Você está na página 1de 12

WORKSHOP ON STRATEGIC PLANNING

WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT


HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES

1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a workshop in Water Resources Management. A
spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel developed by Willem Dube was used. The modules to be
worked in the spreadsheet are: Public Water Supply, Agriculture Demand, Water allocation,
Investments and Economic Analysis, Economic and Financial Analysis.
The spreadsheet was filled according to several in formations included in the lecture notes.
The main objective of the workshop is the understanding of the spreadsheet, the interpretation
of the data and the filling of a scorecard with the most important information to be provided
to the decision makers.
The scorecard is presented in the appendix 1.
2. DATA AND COMMENTS

2.1 Base data for 2000 (input and output)


2.1.1 Public Water Service (PWS)
The consumption for the Old Town in 2000 is 50 l/cap/d and the coverage is 60%.
The consumption for the New Town in 2000 is 70 l/cap/d and the coverage is 80%.
The medium demand for the Old Town (OT) and New Town (NT) are 3.58 and 0.96 Mm3,
respectively. The demand was calculated using data from the 2000 census (population), losses
and coverage.
2.1.2Agriculture
a) River
Cultivated Area 12.338 ha
Crop Rotation:

Agriculture
431.84 Mm3

Crop Rotation
R1
R2
P1

Type
Rice and Vegetables
Wheat and Cotton
Citrus

%
40
40
20

Demand

b) Desert
Cultivated Area 200 ha
Crop Rotation :
Crop Rotation
R1
P1
P2

Type
Rice and Vegetables
Citrus
Apple

%
20
40
40

Agriculture Demand 4.47 Mm3


2.1.3 Industry
Demand 12.8 Mm3
2.1.4 Annual Water Demand and Allocation
Total groundwater renewed 27.5 Mm3.
The allocation of the volumes in each resource was done in order to get positive values in the
deficit column. If the value is negative it means excess of water not used, which is not
economically good and environmental incorrect. The table 1 presents the results after the
allocation and total use and deficits.
Table 1: Annual Water Demand and Allocation for 2000.
Annual water demand and allocation (Mm3/y)

SOURCES

Sustained

Grw.renew.

27.50

Demand:
Supply

OldT
3.58

PWS
NewT
0.96

Vils
0.00

3.00

0.81

0.00

Agriculture
River
Desert
431.84
4.47
20.50

3.13

Industry

Total

12.80

453.65

1.00

28.44

Deficit

0.94

Grw.non-renew
Surf.water
(pipe line)
%Re-use drain
< 10

0.00

Supply

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

8.83

8.83

8.83

418.00

Supply

0.58

0.15

0.00

411.34

1.83

3.48

417.39

-0.61

0.00

Supply

0.00

0.00

Totals

445.50

454.66

9.16

Alloc.

0.00
3.58

0.96

0.00

431.84

4.96

13.31

The total deficit for the allocation is 9.16.

2.1.5 Investments and Economic Analysis


Investments water supply - OT + NT + V1 +V2 = 0.53 M mu
Investments Industry = 0.62 M mu
Investments Agriculture River + Desert = 0
2.1.6 Social Aspects
Water Quality OT part from groundwater part from surface water (good quality).
Water Quality NT part from groundwater part from surface water (good quality).
Employment - Considering the total amount of 12.8 Mm3/y it is possible to provide
employment for 3200 individuals.
Also, considering the area of 200 ha, 300 persons can be employed.
2.1.7 Environmental Aspects
The amount of 8.3 Mm3, 65 % of the total volume (12.8 Mm3) is waste water.
Assuming a consumption of pesticides of 15 Kg/ha it is necessary 3 ton of product to be
applied in an area of 200 ha.
Drawdown (S), assuming the porosity (n) equal to 20 % is S = Q / n * A.
In the River aquifer the drawdown will be 2 cm/y and in the desert area 11 cm/ year.

2.2 Base data for 2010 (input and output)


2.2.1 Public Water Service (PWS)
The consumption for the Old Town in 2010 is 50 l/cap/d and the coverage is 60%.
The consumption for the New Town in 2010 is 70 l/cap/d and the coverage is 100%.
The medium demand for the Old Town (OT) and New Town (NT) are 4.59 and 1.63 Mm3,
respectively.
2.2.2 Agriculture
a) River
Cultivated Area 12.338 ha
Crop Rotation
Crop Rotation
R1
R2
P1

Type
Rice and Vegetables
Wheat and Cotton
Citrus

%
50
35
15

Agriculture Demand 430.41 Mm3


b) Desert
Cultivated Area 200 ha
Crop Rotation
Crop Rotation
R1
P1
P2

Type
Rice and Vegetables
Citrus
Apple

%
20
40
40

Agriculture Demand 4.47 Mm3


2.2.3 Industry
Demand 16 Mm3
2.2.4 Annual Water Demand and Allocation
Total groundwater renewed 27.5 Mm3.
The allocation of the volumes demanded from each resource was done preferably considering
the location of the user and the type water resource available (river, desert aquifer or surface
water). Also it was considered the environmental issue in order to have the minimum
drawdown in both aquifers, taking the deficit from the desert aquifer two times more than the
river aquifer, since the area of the river aquifer is two times more. The table 2 presents the
results after the allocation and total use and deficits.

Table 2: Annual Water Demand and Allocation for 2010.


Annual water demand and allocation (Mm3/y)

SOURCES
Grw.renew.
Grw.non-renew
Surf.water (pipe
line)
%Re-use drain <
10
Totals

Sustained

Demand:

OldT
4.59

PWS
NewT
1.63

Vils
0.00

27.50
0.00

Supply
Supply

3.00
0.00

0.00
1.48

0.00
0.00

418.00

Supply

1.59

0.15

0.00

0.00

Supply

445.50

Alloc.

Agriculture
River
Desert
430.41
4.47
20.58
0.00
409.8
3

Industry

1.63

0.00

430.41

The total deficit for the allocation is 11.6.

2.2.5 Investments and Economic Analysis


Investments water supply - OT + NT + V1 +V2 = 4.92 Mmu
Investments Industry = 1.82 Mmu

Deficit

16.00

457.10

2.00
0.43

5.27
7.00

30.85
8.91

3.35
8.91

2.04

3.73

417.34

-0.66

0.00

0.00

457.10

11.60

0.00
4.59

Total

4.47

16.00

Investments Agriculture River = 0.68 Mmu


Investments Agriculture Desert = 0.29 Mmu
The Benefits, considering the unit price of 0.1 mu/year (PWS and Agriculture) and 0.2
mu/year (industry) will be for each activity as shown bellow:
In 2000 - Agriculture in the River area: R1 = 42.93, R2 = 45.4 and P1 = 22.46. Total amount
of 110.79.
In 2010, Agriculture in the River area: R1 = 53.67, R2 = 39.73 and P1 = 16.84. Total amount
of 110.24.Substracting the two values it gets a value of 0.55 Mmu of benefits.
In the desert area the benefits will be zero, because the values for 2000 and 2010 are the
same.
2.2.6 Social Aspects
Water Quality OT part from groundwater part from surface water (good quality).
Water Quality NT part from groundwater part from surface water (good quality).
Employment - Considering the total amount of 16 Mm3/y it is possible to provide
employment for 4000 individuals.
Also, considering the area of 200 ha, 300 persons can be employed.
2.2.7 Environmental Aspects
The amount of 10.4 Mm3, 65 % of the total volume (16 Mm3) is waste water.
Assuming a consumption of pesticides of 15 Kg/ha it is necessary 3 ton of product to be
applied in an area of 200 ha.
The Drawdown, assuming the porosity equal to20 % is S = Q / n * A.
In In the River aquifer the drawdown will be 8 cm/y and in the desert area 11 cm/ year.
Which are very good values for the environmental point of view, since the value as are in the
same order of magnitude.

2.3 Base data for 2020 (input and output)


2.3.1 Public Water Service (PWS)
The consumption for the Old Town in 2020 is 50 l/cap/d and the coverage is 60%.
The consumption for the New Town in 2010 is 70 l/cap/d and the coverage is 100%.
The medium demand for the Old Town (OT) and New Town (NT) are 9.59 and 2.21 Mm3,
respectively.
2.3.2 Agriculture
a) River
Cultivated Area 12.338 ha
Crop Rotation
Crop Rotation
R1
R2
P1

Type
Rice and Vegetables
Wheat and Cotton
Citrus

%
50
35
15

Agriculture Demand 430.41 Mm3


b) Desert
Cultivated Area 200 ha
Crop Rotation
Crop Rotation
R1
P1
P2

Type
Rice and Vegetables
Citrus
Apple

%
20
40
40

Agriculture Demand 4.47 Mm3


2.3.3 Industry
Demand 20 Mm3
2.3.4 Annual Water Demand and Allocation
Total groundwater renewed 27.5 Mm3.
The allocation of the volumes demanded from each resource was done preferably considering
the location of the user and the type water resource available (river, desert aquifer or surface
water). Also it was considered the environmental issue in order to have the minimum
drawdown in both aquifers, taking the deficit from the desert aquifer two times more than the
river aquifer, since the area of the river aquifer is two times more. The table 3 presents the
results after the allocation and total use and deficits.

Table 3: Annual Water Demand and Allocation for 2020.

Annual water demand and allocation (Mm3/y)

SOURCES
Grw.renew.
Grw.non-renew
Surf.water (pipe
line)
%Re-use drain <
10
Totals

Sustained

Demand:

OldT
9.59

PWS
NewT
2.21

Vils
0.00

27.50
0.00

Supply
Supply

3.00
0.00

0.00
2.17

0.00
0.00

418.00

Supply

6.59

0.04

0.00

0.00

Supply

445.50

Alloc.

Agriculture
River
Desert
430.41
4.47
23.21
0.00
407.2
0

Industry

2.21

0.00

430.41

The total deficit for the allocation is 21.18.


2.3.5 Investments and Economic Analysis
Investments water supply - OT + NT + V1 +V2 = 23.7 Mmu

Deficit

20.00

466.68

2.00
0.62

5.68
12.00

33.89
14.79

6.39
14.79

1.85

2.32

418.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

466.68

21.18

0.00
9.59

Total

4.47

20.00

Investments Industry = 5.04 Mmu


Investments Agriculture River = 1.67Mmu
Investments Agriculture Desert = 0.32 Mmu
The Benefits, considering the unit price of 0.1 mu/year (PWS and Agriculture) and 0.2
mu/year (industry) will be for each activity as shown bellow:
In 2020 - the beneffits will be as follows:
PWS
Industry
Agric.River
Agric.Desert

Investm(Mmu,bank)
Benefits(Mmu,bank
Investm(Mmu,bank)
Benefits(Mmu,bank
Investm(Mmu,bank)
Benefits(Mmu,bank
Investm(Mmu,bank)
Benefits(Mmu,bank

23.7
0.745
5.04
1.44
1.67
0.55
0.32
0

2.3.6 Social Aspects


Water Quality OT part from groundwater part from surface water (good quality).
Water Quality NT part from groundwater part from surface water (good quality).
Employment - Considering the total amount of 250 Mm3/y it is possible to provide
employment for 5000 individuals.
Also, considering the area of 200 ha, 300 persons can be employed.
2.3.7 Environmental Aspects
The amount of 10.4 Mm3, 65 % of the total volume (16 Mm3) is waste water.
Assuming a consumption of pesticides of 15 Kg/ha it is necessary 3 ton of product to be
applied in an area of 200 ha.
The Drawdown, assuming the porosity equal to 20 % is S = Q / n * A.
In the River aquifer the drawdown will be 16 cm/y and in the desert area 18 cm/ year. Which
are very good values for the environmental point of view, since the value as are in the same
order of magnitude.
2.4 Strategies
For the different strategies the spreadsheet was filled in order to have the results.
Table 4: Annual Water Demand and Allocation for 2010 Strategy 1.
Bank rate
Discount rate
PWS l/c/d
PWS coverage
Industry(Mcm)
Agr.River Crop shift
Agr Desert(ha)
Agr.Des.cashcrops
Re-use

Strategy 1
2010
70
100%
16
yes
1500
no
no

Strategy2
2020
70
100%
20
yes
3000
yes
no

Strategy3
2020
70
100%
20
yes
3000
yes
10%

Startegy4
2020
70
100%
20
yes
3000
yes
25%

Strategy5
2020
70
100%
20
yes
max
yes
25%

The tables bellow presents the results of water allocation for different strategies.
2.4.1 Strategy 1 2010
The main change in the Strategy 1 is to increase the cultivated area in the desert to 1500 ha.
This change implies an increase in the demand for water in the desert aquifer mainly.
Table 5: Annual Water Demand and Allocation for 2010 Strategy 1.

Annual water demand and allocation (Mm3/y)

SOURCES
Grw.renew.
Grw.non-renew
Surf.water (pipe
line)
%Re-use drain <
10
Totals

Sustained

Demand:

OldT
4.59

PWS
NewT
1.63

Vils
0.00

Agriculture
River
Desert
430.41
33.50

Industry

Total

16.00

486.13

Deficit

27.50
0.00

Supply
Supply

3.00
0.00

0.00
1.63

0.00
0.00

20.58
0.00

11.51
16.00

7.41
12.00

42.50
29.63

15.00
29.63

418.00

Supply

1.59

0.00

0.00

409.83

5.99

0.59

418.00

0.00

0.00

Supply

0.00

0.00

490.13

44.63

445.50

0.00

Alloc.

4.59

1.63

0.00

430.41

33.50

20.00

The investments in the desert also will increase as well as the benefits. The draw down in the
aquifer will increase, because of the amount of water that have to be extracted from this
aquifer. The River aquifer also will have a drawdown, because according to management
strategy used in the water allocation it was chosen to have a quasi equivalent drawdown in
both aquifers, for environmental reasons. The drawdown in the desert and river aquifer will
be respectively, 0.38 and 0.37 meters/ year.
The economic parameters in strategy 1 will be B/C and IRR will be 1.18/19.8. The NP value
for the strategy 1 cannot be calculated because it is not applied for 10 years.
2.4.2 Strategy 2 2020
The main change in the Strategy 2 was to increase the cultivated area in the desert to 3000 ha,
and also change the crop factors in order to have a good benefit. The percentages used was 60
% for the Perennial 1 (Apple) and 40 % in Perennial 2 (Citrus) This change implies an
increase in the demand for water in the desert aquifer mainly.
Table 6: Annual Water Demand and Allocation for 2020 Strategy 2.
Annual water demand and allocation (Mm3/y)

SOURCES
Grw.renew.
Grw.non-renew

Sustained
27.50
0.00

Demand:
Supply
Supply

OldT
9.59

PWS
NewT
2.21

Vils
0.00

3.00
0.00

0.00
2.21

0.00
0.00

Agriculture
River
Desert
430.41
69.10
23.21
0.00

22.43
42.46

Industry

Total

20.00

531.31

7.00
13.00

55.64
57.67

Deficit

28.14
57.67

Surf.water (pipe
line)
%Re-use drain <
10
Totals

418.00

Supply

0.00

Supply

445.50

6.59

0.00

0.00

407.2
0

4.21

0.00

0.00

Alloc.

9.59

2.21

0.00

430.41

69.10

20.00

418.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

531.31

85.81

The investments in the desert also will increase as well as the benefits. The draw down in the
aquifer will increase, because of the amount of water that have to be extracted from this
aquifer. The River aquifer also will have a drawdown, because according to management
strategy used in the water allocation it was chosen to have a quasi equivalent drawdown in
both aquifers, for environmental reasons. The drawdown in the desert and river aquifer will
be respectively, 0.72 and 0.70 meters/ year.
The economic parameters will be better using strategy to than strategy 1. The B/C and IRR
will be 1.52/26%.
2.4.3 Strategy 3 - 2020
For the strategy 3 it was included the reuse of water of 10%. This factor changes mainly the
results in the drawdown in both aquifers. The investments and benefits are in the same
magnitude as the strategy 2, also high.
For the environmental point of view it is a good result, because it reduces the total water
volume to be extracted fro the aquifers (the total deficit for strategy 3 is 2 times less than for
strategy 2).

Table 7: Annual Water Demand and Allocation for 2020 Strategy 3.


Annual water demand and allocation (Mm3/y)

SOURCES
Grw.renew.
Grw.non-renew
Surf.water (pipe
line)
%Re-use drain <
10
Totals

Sustained

Demand:

OldT
9.59

PWS
NewT
2.21

Vils
0.00

27.50
0.00

Supply
Supply

3.00
0.00

0.00
2.06

0.00
0.00

418.00

Supply

6.59

0.15

0.00

43.04

Supply

488.54

Alloc.

Agriculture
River
Desert
430.41
69.10
8.50
0.00
378.8
6

Industry

2.21

0.00

430.41

Deficit

20.00

531.31

20.00
18.25

8.80
10.00

40.30
30.31

12.80
30.31

30.85

1.20

417.66

-0.34

43.04

0.00

531.31

42.77

43.04
9.59

Total

69.10

20.00

The drawdown in the desert and river aquifer will be respectively, 0.38 and 0.32 meters/ year.
The economic parameters will be better using strategy to than strategy 2. The B/C and IRR
will be 1.65/28.3
2.4.4 Strategy 4 - 2020
The main change in strategy 4 is to increase the reuse of water in 25%. This change has no
effect in the results. (maybe a review of the conditional formula have to be accessed, because

the reuse of more water implies less demand from the aquifers) and consequently the
drawdown would be less).
Table 8: Annual Water Demand and Allocation for 2020 Strategy 4.
Annual water demand and allocation (Mm3/y)

SOURCES
Grw.renew.
Grw.non-renew
Surf.water (pipe
line)
%Re-use drain <
10
Totals

Sustained

Demand:

OldT
9.59

PWS
NewT
2.21

Vils
0.00

27.50
0.00

Supply
Supply

3.00
0.00

0.00
2.06

0.00
0.00

418.00

Supply

6.59

0.15

0.00

43.04

Supply

488.54

Agriculture
River
Desert
430.41
69.10
8.50
0.00
378.8
6

Industry

9.59

2.21

0.00

430.41

Deficit

20.00

531.31

20.00
18.25

8.80
10.00

40.30
30.31

12.80
30.31

30.85

1.20

417.66

-0.34

43.04

0.00

531.31

42.77

43.04

Alloc.

Total

69.10

20.00

2.4.5 Strategy 5 2020


The change in the strategy 5 was accessed in the maximum cultivated area in the desert.
Taking in account the total area of the aquifer and the thickness we compute the total volume
available in that aquifer, considering a effective porosity of 20%. By trying and error in the
spreadsheet the value for the area as changed in order to reach a value close to the total
volume available in the desert aquifer. The maximum area that could be used is 4200 ha and
the total water resource in the aquifer is 96.74 Mm3. (Figure x)
Assuming that the desert area also could be irrigated by the river aquifer water, the simulation
by trying and error in the spreadsheet was done in order to reach a value of deficit in the river
two times less than the total available in the desert aquifer.
The maximum area that could be used is 7977 ha and the total water resource in the aquifer is
183.74 Mm3. (Figure x)
But because of tremendous amount of water extracted by both aquifers it was decided to
choose the smaller value.
Table 9: Annual Water Demand and Allocation for 2020 Strategy 5a.
Annual water demand and allocation (Mm3/y)

SOURCES
Grw.renew.
Grw.non-renew
Surf.water (pipe
line)
%Re-use drain <
10
Totals

Sustained

Demand:

OldT
9.59

PWS
NewT
2.21

Vils
0.00

27.50
0.00

Supply
Supply

3.00
0.00

0.00
2.06

0.00
0.00

418.00

Supply

6.59

0.15

0.00

43.04

Supply

488.54

Alloc.

Agriculture
River
Desert
430.41
96.74
8.50
0.00
378.8
6

Industry

2.21

0.00

430.41

Table 9: Annual Water Demand and Allocation for 2020 Strategy 52.

Deficit

20.00

558.95

30.00
35.61

8.00
10.80

49.50
48.47

22.00
48.47

31.13

1.20

417.94

-0.06

43.04

0.00

558.95

70.41

43.04
9.59

Total

96.74

20.00

Annual water demand and allocation (Mm3/y)

SOURCES
Grw.renew.
Grw.non-renew
Surf.water (pipe
line)
%Re-use drain <
10
Totals

Demand:

OldT
9.59

PWS
NewT
2.21

Vils
0.00

27.50
0.00

Supply
Supply

3.00
0.00

0.00
2.06

0.00
0.00

418.00

Supply

6.59

0.00

0.00

43.04

Supply

Sustained

488.54

Alloc.

Agriculture
River
Desert
430.41 183.74
8.50
0.00
378.8
6

Industry

2.06

0.00

430.41

Deficit

20.00

645.95

55.00
96.74

8.00
10.80

74.50
109.60

47.00
109.60

32.00

0.55

418.00

0.00

43.04

0.00

645.14

156.60

43.04
9.59

Total

183.74

19.35

The conclusion by the analysis of the economic parameters tells us that it is not worth
increase the cultivated area of the desert, since the investments will be high, as well as the
benefits, but the B/C has no significant changes.
will not change significantly.

Appendix 1
WORKSHOP ON STRATEGIC PLANNING
Bank rate
16%
Base case
Discount rate
12%
2000
PWS l/c/d
given
PWS coverage
given
Industry(Mcm)
12.8
Agr.River Crop shift
no
Agr Desert(ha)
200
Agr.Des.cashcrops
no
Re-use
no
OT 3.58,NT
Mm3
0.96
Mm3
12.8
Mm3
431.84
Mm3
4.47
Mm3
9.16
Investm(Mmu,bank)
16%
n.a
Benefits(Mmu,bank
16%
n.a
Investm(Mmu,bank)
16%
n.a
Benefits(Mmu,bank
16%
n.a
Investm(Mmu,bank)
16%
n.a
Benefits(Mmu,bank
16%
n.a
Investm(Mmu,bank)
16%
n.a
Benefits(Mmu,bank
16%
n.a
NPV (Mmu,disc)
16%
n.a
B/C ; IRR
16%
n.a
Water quality
Employment
Employment
Waste water(Mcm)
65%
Pesticides(ton)
Mining (m/year)
Mining (m/year)

250/Mm3
1.5/ha
65%
15kg/ha
n=20%
n=20%

Base case
2010
70
100%
16
yes
200
no
no
OT 4.59,NT
1.63
16
430.41
4.47
11.6
4.92
0.168/y
1.82
0.64/y
0.68
0.55
0.29
0
0
0

OT+- NT++
3200
300

OT+- NT++
4000
300

Base case
2020
70
100%
20
yes
200
no
no
OT
9.59,NT2.21
20
430.41
4.47
44.63
23.7
0.745
5.04
1.44
1.67
0.55
0.32
0
0
0
OT-+, NT+
+
5000
300

8.3
3
0.02
0.11

10.4
3
0.08
0.11

13
3
0.16
0.18

Strategy 1
2010
70
100%
16
yes
1500
no
no
OT 4.59,NT
1.63
16
430.41
33.5
21.18
4.54
0.168/y
2.93
0.64
0.69
0.55
22.87
34.99
5.34
1.18/19.8

Strategy2
2020
70
100%
20
yes
3000
yes
no
OT
9.59,NT2.21
20
430.41
69.1
85.81
23.7
0.745
2.93
1.44
1.67
0.55
46.91
92.72
35.07
1.52/26%

IHE-Delft
Strategy3
2020
70
100%
20
yes
3000
yes
10%
OT
9.59,NT2.21
20
430.41
69.1
42.77
23.7
0.745
2.93
1.44
1.67
0.55
43.4
92.72
39.62
1.65/28.3

2004
Startegy4
2020
70
100%
20
yes
3000
yes
25%
OT
9.59,NT2.21
20
430.41
69.1
42.77
23.7
0.745
2.93
1.44
1.67
0.55
43.4
92.72
39.62
1.65/28.3

Strategy5
2020
70
100%
20
yes
max
yes
25%
OT
9.59,NT2.21
20
430.41
230.34
202.89
24.14
0.745
3.22
1.44
3.15
0.55
61.71
132.46
52.46
1.66/28.5

OT-+,NT++
4000
2250

OT-+,NT++
5000
4500

OT-+,NT++
5000
4500

OT-+,NT++
5000
4500

OT-+,NT++
5000
4500

10.4
22500
0.38
0.37

13
45000
0.7
0.72

13
45000
0.32
0.38

13
45000
0.32
0.38

13
63000
0.55
0.6

Você também pode gostar