.       The government has decided to allocate 1150 MCM/year to the agricultural sector, composed of 530 MCM/year freshwater and the rest, recycled and saline water.

c.       It is estimated that the aquifer deficit and Mekorot’s ability to develop new water (desalination and recycling) will enable achieving the aforesaid goal only in 2010.

d.       Future agricultural demand will probably be strongly affected by the extent to which the suggested price reforms are applied.

e.       The agricultural demand for recycled water will be affected by quality (see below).

f.        The following balances do not include floodwaters. (An average of 15 MCM/year, according to current catchment and reservoir capacities).

 

Agricultural Consumption (MCM/year)

Sources: ⁽¹⁾ and data from the Consumption Division of the Israel Water Commission (hereinafter: ⁽²⁾ ). See Map No. 3

		1998	2000	2002	2005	2010
National System	Fresh	774	651	270	470	470
	Recycled	269	270	279	339	409
	Saline	30	30	30	30	30
	Total	1073	951	579	839	909
Peripheral System	Fresh	86	81	82	71	60
	Recycled	7	9	16	27	36
	Saline	160	162	160	160	160
	Total	253	252	258	258	256
TOTAL	Fresh	860	732	352	541	530
	Recycled	276	279	295	366	445
	Saline	190	192	190	190	190
	TOTAL	1326	1203	837	1097	1165

 

Seasonal Distribution: Summer consumption (May – September): 65% of the annual consumption in a regular year and 60% in a drought year.

Notes:

1.       1998 serves as the representative year for the 1990’s decade.

2.       1999 to 2001 were drought years with minimal precipitation.

3.       2002 is an average rainfall year, but the hydrological crisis is very evident because of the paucity of the aquifer reserves and the severity of salinity, due to over-pumping during the previous drought years. The year 1999 (drought year) had a balance similar to that of 1998.

4.       In general, the shortage is not only a function of the precipitation level of a specific year, but mostly, a consequence of the pumping policy for the aquifers in past years.

Additional Consumption: Water Allocations for the Environment, Landscape and River Rehabilitation

Freshwater: In the current state of drought and water scarcity, there is no allocation of water for environmental enhancement and the natural flow in almost all the rivers is practically nonexistent. This is a consequence of the extremely low aquifer level.

Recycled wastewater:

·         Currently about 15 MCM/year are utilized for river rehabilitation, 85% of which are recycled for agricultural irrigation.

·         The government has decided to increase this amount to 40-50 MCM/year, 75% of which will be restored to the water economy.

 

Additional Consumption: Jordan and the Palestinian Authority

According to the peace agreement with Jordan, Israel is committed to supply:

·         35 MCM/year from the Beit Shean springs.

·         20 MCM/year restoration of Yarmuk River water, from the Sea of Galilee.

Note: In years of shortage, taken from the Israeli source in the Sea of Galilee.

 

The agreement with the PA calls for:

·         31 MCM/year from the national system: (Mountain Aquifer).

·         4 MCM/year from other sources.

Total= 35 MCM/year

·         In addition, the PA pumps 27 MCM/year from the Mountain Aquifer.

Note: We estimate that these quantities will have to be significantly increased in the future. According to the Master Plan ⁽¹⁾, a growth rate of 4.3%/annum is anticipated and it is reasonable to assume that demand will increase accordingly.

 

Total net supply to Jordan and the Palestinian Authorities – 97 MCM/year.

 

Summary of Water Demand (MCM/year)^{(1) + (2)}

Summary by Water Type

		1998	2000	2002 (estimate)	2010 (projected)
National system	Fresh	1629	1495	1106	1609
	Recycled	269	270	279	457
	Saline	30	30	30	30
	Total	1928	1795	1415	2095
Peripheral System	Fresh	120	113	114	100
	Recycled	7	9	16	52
	Saline	196	199	197	159
	Total	323	321	327	311
Total	Fresh	1749 (78%)	1608 (76%)	1220 (70%)	1709 (71%)
	Recycled	276 (12%)	279 (13%)	295 (17%)	509 (21%)
	Saline	226 (10%)	229 (11%)	220 (13%)	189 (8%)
	TOTAL	2251(100%)	2116 (100%)	1735 (100%)	2407 (100%)

 

Summary of Water Demand by Sector

	1998	2000	2002 (estimate)	2010 (projected)
Domestic	694 31%	684 32%	680 39%	875 36%
Industrial	129 6%	132 6%	131 8%	167 7%
Agricultural	1326 59%	1204 57%	837 48%	1165 48%
Environment	4 -	2 -	2	40 2%
Jordan & PA	98 4%	94 4%	85 5%	160 7%
TOTAL	2251 100%	2116 100%	1735 100%	2407 100%

 

Water Supply

 

Freshwater

There are seven major freshwater basins: six are underground aquifers and the seventh is the Sea of Galilee. The three largest basins are the Mountain Aquifer, the Coastal Aquifer and the Sea of Galilee. They are connected via the National Water Carrier. Pumping from the aquifers varies from year to year by the recharge level and the salination level. Continual seawater intrusion to the Coastal Aquifer because of over-pumping has led to severe quality deterioration. The Saline Water Carrier, a system for diverting saline springs that used to flow into the Sea of Galilee, has led to increased water quality in this basin. The Sea of Galilee basin also includes some springs. In general, Israel is currently undergoing a hydrological crisis in the form of large water deficits in these three basins. Eliminating this deficit is one of the major challenges facing the water economy of Israel in the coming decade.

 

Salination Levels and Long-Term Average Recharge by Water Resource (see Map No. 4)

Source: Israeli Geological Service, Hydrological report, 2000

Basin	Salination Level (mgchlorine/liter)	AverageAnnual-Recharge (MCM)
1.Coastal Aquifer	190-320	300
2.Mountain Aquifer	210	360
3.Sea of Galilee Basin	180	550
4.Western Galilee	250	90
5.Carmel	250	40
6.Negev and Arava	320	90
7.Eastern Mountains	150	60
TOTAL		1490

 

 

Desalinated Water

Desalinated seawater:

Currently, the desalination plant in Eilat produces 3-5 MCM/year, using water from the Red Sea. In addition, plans have been completed for desalination plants along the Mediterranean coast: 50 MCM/year in Ashdod and 50 MCM/year in Ashkelon, with an option to expand to 100 MCM/year. Tenders are planned to be issued in 2003 or 2004 for an additional 250 MCM/year.

Desalination of saline water (from salinated aquifers and wells): Currently 1-3 MCM/year are being treated, and in the coming years desalination of an additional 40 MCM/year is planned.

 

Recycled Water

Following is a list of the main facilities for recycling wastewater. All of them are partially or wholly owned by Mekorot. (see Map No. 5)

 

Facility	Water source	Agri./other consumption region	MCM 2002 2010 (est.)(project.)		Current treatment quality	Notes
Shafdan	Greater Tel-Aviv area	Western, Northern and Central Negev, including S.A.T.	110	140	Tertiary +	Allowed for incidental drinking
Haifa Area Association	Greater Haifa area	Western Jezreel Valley	30	45	Secondary+
Jerusalem	Jerusalem & Beit Shemesh	Judean mts., Judean plains & Lachish region	15	20	Tertiary
Hefer Valley	Netanya	Hefer Valley	8	12	Tertiary
Hadera	Hadera	Coastal plain & Iron River	7	10	Secondary+
TOTAL			170	227
% of total wastewater			52%	45%

 

An additional 25 small and intermediate sized sewage treatment installations are in operation. Their treatment quality is generally “Secondary”.

Additional notes: It is estimated that about 100 MCM/year currently flow into the sea. The possibility of using a large quantity of recycled wastewater for agricultural purposes is dependent on upgrading it to a quarternary quality level (suitable for all crops), decreasing the salinity level (desalination of wastewater or the water entering the city), and pooling the water recycled in the winter for consumption in summer. Upgraded quality is also needed for river rehabilitation.

 

 

General Water Balance (MCM/year)(1) + estimates

The supply and the demand mix are presented for a normal year selected from the past decade, a year during the current hydrological crisis, and an average year in the future:

	Normal year (1998)	Drought year (2002 estimate)	Future average year (2010)
Demand by sector:
Domestic	694	680	875
Industrial	129	131	167
Agricultural	1326	837	1165
Jordan & PA	97	86	160
Environment	5	1	40
Total	2251	1735	2407
Demand by water type:
Freshwater	1749	1248	1709
Reclaimed	276	298	509
Saline	226	189	189
Total	2251	1735	2407
Supply:
Aquifers (including saline)	1975	1432	1398
Desalination	-	5	500
Recycled	276	298	509
Total	2251	1735	2407

 

Water Quality

Water quality is measured according to the following:

·                      Salinity – refers to the chlorine level in the water (indicated by electrical conduction capacity).

·                     The presence or absence of chemicals and poisonous contaminants, especially boron, whose presence has a negative impact on crops.

·                     The level of biological purity (T.S.S., B.O.D.).

The current trend calls for stricter adherence to water purity standards. An inter-ministerial committee (Inbar Committee) of director-generals recently issued a report recommending substantially stricter purification standards for recycled wastewater.

Water quality is multifaceted and has many implications, including:

a.       Water quality for domestic and industrial consumption – standards and costs.

During shortages it is possible to use high-quality wastewater for some of these purposes: irrigating public parks, certain industrial uses, etc. (some households in Japan use treated wastewater).

When salinity standards are introduced into water purification standards some towns will have to debate the economic-structural issue of the “location” for removing salts, i.e., desalination at the “city gates” or desalination of the wastewater at the “exit”.

b.                   Water quality for agricultural consumption – Factors influencing the possibility of irrigating crops with wastewater include:

·         Ministry of Health requirements.

·         Salinity level as per the flora-agricultural requirements.

The salinity level is a function of the water’s salinity “at the city gates” (entry water), with an added 70-100mg chlorine/liter.

It is important to note that as more desalinated water becomes part of the Israel water economy; the average salinity level of the entry water will be reduced.

·         The environmental impact of using recycled wastewater, particularly in sensitive areas above aquifers. Such use must be approved by the Ministry of the Environment and the Health Ministry.

Also to be taken into account is the environmental impact of drainage to the rivers in terms of the biological purity level.

Notes:

·         Some salinity problems may be solved by diluting saline water with fresh or desalinated water.

·         The standards for recycled wastewater at the sewage treatment facility exit are currently being updated and expanded (Director-generals Committee, Inbar Committee).

·         Boron – Crops are particularly sensitive to boron. In some areas the recycled wastewater is rich in boron due to the water entering the city from wells with high boron concentrations. This is an acute problem, particularly in the southern Arava and the date plantations there since Eilat’s wastewater is its main water source. Most of Eilat’s water comes from desalinated Red Sea boron-rich water.

c.                   The interface between water quality and various environmental issues

A major part of the hydrological crisis is also an environmental crisis, with continuous pollution of the rivers, aquifers and other natural resources. Serious ecological damage affecting unique natural resources and landscapes often result.

·                     Technically, treated sewage may be used for agricultural purposes, diverted to rivers or the sea or a combination of them.

The effect of diverting the treated sewage on the “receiving” environment and the subsequent environmental demands affect the technology and the development of water treatments.

Agricultural use of wastewater above an aquifer may contaminate it, in turn arousing the issue of sustainable water resources and the problem of creating (or preventing) damage for generations to come.

Dumping in rivers may influence their flora and fauna. Fish and other animals are extremely sensitive to chlorine.

The Barcelona Accord of the Mediterranean countries restricts drainage to the sea.

·                     The effect on the Sea of Galilee:

The amount of water pumped from the Sea of Galilee, especially during a hydrological crisis year, influences its water quality. Consequently, over-pumping may disturb the ecological balance of the algae in the biotope and cause a steep rise in the water’s turbidity. This, in combination with a drastic reduction of the water in the lake (due to the large gap between reserves and pumping), greatly detracts from the ecological and scenic (tourism) value of the area.

The crisis of the Sea of Galilee not only illustrates, but also is symptomatic of the water crisis in Israel.

 

d.                   Economic Facets of the Issue of Quality

The demand for a higher level of water quality has clear economic implications. The debate focuses on who is to carry the financial burden of upgrading the water treatment plants: the local authorities based on the principle that the “polluter pays”, the farmers, the consumers or the government (representing social-environmental interests).

The indecisiveness on these important matters and the resulting imbalance between sewage supply and treatment, together with agricultural demands and drainage solutions, are some of the reasons for the slow transition by farmers to recycled wastewater and is part and parcel of the overall crisis.

 

Public regulation and Institutional structure

 

Description

The following is a partial description of the entities involved in regulating and allocating resources to the water economy.

The large number of parties involved is most apparent, as are the implications of the subsequent bureaucratic maze that hinders initiative and change.

 

Entity	Regulatory and Implementation Authority
1. Water Commission (Min. of Infrastructure) (Until 1996-Min. of Agriculture)	·    Aquifer pumping policy (Operations Comm. of the Hydrological Service) ·    National & regional planning of installations (Planning Division), and desalination tenders ·    Allocation of quotas for all water types (Consumption Division) ·    Encouraging saving water in the various sectors ·    Approval of wastewater reclamation projects ·    Participation in setting water prices ·    Equalization Fund
2. Ministry of Agriculture	·      River drainage and flood prevention (Drainage Division) ·      Grant approval for investment in irrigation projects (Investment Administration) ·      Right of veto on water prices
3. Ministry of the Environment	·      Initiation and approval of all river administrations’ projects (in conjunction with the Jewish National Fund-KKL) ·      Authorization for irrigating with recycled wastewater above aquifers ·      Authorization to dump wastewater into rivers and the sea
4. Ministry of Health	·      Purification standards for all water types and all their uses · Authorization for irrigating areas adjacent to wells
5. Ministry of the Interior	· Municipal Water Company Law · National linear schemes (TAMA-34) for water and sewage · Setting local authority water prices (approval by the Min. of Finance) · Approval of district linear schemes (TAMA) for development of rivers and their environs
6. National Sewage Administration (Min. of Infrastructure)	· Approval of sewage treatment facilities · Allocation of funding to local authorities for sewage treatment
7. Ministry of Finance (Budget Division)	·   Approval of Mekorot water prices ·      Allocation of financial resources (including subsidies} to the water economy and Mekorot ·      Initiation of many structural changes in the framework of the “Arrangements Law”
8. Ministry of Justice	·   Defending the State in Supreme Court appeals, especially in precedent-setting cases (numerous cases arise in the water economy) ·   Approval of legislation drafts
9. Parliamentary Finance Committee	·   Approval of water prices (there is a strong agricultural lobby in this forum.) ·   Approval of structural changes in the framework of the “Arrangements Law” and the national budget
10. Parliamentary Economic Committee	·   Established a sub-committee on the water economy crisis. It is a parliamentary investigative committee that is to submit recommendations
11. Jewish National Fund (KKL)	·   Provides funding for reservoirs after having been approved. Implementation usually carried out by them ·   Partner in the River Restoration Administration and in funding
12. Israel Lands Administration (Ministry of Infrastructure)	·   Allocation of land for wastewater reservoirs and desalination plants

 

Many of these bodies are divided into sub-divisions having authorization and regulatory powers. Various branches of the same body frequently do not adhere to a uniform policy.

 

The Water Supply Institutional Structure

Fresh and saline water:

63% Mekorot (Government company, operates the national system)

8% Local authorities, private production

29% Private production for agricultural consumption, half of it by 4 large water cooperatives (Jordan Valley, Golan Heights, Hula Valley and Gilboa regions)

100%

Recycled wastewater and supply to the agricultural sector

Currently: 67% Mekorot

33% Regional cooperatives

100%

Desalination

Mekorot has rights to 50 MCM

The rest is relegated to private producers as per the B.O.T. agreement with the government.

 

Water Pricing and Costs and Capacity building potential

 

Water Pricing Policy

·                     Water prices are uniform throughout the country, varying only by sector and quality.

·                     Prices are set by the government, based on recommendations of the Ministry of Finance and the Water Commission, and approved by the parliamentary finance committee.

·                     These prices are for water delivered by the national company, Mekorot, which operates the NWC and the Shafdan and supplies some 60% of freshwater consumption and about 50% of recycled wastewater for agriculture.

·                     Private water producers set prices independently, but are subject to an extraction levy imposed by the government. (This tax is calculated to reflect the “scarcity price” of water.) Production and distribution of recycled water in this sector are subject to the approval of the Water Commission.

·                     All water production requires the approval of the Water Commission (production quotas) as does all water consumption and sale (consumption quotas). In practice, the latter quotas apply only to the agricultural sector and are not enforced on domestic and industrial use. (Trade in quotas is prohibited by law.)

·                     Details of water prices are presented below.

 

Costs

Freshwater in the national system (Mekorot)

Average cost: 0.34 US dollar per m³

Cost structure:

Capital:                         40%

Energy:                         28%

Work and operation:      32%

 

Desalination

Cost as per the latest tender for 50 MCM/year in Ashkelon:

0.53 US dollar/m³ to the plant’s gate.

Connection to the national system:          0.07 US dollar/m³

Transport                                              0.08 US dollar/m³

TOTAL                                                0.68 US dollar/m³

 

Treatment of recycled water

Costs vary greatly according to type and size of the facility. Larger facilities have cost advantages.

Average costs in US dollars/m³ wastewater

Secondary treatment:                                                                             0.39

Upgrade to tertiary:                                                                               0.08

Upgrade to wastewater extraction:                                                         0.15

(desalination from 400mg to 50mg chlorine)

TOTAL cost of recycling water for broad agriculture & ecological use     0.62

 

Pooling and conveyance of recycled water for agricultural consumption:

Regional facilities (including land)           0.26 US dollar/m³

Large national facilities (Shafdan)           0.35 US dollar/m³

 

Consumer Prices of Water in Israel

For consumers linked to the national system, Mekorot

Local authorities for household use         0.345 US dollar/m³ (at “city gate”)

Industrial                                                           0.330 US dollar/m³ (average)

 

Agricultural

Agricultural users of freshwater are subject to tiered pricing and quotas. The farmers pay a reduced price for the first 50% of their quota, a higher price for the second 30%, and the full price for the rest of the quota. Separate rates exist for the Beit Shean Valley (by water type), the Jordan Valley and the Golan Heights that together consume 13% of the freshwater demand by the agricultural sector.

Water with over 400mg salinity is charged at a lower rate, according to its salinity level.

The Shafdan charges the same rate for summer and winter consumption, but here too there is a quota.

Recycled wastewater is charged according to a two-tiered system: the first 50% of the quota at a higher price and the second 50% at a lower rate.

 

Agri. Water Rates by Type        Price (December 2001)

                                                             In US dollars/m³

Fresh – tier A                           0.19

Fresh – tier B                            0.23

Fresh – tier C                            0.31 (Full use of quota averages 0.23)

Fresh – above quota                  0.54

 

Jordan Valley – Fresh                0.19

 

Beit Shean Valley:

Fresh                                        0.13

Saline wells                               0.07

Springs                                     0.04

Saline springs                            0.014

 

Golan Heights                           0.21

 

Saline (average)                        0.16

 

Shafdan – winter                       0.15

Shafdan – summer                    0.16

Shafdan – above quota              0.54

 

Other recycled – 1^st 50%           0.14

Other recycled – remaining        0.11

 

User levies on private producers (water not purchased from Mekorot).

Production (extraction) levies are imposed on all the producers, including Mekorot, and are intended to reflect the “shadow price”. They also pay the production and conveyance costs.

Levies                                      In US dollar/m³

Coastal Aquifer                         0.10

Other aquifers                           0.09

Flood and saline                         0.00

 

Water costs for domestic consumers

This is the price to the consumer as charged by the local authorities. The maximum price is set by the Ministry of the Interior. Pricing is progressive, based on consumption.

Rate                                         In US dollar/m³ consumed

Average                                               1.06

Sewage removal surcharge        0.49

 

Capacity Building Potential (Source ⁽¹⁾)

Development plans for the Israeli water economy for the next ten years

1.       Desalination of Mediterranean seawater:

Existing decisions                250 MCM/year

Additional needs                  350 MCM/year

TOTAL                              600 MCM/year

Investment required: 1.4 billion dollars

 

2.       Desalination of saline water (and saline aquifers):

Amount of water                 213 MCM/year (hydrological research is still required)

Investment required:            320 million dollars

 

3.       Improvement of salinated wells (mainly by the municipal authorities):

Potential water quantities                 80 MCM/year

Investment required:                        70 million dollars

 

4.       Wastewater reclamation:

Current amount                                                       280 MCM/year

Planned for end of decade – an additional                 230 MCM/year

TOTAL                                                                  510 MCM/year

Investment required (estimate): 600 million dollars for reservoirs and  conveyance systems.

Upgrading wastewater for unlimited agricultural and environmental use, including desalination:                         300 MCM/year

 

5.       Additional projects:

Fortification of the supply system along the border     600 million dollars

National filtering systems                                         50 million dollars

TOTAL                                                                  650 million dollars

 

6.       Summary of the Israeli water economy’s needs for the next ten years (estimate):

Note: Implementation limitations may require extending the development into the next decade.

 

Desalination of seawater                                    1400 million dollars

Desalination of saline water and wells                 390 million dollars

Wastewater reclamation                                    600 million dollars

Upgrading wastewater                                       600 million dollars

Additional projects                                             650 million dollars

TOTAL                                                            3640 million dollars

 

Major Conflicts

 

·         Competition between the urban and the agricultural sectors on the limited resources of freshwater. All of the inelastic domestic demand in the steadily increasing urban sector is covered by freshwater supply, and thus a large-scale transition in the agricultural water use from good quality water to reclaimed urban and industrial wastewater is expected.

·         Competition between agricultural and ecological utilization of recycled wastewater.

·         Competition between farmers in the central and in the peripheral region of Israel for recycled wastewater. Most of the urban and industrial sewage is “produced” in the coastal plain, in the center of the country, while most of the irrigated areas are located in the periphery. The costs of constructing new networks to transport the recycled water (assuring that it will not be mixed with freshwater) and the costs required to prepare new facilities to store excess treated water from winter to summer are of major importance. The spatial distribution of aquifers and the environmental costs associated with irrigation above them, which may pollute the underlying groundwater, should also be considered.

·         Conflict between the agricultural and the urban sectors on the purification standards for disposal set for the cities by the government. Another conflict is on how the costs and the benefits associated with recycling should be allocated between the generators of sewage (the municipalities) and the agricultural users. An additional conflict is on how municipalities can be assured that the farmers will not reduce usage suddenly (due to an economic crisis for example) and leave the cities with treated water that they cannot dispose of.

·         New and forthcoming partial privatization of water supply are a potential source of conflict between the government-owned company, Mekorot, and private entrepreneurs on two issues: the control of the supply of newly developed water resources (mostly desalinated sea water and recycled wastewater) and the responsibility for the operation of the intra-cities water systems (currently operated by the cities themselves).

·         Conflicts between Israel and the Palestinian Authority on the utilization of the Coastal and the Mountain ground water aquifers.

 

Concluding statement

Israel has a well-organized and developed water economy. Nevertheless, it is undergoing a very severe hydrological crisis. Overcoming the crisis mandates significant policy changes and massive investment.

The agricultural sector is the major water consumer and consequently, most of the changes will affect it. Changes are also needed in different aspects of urban household consumption, especially due to increased demand and the introduction of desalination of seawater.

 

Tel Aviv and the Arava Regions

 

Tel Aviv Region

 

Introduction

The region is located in the coastal plain on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea (and it lies above the coastal aquifer. In terms of population, the Tel Aviv region is the largest in Israel with two million people, 30% of the total population. The region has 160,000 dunam (1 dunam = 0.10 hectares) of cultivated agricultural land, 5% of the total cultivated land in the country. The region’s water economy is therefore characterized by relatively high domestic and industrial consumption, and relatively low agricultural consumption. About two third of the fresh water supplied to the region via the national water system operator by the national water company, Mekorot. The remaining third of the fresh water is provided by private producers from the coastal aquifer. In the future, this region is slated to receive a significant amount of the desalinated sea water.

Domestic consumption is similar to the national average (100 per capita per annum). This consumption is expected to increase by 20% with the development of metropolitan parks and the improvement in quality of life. The quality of the fresh water is good, with a salinity level of 150-250 mg chlorine per liter. In the future, the use of desalinated water will lead to an improvement in the water quality. The region’s large population creates the potential for a large supply of recycled water for agriculture. In addition, high quality treated waste water can be used for irrigation of metropolitan parks and for rehabilitation of streams like the Yarkon River. The climate in the region is Mediterranean, semi-arid, with annual precipitation of 450 mm.

 

Current and New Paradigms

We start with a bullet-points description of the current paradigm:

·         There is no private ownership of water in Israel. By the Israeli Water Law of 1959 all water sources are publicly owned and their utilization is controlled by the Water Commissioner. The allocation of water is administrative: the commissioner issues permits for production (extractions) to suppliers as well as allocations (quotas) for agricultural consumers.

·         Prices of water delivered by the national company Mekorot are set by the government, and are determined in a procedure which is open to political pressure (skillfully applied by the agricultural lobby). Viewing water prices not as an allocation instrument, but as a means to improve income distribution, water charges depend on the type of use: farmers pay the lowest prices, industry pays higher prices and households pay the highest. Within each sector prices do not depend on location: users in all parts of the country face the same prices, regardless of the supply price of water. Private water suppliers are subject to quotas but can set prices independently.

·         The actual planning of water allocation made by the Water Commission follows several stages:

·         Predicting annual water demand by sector and region (including, of course, that of Tel-Aviv), given the actual water prices.

o        Determination of "red lines" for each of the major water sources and the implied total production permits of fresh water;

o        The gap between aggregate demand and total supply of fresh water is bridged via investments in the water economy aimed at: (i) increasing the volume and flexibility of the within-region and between-regions conveyance systems of fresh water, (ii) development of additional (environmentally safe) water treatment plans, reservoirs and conveyance systems; (ii) improving the quality of fresh water as well as of the recycled effluents; and, in the longer run, (d) desalination of sea water.

·         The current management practices result in:

o        Continuous pressure on the governmental budget to increase the share allocated to investments in the water economy and continuous pressure of the budget department of the Ministry of Finance to increase water prices, including the prices for agricultural use.

The above pressure to raise prices is balanced by the agricultural lobby which is very influential in Israel. The main interest of the farmers is to receive as large as possible an allocation of fresh water at the lowest attainable price. The consequences of the success of the agricultural lobby have been over-utilization of water for many years, hydrological deficits, the intrusion of seawater into the coastal aquifer, contamination of reservoirs, and the reduction of the carry-over capacity of the system. A major part of the hydrological crisis is also an environmental crisis, with continuous pollution of the rivers, aquifers and other natural resources. Serious ecological damage affecting unique natural resources and landscapes often results.

These detrimental effects are among the major reasons for the current severe water crisis. Although still very influential, the agricultural lobby lost some of its political power in the last two decades.

·         Additional conflict in the water economy exists between the agricultural and the urban sectors regarding the purification standards for disposal set for the cities by the government. Another conflict is over the allocation of the costs and the benefits associated with recycling between the generators of sewage (the municipalities) and the agricultural users. An additional conflict is the issue of assurance for the municipalities that the farmers will not reduce usage suddenly (due to an economic crisis for example) and leave the cities with treated water that cannot be disposed of.

·         New and forthcoming partial privatization of water supply is a potential source of conflict between the government-owned company, Mekorot, and private entrepreneurs on two issues: the control of the supply of newly developed water resources (mostly desalinated sea water and recycled wastewater) and the responsibility for the operation of the intra-cities water systems (currently operated by the cities themselves).

The current paradigm is the result of inefficient institutional and administrative mechanisms for water allocation and of a poor decision making culture (hydro-politics). The above-mentioned unsolved ongoing conflicts partially paralyze the water economy. This is especially true in a run of dry years (as in 1998-2001) in which many of the problems become more severe. The main quantitative expression of the current crisis is the severe reduction in the ability to produce freshwater from the aquifers (approximately 500MCM) without operating additional wastewater reclamation systems and desalination plants. The agricultural sector bears the brunt of the cuts (since the demand of the other sectors is rigid), and its allocation was recently reduced by about 40%.

To conclude: Israel (with the Tel Aviv region being a representative example of the situation associated with the national water system) is an example of a developed water economy experiencing a man-made water crisis. There has been neglect, much need to be repaired, and attention must be paid to changing circumstances. A sustainable growth of the water sector requires a new paradigm. Fortunately, the fundamental structure of the sector is sound and the basis for reform exists.

 

New Paradigm for Tel-Aviv Region

Intensifying the reclamation of wastewater for agricultural purposes and for river rehabilitation. A large scale transition in agricultural water use from good quality water to reclaimed urban and industrial waste water is expected in the forthcoming years. This shift requires the development of many more environmentally safe water treatment plants, reservoirs and conveyance systems. The urban water economy from the city gate to the consumers, to the treatment plant and to final disposition is becoming as big as the economy of fresh water and it is growing steadily. The current trend calls for stricter adherence to water purity standards. An inter-ministerial committee of director-generals recently issued a report recommending substantially stricter purification standards for recycled wastewater in the near future.

Cost-benefit analysis of the above-mentioned large-scale transition should take into consideration:

·         The spatial distribution of aquifers and the environmental costs associated with irrigation above them, which may pollute the underlying groundwater.

·         The question of how the costs and the benefits associated with recycling should be allocated between the generators of sewage (the municipalities) and the agricultural and ecological users.

·         The question of how municipalities can be assured that the farmers will not reduce usage suddenly (due to an economic crisis for example) and leave the cities with treated water that they cannot dispose of.

·         At the farm level one should investigate farmers' incentives to adapt crop varieties to water of lower quality and evaluate the negative environmental externalities associated with sustained use of treated wastewater.

 

Reform in Water Allocation Practices - - Allocation by Prices

The goals of a reform in water pricing are to increase the overall efficiency of water allocation to the agricultural sector, by raising water prices to an "economically efficient" level, and at the same time to give farmers incentives, via adequate land-dependent cultivation subsidies, to strive towards the national goal of protecting the land and preserving the landscape. The efficient prices should reflect the long run costs of water supply, including the scarcity value of water, and the environmental costs associated with water production and/or water use. More specifically, the analysis of the reform in water pricing should cope with the following questions:

·         How should prices vary by water quality? The quality requirements for urban consumption are much higher than the requirements for agricultural use, but water in Tel Aviv's region is supplied via the same national conveyance system. Should the prices for the agricultural and the urban sectors be identical? Should farmers pay the extra costs required to meet the standards of urban use?

·         How should prices vary by reliability of water supply? The supply to the urban and industrial sectors in Israel is reliable while the supply of fresh water to the agricultural sector is reduced in dry years. In other words, weather uncertainty implies uncertain supply to the agricultural sector.

·         How should the spatial variation of water prices reflect the spatially variable extraction and transportation costs? If equity considerations imply an homogeneous price for water of a given quality, one should evaluate the "efficiency cost" of the equity requirement. It should be noted that an homogeneous price implies cross-subsidization among users in different regions.

·         In addition to sending signals to water users about the full cost of water supply, prices should also cover the costs of supply. In the case that total revenues collected by the suppliers exceed (fall short of) the total costs of supply, rebate to users (governmental subsidy to water producers) should be considered.

 

A massive desalination of seawater is another important action that will be taken in Israel within a few years. Currently, the desalination plant in Eilat (located in the Arava region) produces only 3-5 MCM/year, using water from the Red Sea. In addition, plans have been completed for desalination plants along the Mediterranean coast: 50 MCM/year in Ashdod and 50 MCM/year in Ashkelon (both are located south of the Tel Aviv region), with an option to expand to 100 MCM/year. Tenders are planned to be issued in 2003 or 2004 for an additional 250 MCM/year.

 

The Arava Region

 

Introduction

The region is located at the south-eastern tip of Israel, between the Dead Sea and the Red Sea. The region is sparsely populated, based mainly on the tourist city of Eilat at the southern tip. The remaining population is scattered in rural villages. Land prices are low and there is no demand for additional urbanization. Domestic consumption per capita in this region is particularly high, for two reasons: Dry climatic conditions lead to heavy evaporation and a greater demand for garden irrigation and drinking water. A large part of the population lives in rural settlements, where large amounts of water are needed for private and public gardens. Climatic conditions in the region: arid climate, very low precipitation (up to 10 mm rain per annum), aridity index 0.65. The climatic conditions favor intensive cultivation of vegetables, flowers and date palms. Some 40% of the greenhouses in Israel are located in this region.

The water supply system in the Arava is not part of the national water system. The region receives water from local sources only, via the national water company Mekorot. Drillings in the center of the region (Faran drillings) yield water of reasonable quality - up to 350 mg chlorine per liter. Drillings in the southern Arava yield low-quality water of 600-1,100 mg chlorine per liter. It is important to note that the Red Sea is a unique coral reserve of great ecological value, and it is therefore essential that waste water be recycled for agriculture and not be disposed of in the sea.

 

Current and New Paradigms

We start with a bullet-points description of the current paradigm:

·         The prices for all the water supplied by Mekorot, fresh and saline, are determined within the national framework. Saline water is cheaper than fresh water, in accordance with the salinity level. The price for recycled water for agriculture covers the operational and the capital costs of Mekorot, after discounting state grants.

·         The desalination plant of Red Sea water provides water for the local population in Eilat, the only city in the region.

·         The utilization of recycled waste water produced in Eilat for irrigation is insufficient and inefficient, due to lack of adequate storage facilities and conveyance systems as well as poor institutional structure. The potential to recycle wastewater produced in the rural villages is not utilized as well.

 

New Paradigm for the Arava Region

The general principle is to introduce regional administration of the water sector, with institutional and economic separation of the Arava water resources from the national water system. The water development plans for the region are mainly for pooling and transferring waste water.

The details of this principle are threefold:

·         All water supplied to the city of Eilat will come from the existing desalination plant with price equal to the marginal cost of desalination. In the more distant future ther is a possibility that the desalination plant in Eilat will be enlarged.

·         Wastewater “produced” by the city of Eilat will be recycled for agricultural use. In addition to the building of adequate recycling plants, this also requires the construction of storage and conveyance facilities. Most of the financing should come from the governmental budget, since preserving the ecology of the Red Sea and preventing its contamination by wastewater is a public interest.

·         Water prices for agriculture will be determined independently of the national system so as to reflect the specific cost of their production. Prices of recycled wastewater will be determined by negotiation between the city of Eilat and representatives of the farmers.

It should be noted that the Arava region borders with Jordan. The water production balance – drillings and water production from the local aquifer – is affected by the peace treaty with Jordan.

 

A Brief Summary of Relevant Data for the Selected Regions

Some of the relevant data required for our analysis are summarized in the tables below. The data in all tables refer to the year 2000.

 

Population

Distribution of population by type of settlement

Type of Settlement	Tel - Aviv		Arava
	thousands	%	thousands	%
Metropolitan areas (Pop. exceeding 200,000)	359	18	-	0
Big cities (Pop. 100,000-200,000)	902	47	-	0
Mid-sized cities (Pop. 20,000-100,000)	485	25	41	87
Small towns and cities (Pop. 2,000-20,000)	149	8	-	0
Villages and communities	42	2	5	13
TOTAL	1,937	100	46	100

 

The Arava region is sparsely populated, based mainly on the tourist city of Eilat, at the southern tip. The remaining population is scattered in rural villages. The Tel Aviv region is the largest in Israel with two million people, 30% of the total population in the country, almost all of them reside in the urban sector.

Domestic, Industrial, Agricultural and Environmental Water Consumption

Domestic Consumption (MCM/year)

Year	m3 / capita	Consumption from National System	Consumption from Local System	Total Demand
Tel - Aviv	100	75	119	194
Arava	200	0	9	9

 

Industrial Consumption (MCM/year)

Year	Freshwater			Saline Water	Recycled Water	Total
	Consumption from National System	Consumption from Local System	Total Demand
Tel - Aviv	23	35	58	0	0	58
Arava	0	1	1	0	0	1

 

Agricultural Consumption (MCM/year) Sources:

		Tel - Aviv	Arava
National System	Fresh	33	-
	Recycled	5	-
	Saline	-	-
	Total	38	-
Local System	Fresh	51	15
	Recycled	-	5
	Saline	-	14
	Total	51	34
TOTAL	Fresh	84	15
	Recycled	5	5
	Saline	-	14
	TOTAL	89	34

 

 Environmental Consumption (MCM/year) Sources:

		Tel - Aviv	Arava
Local System	Fresh	-	-
	Recycled	2	-
	Saline	-	-
	Total	2	-

 

The Tel-Aviv region is characterized by relatively high domestic and industrial consumption, and relatively low agricultural consumption. The opposite is true with respect to the Arava Region. The large population of Tel-Aviv region creates the potential for a large supply of recycled water for agriculture. In addition, high quality treated waste water can be used for irrigation of metropolitan parks and for rehabilitation of streams like the Yarkon River. It should be noted that Domestic consumption per capita in the Arava region is particularly high, for two reasons: (i) dry climatic conditions lead to heavy evaporation and a greater demand for garden irrigation and drinking water; and (ii) a large part of the population lives in rural settlements, where large amounts of water are needed for private and public gardens.

 

Water Supply and General water Balances; Salinity Level of Water Resources

General Water Balance (MCM/year)

	Tel - Aviv	Arava
Demand by sector:
Domestic	188	9
Industrial	58	1
Agricultural	90	34
Jordan & PA	-	-
Environment	2	-
Total	338	44
Demand by water type:
Freshwater	331	25
Reclaimed	7	5
Saline	-	14
Total	338	44
Supply:
Aquifers (including saline)	333	30
Desalination	-	9
Recycled	5	5
Total	338	44

 

Salinity Levels and Long-Term Average Recharge by Water Resource

Basin	Salinity Level (mgchlorine/liter)	Average Annual-Recharge (MCM)
Coastal Aquifer – National System and Local Producers	-	250
Sea of Galilee Basin - National System	-	180
Arava – Local Sources	400	-
TOTAL	400	214

 

Natural water sources in the Tel-Aviv region are:

1.         Supply from the national water system (via the national water network of the Mekorot company):

a.         Production from the coastal aquifer, above which the region lies

b.         Water supply from the Sea of Galilee via the National Water Carrier (NWC).

2.         In addition, part of the fresh-water is provided by private producers from the coastal aquifer (some 35% of the fresh water).

3.         In the future, this region is slated to receive a significant amount of the desalinated sea water. Domestic consumption is similar to the national average (100 m3 per capita per annum). This consumption is expected to increase by 20% with the development of metropolitan parks and the improvement in quality of life.

The quality of the fresh water is good, with a salinity level of 150-250 mg chlorine per liter. In the future, the use of desalinated water will lead to an improvement in the water quality.

The Arava is not part of the national water system, but receives water from local sources only, via the national water company Mekorot:

Drillings in the center of the region (Faran drillings) yield water of reasonable quality: up to 350 mg chlorine per liter.

Drillings in the southern Arava yield low-quality water: 600-1,100 mg chlorine per liter. The desalination plant of Red Sea water provides water for the local population in Eilat.

In addition, waste water for agriculture is obtained from Eilat and the agricultural settlements. It is important to note that the Red Sea is a unique coral reserve of great ecological value, and it is therefore essential that waste water be recycled for agriculture and not be disposed of in the sea.

The water development plans for the region are mainly in the area of pooling and transferring waste water. In the more distant future there is a possibility that the desalination plant in Eilat will be enlarged.

 

Summary Matrix and Map

This section is summarized via a detailed summary matrix and a map in which the borders of the two selected regions are outlined.

Summary Matrix of Israeli Regions

			Tel - Aviv	Arava
Natural conditions and infrastructure	Regional Context	Climate Type	Semiarid	Hyperarid
		Aridity Index	0.05-0.2	0.5-0.65
		Permanent Population	1,937,000	46,200
	Water availability	Total Water Resources / Availability (MCM)	343	44
		Trans-boundary water
	Water quality	Quality of surface water	-	-
		Quality of groundwater	Good	Poor
		Quality of coastal water	-	-
	Water Supply	Percentage of supply coming from: v      Groundwater v      Surface water v      Desalination v      Recycling v      Importing	99% 0% 0% 1% 0%	68% 0% 21% 11% 0%
		Network coverage: v      Domestic v      Irrigation v      Sewerage	100% 100% 100%	100% 100% 100%
Economic and Social System	Water use	Water consumption by category: v      Domestic v      Irrigation v      Industrial and energy production	56% 17% 27%	21% 77% 2%
		Population to resources index
	Water demand	Water Demand trends v      Domestic v      Industrial v      Agriculture v      Rivers	Steadily increasing Steadily increasing Transfer to recycled water Use of recycled water	Stable Stable Transfer to recycled water -
		Consumption index	Stable per-capita urban consumption	Stable per-capita urban consumption
		Exploitation index	100%	100%
	Pricing system	Average household budget for domestic water (pa)	$100	$130
		Average household budget for agricultural water
		Average household income
		Cost recovery
		Price elasticity	Agricultural demand is somewhat elastic. Elasticity of urban and industrial demands are small.	Agricultural demand is somewhat elastic. Elasticity of urban and industrial demands are small.
	Social capacity building	Public participation in decisions	Very High	Very High
		Public education on water conservation issues	Fair	Fair
Decision Making Process	Water Resources Management	Water ownership	State	State
		Decision making level (municipal, regional, national) regarding: v      Water supply for each sector v      Water resources allocation for each sector	National National National	National Local Local
	Water Policy	Local economy basis	National	National
		Development priorities	Recycling and Desalination	Recycling and Desalination