In the past I have already referred to the sea canal as part of a list on environmental issues and at the end of several lists I added a warning paragraph, following the government's decision to approve the Emek HaShalom plan and at the request of readers here is a little excerpt
Pictured: Sinkholes in the Dead Sea. From a study by the Technion
Herzl already foresaw the possibility of taking advantage of the depth of the Dead Sea, deliberately bringing water from the Mediterranean Sea and using the height difference to produce electricity. About thirty years ago, the initiative floated and rose. The huge expenditure does not justify the production of about 5% of electricity from the state's consumption.
We will clarify that at the time there was no awareness of the trouble that was occurring in the Dead Sea, the fact that the sea was drying up had not yet emerged, sinkholes had not yet appeared, even the environmentalists did not foresee the disaster in its full scope. It is true that on the fringes of the initiative proposals appeared for the development of tourism projects along the canal, but the main intention was electricity generation. Then, like today, the developers did not bother to check the environmental damage that such a canal could cause. Today, the awareness of environmental damage prevention among the general public exists and is growing, despite the continuous neglect of politicians and leaders.
The Dead Sea is drying up and receding, enormous damage is being caused to the environment to its inhabitants and to tourism, a situation that re-raised the vision of the canal, but this time the direction is to the south, that is, a canal that will flow water from the Gulf of Eilat to the Dead Sea, the main "excuse" for the megalomaniac initiative is to restore water to the Dead Sea, On that occasion, electricity generation, water desalination, development and settlement.
The entrepreneurs announce the development of tourism and other economic activities around the canal, this despite the fact that it is clear to every bar-by-rab that because of the structure of the area, large parts of the canal will be. .. pipeline, the entrepreneurs' reference is to the "development of the Negev" and the means of production, and the "settlement of thousands of people" as if the steppe is empty of inhabitants, it has no means of production, there is no tourism, there are no residents and no residents live there, in other words the entrepreneurs return to the old slogan "Nalvishach Shlomat Concrete and cement"... the same slogan that has led to many environmental disasters, the biggest and most well-known of which is drying out the sick.
Despite the repeated announcements of the entrepreneurs about "the march towards the execution" the voice of the green bodies will not be heard. .. ? I sent a query to the Society for the Protection of Nature about its position on the issue, the answer I received: "Although the issue has been discussed for many years, a lot of information is lacking, especially in regards to the environmental consequences, and therefore the company has not yet taken an unequivocal position on this issue."
In other words: (my apostate), even for those who are entrusted to warn and guard against damage to the environment, the dimensions of the damage that the project will cause are not clear, this does not mean that no damage will be caused, but it is not clear whether the dimensions of the future damage justify action...?
what is the damage What environmental impacts are expected? The canal will lead salty water above to the underground reservoir of Arava water. In the south the water of the Arava is brackish, in the north it has a low salinity to fresh water, any leakage and leakage will cause the salting of the underground reservoirs, i.e. damage to the water supply to Eilat, the settlements of the Arava and the agricultural fields, leakage and leakage may happen due to many mechanical reasons and plans, but mainly because of the Syrian-African rift, The entire area is subject to constant geological activity, the oscillations and tremors result from the movement of continental plates in three directions, oscillations, tremors that caused damage to buildings in the past, it can be expected that the geology "will not be silent" because of a megalomaniac project. The salinization of the Arava water reservoir (north and south) will harm the animals and plants, in any case there is already drying of the vegetation in the wadis that go down to the Arava due to increased pumping, of course the damage will also be to the water supply to all the settlements, for agriculture and of course to Eilat.
The Gulf of Eilat is a body of water with no outlet (north), a special and unique body of water with a rotational flow regime, life (fish, corals, vegetation) depends on the water flow regime, pumping hundreds of millions of cubic meters of water will affect the flow regime and cause it to change, who knows How will this change affect the fauna in the bay?
Eilat is known for its dry climate, a dryness that eases the oppressive heat in the summer, most of the year blows in a (dry) north-northeast oriented wind region, a large body of water northeast of Eilat will significantly increase the (relatively low) humidity around the city, accordingly / in the future will be created Different local climate conditions (moist) along the canal in the Arava, (wherever there will be an open canal). These climatic conditions will intensify in the vicinity of the power plants, since there will be waterfalls and open reservoirs. Already today, the salt pools create a moisture "screen".
According to the media, in the meetings between Israeli and Jordanian officials, it was decided: "(open) lakes will be created that will be a focal point for recreational activities", gentlemen of the contracts, we do not need artificial lakes, we have unique and special attractions and tourist sites in the entire world and there is no justification for "contracts" to damage them
According to the plan, waterfalls will generate electricity for the desalination of part of the water, which means that water with a salinity higher than 4.5% (the salinity of the water in the Eilat Bay) will reach the Dead Sea. How will this water affect the mineral composition of the Dead Sea water? After all, the main purpose of the project is to "save the Dead Sea". There are two assumptions: chemists from the Dead Sea factories claim that a "white gypsum carpet will form on the surface of the water", according to preliminary tests by other parties, there is a chance that there will be "a bloom of algae and bacteria that will color the sea red". A sea covered with a layer of plaster or "blooming" in red, is certainly not the goal of the entrepreneurs. ..
There are also the "marginal" damages that come with a megalomaniac project. It is important to foresee the hundreds of mining tools that will "plow" the area for about five years. Anyone who thinks that it is possible to operate a mining machine in a "pristine" area without causing damage... it is advisable to think twice (third , fourth , again and again), until he reaches the correct conclusion
It is hard to imagine that the Israelis who free themselves from physical labor will join the project, that is: several hundred "guest" workers will be employed, for whom work camps will be established, "temporary" camps that will become a permanent nuisance and a source of garbage production and environmental hazards, the stay of "guest" workers in the territory will cause damage to animals and plants . (See the damage caused by the Thais to the wild animals throughout the country), yes, these are impacts/vulnerabilities that are part of any large project, and indeed, any large project whose initiators do not consider the environmental aspects ended in irreversible damage to the environment and nature and its benefits. .. When in doubt, see: the Aswan Dam, the irrigation canals that dried up the Aral Sea, and of course the drying up of the Hula.
According to the statements of the developers of the "Te'alat-Hayim" it will cost about 5 billion dollars. According to experts in economics and important costs and feasibility, the establishment of water desalination systems (on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea) for approximately 650 million cubic meters of water per year will cost a billion dollars. Desalination of water in such an amount will allow the Jordan to flow through its course, back to the Dead Sea. According to the calculation (class 4) there are about XNUMX billion left to generate electricity without harming the environment and let the (natural) situation be restored to its original state.
Some time ago I sent a letter/query to the office of Shimon Peres: I received a reply from the "responsible for projects", below are "selected" sections:
"The Deputy Prime Minister's Office in charge of regional economic development is working to develop the "Economic Peace Corridor" projects for the benefit of the residents of the region, and this, of course, without harming the environment, animals and plants." The Sea Canal in question is one of many projects included in the significant vision of the Economic Peace Corridor." Indeed a "significant vision" in danger to the environment!
And the person responsible continues and promises: "Since these are significant projects that generate regional change, of course each and every project will be examined and its impact on the environment, economy and society in the region will be investigated." is that so ? This is how the drying of the patient will be checked?
And she adds: "I recommend that you wait for the various studies that will surely be published soon and not attack the issue based only on rumors or general ideas." Someone who knows the conditions of the field does not need studies to see the environmental risk, the studies are needed to steer the project on a path that will not cause damage.
"Preliminary tests carried out by the ministry show that the Sea Canal is the one that can improve the problematic situation of the Dead Sea, both in terms of the consistently falling level and in terms of the sinkholes and the drying out of the area." This is simply a mistake, whoever thinks that "filling the Dead Sea will "immediately" solve the problem of sinkholes proves his lack of understanding on the subject. The problem of the mineral composition also remains. ..
"I'm sure you know the activities of Minister Peres and his ability to implement projects that benefit the region and its residents."
This is exactly the scary and disturbing point, the supreme ability to carry out projects despite being unnecessary and harmful,
"The insinuation as if various economic or private profits are the motive for ventures is simply insulting" Maybe the readers will help me find the "insinuation"?
"The many years and significant activity of Minister Peres for the region is proof of the sincerity of his intentions." And again, here is the problem of "honest intentions", many of which "pave the road to hell"!
It turns out that unlike entrepreneurs who feed on "ideas", everyone who knows the area must be aware of the risks.
In the meantime, the entire project, "Emek HaShalom" was approved at a cabinet meeting, within the project there are positive and important ideas, but its center is the Sea Canal, when such a large project is based on a disaster. ... Peres' office publishes a call to come live in the Arabah when the advantage highlighted in the advertisement is "quiet and clean air", at the same time the office publishes plans for "industrial plants to be established in the area", is there really no one there who sees the contradiction?
Herzl envisioned the Canal of the Seas from his seat in Europe... therefore it is no wonder that in his vision there were sides that do not fit the mother of the desert Land of Israel. The innovators of the vision are the inhabitants of the land and are supposed to know it... Visions are a basis for important and positive activities, when they take into account the environmental conditions, when the vision is disconnected from reality, there is a high chance of turning it into a dream in the heat of the moment
It is possible that after the feasibility and viability test, it will become clear that there is a way to carry out the project without the associated risk and damages, it is possible that it will turn out that the project is positive and worthwhile and that it can be carried out, with increased safety factors to ensure that there will be no environmental damage... Again: simpler, cheaper , more correctly, to solve a problem by removing the cause of the problem, in our case: let the Jordan flow into the Dead Sea!
One of the positive possibilities is that a large part of the financing for the project should come from the World Bank, a body whose environmental awareness is increasing over the years, an awareness that will lead to the prevention of funding and possibly to the prevention of implementation, or to intermittent implementation under restrictive conditions that will neutralize any possibility of environmental damage. For now, I only represent myself, so we can hope that there will be someone whose ability is strong enough to stop the disaster.
Dr. Assaf Rosenthal,
Tour guide/leader in Africa and South America.
For details: Tel. 0505640309 / 077-6172298,
Email: assaf@eilatcity.co.il
In the same matter
An article by Shimon Peres dealing with the Peace Valley, 27/3/07, Haaretz
A blog review of the article and the vision at Cafe The Marker (Rafi Glick)
5 תגובות
The fresh water will be sent to Amman, the concentrated water - roughly half the amount - about a billion cubic meters per year will be sent to the Dead Sea.
I really can't believe the extent of our "greens", I can't believe it!
The idea of decanting water and sending it to the Dead Sea is likened to transporting fresh water from Turkey by train...
It won't help, saving the Dead Sea depends on the rapid transfer of seawater to the dying sea. Whether the canal will be from Beit Shan or from Eilat, that will be determined by the experts.
Our hiccups have been showing for years that they have lost their way.
Instead of accompanying the Zionist act with concern for the environment, they took a direction to oppose everything that "hurts" the environment.
One of the additional absurdities to the idea of desalination to the Dead Sea, is opposition to individual settlements and real settlements in the Negev.
It's hard to believe, but they are opposed to the Jewish settlement of Lachish. For the individual settlements, instead of saying thank you to those willing to do so, they stick sticks in the settlers at the same time that every free space is occupied by the Bedouins and there is no tweet about that...
Hello surfers,
Mtsav groups articles for those who want to get "to the bottom of things"
p1" via k_zvi "Saving the Dead Sea "p1"
http://www.google.com/reader/shared/user/09654193187354442779/label/p1
I recommend browsing for more extended topics as well.
Tsek - the manager of the Arad-City forum
http://www.tapuz.co.il/blog/userblog.asp?passok=yes&Catid=10862&blogId=54737
Asaf Rosenthal - although I'm sure you are an educated person and I agree with Toghan - it's been a long time since I've seen an article written in such a bad style, riddled with spelling errors, wording errors and punctuation errors.
Pay attention to the number of brackets and you will understand what I am talking about.
It would have been appropriate to pass the article to a linguistic editor or at least to someone who would do normal proofreading.
Thank you very much Dr. Rosenthal for your eye-opening article.
You raise very important and interesting points both on the geophysical level and on the biological level (which also includes the anthropological level). As we know, the Jordan does not really exist. What is poured into it is a little brackish water and waste water from the Kinneret area and not fresh water which is stopped in its flow to the Jordan.
As you said, it is necessary to prevent the drying of the Dead Sea, since the damages of its drying are very heavy. You rightly said that large parts of the sea canal that will flow from Eilat to the Dead Sea will be a closed "pipe" that will not be a tourist attraction.
At the same time, I disagree with your opinion that the Negev and the Arabah are sufficiently populated and that the means of production and tourism there sufficiently utilize the potential inherent in them. Of course, beyond any doubt, it is appropriate to provide as much information as possible regarding the possible environmental consequences that may be caused by this project, thereby actually finding out whether the dimensions of the future damage warrant action.
A possible scenario in which damage to the water canal will cause the salting of the fresh Prairie water in the north is indeed a frightening and disastrous scenario, but this fear, be it more or less well-founded, is still a fear of the immunity of technology and such fears should not be allowed to stop progress. Doomsday-style scenarios have prevented and are still preventing development and progress and must be taken into account in due measure. Of course, a large and ambitious project like the sea canal should take into account seismological biological and anthropological considerations, among other economic considerations, peace and the like. I am not an expert in the field, but I know of buildings that are supported by advanced technologies that are supposed to prevent or slow down their damage due to tectonic activity (for example, architecture in the Japanese islands, etc.). Technological robustness at the same time as heavy regulation of water crossings from station to station will significantly reduce the possibility of a possible ecological disaster due to leakage and massive salinization of the fresh Prairie water.
As for the issue of the flow regime in the Gulf of Eilat, I find the argument to be very weak, since it is a large and deep water basin anyway, and it appears on the face of it that the amount of water that will flow through such a canal is negligible in relation to the final water volume of this basin. Also, because of the producers, the water that enters the basin in Eilat is warm, nutrient-poor surface water that comes from the ocean. This surface water mixes during the winter with the deep water, but the bay remains relatively oligotrophic (except for those times when anthropogenic pollution occurs). I believe that pumping water from the bay will not affect the fauna in it, certainly not on the same scale as that of ships discharging ballast water or oil pipeline explosions, fish ponds and the like.
I wonder how well-founded the claim is that such a canal will cause a significant increase in humidity in the area, especially considering the fact that, as you mentioned, large distances of this canal will flow through a pipe. Since I am not familiar with the climatic possibilities in general and the regime of air currents in Israel in particular, I cannot express an opinion on this matter. If there is truth in these claims, then they should definitely be taken into account and added to the negative aspects of the Sea Canal. At the same time, I completely agree with you that the creation of open lakes for tourist purposes is a meaningless vanity that will harm the environment and the landscape much more than the benefit it will bring. There is no point in sculpting nature after nature, especially when the latter is artificial.
The question of the influence of the mineral composition of the Dead Sea water with the Gulf water is very worrying. I assume that these questions will be among the simpler ones and can be answered under relatively simple controlled experiments. Of course, a plaster carpet on the surface of the water is not desirable as well as blooms of algae and bacteria in the Dead Sea. As you know, the Dead Sea is not a sea of death at all and different animals live in it in a tremendous and impressive variety of species. As an ecosystem that originally received fresh water from the Jordan, it appears on the face of it (without studying the microbial fauna of the Dead Sea and the Gulf of Eilat) that such biological damage is not sufficiently substantiated. As an extreme hypersaline lake with a stable microbial base, I cannot describe a situation where there will be a "hostile" takeover of some species over others, as is sometimes seen in Lake Kinneret. Physiology of an extreme environment is not something trivial and in-depth biological tests should answer such a concern. In addition, assuming that the gypsum and algae/bacteria blooms will turn out to be only temporary or an option that cannot really exist, does a sea canal from the Mediterranean Sea to the Dead Sea make more sense to you? A canal that will of course go from west to east and will not be exposed to such heavy tectonic damage? A canal of this type will also come into less contact with the fresh water reservoir in the north of the Arava and the chance of pollution and salting will decrease compared to a canal coming from the south - right?
You have already said in advance that the drying up of the Dead Sea basin is a sick evil and must be answered as soon as possible - which means we agree that there is a need to inject water or at the very least, in your opinion, to prevent the Jordan from flowing into the Dead Sea. Your fear of damages such as the drying up of the Hula and the Aral Sea is indeed historically based, therefore this subject should be approached carefully and learn well from the mistakes of the past in order to prevent such ecological disasters. I ask myself to what extent an ecological disaster, if God forbid occurs in the Dead Sea due to the discharge of seawater from the Gulf of Eilat, will it be an irreparable disaster? Is it possible to intelligently prevent such a disaster and is it possible to get out of it if and when it happened?
The cost and benefit calculations you present are very interesting and on the face of it it seems that if the data is correct you are indeed right. At the same time, you forgot to add another factor, which is the natural use and utilization of creating "clean" electricity from the operation of water turbines on the one hand and relying on the emptying of the Dead Sea while evaporating liquids. Such a system, which would hypothetically operate for decades, could return "small" amounts of several billion dollars or even more. I'm not an economist and I don't understand a thing and a half about electricity and water technology, but it seems on the face of it that you didn't address this point where a sustainable system has been in use for many years.
It is appropriate and correct to doubt the credibility of ministries and spokespeople on behalf of the government. It is also appropriate in general to doubt large projects with a lot of money running around them. It would be only natural and basic to allow external and internal bodies to review the various aspects of this project. The issue of water desalination facilities and cost versus benefit is a cardinal issue that should be of interest to those concerned. According to your calculations, it seems that there is absolutely no particular point in changing the landscape so drastically for a result that can be achieved through water desalination.
------
The author is a PhD student in marine microbiology with a specialization in the environment of hypersaline lakes. In his master's thesis he dealt with the physiology of sea urchins from the Gulf of Eilat.