By Geneviève Lalonde
The Dead Sea, it is an international landmark. People travel from far away just to experience the thrills of literally walking on water. In the past twenty to thirty years, the sea levels have dropped by over a third. This decrease is because its upstream source is being used up for agricultural and industrial uses. A private consortium have implemented a 10 billion dollar project to help bring an immediate supply of fresh water to the Jordan as well as bring an end to the “dying” of the Dead Sea. This will be done by taking salted water from the Red-Sea, transferring it to a water treatment plant were a de-saltation process will release the salted residue into the dead sea and the fresh water will be sent to the city of Amman for consumption.
The Jordan Post published an article entitled “$10b seawater desalination plant project announced “ and the author Hana Namrouqa seems to think that this project provides the solution to ending the environmental disaster and deliver much needed fresh water. In this case, we are talking about restoring one of the most historic bodies of water in the world. There is little doubt that from a demarcation perspective something must be done, probably on both fronts.
From a consequential point of view, the project seems to address the two issues positively with the exception that more studies are needed to understand what the new solution in the Dead Sea will become. The Dead Sea is already so concentrated with vitamins and minerals that adding brine may not be right solution to refilling it.
Judging from an earlier National Geographic review of the options, certain scientists agree that the Dead Sea will “dry up in the next 50 years” if nothing done to save it. If we insert a type of “artificial” replica of itself, we are not really saving it; we are transforming it into a genetically modified version. A modified version may not be the answer either; it will bring the possibility of algae and may even destroy the natural minerals that it is so famous for.
This brings up a non-consequential point of view of how can we be sure that today’s ecosystems surrounding the Dead Sea won’t be negatively affected? In fact, we cannot count on their survival but does that really matter to the majority? If we created some of these ecosystems by diminishing the levels of the Dead Sea then there should be no harm in destroying them now, correct? The question becomes is this ethically right? Do we have the power to destroy other living things just because they do not have an essential value to us?
This is a debate between the government of Jordan and the Dead Sea`s surrounding nations and the private sector. There is one thing that is clear. The Jordanian population is in need of fresh water. The private project will definitely provide in this regard although should and will the remaining salted water be released into the Dead Sea? Hopefully more studies will provide some of the answers.
To conclude we have two choices, 1) replenish the existing Dead Sea and potentially destroy what is left all in order to create a “new and improved version” or 2) leave it in its current state until all that is left is a dried up piece of salt. We can contemplate about what is the right decision but in the end, we do tend to choose what is right for the economy and the relationships between borders.
Resources
“$10b seawater desalination plant project announced
The Jordan times
by Hanna Namrouqa Mai 18th 2009
http://www.jordantimes.com/?news=16799
Diverting Red Sea to Save Dead Sea Could Create Environmental Crisis
National Geographics By Mati Milstein
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/12/061214-dead-sea.html
Good work including both of the views in your article. However, I believe you could have devoted a little more time to the discussion of ethics, and a little less to the explanation of the issue. I loved the topic however, I find it very interesting, and it is especially relevant in the world today.
ReplyDelete