Economic study of desalination and seawater transition: Case study of mining industries in the southeast of the country

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Instructor, Departmentof Agricultural Economic, Faculty of Agricuiture, Payam Noor University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assist Professor, Department of Environmental Sciences Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract
Demand for water is increasing day by day due to population growth and increasing economic activities. Climate change, as a potential threat to both water supply and demand, has upset the balance between water resources and consumption, especially in arid and semi-arid countries. The result is a widening gap in water supply and demand, increasing social conflict, and the instability of aquatic ecosystems and the environment. Water resource planners in many parts of the world have come to the common understanding that conventional water resources alone can no longer bridge the gap between supply and demand and should focus on water resource planning where different options of development of water resources are available. In the meantime, the use of unconventional water resources as a promising option to alleviate the quantitative and qualitative pressures on conventional water resources worldwide is of particular importance. Unconventional water resources mainly include seawater, brackish water and effluents from drinking, industrial and agricultural uses, of which seawater desalination is of particular importance.
However, exploiting these resources is economically and financially challenging due to their high costs. Therefore, it is necessary to carefully consider the opportunity cost of water supply in this way with the its benefits. In this paper, using economic analysis based on welfare theory, which is widely accepted as a decision-making framework in the selection and implementation of investment projects. For economic evaluation, the overall effect of the project on improving the economic well-being of the whole community is measured by estimating and comparing the collective benefits of the project over time. If the economic benefits of the project outweigh the costs, it means that the value of consumption created for the community as a result of the project is greater than the value of the resources sacrificed for the project by other uses. In this paper, the Persian Gulf Water Desalination and Transfer Project, which is being implemented to supply water to the mining industries in southeastern Iran, gross water supply benefits by the project are estimated based on its final production value (economic value) in consumer industries are evaluated against the investment, operation and maintenance costs of both parts of project, namely desalination and water transfer. The results of the net present value of the project indicate that the benefits of water supply for the mining industries in the southeast of the country through desalination and water transfer from the Persian Gulf is not only able to compensate all investment, operation and maintenance cost and cost opportunity money, but also can add a total of 59,127.2 billion rials to the economic welfare of society during the 30-year period of operation. It should be noted that the internal rate of return of the project is 22.3%, which is significantly higher than the basic discount rate (0.07). On the other hand, in order to attract private investors to invest in this field, projects in this field must have financial stability. Therefore, the economic evaluation of the project should include an analysis of the financial sustainability of the project from the perspective of stakeholders. The financial analysis of the project is similar to the economic analysis in form. Both evaluate the benefits of investing. However, the concept of financial gain is not the same as economic profit. As mentioned above, in economic analysis the effects of the project on the national economy or the welfare of the community as a whole are measured, while in financial analysis the profit of the project is estimated for the operator or project participants it becomes. For a project to be economically viable, it needs to be financially sustainable and economically viable. The financial instability of the project leads to the non-realization of its economic benefits. Indeed, a comprehensive economic analysis should answer the question of whether the project's financial costs are covered by its beneficiaries and whether there is a financial incentive for project participants. The basic test for evaluating a financial sustainability project is whether the financial project for repayment is too much of the participants' capital. The Persian Gulf water desalination and transfer project is implemented by the private sector; where 15% of the required investment capital is brought from the investor and 85% is financed by BOO method. According to the agreement between the private investor and the water-demanding industries, the (financial) price of selling each cubic meter of desalinated water on the place of the industries is based on the cost (financial) of both components, the desalination and the transfer of each cubic meter of water plus 30 Percentage of profit margin is determined. Accordingly, the financial income of the project is calculated by multiplying the selling price of each cubic meter of water by the amount of water allocated to different industries. The financial criteria of the project indicate the very good profitability of the project from the perspective of the private sector investor. According to the calculations, the financial rate of return of the project is 30.9% and the rate of financial return brought by the investor is estimated to be 33.2%, both of which are significantly higher than the cost of capital opportunity (interest rate of the facility, 19% for Rial loan and 7/7% of foreign currency loans). Therefore, it can be concluded that the implementation of the Persian Gulf desalination and water transfer project to supply the water needed by the country's mining industries has an economic justification. The economic benefits of supplying water through seawater desalination to meet the needs of the mining industries can cover the high costs of desalination and water transfer and justify its implementation from the perspective of the national economy, the financial sustainability of the project also indicates the existence of sufficient financial motivation for the private sector to participate in investment projects for desalination and seawater transfer projects with industrial and mineral use.

Keywords


  • بانک مرکزی ایران. 1392. گزارش‌های آماری.
  • حسینی س. ع. 1396. چالش‌های پایداری در مدیریت منابع آب ایران. فصلنامة علوم اجتماعی. 77: 362-402.
  • سایت وزارت نیرو .1392. گزارش‌های مختلف وزارت نیرو.
  • صادقی ز. حری ح. ر. و صفی نتاج م. مقایسة اقتصادی شیرین‌کردن آب خلیج فارس با استفاده از انرژی‌های نو و فسیلی. فصلنامة اقتصاد محیط زیست و منابع طبیعی. 1(2): 143-171.
  • عبدالمجیدی ح. حسام م. هزارجریبی ا. و دهقانی ا.ا. 1390. ارزیابی اقتصادی شیرین‌سازی آب دریای خزر به روش اسمز معکوس. مجموعه مقالات کنفرانس ملی بهره‌برداری از آب دریا. کرمان. زمان برگزاری همایش و تعداد صفحات مقاله؟
  • مرکز آمار ایران. 1392. گزارش‌های آماری. 235-252.
  • Abazza H. Khodagui H. Damianidis S. and Konstantianos V. 2012. Economic considerations for supplying water through desalination in south Mediterranean countries. Sustainable Water Integrated Management- Support Mechanism (SWIM- SM), Project funded by the European Union.
  • 1999. Guidelines for the economic analysis of projects. Economics and development resource center, Asian development bank.
  • Adham S. 2007. Desalination. Proc. Membrane Specialty Conf. II, Australian Water Association, Paper 12. Online at: http://www.awa.as.au.
  • 2009. Official notes of desalination course. Asociación Española de Desalación y Reutilización (AEDyR). Madrid, Spain. Online at: http://www.Aedyr.com
  • Bernat X. Gibert O. Guiu R. Tobella J. and Campos C. 2010. The economics of desalination for various uses. Water technology center. Barcelona. Spain. Online at: http://www.ceraqua.com.
  • Blank J.E. Tusel G.F. and Nisan S. 2007. The real cost of desalted water and how to reduce it further. Desalination. 205: 298–311.
  • Dupont D.P. and Renzetti S. 2001. The Role of Water in Manufacturing, Environmental and Resources Economics. 18: 411-432.
  • Fritzmann C. Löwenberg J. Wintgens T. and Melin T. 2007. State-of-the-art of reverse osmosis desalination. Desalination. 216: 1-76.
  • Haro D. Solera A. Pedro M. and Andreu J. 2009. Optimal Management of the Jucar River and Turia River Basins under Uncertain Drought Conditions. Journal of Procedia Engineering. 89: 1260-1267.
  • Farley D. and Farley J. 2004. Ecological economics: principles and applications, Handbook. Washington DC: Island Press. 484 p.
  • Hoang M. Bolto B. Haskard C. Barron O. Gray S. and Leslie G. 2009. Desalination in Australia. CSIRO Materials Science and Engineering, Water for a Healthy Country Flagship Report series ISSN: 1835-095X. 2009. online at: http://hdl.handle.net/102.100.100/112839?index=1
  • International Desalination Association and Global Water Intelligence Release New Data in 30th Worldwide Desalting Inventory . data online at: http://www.idadesal.org. Zou Q.Liu X. 2016. Economic effects analysis of seawater desalination in China with input–output technology. Journal of Desalination. 380: 18-28.
  • Karagiannis I. C. and Soldatos P. G. 2008. Water desalination cost literature: review and assessment. Desalination. 223: 448-456.
  • Lattemann S. and Höpner T. 2008. Environmental impact and impact assessment of seawater desalination. Desalination. 220: 1-15.
  • Molinos-Senante M. Hernández-Sancho F. and Sala-Garrido R. Economic feasibility study for wastewater treatment: A cost–benefit analysis. Science of the Total Environment. 408: 4396-4402.
  • Nellen A. 2011. Desalination: A Viable Answer to Deal with Water Crises? Strategic analysis paper. Independent Strategic Analysis Australia’s Global Interests. Online at: http://www.futuredirections.org.au.
  • Nisan S. and Benzarti N. 2008. A comprehensive economic evaluation of integrated desalination systems using fossil fulled and nuclear energies and including their environmental costs. Desalination. 229: 125-146.
  • Reddy K. V. and Ghaffour N. 2007. Overview of the cost of desalinated water and costing methodologies. Desalination. 205: 340-353.
  • Renzetti S. 1988. An Econometric Study of Industrial Water Demands in British Columbia, Canada. Water Resources Research. 24: 1569-1573.
  • Renzetti S. 1992. Estimating the structure of industrial water demands: The case of Canadian manufacturing. Land Economics. 68(4): 396-404.
  • Renzetti S. and Dupont D. 2004. The performance of municipal water utilities: Evidence on the role of ownership. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A. 67(20-22):1861-1878.
  • Verlicchi P. Al Aukidy M. Galletti A. Zambello E. Zanni G. and Masotti L. 2012. A project of reuse of reclaimed wastewater in the Po Valley, Italy: Polishing sequence and cost benefit analysis, Journal of Hydrology. 432-433: 127-136.
  • Wang H. and Lall S. 1999. Valuing water for Chinese Industries: A marginal productivity Assessment. Development Research Group the World Bank. Online at: https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-2236.
  • Birol E. Karousakis K. and Koundouri P. 2006. Using economic valuation techniques to inform water resources management: A survey and critical appraisal of available techniques and an application. Science of the Total Environment. 365: 105-122.
  • Duly, Herman, E. and Farley J. 2004. Ecological economics: principles and applications, Handbook. Island Press, Washington, DC.

  • Receive Date 21 November 2020
  • Revise Date 31 March 2021
  • Accept Date 21 April 2021