Localizing the Water-Energy Nexus: The Relationship between Solar Thermal Power Plants and Future Developments in Local Water Demand
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Case Study
3. Research Approach and Methods
3.1. Research Approach
3.2. Methods
3.2.1. System Mapping
3.2.2. Participatory Scenario Development
3.2.3. Water Demand and Supply Modelling
3.2.4. Participatory Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA)
Defining Evaluation Criteria and Stakeholder Preferences
Identifying Water Conservation Measures
Evaluation of Water Conservation Measures
4. Analysis and Results
4.1. Systems Analysis
4.2. Socio-Economic Water Demand Scenarios in the Middle Drâa Valley
4.3. Multi-Criteria Assessment of Water Conservation Measures
5. Discussion and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Scenario Details
S1—Business as Usual | S2—Economic Growth First | S3—Growing Sustainability | |
---|---|---|---|
Agricultural development | |||
Cultivated area | Cultivated area remains the same Water scarcity limits expansion of cultivated area | Irrigated area is extended until water scarcity limits the expansion of cultivated area | Cultivated area remains the same |
Choice of crop types | Cash crop farming for export increases moderately Water productivity remains low | Increase of cash crop farming for export (watermelons, vegetables, fruit) until water resources are exhausted Water productivity increases | Shift to crops that use less water like arboriculture/dry land crops Water productivity increases significantly |
Irrigation with groundwater | Moderate increase of groundwater use for irrigation and number of groundwater pumps | Exploitation of groundwater resources Use of groundwater for irrigation and number of groundwater pumps increases significantly | Groundwater use limited to sustainable levels |
Irrigation efficiency | Irrigation efficiency remains constant | Irrigation efficiency increases (extension of drip irrigation) | Drip irrigation is significantly extended and increases the irrigation efficiency levels |
Livestock numbers | Livestock farming continues to decrease, lowering livelihood security levels in the absence of alternative income generating activities | Livestock farming decreases with more farmers earning their income from cash crops | Livestock remains an integrated part of farming (integrated livestock/agricultural production systems), animals provide fertilizer in form of manure, weed control, and security to small-scale farmers Numbers of animals is limited to a sustainable level (e.g., fodder production is limited to a certain share of biomass production) |
Water quality | Already low water quality levels continue to deteriorate | High groundwater use leads to declining groundwater levels, which contributes to increased salinity of: Irrigation water, which adversely affects agriculture (decreased yields, higher irrigation water demand to leach salts past the plant root zone) Drinking water, further reducing its (already low) quality | Water quality slowly improves, as salinity levels decrease due to reduced groundwater use and evaporation Wastewater treatment in the urban centers is maximized |
Demographic and social development | |||
Population development (oases/towns) | Migration from the region continues due to lack of employment and economic opportunities in the region Urban areas: continue to grow Oases: population decline | Migration from the region is reduced due to employment and economic opportunities in the region Urban areas: continue to grow Oases: steady growth at lower level | Migration from the region is reduced due to employment and economic opportunities in the region Urban areas: continue to grow Oases: steady growth at lower level |
Lifestyle developments | No significant change in people’s lifestyles and associated water demand | Cultivation of cash crops leads to an increase in farm incomes and multiplier effects for the service sector Higher incomes lead to lifestyle changes which increases water consumption per capita | Water consumption is decoupled from lifestyle changes and remains stable Water saving measures enhance quality and availability of water for household consumption Sustainability becomes important lifestyle component |
Economic development | |||
Tourism sector | Very limited change in the number of tourists Water use per tourist remains high | Number of tourists in the urban centres and oases increases significantly, reaching former heights Water use per tourist remains high | Tourist numbers increase slightly Share of sustainable tourism increases, more environmental-sensitive tourists come to the region to visit the solar power plant NOORo Higher expenditure per tourist Water saving measures are also implemented in the conventional hotel industry |
Regulations | |||
Regulations, rural development programmes, subsidy schemes | Supportive policies and programs exist but are not accessible by the majority due to lack of funding, land right questions, and lack of technical know-how | Supportive policies and programs for cash crop production and tourism development | Policies, programs, and awareness campaigns to support transition to drip irrigation, cultivation of less water-intensive crops, water re-use, and water saving measures in all sectors |
Appendix B. WEAP Model Parameters
S1—Business as Usual | S2—Economic Growth First | S3—Growing Sustainability | |
---|---|---|---|
Agricultural development | |||
Cultivated area | Cultivated area: remains the same | Cultivated area: 2% increase | Cultivated area: remains the same |
Share of crop types | wheat: 55% | wheat: 30% | wheat: 60% |
barley: 8% | barley: 5% | barley: 10% | |
alfalfa: 14% | alfalfa: 9% | alfalfa: 10% | |
henna: 1% | henna: 1% | henna: 1% | |
vegetables: 1% | vegetables: 10% | vegetables: 10% | |
melons: 5% | melons: 20% | melons: 2% | |
dates: 16% | dates: 25% | dates: 7% | |
Irrigation efficiency | Irrigation efficiency: remains constant at 65% | Irrigation efficiency: increases to 85% | Irrigation efficiency: increases to 95% |
Livestock farming | Livestock farming: 0.25% decrease | Livestock farming: 2.5% decrease | Livestock farming: 0.5% decrease |
Demographic and social development | |||
Population development (oases/towns) | Urban areas: 2.25% increase Rural areas: 0.45% decrease | Urban areas: 3% increase Rural areas: 1% increase | Urban areas: 3% increase Rural areas: 1% increase |
Water use (oases/towns) | Urban areas: 18.2 m3/head Rural areas: 7.3 m3/head | Urban areas: 25.5 m3/head Rural areas: 11 m3/head | Urban areas: 18.2 m3/head Rural areas: 11 m3/head |
Reservoirs | |||
Sedimentation rate | Sedimentation rate: 0.7% decrease | Sedimentation rate: 1.5% decrease | Sedimentation rate: 0.5% decrease |
- Climate data
- Hydrologic Parameterization
- Households
- Agricultural Area and Irrigation Requirements
- Energy Production
References
- Rodriguez, D.; Delgado, A.; DeLaquil, P.; Sohns, A. Thirsty Energy, Water Papers; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2013; Available online: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/835051468168842442/Thirsty-energy (accessed on 15 July 2020).
- OECD/IEA. Water-Energy Nexus. World Energy Outlook 2016 Excerpt; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Macknick, J.; NewmarkSamuel, R.L.; Heath, G.A.; Hallett, K.C. Operational water consumption and withdrawal factors for electricity generating technologies: A review of existing literature. Environ. Res. Lett. 2012, 7, 045802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Poullikkas, A.; Kourtis, G.; Hadjipaschalis, I. An overview of CSP cooling systems. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Renewable Energy Sources and Energy Efficiency, Nicosia, Cyprus, 19–20 May 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Qin, Y.; Mueller, N.D.; Siebert, S.; Jackson, R.B.; AghaKouchak, A.; Zimmerman, J.B.; Tong, D.; Hong, C.; Davis, S.J. Flexibility and intensity of global water use. Nat. Sustain. 2019, 2, 515–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MESIA. Solar Outlook Report 2020; Middle East Solar Industry Association: Dubai, UAE, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- DLR. Institute of Solar Research in the EU-Funded Project WASCOP: Soiling Prediction Model, Tests of Mirror Coatings and Innovative Cleaning Methods for Solar Mirrors; German Aerospace Center: Cologne, Germany, 2016; Available online: https://www.dlr.de/sf/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-10436/20174_read-47350/ (accessed on 15 July 2020).
- Hightower, M.; Pierce, S.A. The energy challenge. Nature 2008, 452, 285–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- World Bank. Climate Change in the Middle East & North Africa. 2018. Available online: http://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/menaclimate-change (accessed on 19 December 2019).
- Waha, K.; Krummenauer, L.; Adams, S.; Aich, V.; Baarsch, F.; Coumou, D.; Fader, M.; Hoff, H.; Jobbins, G.; Marcus, R.; et al. Climate change impacts in the Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA) region and their implications for vulnerable population groups. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2017, 17, 1623–1638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leck, H.; Conway, D.; Bradshaw, M.; Rees, J. Tracing the water–energy–food nexus: Description, theory and practice. Geogr. Compass 2015, 9, 445–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Biggs, E.M.; Bruce, E.; Boruff, B.; Duncan, J.M.; Horsley, J.; Pauli, N.; Haworth, B. Sustainable development and the water–energy–food nexus: A perspective on livelihoods. Environ. Sci. Policy 2015, 54, 389–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Terrapon-Pfaff, J.C.; Ortiz, W.; Dienst, C.; Gröne, M.-C. Energising the WEF nexus to enhance sustainable development at local level. J. Environ. Manag. 2018, 223, 409–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoff, H.; Alrahaife, S.A.; El Hajj, R.; Lohr, K.; Mengoub, F.E.; Farajalla, N.; Fritzsche, K.; Jobbins, G.; Özerol, G.; Schultz, R.; et al. A Nexus Approach for the MENA Region—From Concept to Knowledge to Action. Front. Environ. Sci. 2019, 7, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siddiqi, A.; Anadón, L.D. The water-energy nexus in Middle East and North Africa. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 4529–4540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Saidi, M.; Schellenberg, T.; Roach, E. Water, Energy and Food Nexus in Egypt-Nexus Country Profile; Nexus Research Focus; TH Köln University of Applied Sciences: Köln, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Al-Masri, R.A.; Chenoweth, J.; Murphy, R.J. Exploring the Status Quo of Water-Energy Nexus Policies and Governance in Jordan. Environ. Sci. Policy 2019, 100, 192–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Terrapon-Pfaff, J.; Fink, T.; Lechtenböhmer, S. The Water-Energy Nexus in Iran: Water-Related Challenges for the Power Sector; Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung: Bonn, Germany, 2018; Available online: http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/15108.pdf (accessed on 15 July 2020).
- Busche, H. Modeling Hydrological Processes in a Semi-Arid Mountainous Catchment at the Regional Scale. Ph.D. Thesis, Universitäts-und Landesbibliothek Bonn, Bonn, Germany, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- World Bank. Average Precipitation in Depth (mm per Year). World Bank Open Data. 2014. Available online: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.PRCP.MM?locations=MA (accessed on 6 February 2020).
- Diekkrüger, B.; Busche, H. Impact of global change on hydrology and soil degradation-scenario analysis for the semi-arid Drâa catchment (South Morocco). In River Basins and Change; Janos, J.B., Jan, L., Nachtnebel, H.-P., Eds.; GWSP IPO: Bonn, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- ORMVA. Productions Agricole; Office Régional de Mise en Valeur Agricole: Ouarazazate, Morocco, 2018.
- GoM/DGCL. La Région de Drâa-Tafilalet. Monographie Generale. Royaume du Maroc. Ministère de l’Intérieur. Direction Générale des Collectivités Locales. 2015. Available online: http://www.fcs.ma/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/MONOGRAPHIE-DE-LA-REGION-DE-DRAA-TAFILALET-FR.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2019).
- MASEN. Projects Map 2018. 2018. Available online: http://www.masen.ma/en/projets/ (accessed on 3 November 2020).
- Heidecke, C. Economic Analysis of Water Use and Management in the Middle Drâa Valley in Morocco. Ph.D. Thesis, Universitäts-und Landesbibliothek, Bonn, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Wuppertal Institute, Germanwatch. Social CSP–Energy and Development: Exploring the Local Livelihood Dimension of the NOORO I CSP Project in Southern Morocco; Final Report to the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ); Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy: Wuppertal, Germany; Germanwatch: Bonn, Germany, 2015; Available online: www.wupperinst.org/en/projects/details/wi/p/s/pd/449/ (accessed on 15 July 2020).
- Karmaoui, A.; Ifaadassan, I.; Babqiqi, A.; Messouli, M.; Khebiza, M. Analysis of the Water Supply-demand Relationship in the Middle Draa Valley, Morocco, under Climate Change and Socio-economic Scenarios. J. Sci. Res. Rep. 2016, 9, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albrecht, T.R.; Crootof, A.; Scott, C.J. The Water-Energy-Food Nexus: A systematic review of methods for nexus assessment. Environ. Res. Lett. 2018, 13, 043002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Strasser, L.; Lipponen, A.; Howells, M.; Stec, S.; Bréthaut, C. A Methodology to Assess the Water Energy Food Ecosystems Nexus in Transboundary River Basins. Water 2016, 8, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohtar, R.H.; Lawford, R. Present and future of the water-energy-food nexus and the role of the community of practice. J. Environ. Stud. Sci. 2016, 6, 192–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoolohan, C.; Larkin, A.; McLachlan, C.; Falconer, R.; Soutar, I.; Suckling, J.; Scott, M. Engaging stakeholders in research to address water-energy-food (WEF) nexus challenges. Sustain. Sci. 2018, 13, 1415–1426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Bielicki, J.M.; Beetstra, M.A.; Kast, J.B.; Wang, Y.; Tang, S. Stakeholder Perspectives on Sustainability in the Food-Energy-Water Nexus. Front. Environ. Sci. 2019, 7, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Pittock, J.; Dumaresq, D.; Bassi, A.M. Modeling the Hydropower–Food Nexus in Large River Basins: A Mekong Case Study. Water 2016, 8, 425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- GoC. Horizons Foresight Method: System Mapping. Government of Canada. 2016. Available online: https://horizons.gc.ca/en/our-work/learning-materials/foresight-training-manual-module-4-system-mapping/ (accessed on 15 July 2020).
- Zhang, W.; Gowdy, J.; Bassi, A.M.; Santamaria, M.; DeClerck, F.; Adegboyega, A.; Andersson, G.K.S.; Augustyn, A.M.; Bawden, R.; Bell, A.; et al. Systems thinking: An approach for understanding ‘eco-agri-food systems’. In TEEB for Agriculture & Food; Scientific and Economic Foundations: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- World Bank. Participatory Scenario Development Approaches for Identifying Pro-Poor Adaptation Options: Capacity Development Manual; Discussion Paper 19; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- McBride, M.F.; Lambert, K.F.; Huff, E.S.; Theoharides, K.A.; Field, P.; Thompson, J.R. Increasing the effectiveness of participatory scenario development through codesign. Ecol. Soc. 2017, 22, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Kok, K.; Biggs, R.O.; Zurek, M. Methods for Developing Multiscale Participatory Scenarios: Insights from Southern Africa and Europe. Ecol. Soc. 2007, 12, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Walz, A.; Lardelli, C.; Behrendt, H.; Grêt-Regamey, A.; Lundström, C.; Kytzia, S.; Bebi, P. Participatory scenario analysis for integrated regional modelling. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 81, 114–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reed, M.; Kenter, J.; Bonn, A.; Broad, K.; Burt, T.; Fazey, I.; Fraser, E.; Hubacek, K.; Nainggolan, D.; Quinn, C.; et al. Participatory scenario development for environmental management: A methodological framework illustrated with experience from the UK uplands. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 128, 345–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Volkery, A.; Ribeiro, T.; Henrichs, T.; Hoogeveen, Y. Your Vision or My Model? Lessons from Participatory Land Use Scenario Development on a European Scale. Syst. Pract. Action Res. 2008, 21, 459–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kosow, H.; Robert, G. Methods of Future and Scenario Analysis: Overview. Assessment, and Selection Criteria; German Development Institute: Bonn, Germany, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Mateo, J. Multi Criteria Analysis in the Renewable Energy Industry; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Munda, G. Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation for a Sustainable Economy; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Stirling, A. Analysis, participation and power: Justification and closure in participatory multi-criteria analysis. Land Use Policy 2006, 23, 95–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malczewski, J. GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, UK, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Stillwell, W.G.; Seaver, D.A.; Edwards, W. A comparison of weight approximation techniques in multiattribute utility decision making. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 1981, 28, 62–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoon, K.P.; Hwang, C.L. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction; Sage Publications: New York, NY, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- UNEP. Harnessing Opportunity Wastewater as a Managed Resource. United Nations Environment Programme. 2017. Available online: http://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/17679/harnessing_opportunity_wastewater.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed on 15 July 2020).
- Ersoy, S.R.; Terrapon-Pfaff, J.; Ribbe, L.; Merrouni, A.A. Water Scenarios Modelling for Renewable Energy Development in Southern Morocco. J. Sustain. Dev. Energy Water Environ. Syst. 2021, 9, 1080335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johannsen, I.M.; Hengst, J.C.; Goll, A.; Höllermann, B.; Diekkrüger, B. Future of Water Supply and Demand in the Middle Drâa Valley, Morocco, under Climate and Land Use Change. Water 2016, 8, 313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- GMAO. MERRA-2 tavg1_2d_slv_Nx: 2d, 1-Hourly, Time-Averaged, Single-Level, Assimilation, Single-Level Diagnostics V5.12.4. Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC). Global Modeling and Assimilation Office; 2019. Available online: http://www.soda-pro.com/de/web-services/meteo-data/merra (accessed on 5 June 2019).
- Christensen, J.H.; Kanikicharla, K.K.; Aldrian, E.; An, S.I.; Cavalcanti IF, A.; de Castro, M.; Kitoh, A. Climate phenomena and their relevance for future regional climate change. In Climate Change 2013 the Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 1217–1308. [Google Scholar]
- Sieber, J.; Purkey, D. WEAP—Water Evaluation and Planning System: User Guide; Stockholm Environment Institute: Somerville, MA, USA, 2015; Available online: https://www.weap21.org/downloads/WEAP_User_Guide.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2019).
- ABH. Bilan hydraulique et fiche technique du reservoir Mansour Eddhabi, Tiouine et la nappe de Zagora; Agence du Bassin Hydraulique: Zagora, Moroccco, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Fink, A.; Reichert, B.; Christoph, M. West Africa an Integrated Approach to the Efficient Management of Scarce Water Resources in West Africa. In Impetus Atlas Morocco: Research Results 2000–2007, 3rd ed.; Schulz, O., Judex, M., Eds.; University of Bonn: Bonn, Germany, 2008; Available online: http://www.impetus.uni-koeln.de/en/impetus-atlas/impetus-atlas-morocco.html (accessed on 10 June 2019).
- Ducrocq, V.; Drobinski, P.; Gualdi, S.; Raimbault, P. Sub-chapter 1.2.1. The water cycle in the Mediterranean. In The Mediterranean Region under Climate Change: A Scientific Update; Moatti, J., Thiébault, S., Eds.; IRD Éditions: Marseille, France, 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- WaPOR. Reference Evapo Transpiration (Dekadal). 2019. Available online: https://wapor.apps.fao.org/catalog/1/L1_RET_D (accessed on 10 June 2019).
- FAO. Irrigation Water Management: Irrigation Water Needs. Training Manual, 3. Chapter 3: Crop Water Needs. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 1986. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/s2022e/s2022e07.htm (accessed on 10 June 2019).
- MASEN. Case Study: Masen NOOR Ouarzazate Solar Complex. 2017. Available online: http://cmimarseille.org/menacspkip/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Youssef_Stitou_MENA_CSP_KIP_Jordan_Workshop_25_July_2017.pdf (accessed on 18 March 2019).
- Capitals 5. NOORo IV Ouarzazate 70 MW Photovoltaic Power Project Kingdom of Morocco: Specific Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Vol 2: Main Text. 2017. Available online: http://www.masen.ma/sites/default/files/documents_rapport/2_4.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2019).
Category | Criterion | Short Description | |
---|---|---|---|
Environment | C1 | Water savings | This criterion estimates the amount of water that could potentially be saved (through both conservation and efficiency measures) by the chosen alternative if implemented on a large scale. The higher the potential, the more preferable the option. |
C2 | Water quality | This criterion refers to the estimated impact on water quality by the chosen alternative—the ability of the option to improve water quality. The higher the potential, the more preferable the option. | |
C3 | Sustainability of water use | This criterion takes the different sustainability degrees of each alternative into account. In particular, the alternatives that do not involve groundwater overexploitation but favor the use of renewable water resources are preferred. | |
Technology | C4 | Technical and operational suitability | This criterion is related to the suitability of the technology or political instrument for implementation in the Middle Drâa Valley. The higher the suitability (feasibility and viability), the more preferable the option. |
Economic | C5 | Investment cost | This criterion corresponds to the estimated initial investment for implementing an alternative. The lower the cost, the more preferable the option. |
C6 | Operation & maintenance costs | This criterion captures the on-going expenses that a measure entails; for example, for maintenance. The lower the cost, the more preferable the option. | |
C7 | Economic benefit | This criterion measures the on-going beneficial effects of the measure; for example, through profits from the export of cash crops or money saved through reduced water consumption. | |
Social | C8 | Social acceptance | This criterion estimates the level of social acceptance and willingness of the local community to support the chosen alternative—also based on its compatibility with traditional practices. |
Category | Measure | Short Description | |
---|---|---|---|
Water conservation measures | M1 | Crop choice | This measure simulates a change in cropping patterns towards less water-intensive crops (e.g., arboriculture). |
M2 | Irrigation practice | This measure describes the change in irrigation patterns from daytime to night-time irrigation, which can reduce water losses due to evaporation. | |
Water efficiency measures | M3 | Irrigation efficiency | This measure assumes an improvement in irrigation efficiency by applying drip irrigation. |
M4 | Conveyance efficiency | This measure covers improvements in conveyance efficiency from current open channel networks (60% efficiency) to lined channels (80% efficiency) or pipes (95% efficiency). | |
M5 | Precision agriculture | This measure covers the implementation of precision agriculture on a large scale, increasing water efficiency in the agricultural sector from the current relatively low levels. | |
M6 | Desalination | This measure aims to install desalination units as the high salinity levels of the water in the Drâa Valley is hindering agricultural production. Desalinated water can be used for irrigation to improve water productivity or as drinking water. | |
M7 | Wastewater treatment | This measure describes the re-use of treated wastewater as alternative source of irrigation and drinking water. | |
M8 | Rainwater harvest | This measure covers the harvest of rainwater for irrigation purposes and as a domestic water source. | |
M9 | Water savings in urban households | This measure assumes water savings in the growing urban population by installing water saving appliances. | |
M10 | Water savings in the tourism sector | This measure aims to reduce the per capita water use in the tourism sector. | |
Water policies | M11 | Aligning national water & agricultural strategies | This measure aims to eliminate inconsistencies and contradictions between the “Plan Maroc Vert” and the national water policies. |
M12 | Regulatory interventions | This measure designates regulatory changes to either legally limit the cultivation of water-intensive crops or provide subsidies for the cultivation of less water-intensive crops. | |
M13 | Information campaign | This measure aims to provide more information and increase knowledge about water saving technologies to allow users to make informed decisions regarding investments in technologies. | |
M14 | Conservation-oriented water charges | This measure aims to introduce water charges to reduce water use in agriculture. | |
Technical measures: solar power plant | T1 | Conversion of NOORo 1 to wet/dry hybrid | This measure simulates the introduction of novel hybrid dry/wet cooling technology, which could save up to 80% of water compared to wet only cooling without compromising performance. |
T2 | Reducing cleaning water consumption NOORo I-IV | This measure covers the optimized cleaning schedules and implementation of devices that cut water consumption for cleaning. | |
T3 | Maximize reduction of water consumption for cooling and cleaning | This measure describes the maximum reduction of water consumption in the solar power plant through the application of the latest technological innovations in both cooling and cleaning, as well as an additional reduction through the internal re-use of water. |
Criteria | Average | Farmers Group | Civil Society Group | Local Administration | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | Water savings | 0.16 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.34 |
C2 | Water quality | 0.19 | 0.11 | 0.15 | 0.08 |
C3 | Sustainability of water use | 0.12 | 0.15 | 0.21 | 0.03 |
C4 | Technical and operational suitability | 0.11 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.21 |
C5 | Investment cost | 0.09 | 0.34 | 0.08 | 0.15 |
C6 | Operation & maintenance costs | 0.10 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.11 |
C7 | Economic benefit | 0.12 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.05 |
C8 | Social acceptance | 0.12 | 0.21 | 0.34 | 0.02 |
Sum | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Terrapon-Pfaff, J.; Ersoy, S.R.; Fink, T.; Amroune, S.; Jamea, E.M.; Zgou, H.; Viebahn, P. Localizing the Water-Energy Nexus: The Relationship between Solar Thermal Power Plants and Future Developments in Local Water Demand. Sustainability 2021, 13, 108. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010108
Terrapon-Pfaff J, Ersoy SR, Fink T, Amroune S, Jamea EM, Zgou H, Viebahn P. Localizing the Water-Energy Nexus: The Relationship between Solar Thermal Power Plants and Future Developments in Local Water Demand. Sustainability. 2021; 13(1):108. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010108
Chicago/Turabian StyleTerrapon-Pfaff, Julia, Sibel Raquel Ersoy, Thomas Fink, Sarra Amroune, El Mostafa Jamea, Hsaine Zgou, and Peter Viebahn. 2021. "Localizing the Water-Energy Nexus: The Relationship between Solar Thermal Power Plants and Future Developments in Local Water Demand" Sustainability 13, no. 1: 108. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010108