Jordan is a strong proponent of the Red–Dead project, mainly because per capita, the country’s access to fresh water is among the most restricted in the world. Saad Abu Hammour, secretary-general of the Jordan Valley Authority, told the Jerusalem hearing that the scarcity of water in Jordan has been exacerbated by the arrival of more than 250,000 Syrian refugees into the country since the outbreak of the Syrian civil war in 2011.
International tensions
Raising money for the pipeline may pose a problem at a time when many governments around the world are imposing austerity measures.
But an even more formidable obstacle may prove to be the region's politics, says Gidon Bromberg, director of FoEME in Israel. The project’s progress depends on all three parties signing a treaty, but Bromberg wonders whether the Israeli government is prepared to enter a treaty with the Palestinian Authority.
“A treaty means political recognition to sovereignty rights around the Dead Sea," he says. "They got away with it in the interim by calling everyone ‘beneficiaries’. The Palestinians aren’t going to accept that. But even more importantly, the international community isn’t going to accept that. So no-one is going to give money unless you have a treaty in place.”
This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article was first published on February 27, 2013.
See what we're tweeting about
18 Comments
Add CommentIt is a real pity that politics could keep a worthwhile project that everyone could benefit from from happening.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI wonder what size of bore they would need to funnel sufficient water to maintain the water levels in the Dead Sea and provide potable water to the surrounding peoples? The middle east could bloom again.
I also wonder how they intend to keep organisms from the Red Sea from entering the ecosystem of the Dead Sea... Not much lives there except Almost nothing can survive in this water except some highly specialized green algae and red archaeobacteria. Not sure how dumping the brine there would affect that ecosystem either.
Just imagine the Greenie lead uproar today if building the Suez and Panama canals were only now being contemplated.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNah, it's usually conservatives that get in an uproar about large infrastructure projects. Can't have the government investing in its own economy and improving people's lives now, can we? And we ESPECIALLY don't want to do anything improve the unemployment rate when the wrong people are in power either....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo you think these people are conservatives?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://foeme.org/www/?module=about_us
Climate change stands on its own, as being one of the greatest environmental, social and economic threats facing the planet today, especially to our scarce water resources.
When those canals were built there was no concept of environmental change and degradation.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne unintended side effect might be the prevention of a war over water between Israel and Jordan (amongst others). I agree that the Jordanian government would have severe reservations about Israel controlling the tap (and with good reason).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWouldn't this cause a huge increase in the salinity of the Dead Sea? Or else cause salt deposits, if the water can't hold any more salt.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVery clever.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThey plan to use the Dead Sea as a dump for salty brine.
And thus "save it".
The only argument is over who does the dumping.
How about instead a really novel idea?
How about stopping all that water diversion from the Jordan River that used to bring more than enough water into the Dead Sea to keep it stable?
And you're saying that,realistically,there would be no repercussions in implementing your "novel" idea? How about restoring full flow to the Colorado River? Same concept - how well would that work? It's easy to make such comments, but a lot harder to demonstrate the viability.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBtw, the salty water that would be put into the Dead Sea from desalination plants would have about the same salinity as what is already there.
I doubt you understand the implications of what you are proposing. Where would all the people get their drinking & water for crops from if they ceased using water from the Jordan River? Surely it is not your preference that these people simply have to move or perish? Misanthropy is an ugly thing. I hope you do not subscribe to it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs for dumping brine, the salinity of the Dead Sea is so high that you can lay on your back & read a book while laying in it. The brine they propose to dump as a by-product of desalination would still be only a fraction as salty as the naturally occuring Dead Sea water.
Sorry. Meant to be replying to 8. CharlieinNeedham 08:33 PM 2/28/13
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJordan and Israel were already talking about the Dead-Red project in 2006 when I was Jordan's country lawyer.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.law.gonzaga.edu/gjil/2006/03/shared-water-resources-in-the-jordan-river-basin/ This is not a new story. Why has it suddenly become newsworthy now?
From the article..
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this...The project’s progress depends on all three parties signing a treaty, but Bromberg wonders whether the Israeli government is prepared to enter a treaty with the Palestinian Authority......
Whereas we all know how eager the Arab countries in the region are to sign treaties with Israel. (or even acknowledge that Israel exists)
Yes, sickening bias. What's new?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOK, suppose they add brine to the Dead Sea for 100 years. Assuming they add enough to replace water lost to evaporation, how much will that increase the salinity? Keep in mind that whatever salt is added stays there, but the accompanying water does not.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt would be roughly enough to replace the salinity lost due to very little coming down the river Jordan and the extraction of various salts from the Dead Sea by chemical companies. In other words it would keep things approximately as they should be.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSince the water is almost exclusively for Jordan, why would Jordan accept the cheaper route when it gives other nations control over Jordanian survival? What if the Israelis decide to charge per gallon? Politics stink but it is an important fact of life.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you add salty water to a close system with no fresh water entry, just by the unavoidable evaporation, the salt concentration in this sea will go higher and higher as time goes by. If the wall that blocks the Red sea flowing to the Dead sea is fully open, as to allow in and out currents to form, as the Mediterranean-Atlantic currents in and out that exist in the Gibraltar strait, things may be probably less dangerous. As the Bible states clearly that from the four walls of the Jerusalem's temple, rivers will flow, that will reach the salty waters' sea and will regenerate it, perhaps in this case it would be better waiting to the God's actions. Salut +
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this