De-centralized Water Management in the Palestine

Territories (Short Term):

The growing scarcity of water in Israel and the Palestinian Territories has led to over exploitation of ground water resources from aquifers in Gaza and the West Bank. This has endangered health security of the next generation of the Israelis and Palestinians, while the present generation is somehow managing with dwindling resources and increasing pollution.

There is a complete communication deadlock between the dominant political forces in Gaza and the Government of Israel, though an Ad Hoc Committee of the Palestinian Authority and Israel works together on certain logistical issues, including movement of goods into Gaza. However, this does not stop water pollution from spreading across territories beneath the ground controlled by the respective parties. The untreated sewage in Gaza city not only pollute the beach and create lagoons of filth that are an obvious health hazards for the Palestinians but also travels to the port city of Ashkelon. In the West Bank with groundwater flows travelling from the Palestinian side to the Israeli side, the chances of groundwater pollution affecting Israeli sources are much higher. It

32

is in Israeli interests to help build infrastructure in the Palestinian Territories (Gaza and West Bank) and ease restrictions imposed on goods and fuel. Development in the territories will ensure greater water security for Israel in the future. Recognizing this, Ashkelon Mayor Benny Vaknin has initiated a $50 million project to modernize and upgrade Gaza city’s sewage and sanitation systems and re-use treated wastewater in Gaza for irrigation.

Building wastewater treatment plants in the Palestinian Territories is necessary, but requires large investments. Funds for wastewater treatment and water infrastructure projects have been put on hold because of administrative hurdles, as well as the political and economic climate of occupation. Gaza has a master plan which includes the expansion and improvement of wastewater treatment – including three new plants but merely 2 per cent of the investment programme has been implemented due to hostilities between Israel and Hamas and sanctions placed on the Hamas government in Gaza after their hostile take-over of the strip in 2007.

The West Bank currently has one functional wastewater treatment plant in Al-Bireh (out of five plants in total) but it produces poor quality effluent that is not even re-usable in agriculture. Sewage has become a serious problem in the West Bank and if not treated it will contaminate the only indigenous source of freshwater that the territory possesses. Pollution of the Mountain Aquifer will affect both Palestinians and Israelis and similarly joint projects to improve the quality of wastewater will benefit them both. Israel has the technical expertise to assist the Palestinians.

Today Israel is one of the leading countries in wastewater technology and utilizing wastewater in agriculture; they currently treat an estimated 96 per cent of their total wastewater. According to some experts, building a WWTP in Obeidiya should be the top priority since the wastewater from the Palestinian communities in East Jerusalem and the surrounding

area contribute the largest proportion of untreated wastewater being released in the West Bank. Other large scale plants pending are Salfit, Jenin Regional, Tulkarem Regional and Ramallah. In the long term all of these will provide additional quantities of water for re-use in agriculture.

One option for the future, which could be implemented in the short term, is the construction of small household level waste water treatment plants for the poorest of the poor. In a paper specially written for SFG, Dr. Monther Hind and Dr.

Clive Lipchin discuss a pilot project in the Bedouin communities of An Najadah and Az Zuweidin (located in the Hebron Governate), which provides an example of the potential of decentralized wastewater treatment plants in the West Bank. In 2009, the Italian Association for Solidarity among People (AISPO), Palestinian Wastewater Engineers Group (PWEG), and Union of Agricultural Work (UWAC) implemented a project to set up grey wastewater treatment plants to benefit 20 Bedouin households. In this system, black water is directed to the cesspit, while first anaerobic, then aerobic processes treat the water. GWWTs (grey wastewater treatment), with a capacity of 0.5 cubic metres per day, were installed to irrigate 500 square metre home gardens. About 80 per cent of household water use is in the form of grey water; out of this about 60 per cent can be recovered, treated, and reused. This system of grey wastewater treatment can yield drinking water savings of 150,000 L/household/

year. Each home garden can produce roughly 300 kg of vegetables per season, with two or potentially three seasons each year. This pilot decentralized wastewater treatment programme reduces water consumption, as well as the costs associated with cesspit discharge.

This project of 20 households annually provides 3,600 cubic metre of unconventional water, which can subsequently be used in home gardens, with an annual production of 12,000 kg of vegetables. Figure 1-h provides a cost benefit analysis of this pilot project.

Strategies - A Future Possibilities

Thus going by the estimated costs for the construction and installation of one plant, a two or three million Euro investment could establish a few hundred such plants in the West Bank. Of course a detailed study needs to be done to determine the running, energy and other related costs of such a plant; as well as the total number of people these plants would serve.

Besides the specific plant mentioned in the example given above, several other small size waste water treatment plants are available in the regional and global market. Some of them are designed to use solar energy. Some are slightly larger than the one mentioned above and can serve a small community, not merely a household or a cluster of households. It would be necessary to undertake a market study to identify options for small size waste water treatment plants, particularly the ones which are energy efficient or depend on solar or other alternative sources of energy. Some foreign aid can be allocated for this purpose as it will also provide exposure for companies in donor countries. The total cost would be a few million dollars or euros.

There is also a downside to the decentralised plants.

It is difficult to control the discharge and treatment of sewage. Unlike a centralised plant where sewage can be managed by a single authority, thousands of decentralised plants would mean dependence on information, awareness, conscience and willingness of a large number of people to observe self-discipline.

Therefore, introduction of decentralised plants in large numbers must be linked to a reliable monitoring and maintenance mechanism.

Next Steps

Since decentralised plants carry significant benefits for poor communities but risks of health hazards, it would be necessary to have a group of experts to examine all aspects of the viability, merit and costs of introducing such plants on a large scale. The group can prepare a plan of action including technical details, budget, monitoring mechanism and submit its report to the Palestine Water Authority (PWA). If approved by the PWA, the plans should then be discussed at Joint Water Committee to ensure that Israel would allow the movement of components to the Palestinian Territories until Final Status negotiations are successfully completed.

Fig 1-h: Cost Benefit Analysis of Grey Wastewater Treatment System (180 cubic metre/yr)

Source: Dr. Monther Hind and Dr. Clive Lipchin Cost (Euro)

Construction and installation cost Depreciation (life time – 25 years)

Total

Annual Benefits (Euro)

Savings in emptying the cesspit (per year) Savings in freshwater purchase (per year) Savings in medicines, and insecticides (per year) Saving in fertilizers (per year)

Gender and Social Benefits:

Strengthen socio-economic ties within the family Better relationships with neighbours

Reducing management time of women on water and wastewater, giving more attention to family

Savings on environment and public health Total

200 180 250 60

690 2,000

80

2,080

34

5. Confidence Building