EUROPEAN-COMMISSION Palestinian National Authority EURO-MEDITERRANEAN Environmental Quality Authority PARTNERSHIP EQA

Development of Tools and Guidelines for the Promotion of the Sustainable Urban Wastewater Treatment and Reuse in the

Agricultural Production in the Mediterranean Countries(MEDAWARE)

TASK 5: A detailed description of the Reuse Schemes applied in Palestine

February 2005

Palestine

MEDAWAREMEDAWARE ME8/AIDCO/2001/0515/59341-P033 ME8/AIDCO/2001/0515/59341-P033

Table of Contents

A) Review of the urban wastewater reuse system focusing on the reuse in agricultural production…………………………………………………………3

A.1) Reuse technologies in Palestine………………………………………………...3

1. Potential of Treated Wastewater Reuse................................................................41.1 Gaza Strip.........................................................................................................41.2 West Bank........................................................................................................51.3 Nablus.............................................................................................................51.4 Jenin................................................................................................................51.5 Bethlehem.......................................................................................................51.6 Hebron.............................................................................................................51.7 Qalqilya...........................................................................................................71.8 Ramallah.........................................................................................................71.9 Tulkarm...........................................................................................................7

2. Palestinian Practice of Reuse in Agricultural Production.....................................82.1 Beit Lahia area................................................................................................8

2.1.1 Technical aspect...................................................................................................92.1.2 Economical aspect..............................................................................................122.1.3 Social aspect.......................................................................................................142.1.4 Difficulties.........................................................................................................15

2.2 Al-Bireh wastewater reuse demonstration project........................................162.2.1 Technical and technological aspects..................................................................162.2.2 Economical aspect..............................................................................................272.2.3 Socio-culture aspects..........................................................................................272.2.4 Safety and health protection...............................................................................282.2.5 Obstacles and difficulties...................................................................................282.2.6 Future plans........................................................................................................29

2.3 Wastewater reuse in research studies............................................................293. Reuse in Aquifer Recharge………….................................................................334. Reuse in Industrial Sector……………...............................................................34

4.1 Background...................................................................................................344.2 Potential of industrial reuse...........................................................................344.3 Stone Cutting Industry and Wastewater Recycling......................................35

A.2: Palestinian Reuse Standards………………………………………………….35

B) Development of specification for the urban utilization focusing on the reuse in agricultural production…………………………………………………………….36

B.1) Storage of Treated Wastewater………………………………………………36

1. Gaza Strip........................................................................................................382. West Bank.......................................................................................................40

2.1 Effluent storage.....................................................................................................402.2 Project guidelines..................................................................................................40

3. Potential problems from storage of treated effluent…………...................................41

1

B.2) Sustainable wastewater reuse………………………………………………....42

1 Economic Value……………………...................................................................432 Security and Stability………………...................................................................433 Land Availability…………………….................................................................444 Treatment Requirement……………....................................................................455 Crops…………………………………................................................................456 Irrigation Methods…………………....................................................................457 Public Acceptance And Attitude……..................................................................468 Wastewater impact…………………...................................................................46

C) Conclusion and Recommendations ……………………………………………46

List of Figures

Figure 1: West Bank governorates.............................................................................................6Figure 2: Gray wastewater stream discharged through open channels from Al-Fara Refuge

Camp..................................................................................................................................7Figure 3: General view of Beit Lahia site (MoA et al., 2004)..................................................10Figure 4: Alfalfa crops in BeitLahaya area (MoA, 2004)........................................................12Figure 5: Al-Bireh wastewater treatment plant........................................................................17Figure 6: Seedlings annual cultivation nursery........................................................................18Figure 7: Filtration/Chlorination units used for wastewater tertiary treatment........................19Figure 8: Parcels of Al-Bireh reclaimed wastewater demonstration project............................25Figure 9: Orchard trees irrigated by reclaimed wastewater......................................................26Figure 10: Stone cutting treatment process in the West Bank..................................................35Figure 11: Potential of treated wastewater expected to be used for agricultural production. . .38Figure 12: Distribution of agricultural areas............................................................................44

List of Tables

Table 1: Economical balance for the year 2003 – BLAPP1.....................................................12Table 2: Potential economical balance – BLAPP 1..................................................................13Table 3: Summary of Al-Bireh WWTP reclaimed water use achievements............................18Table 4: An overview of secondary, tertiary effluent and soil characteristics of Al-Bireh

reclaimed wastewater reuse demonstration project (CH2 MHILL, 2003).......................20Table 5: Technical data of Al-Bireh wastewater reuse demonstration project.........................21Table 6: Al-Bireh wastewater reuse demonstration project costs............................................27Table 7: Fresh water, raw and treated wastewater characteristics (WESC, 1997)...................30Table 8: Main results of Nablus municipality reuse demonstration project.............................32Table 9: Water consumption and wastewater generated from the West Bank industries........34Table 10: Design Parameters for Reclaimed Wastewater........................................................41

Abbreviations and Acronyms

2

ARIJ : Applied Research Institute-JerusalemBLAPP : Beit Lahia Pilot ProjectBOD : Bio-chemical Oxygen Demand CAMP : Coastal Aquifer Management Programme COD : Chemical Oxygen Demand Cr : ChromiumDO : Dissolved Oxygen EC : Electrical Conductivity EPA : Environment Protection Agency EQA : Environment Quality Authority F.C : Fecal Coliform IUG : Islamic University of Gaza K : Potasium

Kc : Crop coefficientMoA : Ministry of Agriculture MoH : Ministry of Health MOPIC : Ministry of Planning and International CooperationNGOs : Non Governmental Organizations. NO3 : Nitrate

O & M : Operation and Maintenance P : Phosphate PHG : Palestinian Hydrology Groupppm : part per million PWA : Palestinian Water Authority PWD : Peak Water DemandSAR : Sodium Adsorption Ratio

SAT : Soil Aquifer TreatmentTDS : Total Dissolved SolidsTN :Total nitrogen TSS : Total Suspended Solids UNDP : United Nations Developing Program.UNEP : United Nation Environmental ProgrammeWWTPs : Wastewater treatment plants

Units of measurements Co :degrees Celsiusha :10.000 m2 m2 :Square meterm3 :Cubic meter mg/L :milligram per liter microS/cm :Micro Siemens per centimeter m3/d :Cubic meter per dayMCM : Million Cubic Meters

3

A) Review of the urban wastewater reuse system focusing on the reuse in agricultural production

A.1) Reuse technologies in Palestine 1. Potential οf Treated Wastewater ReuseTreated wastewater is now being considered as a new source of water that can be used for different purposes such as agricultural and aquaculture production, industrial uses, recreational purposes and artificial recharge. Using wastewater for agriculture production will help in alleviating food shortages and reduce the gap between supply and demand. The interest in the reuse of treated effluent has accelerated significantly in the Palestinian Territories for many reasons;

Depletion of groundwater resources Expansion of sewerage system networks Production of large quantities of wastewater which makes its use for agriculture a

viable alternative. Wastewater is a rich source of nutrient and can reduce the use of fertilizers. The reuse is a safe disposal of wastewater which will reduce the environment and

health risks, and The treatment of wastewater to be used for irrigation is cheaper than that needed for

protection of the Environment (UNEP, 2000). Wastewater treatment is the most economically and environmentally sound option for

augmenting water supplies. The major obstacles issues for making wastewater treatment effective include maintaining a regional standard of treated water quality and building and renovating sufficient sewage infrastructure on the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip (Peter, 2000).

1.1 Gaza Strip

Water resources in Gaza Strip are very limited. Over exploitation of the aquifer diminished seriously the quantity and quality of ground water badly needed for human consumption as well as for agriculture; one of the main sources of income in the Gaza Strip. The reuse of treated wastewater could be an important alternative to solve the water deficit crisis in Gaza Strip.

According to the Water Sector Strategic Planning Study, about 20,000 dunums are to be irrigated by treated wastewater in the year 2005 and this will increase to about 30,000 dunums and 60,000 dunums respectively in the years 2010 and 2020 (PWA, 2000).

Wastewater treatment plants in Gaza Strip have been designed upon assumptions of wastewater characteristics and amount of flow, because no data were available at all (Nashashibi, 1995). The existing three WWTPs ( Beit Lahia, Gaza, and Rafah ) are heavily overloaded as a result of the rapid population growth. Currently, most of the effluent discharged from the three existing WWTPs in Gaza Strip is disposed into the Mediterranean Sea. Although the quality of the effluent from Gaza and even Beit Lahia WWTPs would nearly meet class C standards which are progressively match irrigating citrus, fodder crops and olives.

4

To solve these crucial growing problems, Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation (MOPIC) in close cooperation with Palestinian Water Authority (PWA) has identified locations for new three regional plants. These plants are supposed to be funded by donor countries (Sweden, Germany and Japan) and will replace the existing ones by year 2020. Their location will be far away from the residential areas near the eastern border of the Gaza Strip.. They will serve all communities in the Gaza strip. Their total capacity will be about 116.8 Mm3/year with a better effluent quality criteria (Class D) for irrigation than that of the already existed plants.

1.2 West Bank

The use of reclaimed water to meet increasing agriculture water demand was identified as one of the main objectives of the Palestinian sector, the wastewater use for agriculture is still not practiced in the national agriculture production. The Palestinian experience in the reuse is young and poor. This is mainly because of the lack of proper sewage collection and treatment system that enable the treated wastewater to a level that could be used in agricultural productions. With the exception of the treatment facilities at Al-Bireh WWTP, east of Ramallah, the existing treatment facilities of the main Palestinian cities are overloaded (PWA, 2000). Political reasons, public acceptance could be considered also some of factors affecting the wastewater reuse in agriculture. Using raw wastewater in irrigation is practiced in many areas in the West Bank, especially in the wadis where wastewater effluents flow from the major cities. The reason for this practice is that farmers are not able to stop wastewater stream from passing through or nearby their fields. Below is some information a bout raw wastewater practices in the West Bank (figure 1).

1.3 Nablus

Raw wastewater is used for irrigation on a wide range in the suburbs of Nablus city. The collected wastewater from the western part is used for irrigation in Beit Eba village. Near Al-Fara Refugee Camp, the open channels collecting gray wastewater (Figure 2) and meets the WW discharged from Nablus city in the vicinity of E’in Shibli. At this location, mixed wastewater is used in irrigation of various crops. A study made in Nablus on the intestinal parasitic infection concluded that out of the 23,000 samples of human waste that were tested, 32% were positively infected (Kabbouneh, 1996).

1.4 Jenin Some farmers use the contents of cesspits to irrigate stone fruit and olive trees.

1.5 Bethlehem A variety of crops are irrigated using raw wastewater in Wadi Al-Nar east of the city. Most of these crops are vegetables that are usually eaten uncooked (e.g. parsley, pepper, lattice, onions, radish). Other crops include cauliflower and eggplants, as well as olive trees (Nashashibi, 1995).

1.6 HebronIrrigation using wastewater is practiced in Wadi As-Samn area. Common crops like tomatoes, eggplants, grapes, cauliflower and squash are irrigated using raw WW. Cattle use raw wastewater for drinking.

5

Figure 1: West Bank governorates.

6

Figure 2: Gray wastewater stream discharged through open channels from Al-Fara Refuge Camp.

1.7 QalqilyaWastewater flow from Alfeh Menasheh kibbutz passes across Habla village before joining the wastewater stream from Qalqilya city. Farmers use this wastewater for irrigation of pasture crops used for grazing.

1.8 RamallahIrrigation with wastewater is practiced in Ramallah and Al-Bireh Governorate. The contents of the cesspits are usually discharged into cultivation area (usually planted with olives and barley). Such practices are common in Al-taybeh, khirbet abu Falah, Al-Midia, Deir Abu Mish’al, Beit Rima, ‘Arura and Deir Dibwan (ARIJ, 1996).

1.9 TulkarmRaw wastewater is used to irrigate groves of olive and stone fruit trees especially in A’izbat Shoufa and Kafa village. Many farmers are using the raw wastewater discharged by the Israeli settlers in the West Bank without any kind of treatment.

Treated wastewater reuse in the agriculture is mainly practiced in a small scale in case of a demonstration projects and universities (restricted irrigation), a few demonstration projects are conducted in the West Bank. The pilot projects were conducted by some of universities, consultant firms and others through NGOs. Birzeit University and Abu-dies University uses the treated effluent for flushing toilet and for landscape purposes, moreover there are small-scale schools and houses projects using treated gray wastewater in agriculture. Both

7

centralized and decentralized wastewater treatment system were installed. The most recent demonstration projects conducted at Al-Bireh WWTP, this demonstration project was the most reliable and updated ones in the west bank. The project aimed to generate Palestinian experts in wastewater use in agriculture and to assess the feasibility of the use of the reclaimed water on the agricultural lands adjacent to the wastewater treatment plants.

2. Palestinian Practice of Reuse in Agricultural Production

PWA is considered the key regulator and guardian of Palestinian water resources. A number of strategies are being developed by PWA; these strategies are (PWA, 2003).

Reuse of wastewater must be considered in all treatment schemes. Co-operation must be established with different relevant bodies. For every reuse project-beneficiaries must be involved in all project phases. Flexible reuse plans should be developed to be able to utilise treated wastewater in

winter seasons and when the effluent quality drops below the demands. Establish planning tools (regulations, standards, guidelines, etc) for reuse and

recharge. Discharge to surface water may be considered as an interim action, or if reuse are not

feasible. Do not allow irrigation of crops eaten raw by treated effluent and adopt appropriate

enforcement means. Regulatory Directorate For better water quality and reuse efficiency, consider (1) mixing of treated effluent

with urban and surface runoff, (2) artificial recharge of groundwater with treated effluent wherever possible and (3) establish surface storage for treated effluent with or without harvested runoff.

Allow private sector and/ or public to manage or share the management of wastewater reuse projects (contract private companies or public associations and co-operative to mange wastewater reuse).

Develop a program for modifying water use habits to include reuse of treated effluent in urban centres (greening, fountains, urban parks and landscape irrigation forestation, and other areas).

2.1. Beit Lahia area

A French program called “Strategy of agricultural water management in the Middle East is a good demonstration example for the Palestinian practice of treated wastewater reuse in agricultural production. Two areas were chosen for the implementation of this project in the Palestinian Territories which only initiated at the beginning of 2003: Gaza Strip and Al Bathan Al Farah valley in the West Bank (MoA et al., 2004). The program is coordinated by a Steering Committee (MoA, PWA, French Consulate, MREA) chaired by a MoA representative in Ramallah and each pilot project is managed by a technical committee (MoA, PWA, PHG, French Consulate, MREA). EQA participated as a regulatory and evaluating the progress of the project and it environmental impacts during the site visits and inspections. Moreover, EQA contributes in reviewing the technical reports of the project prepared by the French Consultant MREA.

The project has selected two areas in the Gaza Strip: 1. Beit Lahia area where the treated wastewater coming from the Beit Lahia WWTP was available in unlimited quantities and new

8

experimental irrigated areas could be developed in large empty sandy dunes areas available around the village. 2. CAMP area (Coastal Aquifer Management Programme) area where TWW from the Gaza city WWTP could be used to irrigate existing citrus farms and

An initial attempt of vegetables production had been done in a greenhouse inside the Northern WWTP but it was later abandoned due to the resistance of the consumers. Due to the good quality of water, the production of flowers (carnation) was initially considered but the Ministry of Agriculture decided not to use waste water for this production because of the hypothetic risks on export, especially for the Israeli market. The existence of an important Bedouin village with many animals and big areas of unoccupied sandy dunes has oriented the project to a demonstration of fodder production. In Beit Lahia area, two separated pilot projects have been conducted as shown in Figure 3.

2.1.1. Technical aspect

Location of the project area

Looking for a suitable area for an irrigated fodder farm closed to the Beit Lahia WWTP effluent created lake near the Bedouin village, the main issue there have been the security issue. Being very close to the Israeli sniper tower protecting Nisanit settlement, only an area between the village and the lake could be used. Another area at the North of the lake that was offered to a farmers association in order to develop a strawberry farm (using ground water well to be dug there) had to be abandoned due to the significant risk of Israeli fire from the military post.

The proposed area appeared to be suitable for the project as it was large enough (around 20 dunums were proposed by the Bedouin village for alfalfa, olive trees and maize production), almost flat, already fenced, with very few parts already occupied. The selected Beit Lahia Bedouin village area was constituted by dunes of white sand placed on clay layers. The lake, constituted by the effluents of Beit Lahia WWTP (near by 30 MCM released since the beginning and 1,0 MCM lake kept by a continuous average 10.000 m3/day effluent from the Beit Lahia WWTP. The interest of the Bedouin village and of PWA was at the same time the development of a productive project and the possibility to reduce quickly increasing risks of accidental flood if the sandy walls surrounding the lake suddenly would break.

9

Figure 3: General view of Beit Lahia site (MoA et al., 2004)

The idea was to produce during 3 years fodders (mainly alfalfa and some olive trees following to the farmers interest) irrigated with the TWW from the lake that could be used by local farmers from the Bedouin village to feed their animals or sell when there is surplus. During this 3 years period the operation of the “farm” would be organized by the projects in order to monitor all the technical aspects (irrigation systems, soil, fodder quality, fodders varieties, costs and revenues, adapted techniques, etc). After this period the “farm” would be transferred to the Bedouin village if the operation appears to be sustainable and profitable

Preparation of the irrigated area The selected area for the project was initially almost flat with very slight slopes and some isolated small dunes and narrow valleys. The small irregularities were levelled in a two day bulldozer operation in order to facilitate all the further operations and to increase the uniformity of irrigation.

In order to improve the soil texture +/-30 cm layer of clay soil was added. Sand mixed with manure (that might be cheaper for the farmer) was added to the surface, one block (0,4 du) was kept without adding clay soil. Manure was added in order to compare the two solutions (managing the manure block in the same way as the clay blocks).

Selection of the irrigation systemDue to the already known risks of contamination of workers-farmers (surface irrigation in basins and any system requesting many direct contact with water) and in some case even neighbours (over head sprinklers with wind being able to spray unsafe water into inhabitant areas), a drip irrigation system was selected. The technical committee agreed to install, due to its higher safety and very common use in Gaza strip (generally using ground water without any filtration).

10

BedouinVillage

Om en NaserInfiltration basin

BLAPP2

Waste water lake

N

BLAPP1: Beit Lahia Pilot Project 1BLAPP2: Beit Lahia Pilot Project 2 : Pump : Main pipes : Sniper tower

Waste water treatment plant

Settlement

BLAPP1

Subsurface drip irrigation systems are commonly used for public areas irrigated by TWW and technical exist for such buried irrigation systems but due to the impossibility to observe the evolution of the network (clogging of the emitters, uniformity of the irrigations, roots entering and the emitters) and to the already complicated techniques to be developed to use drip irrigation with TWW, the team decided to test only the drip irrigation system. The difficulties to operate drip irrigation system were already known:

- high suspended solids in the TWW requesting very efficient filtration systems,- difficulties to control algae existing in the TWW, - risks of algae and bacteria pullulating inside the irrigation system

Selection of the filtration systemDue to the very high content of suspended solids and algae, the first filtration system chosen was the sand filter (4 to 6 mm crushed silicate, allowing a 150 mesh filtration). The media filter 3” (0,55 m2 filtrating area) was brought from Jordan.

Crops The farmers where basically interested in alfalfa (Figure 4), considered the highest quality fodder. A “modern” variety called Hijazi was proposed by the MoA technicians. The excellent results of Jordanian farmers with a combination of Sudan Grass in summer and Rye grass in winter in their TWW irrigated areas (Madaba, Hashmieh) suggested these two crops could be tested too. Local farmers made limited experiments with maize, sorghum, etc. Plants of Olive trees, of a high and thin variety (supposed not to expand over irrigated fodders area) were given by the MoA and were planted in marginal locations (close to the fences).

Consumed water Planning an operation of daily irrigation in 8 hours, an operating pressure of 1,0 bar at the emitter and average head losses inside the 3 filters less than 9 mwc (0,9 bar), an electric pump supposed to produce 25 m3/h at 25 mwc (2,5 bar) was chosen. The area was divided in 13 blocks of 1,2 to 1,4 dunums each (5000 to 6000 drippers each bloc, supposed to receive 20 to 25 m3/h each). The application twice a week of based upon a 4 mm/day consumption during the summer period (14mm at each irrigation) was planned (0,73 hour/each block based on 25 m3/h).

11

Figure 4: Alfalfa crops in BeitLahaya area (MoA et al., 2004)

2.1.2. Economical aspect

Table 1 presents the economical balance for the first production site (BLAPP1).

Table 1: Economical balance for the year 2003 – BLAPP1BEIT LAHIA PILOT PROJECT 1 : ECONOMCAL BALANCE FOR 2003

  Unit Quantity PriceTotal Price time Price/Year Pr./year/du.

INCOMEAlfalfa Kg 52 635,00 0,13 7 000,46 1,00 7 000,46 519,32

Total income 7 000,46 519,32 COSTSVariable Costs

Pesticides Application 2,00 180,00 360,00 1,00 360,00 26,71

Crop Husbandry (1 Worker) Month 12,00 1 125,00 13 500,00 1,00 13 500,00 1 001,48

Crop Irrigation (1 Worker) Month 12,00 1 125,00 13 500,00 1,00 13 500,00 1 001,48

Crop Harvesting Operation 6,00 291,69 1 750,11 1,00 1 750,11 129,83

Maintenance 1,00 1 000,00 1 000,00 1,00 1 000,00 74,18

Pump Electricity Consumption kW 5 742,85 0,42 2 412,00 1,00 2 412,00 178,93

12

Total variable cost 32 522,11 2 412,62 Fixed Costs

Land Preparation Operation 1,00 1 400,00 1 400,00 7,00 200,00 14,84

Sowing Operation 1,00 1 640,00 1 640,00 7,00 234,29 17,38

Seeds Kg/Dunam kg 25,00 50,00 1 250,00 7,00 178,57 13,25

Irrigation system+Fence   1,00 62 789,00 62 789,00 10,00 6 278,90 465,79

Room+Electrical Connection   1,00 11 590,00 11 590,00 20,00 579,50 42,99

Claying Operation 1,00 39 000,00 39 000,00 100,00 390,00 28,93

Total fixed cost  7 861,26 583,18 Total cost 40 383,37 2 995,80

Balance-33

382,91 -2 476,48

Source: MoA et al., 2004

Potential economical balance: If we consider that the yield should be 800 kg/du, as we should harvest 8 cut for one year, considering 13,48 effective dunums the potential quantity of alfalfa produced during 1 year is 86 272 kg. The price should be the market price, that is around 0,5 shekel per kilo.

Normally, one worker is enough to cover the work of husbandry and irrigation for this land (actually, only one is covering this work and all the required measurements for the year 2004).

Table 2: Potential economical balance – BLAPP 1BEIT LAHIA PILOT PROJECT 1 : POTENTIAL ECONOMICAL BALANCE

  Unit Quantity PriceTotal Price time

Price/Year

Pr./year/du.

INCOME

Alfalfa Kg86,272.0

0 0.50 43,136.0

0 1.00 43,136.0

0 3,200.00

total income43,136.0

0 3,200.00 COSTSVariable Costs

Pesticides Application 2.00 180.00 360.00 1.00 360.00 26.71

Crop Husbandry (1 Worker) Month 6.00 1,125.00 6,750.00 1.00 6,750.00 500.74 Crop Irrigation (1 Worker) Month 6.00 1,125.00 6,750.00 1.00 6,750.00 500.74 Crop Harvesting Operation 6.00 718.93 4,313.60 1.00 4,313.60 320.00 Maintenance   1.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 1.00 1,000.00 74.18 Pump Electricity

Consumption kW 5,742.85 0.42 2,412.00 1.00 2,412.00 178.93

Total variable cost21,585.6

0 1,601.31 Fixed Costs

Land Preparation Operation 1.00 1,400.00 1,400.00 7.00 200.00 14.84 Sowing Operation 1.00 1,640.00 1,640.00 7.00 234.29 17.38 Seeds Kg/Dunam Kg 25.00 50.00 1,250.00 7.00 178.57 13.25

Irrigation system+Fence   1.00 62,789.0

0 62,789.0

0 10.00 6,278.90 465.79

13

Room+Electrical Connection   1.00 11,590.0

0 11,590.0

0 20.00 579.50 42.99

Claying Operation 1.00 39,000.0

0 39,000.0

0 100.0

0 390.00 28.93 Total fixed cost 7,861.26 583.18

Total cost29,446.8

5 2,184.48

Balance13,689.1

5 1,015.52

Source: MoA et al., 2004In Table 2, we can see that in this case the balance is positive. The production allow a benefit of 1015 shekel/dunum, that is around 225 US$/dunum. This result is really interesting, as it shows the potential sustainability of the waste water reuse in agriculture for producing alfalfa.

2.1.3. Social aspect

The safety of using treated waste water for irrigation and if they could feed their animals with it, were major concerns within the Bedouin village. They also asked frequently if there are any possible effects on the meat and the milk. At the beginning, almost all the Bedouin people were not convinced of the safety of feeding their animals with the plants irrigated by the treated water.

During the work the people were convinced about the safety of using these plants. Some of the people started getting convinced and these pioneers started convincing other peoples, but till this stage (August, 2003) there were many people who don’t trust the idea of using the treated water for irrigation.

So, in order to inform and convince the concerned population, some visits to similar projects in Jordan were arranged to four of the farmers from the Bedouin Village who were reluctant to this technique. It was a good opportunity for them to discover several big farms were the water reuse in agriculture is common since 20 years, and allow them to meet farmers there and discuss technical aspects, asking about their experience in the field of TWW irrigation.

Another aspect was their reluctance about fodder varieties they did not know. Some of the fodders which was cultivated in the site was not known for them as the Ray Grass and Sudan Grass; and from the beginning they preferred Alfalfa.

On the other hand, the peoples started accept (and prefer some times) using other fodder to feed their animals such as Sudan Grass because they noted that the cow’s milk quantity increased after feeding them with Sudan Grass. They also preferred to feed cows with Sudan Grass more than goats or sheep because cows have more abilities to eat it when it the leaves are tough.

Nowadays and after more than one year of the project beginning almost all the people in the Bedouin Village are using the fodder plants irrigated by the TWW without commenting any bad effect on their products or the impacts on cattle.

Safety and Health protectionThe monitoring of the quality of irrigation water has been done at two levels:

1) Field measurements of the lake water quality done with a mobile lab (EC, PH, DO)

14

2) Quality of the irrigation water through analysis at the Ministry of Health lab, at the Islamic University lab and at the Ministry of Agriculture lab. Water samples collected by the team in the irrigation network, from the drippers delivering treated waste water and fresh water (municipal network water).

Water quality field measurements A measurement box (WTW multi 340i), allowed between September and November 2003 six direct measurements of pH, Electro Conductivity (EC), Dissolved Oxygen (DO) and temperature of the water from the lake collected with a plastic container. The DO (the least stable) is the first to be measured, and then the other parameters.

The values of the lake water EC (2 dS/m) and pH (8,4) have been almost stable during the second half of the 2003 irrigation season. The value for EC (around 2 dS/m) that is less than many places in Gaza, and allow us to cultivate in good conditions alfalfa or others fodder (tolerance alfalfa =2-3 dS/m, tolerance rye-grass = 5-7 dS/m1). The dissolved oxygen DO seems to be the most fluctuating parameter.

The main observations were:

The sanitarian quality of the lake water is surprisingly good. The fecal coliforms are especially low for a treated waste water:

(less than 50 counted coliforms / 100 ml) and have been decreasing during the period. No salmonellas encountered The salinity of the water is medium: 1,8 to 1,9 dS/m, TDS 1300 ppm The chloride concentration is relatively high +/- 300 ppm. SAR around 5 is not worrying for a 1,9 mS/cm water. The performance WWTP’s operation, considering the effect of the lake, is acceptable

(BOD less than 80 COD less than 200) The quantities of Boron is relatively small (maximum 0,37 ppm) Within the heavy metals, all out of copper (0,9 ppm passing the 0,5 ppm thereshold)

and Chromium Cr (reaching the 0,01 threshold) are in very limited concentration Total Nitrogen (Kheladi) 30 ppm and nitrate NO3 around 15 ppm seem normal and

even low. Phosphate (P) concentration (less than 3 ppm) seems low Potassium (K) concentration (30 to 35 ppm) seems normal.

Generally the lake water seems safe, not too saline (with many chloride), with Boron and heavy metal risks (out of possibly copper and chromium) but with a relatively low concentration of nutrients (N and P). Most of the microbiological and heavy metals results are accepted according to the Palestinian standard draft for TWW reuse in agriculture.

2.1.4. Difficulties

1

15

Initial filtration difficulties Initially the media filter did not operate correctly due to the too fine particles that were clogging very quickly the screen filter. The pump was producing a high pressure (4 bars) before the sand filter, but the pressure after the sand filter was very low and even sometimes 0. The solution appeared to be to abandon completely the projected layer of very fine sand (normally between 0,4 and 0,7 mm) and use only the medium sand (1 to 2 mm) and big sand (2 to 4 mm). This may be due to a big quantity of excessively fine sand in the purchased media or to the wrong size of the nozzles receiving filtrated water inside the media filter.

The difficult control of the systemThe operator of the irrigation system use to apply the same pumping time for each block. Even if in the project the irrigation blocks were supposed to be very similar, the differences between the blocks appeared to be relatively important (different areas, different number of emitters, different distance and elevation creating different pressures at the entry of each block). When controlled at the water meter level it appeared that, in order to apply exactly the same amount of water to each block, it was necessary to adapt the time calculating the applied quantity based on the real area of the block, the number of emitters, the real flow distributed to each block. This difficulty appeared at the end of the irrigation season and a more precise irrigation will have to be organized during the second irrigation season.

The insufficient flowThe flow of the system was supposed to reach 25 m3/h but initially only 20 or 21 m3/h were registered and with time at the end of the irrigation season the flow used to be close to 17 m3/h and even sometimes 15 m3/h. The operator and the local team tried to adapt to this insufficient flow but during the peak period, the quantities applied have been insufficient and have affected the production.

Test will have to be done to understand if the characteristics of the pump have changed or if extra head losses appeared (clogged water meter, problems with the media, etc), and irrigation time should be extended and adapted to the plant needs.

2.2. Al-Bireh wastewater reuse demonstration project

Al-Bireh reuse demonstration project conducted the different aspects of reclaimed water use in irrigation by developing a set of different effluent polishing and irrigation techniques on crops. The primary goals of the project were to build the initial institutional relationships, raise the profile of wastewater reuse and compost use, and to develop the first stage of on-the-ground experience and capacity in the field of wastewater reuse (CH2 MHILL, 2003b). The demonstration project was recommended by a detailed feasibility study that conducted to assess the use of the reclaimed water on the agricultural lands adjacent to the Hebron proposed WWTP.

2.2.1. Technical and technological aspects

BackgroundAl Bireh WWTP is located in Wadi Al-Ein (south of Al-Bireh city) over 2.2 ha area; it was constructed in 2000 with a total cost of € 7 million (Figure 4). The connected population to sewers system in Al-Bireh city is about 60%, which amount to 50,000 inhabitants and designed to serve more than 100,000 inhabitants. The treatment system is extended aeration

16

with mechanical solids handling. The plant was designed to treat 5750 m3/day with an overall retention time of 20 days (the present total inflow is 3200 m3/day).

Figure 5: Al-Bireh wastewater treatment plant

Wastewater reuse demonstration projectOrnamental crops like roses, flowers, bougainvillea and hedgerows were planted for site beautification. On an area of 5 dunum, 2 to 4 year old orchard trees were planted, including different varieties of olives, date palms, stone fruits, citrus, cherries, mango, avocado, guava, pomegranate, figs and grapes. On an area of 3 dunum indigenous Palestinian trees were irrigated, including nut trees like pistachio, walnut, pecan, macadamia, pine nuts, acacia, pines and carob. A parcel of 0.7 dunum was planted with sweet corn. Pre-sowing irrigation of corn was by sprinkler, and after emergency by alternate row drip irrigation. Nitrogen application through the reclaimed wastewater was 7 kg/dunum. No fertilizer was applied in addition to the nutrients presents in the reclaimed wastewater.

A nursery of 600 m2 for annual cultivation of 80,000 seedlings of indigenous trees and cooked vegetables is installed (Figure 6). The nursery irrigation system consisted of micro-drippers with a low discharge of 0.2 l/h, thus keeping the overall system flow below the design flow of 0.8 m3/h. The eggplants were trellised to ensure a safe distance of 50 cm from the drip lines.

17

Figure 6: Seedlings annual cultivation nursery

Four automatic irrigation head controls were installed, including fertilizer injection points, pressure control and filtration devices. A disinfection system was installed to treat 0.8 m3 of treated wastewater (Figure 7). It was consisted of gravel media filtration for turbidity reduction, a chlorine-dosing unit calibrated to inject chlorine at a rate of 2 mg/l and 400 l vessel that retained the chlorinated water for 30 minutes.

Two different types of effluent were identified for reuse. High effluent and very high quality effluent. Effluents applied on many different types of agriculture crops and trees. Subsurface drip was used for high quality effluent and the drip irrigation system was used for very high quality effluent. Table 3 summarizes the adopted regulations, applications and achievements of Al-Bireh WWTP reclaimed water use.

Table 3: Summary of Al-Bireh WWTP reclaimed water use achievementsEffluent Type Regulation Application Achievements

High quality BOD/TSS<20/30 mg/lF.C*<1,000 MPN/100 ml

Orchard, olives, OrnamentalsGrape stocksProcessed vegetablesRestricted area landscaping

High growth High yield

Very high quality F.C* non-detectableEffluent polishing**

Cooked vegetablesNursery (eggplants)

High yield No contamination

* F.C: Fecal Coliform ** Gravel media filtration and chlorination used

18

Figure 7: Filtration/Chlorination units used for wastewater tertiary treatment

Regular basis of the reclaimed water, soil and microbiological quality were tested. The test results show that the tertiary treatment generates reclaimed water suitable for unrestricted agriculture reuse application according to Israeli and US EPA guidelines (Table 4).

Crop quality tests showed that eggplants irrigated with reclaimed water were not contaminated with fecal coliform and intestinal viruses. In the nursery, seedling germination rates were high (>90%) and seedlings irrigated with the reclaimed water showed high vegetative growth.

19

Table 4: An overview of secondary, tertiary effluent and soil characteristics of Al-Bireh reclaimed wastewater reuse demonstration project

No. Item Sampling Dates

Parameter Results

1 Secondary treated water

Continuously BOD 25-15 mg/lTSS 35-25 mg/lEC 1.7-1.5 DS/mpH 7.5-7N 40-30 mg/l

2Tertiary treated water

01 June, July,August, 2003

Residual chlorine 1.0-0.5 mg/l

Turbidity 1-2 NTU24 June,2003 Fecal Coliform 0 CFU/100 ml

3 Soil 07 July, 2003

pH 7.5ECe 0.5 dS/mNa 1.0 meq/lCa 63.4 mg/lMg 13.2 mg/lCl 48 mg/lHCO3 195 mg/lSO4 43 mg/lNO3 6.2 mg/kgNH4 35 mg/kgP-Olsen 3.0 mg/kgK 6.1 mg/lMn 39.2 mg/kgZn 1.6 mg/kgB 0.08 mg/lCaCO3 6.4 %Sand 16 %Silty 49 %Clay 35 %Saturation 64 %

Source: CH2 MHILL, 2003a

Sweet corn showed high vegetative growth and obtained a high cob yield of 5 ton/ha. Corn residuals were used as fodder for animals. High growth of weeds at the site was noted. O&M of irrigation system was significantly reduced by the installed automated controls. Table 5 shows the technical data used for the different crops quality at Al-Bireh reclaimed wastewater reuse demonstration project. Figure 8 shows the locations of the irrigated areas. Appendix 1 shows the crops and equipments items used in Al-Bireh reuse demonstration project . The ornamental trees and flowers and the young orchard trees showed high vegetative growth (Figure 9).

20

Table 5: Technical data of Al-Bireh wastewater reuse demonstration projectPARCEL A1

Area 200 m2

Soil Shallow, originally no soil profile, so between 80 cm and 100 cm of soil was applied.

Crop Orchard trees; 35 to 40 m2 per tree, 55 trees in total. Details Crop Irrigation Equipment

1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.

Almonds (2 trees)Apricot (2 trees)Peach (2 trees)Plum (2 trees)Orange (4 trees)Lemon (4 trees)Grapefruit (4 trees)Macadema (2 trees)Pecan (2 trees)Fig (2 trees)Walnut (2 trees)Pomegranate (4 trees)Mango (5 trees)Permsimmom (3 trees)Bisardi cherries (3 trees)Red cherries Guave (3 trees)Avocado (3 trees)

Uniram, 400 meter, 2.3 l/hour emitters every 75 cm (capacity 1230 l/h) was put in ring around the trees, according to standard gardening procedures and with insert connectors. Each group of trees could be disconnected from the system by a stop valve between the insert connector and the drip line. Half of the drippers were closed to anticipated low water demands and future higher water demand.

ETmax 7 mm/day at full maturity

PWD (Peak Water Demand)

14 m3/day

Qmax (at 10 hours irrigation)

1400 l/hour

Qdesign (at 60% Qmax)

840 l/hour

PARCEL A2Area 130 m2 (65*2)Soil Shallow, originally no soil profile, so between 80 cm and 100 cm of soil is

applied.Crop One row of table grapes, trellised, maximum 2 m and 65m longIrrigation equipment Uniram, 65 meters, 2.3 l/hour emitters every 75 cm was put in the middle of the grape trellis. Part of the drippers was be closed to anticipate low water demands and future higher water demands.

ETmax 7 mm/day at full maturity

PWD (Peak Water Demand) 0.91 m3/day

Qmax =Q design (at 10 hours irrigation)

91 l/hour

21

PARCEL A32Area 520 m2 (65*8) mSoil Shallow, originally no soil profile, so between 80 cm and 100 cm of soil

was applied.Crop Ten rows of sweet corn, sown at 80 cm distance.Irrigation Equipment For emergence of corn, sprinkler was used. Afterwards, Uniram, 330 meter, 2.3 l/hour emitters every 75 cm was put in the middle of every second two rows (5 driplines in total).

ETmax 8 mm/day at full maturity

PWD (Peak Water Demand) 4.2 m3/dayQmax =(at 10 hours irrigation) 415 l/hour

Q design =Qmax 415 l/hourPARCEL B1

Area 480 m2 Soil Sufficiently deep soil profile for mountainous trees, no actions needed.

Crop Ornamental trees and shrubs: Bougainvillae (5 shrubs), Brightion (5 trees), Pine trees (3 trees),Carob (3 trees)

Irrigation Hardware Technical garden dripline, 140 meter, 1.6 l/hour emitters every 50 and 100 cm (capacity 224 l/h) was put in rings around the trees, according to standards gardening producers. Part of the drippers was closed to anticipate low water demands and future higher water demands.

ETmax 7 mm/day at full maturity

PWD (Peak Water Demand) 3.4 m3/day

Qmax =(at 10 hours irrigation) 340 l/hour

Q design (at 60% Qmax) 202 l/hourPARCEL B2

Area 1090 m2 Soil Sufficiently deep soil profile, no actions needed.Crop Some grass and trees (eucalyptus and acacia) planted. Some bushes and

trees placed in between and next to the existing trees.Irrigation Equipment The existing sprinklers system was replaced by drip lines to reduce weed growth and stem rot, technical garden dripline, 200 meter, 1.6 l/hour emitters every 50 and 100 cm was put in rings around the trees, according to standard gardening procedures. Part of the drippers was closed to anticipated low water demands and future higher water demands.

ETmax 8 mm/day at full maturityPWD (Peak Water Demand) 8.72 m3/dayQmax =(at 10 hours irrigation) 872 l/hourQ design (at 80% Qmax) 700 l/hour

22

PARCEL C1Area 200 m2 Soil Sufficiently deep soil profile, no actions needed.

Crop 15 datepalms. Irrigation EquipmentTechline 200 meter of dripline; 1.6 l/hour emitters every 50 cm (capacity 700 l/h) was put in ring around the palms, according to standard gardening procedure. Dripper could be closed to anticipated low water demands and future higher water demand.ETmax 500l/tree/day at full maturity

PWD (Peak Water Demand) 7.5 m3/day

Qmax =(at 10 hours irrigation) 750 l/hour

Q design (at 60% Qmax) 500 l/hourPARCEL C2

Area 165 m2 Soil Sufficiently deep soil profile, no actions needed.

Crop Ornamental trees like rose bushes and boungainvillae Rose bushes (20 pieces) Flowers (100 pieces)

Irrigation Equipment Techline 200 meter of dripline; 1.6 l/hour emitters every 30,50 and 100 cm (capacity 700 l/h) was put in lines next to the flowers, according to standard gardening procedures. Drippers could be closed to anticipate low water demands and future higher water demands.

ETmax 8 mm/day at full maturityPWD (Peak Water Demand) 1.32 m3/day

Qmax =(at 10 hours irrigation) 132 l/hour

Q design =Qmax 132 l/hourPARCEL D

Area 500 m2 Soil Sufficiently deep soil profile for shallow rooting flowers, no actions

needed.Crop Landscaping flowers, providing ground cover and preventing erosion.Irrigation Equipment Techline 200 meter of dripline; 1.6 l/hour emitters every 30,50 and 100 cm was put in rows next to the flowers, according to standard gardening producer. Drippers could be closed to anticipate low water demands and future higher water demands.ETmax 8 mm/day at full maturityPWD (Peak Water Demand) 4 m3/day

Qmax =(at 10 hours irrigation) 400 l/hour

Q design =Qmax 400 l/hour

23

PARCEL E1Area 600 m2 under greenhouse Soil Sallow; no soil profile initially, so 0.8 to 1.00 m of soil applied and

leveled.Crop A minimum of 100 m2 of cooked vegetable like zuchinni and eggplant, the

remaining 500 m2 was to the discretion of Nour shams Nursery.Irrigation EquipmentTechline 200 meter of dripline; 1.6 l/h emitters every 30 cm was put rows for the irrigation of the eggplant. Drippers could be closed to anticipate low water demands and future higher water demands.ETmax 10 mm/day at full maturityPWD (Peak Water Demand) 6.0 m3/dayQmax =(at 10 hours irrigation) 600 l/hour

Q design =Qmax 600 l/hourPARCEL E2

Area 1500 m2 Soil Sufficiently deep soil profile, no actions needed.

Crop Old olivesIrrigation Equipment 600 meter of dripline; 2.3 l/h emitters every 75 cm (capacity 1600 l/h) was put in rows of 30 to 35 meters, two rows per row of olives, next to the olives trees. Drippers could be closed to anticipate low water demands and future higher water demands.ETmax 7 mm/day at full maturityPWD (Peak Water Demand) 10.5 m3/dayQmax =(at 6 hours irrigation) 1750 l/hour

Q design =Qmax 1750 l/hour

Partner identification, operational framework and training sessions A steering committee for the reuse demonstration project was established, comprising of staff from Palestine Water Authority, the MOA, the environmental Quality Authority (EQA) and ABM. The involvement of the committee and direct operational involvement by the institutions had facilitated the first steps towards a systematic approach to wastewater reuse within the West Bank (CH2 MHILL, 2003a). A private partner in the O& M of the reclaimed wastewater was involved, that was especially in the O&M of the green house.

24

Figure 8: Parcels of Al-Bireh reclaimed wastewater demonstration project

A private subsequently withdrew during the project implementation. Nowadays the MOA is operating the greenhouse as a nursery for the annual cultivation of 80,000 seedlings of indigenous trees. The seedlings are used by the MOA for farmers supporting and Al-Bireh municipality is responsible for the maintenance of the ornamental sections of the reuse scheme. Both MoA and ABM were supplied with gardening tools and nursery items.

Sets suppliers and the consulted firm, conducted training sessions. In total, 20 trainers from Palestinian institutions have been trained in the O & M of the irrigation system.

Figure 9: Orchard trees irrigated by reclaimed wastewater.

Irrigation methodDrip irrigation method is considered in this demonstration project. This is a localized method, whereby water under limited pressure (1.5-4 bars) is applied through emitters at a known rate, around plants to be irrigated. The aim is to meet, with minimal waste, the plant’s water requirement by directly wetting the root zone. The flow is 2.3 l/h emitters with a turbulent, self-cleaning flow path in a spacing of 0.75 m.

Advantages of drip irrigation1. Drip is adaptable to fields with odd shapes or uneven topography. Drip irrigation can

work well where other irrigation systems are inefficient because parts of the field have excessive infiltration, water puddling, or runoff.

2. Drip irrigation can be helpful if water is scarce or expensive. Precise water application is possible with drip irrigation. Irrigation with drip can be more efficient because evaporation is reduced, runoff is reduced or eliminated, deep percolation is reduced, and

irrigation uniformity is improved so it is no longer necessary to "over water" parts of a field to adequately irrigate the more difficult parts.

3. Drip irrigation systems can be designed and managed so that the wheel rows are sufficiently dry so that tractor operations can occur at any time at the convenience of the producer.  Timely applications of herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides are possible.

4. Proven yield and crop quality responses to drip irrigation have been observed in crop types.

5. A drip irrigation system can be automated. 

Disadvantages of drip irrigation1. High initial capital costs. Part of the system cost is a capital investment useful for several

years and part of the cost is annual. Systems can easily be over designed. 2. Drip tape has to be managed to avoid leaking or plugging. Drip emitters can easily be

plugged by silt or other particles not filtered out of the irrigation water.  Emitter plugging also occurs by algae growing in the tape and chemical deposits at the emitter.  Tape depth will have to be carefully chosen for compatibility with other operations such as cultivation and weeding. Use of de-clogging agents such as anti algae chemicals and diluted acids for removing calcareous deposits is common practice.

3. Available technical skill is needed to meet the requirements of drip system.

2.2.2. Economical aspectAt the current time no studies shows the feasibility or an expected costs of conducting a large reuse project in the West Bank. Each city has it is specific conditions and characteristics. Costs of Al-Bireh reclaimed wastewater reuse demonstration project Items are listed in Table 6.

Table 6: Al-Bireh wastewater reuse demonstration project costsItem Costs ($)Site preparation* 18,000Disinfection equipment 4,000Greenhouse 8,000Training 20,000Contracted labor 1,500Laboratory 2,300Contingency (10%) 600Gardening tools 1,300Nursery 11,000Total 66,700

* Site preparation includes, land preparation, purchase and transport of soil for application over shallow soils not suitable for irrigated agriculture, ornamentals for landscaping of the WWTP, orchard crops and field crops for agriculture reuse site.

2.2.3. Socio-culture aspects

In fact, the Palestinian local society is still having reservations from using the treated wastewater in the agriculture. A few non-planned public awareness programs were not getting a success in affecting the public opinion towered the idea of using treated wastewater in agriculture, that suspicious was clearly noted when Bani-Naim people refuse to build a

regional wastewater treatment plant that enable them to use the treated wastewater in the future. Some opinion surveys were conducted to assess this acceptability. One of the most reliable surveys was a survey conducted by a consulting engineering center in 1997 year; the survey was conducted to assess the acceptability of among the farmers in the villages that might be got benefit from using the treated wastewater from Al-Bireh city in their own agriculture. It aimed at assessing the acceptability of the critical man related elements, the land ownership dimension and the possibilities of implementing the required health, social, technical and economic changes associated with the reuse project in the area. Thirty-five landowners from all three concerned villages were interviewed and the results of that survey were as follows:

Some farmers are refused to be interviewed, that was because they were opposed the idea of wastewater reuse in the agriculture for any kind of crops irrigation.

The majority of those farmers that came forward were old men. Their experiences were in the traditional farming methods and their educational level was limited.

Most of the farmers are operated by their owners and refuse the idea of renting out their farmers.

Regarding the income from the farming, most farmers answered that it is less than 40%

Most farmers who interviewed accepted the concept of reuse. A moderately high percentage claimed to be aware of health provisions and restrictions on the choice crops.

The current use of commercial fertilizer is moderate (60-70% use some form of fertilizer), this is because of the organic fertilizer based practices.

Generally there is lack and non-sufficient surveys that could reflect scientifically the Palestinian public opinions in reusing issues; hence, well-studied surveys are desired.

In such reuse projects, the main social challenges are considered the identification of the local stakeholders in reuse projects, establishment of public awareness programs and extension work to change farmer’s negative perception of water reclamation and reuse and to provide practical extension tools for sustainable water reuse.

Al-Bireh WWTP demonstration project becomes a live show of wastewater reuse in the West Bank. Many groups from different local society visited the project in the last year. Positive results have been achieved on the West Bank in the field of wastewater reuse. Efforts increase towered the development of an integrated public awareness programs which highly assist in a new perception to the wastewater.

2.2.4. Safety and health protection Al-Bireh demonstration project was conducted in a very strict safety and health practices. Good quality of the treated wastewater, assembled disinfections system, drip irrigation system, availability of safety tools, immunization against typhoid fever and hepatitis A and B among the workers, all of these aspects formulate a succeed base for safety and health requirements.

2.2.5. Obstacles and difficultiesGenerally wastewater reuse projects associated with many obstacles in the West Bank, which mainly political, financial, social, institutional and technical ones.

The perception of the public opinions towards wastewater reuse is still suspicious.

Technical capacities in the reuse projects are not formulated well to build on larger reuse projects.

Intermittent reuse project, size, limited budget and time of the reuse projects are negatively affecting the sustainability and the value of reuse projects.

Week of networking system and information exchange. Reuse idea is still tied to the political issues concerned to the Palestinian water rights;

the Israelis ask to consider the reused wastewater as a part of the total Palestinians fresh water rights.

Non-availability of sewer networks and proper wastewater treatment systems is eliminating big jumps in the reuse practices.

Health monitoring systems is still week. Reuse standards is still not established, Israelis are asking for strict standards, while

the Palestinians are not able to manage some kind of the presented standards. Institutional Structure: The sustainability of reuse projects is greatly dependent upon

the institutional structure that exists to support operations. Efficient financial and technical management of the treatment plant and associated facilities requires strong institutional support. At present, the institutional responsibilities for wastewater management in the West Bank are not well defined due generally to the overall absence of significant wastewater infrastructure.

Integrated vision: no integrated vision developed for the reuse issues; this includes the political side, institutional, water policy, awareness, marketing and tariff, ext.

2.2.6. Future plansThe future plans of Al-Bireh WWTP effluent is to be used for irrigation in lands of Deir Deboan and other two town lands adjacent to the treatment plant. Regarding to the demonstration project more chances are available for the researcher whom interesting in the reuse issues. Increase in the proposals focused on the reuse is notable. Al-bireh demonstration project became a known place for whom looking for a good-implemented project in the West Bank. More visits are expected in the coming years as the wastewater and reuse issues become more attractive to the people.

2.3. Wastewater reuse in research studiesSince that wastewater reuse issues is still in the preliminary stages in the West Bank and few demonstration projects were conducted there, no big efforts were done on this field. Few researches were conducted. Well equipped laboratories that are essential to perform the necessary tests were not available (Kabbouneh, 1996).

Effects of the chemical quality and musicological aspects of the reclaimed wastewater on soil and plant were conducted by Water and Environmental Studies Center of Al-Najah National University in cooperation with Nablus Municipality and the United Nations Developing Program (UNDP. Nablus municipal wastewater was treated using two-treatment process: double stage trickling filter and combined activated sludge and trickling filter. Fresh water is also used for irrigation. Table 7 shows the quality of the raw, the treated wastewater and fresh water used for irrigation.

Table 7: Fresh water, raw and treated wastewater characteristics (WESC, 1997)

Property Unit Raw WW(Rang)

Trickling filters(Range)

Activated sludge+TF (Range)

Fresh water

EC (ms/cm) 0.9-6.73 1.04-3.98 0.36-3.79 7.5pH Value 6.75-8.82 7.61-9.06 7.5-8.98 0.8BOD mg/l 350-1374 10-520 10-720 55.2COD mg/l 909-3500 181-200 18-2000 50.1TSS mg/l 190-800 4-620 2-660 25NO3 mg/l 2.8-5 25-45 15-55 10.2PO4 mg/l 0.6-11.62 1-9.2 0.86-10 15CL mg/l 165-2044 324.4-1067 48-1000.2 2.7HCO3 mg/l 500-592 300-400 180-421.3 17.5SO4 mg/l 32-34.25 20-23.5 15-23.75 70Ca mg/l 60.1-100 77.6-80.3 57.7-93.8 272Mg mg/l 25-46.2 21.3-48.6 15.3-51 0.0Na mg/l 200-667.7 210-700 31-724.5 1.3K mg/l 6.5-10.11 2.1-9.79 1.4-8.83 0.0SAR (mmole)1/2 6.48 7.28 5.46 0.0B mg/l 0.11 0.15 0.13 ***Cu mg/l 0.9 0.95 0.92Zn mg/l 2.1 2.50 2.25

Treated wastewater was used in irrigation of peppers in a green house by three irrigation systems: drip, drip with plastic mulch, and furrow irrigation. The green house was planted for the first growing season with Hot Pepper on May, 1996 and harvested totally on September, 1996. Pepper fruits were harvested through five cuttings. In the second growing season eggplant was planted on the end of October, 1996 and harvested totally on the mid June, 1997. Orchard species: graps, peaches, and apples were also studied.

During the research period plant diseases were controlled with proper pesticides during the growing season and soil samples were taken at different depths. Water irrigation needs were calculated according to the crop water requirements estimated from the Class-A Pan evaporation method and the crop coefficient (Kc) established for the two crops, tension meters stations were installed for the purpose of irrigation scheduling.

Microbiological aspects were also studied in this demonstration project. Sand filters were used for pathogenic removal. The effluent of the activated sludge system had a total coliform bacteria average of about 50*106/100 ml with removal efficiency of 99.695% and 0.5*106/100 ml with a removal efficiency of 99.9969% after using a sand filter, where the effluent of the trickling filter system had a total coliform bacteria average of about 90*106/100 ml with removal efficiency of 99.4080% and 2*106/100 ml with a removal efficiency of 99.9875% after using a sand filter. Eggplants fruits were irrigated by three types of water and three types of irrigation systems were used also. Main results of the research are shown in Table 8.

The research concluded that the drip irrigation (with mulch) is the best method of irrigation with treated wastewater and crop selection according to sensitivity to salinity is very important when treated wastewater is applied.

Table 8: Main results of Nablus municipality reuse demonstration project

Pepp

er p

lant

s

Crop yield Incase of treated WW, plants under drip irrigation yielded higher than those under furrow, mulching also raised the yield. In case of fresh water the effect of mulching on pepper yield was insignificant but fresh water gave higher yields than both AS and TF under surface irrigation.

Number of fruits Both WW effluents gave higher numbers of fruits than fresh water under drip irrigation, but the difference was significant only in the activated sludge. Drip irrigation gave higher number of fruits than furrow.

Height of the plant

The height of plants under drip irrigation was significantly more than other techniques. Mulching was also significant.

Diameter of stem For drip irrigation with mulch both WW treated effluents gave results significantly higher than fresh water. In the case of drip irrigation without mulch and furrow irrigation, activated sludge effluents gave results significantly higher than control plants. Plants irrigated with TF treated WW showed diameters significantly less than control treatment.

Soil composition

Soil salinity was increased under the green house and when high-efficiency irrigation systems were used and considerable amount of nutrients had been added through using of treated WW. Similar trends were observed with chloride and sodium. Mulching reduced water evaporation from soil surface, controlled weed growth, and left more water for salt washing.

Plant composition

Negative accumulation of heavy metals is not expected since the municipal wastewater in the West Bank has these elements in minor levels.

Drip Irrigation System

The drip irrigation system in the green house was evaluated after the two growing seasons. The results indicated that a minimum clogging of the drippers even with treated effluents. The filtration units used had a positive effect.

Microbiological Aspects

Eggplants that irrigated by three different irrigation systems showed an average of 22 org/100 ml, 6 org/100 ml and 32 org/100 ml for the drip irrigation, drip with mulch and furrow systems, respectively. Those that irrigated by three types of wastewater showed an average of 17 org/100 ml, 22 org/100 ml and 3 org/100 ml for the effluents of the activated sludge, trickling filter, and fresh water, respectively.

An on going research to investigate the hygienic aspects of reclaimed sewage for processed crops production within an ongoing research project conducting by Water Studies Institute in Birzeit University. Microbial lab experiments on specific pathogens (Salmonella typhi, Fecal coliform, Fecal streptococcus) and parasites (Amoebae cysts, Balantidium coli and Ascaris lumbricoides) from different sampling sites of Al-Bireh WWTP and certain processed crops were conducted within three months of the research. Samples from sprinkler irrigated grass (fodder maize, industrial eggplants; soil covered with green grass were analyzed in the study. The result is expected to be available in March 2005.

3. Reuse in Aquifer Recharge

Although the text of this task concentrates on using the treated wastewater in agricultural production, it is worthy to describe some other usage of the treated wastewater such as aquifer recharge. The treated wastewater forms potential resources of water that is used to reduce the deficit in the aquifer water balance. The factors that governing the infiltration capacity and the type and size of the infiltration basin are:

1. Infiltration capacity at the soil surface (the soil at the bottom of the infiltration basin),2. Hydraulic capacity of the soil profile and the geologic information below the bottom

of the infiltration basin,3. Property of the water to be infiltrated which may lead to

a. Pollution of groundwater,b. Clogging of the basin and that will affect the infiltration capacity of the basin.

Treated wastewater could usually infiltrate to groundwater with high risk to polluting the aquifer. Therefore, several measures should be considered regarding the quality of the treated wastewater and the type of the recharging system. Recharging the aquifer by injection type system (wells/boreholes) is excluded because this type of system is much more subjected to clogging and will not have a purifying effect on the residual pollution in the treated water. The accepted recharging system type is to leave substantial soil below the bottom of the infiltration basin. This system will improve the quality of the water by the Soil Aquifer Treatment (SAT) before reaching the groundwater. Thus, this type cab be used for unrestricted irrigation without any risk to farmers health.

Three infiltration basins were constructed for the Gaza WWTP during 1987, as part of a reuse system under United Nations Development Program (UNDP) funding. These basins are located approximately 850 m southeast of the Gaza WWTP. These basins were not used until April 1998 due to the unacceptable quality of the Gaza WWTP effluent. Since 1998, the Gaza WWTP has typical disposed approximately half (20,000 m3/day) of its treated (defined as primary and secondary treatment) effluent via these basins, with the remaining effluent being discharged to the Wadi Gaza or the Mediterranean Sea. Under a separate demonstration project of Coastal Aquifer Management Program (CAMP), the three basins were indented to be expanded for five basins; however, this project was suspended since new treatment plant with recharging system is expected to be constructed in the eastern part of Gaza City. Two recharging sites or infiltration areas each 60,000 m3/day capacity shall be installed on the right and left banks of wadi Gaza.

4. Reuse in Industrial Sector

4.1. Background

The existing major industries in the West Bank could be classified into two main categories: extractive industries and manufacturing industries. Quarrying limestone, marble stone, and crushed aggregates are considered the extractive one while manufacturing industries include units for cutting and polishing stone, leather tanning, textile dyeing, food and beverage, textile, shoes and leather, metal processing, etc.

Many industries in the West Bank use great amounts of the limited drinking water resources, this water is discharging to the sewer network without a pre-treatment stage in many cases of the existing industry. No alternatives were provided or enforcement to use treatment technologies within the system of industry. Water consumption and wastewater generated from these industries is shown in Table 9.

Table 9: Water consumption and wastewater generated from the West Bank industries (MenA, 1999)

Type of industry Water Consumption (m3/yr)

Wastewater Generation(m3/yr)

Textile dyeing 1533600 1533600Tanning Industry 410400 410400Food & Beverage 1723680 689472Construction 854000 256200Stone processing 1116640 1116640Chemical industry 112520 36608Metal working & furniture 76358 76358Wood working and furniture 12048 12048Olive mills 375300 375300Non-metallic 15240 6096Plastic, rubber, sponge 5076 5076Printing, paper and carton 4680 4680Clothes, shoes & textile 43236 43236

6282778 4565714

4.2. Potential of industrial reuse

General looking to the locations of the industrial areas and most of the proposed WW treatment plants, wastewater characteristics that need high treatment technology to be use for industrial purposes and water needs of industrial sector compared to the other sectors (4% industry, 40% domestic and 56% agriculture), it could be conclude that it is not feasible at least in the short term to use the treated wastewater in the industrial sector.

Some of the local industries like stone cutting has its own treatment plant, this include treatment, reuse and recycle. This system is feasible regarding to industry owners and it minimizes the negative effect of wastewater discharging to the sewer network.

As mentioned earlier no work in the principle says “clean production” and no enforcement system applied by most of the Municipalities in the West Bank, hence, clean production principle should be extended to include most of the existing industries in the West Bank and proper treatment units should be installed that will raise the potential of wastewater reuse within most of the existing industries in the West Bank.

4.3. Stone Cutting Industry and Wastewater Recycling

Stone cutting industry is one of the most water consumers industry in the West Bank. There are about 706 facility that consume about 500,000 m3 /year and produced nearly 700, 000 tones of slurry. Water is used for saws cooling, collection of stone powder and as lubrication agent. Recycling of wastewater is practiced in the most factories of stone cutting industry. Water is supplied by gravity from an elevated tank to stone-cutting and polishing machines, Most of the effluent is collected in channels containing saw dust up to the amount of about 12,000 mg/l, and then wastewater is collected in a collection sedimentation tank. The settled effluent is pumped from the third chamber to an elevated tank and reused with suspended solids content around 500 mg/l and treated wastewater is continuously recycled within the industry. Many attempts and research have been conducted to minimize the level of suspended solids after three or four days of recycling that reach up to 11,000 mg/l. Some of these factories had succeeded to over come of these troubles and others are still suffering. Figure 6 shows the treatment process of the stone cutting industry. This is mainly for the large factories. Simple processes are used for the small factories, and it is mainly depends on primary sedimentation tanks and other factories add coagulation in the treatment process.

Figure 10: Stone cutting treatment process in the West Bank

A.2: Palestinian Reuse Standards

Wastewater treatment and reuse criteria differ from one country to another and even within a given country such as in Italy and Spain. Some of the main discrepancies in the criteria are, in part, due to differences in approaches to public health and environmental protection. For example, some countries have taken the approach of minimising any risk and have elaborated regulations close to the California’s Title 22 effluent reuse criteria, whereas the approach of other countries is essentially a reasonable anticipation of adverse effects resulting in the adoption of a set of water quality criteria based on the WHO (1989) guidelines. This has led to substantial differences in the criteria adopted by Mediterranean countries (Kamizoulis et al., 2003).

For a long time, Palestine did not have any specific wastewater regulation, references were usually made to the WHO recommendations or to the neighbored country's standard ( ex. Egypt, Jordan). Recently, the Environment Quality Authority with coordination of Palestinian ministries and universities (e.g. PWA, IUG,) has established specific wastewater reuse regulations. The draft of Palestinian legislation for reuse of treated wastewater is still under study in the Palestinian Standard institute.

The draft Palestinian standard which was described I Task 4 mainly envisage; a) Sanitary, b) Environmental and c) Agrotechnical quality requirements.

a) Sanitary requirements centred upon the pathogens potentially present in wastewater, namely bacteria and intestinal nematodes (Ascaris and Trichuris species and hookworms). Where its recommended less than 1 intestinal nematode per liter and 200 to 1000 fecal coliforms per 100 ml of wastewater depending on the reuse conditions.

b) From the environmental viewpoint concentration of various heavy metals (particularly cadmium, copper, zinc), salt, nutrients (N and P) and malodors have taken into consideration.

c) Agrotechnical requirements firstly include total salt and several anion (Cl, SO4, HCO3), cation (Ca, Mg, Na) and boron concentrations which determine traditional irrigation water quality standards depending on the plant species, soil physical and chemical properties, climate and irrigation methods.

There are several other agrotechnical aspects in agricultural use of effluents like determination of land requirements, available effluent quantity, selection of crops and cropping pattern, estimation of irrigation requirements and finally wastewater storage needs and capacities (Suer et al., 2003).

Most of the reuse projects in Gaza Strip and West Bank are using treated wastewater for irrigation according to WHO and FAO guidelines. The WHO guidelines are strict in respect of the requirements to keep the number of eggs (ascaris and hookworms) in effluent below one egg per liter whether the effluent is used for restricted or unrestricted irrigation using surface and sprinkler irrigation. This is not applicable in case of restricted irrigation where exposure of workers and public does not occur.

On the other hand these guidelines are relaxed in the case of feacal coliforms, as no standard is recommend for these pathogens in the case of restricted irrigation and 1000 or less per 100 ml in the case of unrestricted irrigation. This is based on the assumption that the treatment that results in effluent of having less than one egg per liter of intestinal will be practically safe in case of virus and bacteria.

In addition to the microbiological quality requirement of effluent used for irrigation attention also is given to quality parameters of importance in respect of ground water contamination and of soil structure and crop productivity. These include the nutrients content of the effluent (mainly nitrate), total dissolved solids, and sodium adsorption ratio and toxic elements (boron and heavy metals), which is available at FAO guidelines (PWA, 2000).

Despite meeting the regulation and guidelines, the reuse of wastewater is not entirely a risk-free. Continued research will result in developing new technologies or improving the existent methodologies used for assessment of health risk associated with trace contaminants, evaluation of microbial quality, treatment systems, and evaluation of the fate of microbial, chemical and organic contaminants (Suer et al., 2003).

B) Development of specifications for the urban utilization focusing on the reuse in agricultural production

B.1) Storage of Treated Wastewater

1. Gaza Strip

The existing wastewater treatment plants` serve only Northern, Gaza and Rafah Governorates. However, not all houses in these Governorates are connected to the sewerage network. Despite that the existing three WWTPs are heavily overloaded as the actual flow far exceeds the design flow. Blocked pipes and flooded manholes are daily events in Gaza Strip. The total capacity of the existing three WWTPs is approximately 20.5 Mm3/year. The effluent of Northern Governorate plant discharges to the near sand dunes causing many environmental problems to the aquifer and to the neighboring people. Gaza WWTP recharges the aquifer with approximately 3.6 Mm 3 of treated wastewater annually through the infiltration sandy basins and the remaining quantity (11.7 Mm3) is disposed into the Mediterranean Sea. Rafah plant effluent is discharged into the sea. Clearly, most of wastewater effluent is wasted and causing serious environmental impact.

Future of wastewater reuse seems to be promising in the Gaza Strip. The expected amount of wastewater to be used for irrigation will progressively increased on the coming twenty years saving more than half of groundwater needed for irrigation. To distribute the reclaimed wastewater to the agricultural areas and to the proposed infiltration basins, it is suggested to construct a main reclaimed wastewater carrier that will interconnect the three proposed regional WWTPs with the agricultural areas and the infiltration basins (Khalil et al., 2003).

The amount of well treated wastewater assumed to be used for irrigation by year 2005 will be around 19 Mm3/year and this will increase to about 53 Mm3/year by year 2020 (Figure 11).

Figure 11: Potential of treated wastewater expected to be used for agricultural production (Khalil et al., 2003)

Municipal wastewater is mainly composed of about 99.92% water, together with relatively small concentrations of dissolved and suspended organic and non-organic solids. Among the organic substances are carbohydrates, lignin, fats, soaps, synthetic detergents, proteins as well as various natural and synthetic organic chemicals from the process industries.

Municipal wastewater also contains a variety of inorganic substances from domestic and industrial sources including a number of potentially toxic elements, such as arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, chromium, etc. These toxic chemicals might not only affect human health, but they may well be phototoxic levels, that would limit the use of wastewater for irrigation. However from the point of view of health, which is a very important consideration in agriculture use of wastewater, the contaminants of greatest are the pathogenic micro and macro-organisms. These include virus, protozoa, and helminthes. These pathogens are the most important, to consider, in addition to the toxic elements and nitrates, for the purpose of avoiding any hazards for the human health and the environment.

The effluent of Gaza plant contains higher levels of N and P than the recommended levels (Pescod, 1992). Although these elements are important for soil refreshment and reduce the use of fertilizers and hence saving money, their high content in wastewater could cause many problems to plants. Chloride concentration of wastewater effluent is classified as slight to moderate use restriction using a drip localized irrigation system. The reclaimed wastewater effluent from Gaza WWTP will offer a better water quality when compared with water quality of existing wells in the area (Average chloride and nitrate concentrations are equal to 1125 and >100 mg/l, respectively). Salinity of the groundwater increases by time due to seawater intrusion and mobilisation of incident deep brackish water, caused by over-abstraction of the groundwater (Ouda and Al-Agha, 2000). The coliforms content is higher than that recommended by World Health Organization. This may impose some health problems to farmers upon contact with such wastewater (Beuchat and Ryu, 1997).

The performance of the Rafah WWTP does not have an effective treatment process and can only be considered to give a basic settlement process. The only current viable use for wastewater in the Rafah area is for agricultural irrigation. The immediate area of the Wastewater Treatment Plant contains portions of land used for greenhouses, citrus and mixed horticulture. This would include crops eaten uncooked and therefore require any effluent for reuse to be of a quality suitable for unrestricted use. Further west is a large area, which, except for dates, almonds and rainfed crops is not fully utilized due to lack of water resource. This area could utilize water for restricted use or open the land for greater use if the standard of wastewater quality suitable for unrestricted use.

The wastewater effluent of the three planned WWTPs will meet Class D standards in terms of having lower BOD and COD. Certain precautions will be considered to overcome the presence of fecal coliforms by implementing a chlorinating unit at the pumping station. Such reclaimed wastewater will be expected to irrigate a broad spectrum of crops. The use of reclaimed wastewater for irrigation will not have any negative effect on the yield of olive or almond trees but a maximum of 25% yield reduction may occur with citrus trees (PWA, 2001).

2. West Bank

Since wastewater reuse is still not well practiced in the West Bank and no national reuse projects, the wastewater reuse management is also still not formulated or experienced. Specification for storage reservoir is one of these aspects, no storage reservoirs were conducted in the West Bank in the last years and no adopted specifications for these reservoirs in the national policy are considered. The specification and consideration below was proposed for the regional Bani-Naim Wastewater treatment plant in Hebron Area, the plant was designed to treat Wastewater to be use in the irrigation, a comprehensive reuse management was studied by CH2 MHILL firm through USAID funding, storage reservoirs was one of the reuse facilities proposed to be implemented.

2.1 Effluent storage

During periods of high rainfall when irrigation is not occurring, more effluent will be available than will be used for irrigation. To allow flexibility in operation of the land application system 500,000 m3 of effluent storage are required. This volume of storage will eliminate the necessity for discharge of treated effluent to the environment in the early years of project development. The anticipated volume of treated wastewater at WWTP start-up is 6,250 m3/ day. At this rate of plant discharge, approximately 130 ha of land could be irrigated. Excess effluent would be used (primarily in winter) for reclamation of other potentially irrigable land with high salinity or sodicity in the root zone. As WWTP discharge increases over time additional uses of excess effluent would need to be identified or additional storage would need to be constructed to avoid discharge of treated effluent to the environment.

All storage ponds have been assumed to be 10 m deep, which includes 8 m of active storage, 1 m of freeboard and 1 m of dead storage. It is recommended to construct 143 days storage to avoid wadi discharge. Total land requirement for Phase I storage would be approximately 26.8 ha, increasing in 2025 to 105 ha. It is worth to mention that zero-discharge effluent was one of the Israeli requirements to give permission for the wastewater treatment plant.

The ponds would be lined with soil cement or bentonite, and there would be no imported material for embankments, nor excess spoil for disposal. There would be a 5-m-wide perimeter road on top of the embankments.

2.2 Project guidelines

Wastewater quality parameters of the reclaimed wastewater and construction parameters are shown in Table 10.

Table 10: Design Parameters for Reclaimed Wastewater

Water Quality ParametersTotal fecal coliform -  1,000 CPU/100 mlAverage biological oxygen demand (BOD) – 20 mg/LAverage total suspended solids (TSS) – 20 mg/LAverage total nitrogen (TN) – 40 mg/LTotal dissolved solids (TDS) – 1,000 to 1,500 mg/L

Construction Parameter

Implications for Reclaimed Wastewater Reuse

Average wastewater production 15,000 m3/day

Provides for approximately 240 ha of potential irrigated area, depending on the selected cropping pattern.

Storage– 500,000 m3 Increases the potential irrigated area to approximately 300 ha.Minimum pressure at last farm turnout – 7 m

Pressure may be too low for on-farm irrigation system. May require small field storage reservoirs and irrigation booster pumps to supply sufficient pressure.

3. Potential problems from storage of treated effluent

3.1 Algal and microbiological growth

Virtually any open body of water has the potential to support algal growth. Exposure to sunlight and the presence of high concentrations of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) will create algal blooms in the proposed reuse water reservoir. Excessive algal growth could cause aesthetic, water quality and other problems, including: turbidity, odors, increase of maintenance work due to developing free-floating organisms that may attach to the structures and escape into the distribution system.

Algae are commonly controlled in reservoirs with: Aerators Addition of chlorine and/or copper sulfate. These chemicals are not always effective. A natural algaecide A cartridge filter installed at the effluent of reservoirs to remove algae upstream of the

distribution system

A pilot program should be developed on a small basin with treatment plant reclaimed water to recommend the proper alternative that could be use.

Sunlight, warm temperatures and decaying natural organic matter and birds provide conditions suitable for and sources of bacteria and other microorganisms.

3.2 Dissolved oxygen depletion, control and mixing

Considering the relatively shallow depth of the proposed reuse water reservoir (8 m) and the climate of the Bani-Naim Area where the WWTP was proposed, conventional thermal stratification and seasonal turnover of the reservoir is unlikely. Nevertheless, an anaerobic condition may develop in the sediment of the reservoir, and low DO levels can result in odors and release nutrients from the sediments. Especially with thermal and or wind-induced currents that mix the water column. Hence, providing a cascade aeration feature where the reclaimed water enters the reservoir was recommend and incase of non sufficiency supplemental aeration and mixing can be achieved with pumps and propeller-type mixers or aeration systems that involve forced air. Forced aeration systems are more predominantly used. It is recommended that complete mixing of the reservoir be provided to control algal growth.

3.3 Detention time management

The literature suggests that if the detention time of water in a reservoir is less than the doubling rate of algae, about one week, washout of algae will occur and prevent a bloom from occurring. The 145-day storage capacity of the proposed reservoir eliminates this strategy.

3.4 Annual cleaning

During the one month per year when the reservoir is projected to be dry (mid-September to mid-October), the reservoir bottom should be scraped and the sediment and any plant material removed to a landfill or applied as a soil amendment to agriculture (fodder crops). Disking the bottom sediment lets the accumulated organic matter and nutrients.

B.2) Sustainable wastewater reuse 1. Economic ValueCompared to developing other new sources of water, wastewater is one of the most economically sound options. With continued supply assured, the major costs come from treatment and infrastructure capital costs. Depending on the level of treatment and the size of the treatment plant, treatment costs are estimated at $0.15 – $0.42/m3, including conventional primary and secondary treatment and conveyance. At this level, water would be usable in agriculture and industry and would only need a separate conveyance system, so as not to contaminate drinking water systems. While the technology is available to treat wastewater for drinking, the idea still lacks major public support worldwide and has only been pursued in isolated localities. Moreover it would cost an additional $0.85/m3 above current treatment costs, making it a prohibitively expensive option for nations with low GDPs, such as the Palestinian territories. Still for agricultural purposes, wastewater is the best source available to increase water supply in the region, both from an environmental and an economic perspective (Naser, 2002).

The economic benefits or values of using treated wastewater in irrigations is computed in several projects and plans in the Gaza Strip and West Bank taking the following factors into account:

an increase in the area irrigated, introducing new species of citrus, such as the Clementine which is more profitable,

renovating orange groves, etc., lowering the cost of water for farmers, with selling price of treated water estimated at

0.15 NIS/m3 in comparison to 0.50 NIS/m3 for wellwater.

The combined actions of these three factors should results in a general increase in benefits in the reuse zones of 80 %. For the framers, implementation of treated wastewater irrigation should allow an increase in revenue of 52 % for an increase in labor of 12 % (Peter, 2000).

2. Security and Stability

As noticed in previous Tasks of MEDWARE project, wastewater treatment plants in Gaza Strip and West Bank have been designed upon assumptions of wastewater characteristics and amount of flow, because no data were available at all. The existing three WWTPs are heavily overloaded as a result of the rapid population growth. The residential area is spreading closer to the plants and the inhabitants are suffering from the offensive odor and mosquitoes problems (Yassin and Abd Rabou, 2002). Beside that, the residents of some areas faced the risk of being flooded by the wastewater. The sand embankment, constructed to protect the surroundings from flooding, does not seem to withstand the risk of rapid increase in the height of the accumulated wastewater. Recently, children died from drowning in these wastewater lagoons.

To solve these crucial growing problems, Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation in close cooperation with Palestinian Water Authority has identified locations for new three regional plants. These plants will be funded by donor countries (Sweden, Germany and Japan) and will replace the existing ones by year 2020. Their location will be far away from the residential areas near the eastern border of the Gaza Strip. However, these area may be also considered as unsecured area due to the current Israelis activities starting from Sep.2000. 3. Land Availability

Because there is little statistical data available concerning the agricultural sector in Gaza Strip, it is not possible to determine with accuracy the quantity of the land which can be postulated for irrigation by treated wastewater. On the basis of the information available concerning agriculture in Gaza Strip as shown in Figure 12. The total number of farms in Gaza Strip is estimated at between 15,000 and 20,000. These farms are located mainly in the eastern half of Gaza Strip along the Israeli border where the new wastewater treatment plant will be located. The agricultural area is bounded from the west by the main median road. These area is considered as such because there is little ongoing urban development and none planned in the future. Moreover, farming activity is widespread but access to water is often difficult, the quality of groundwater is mediocre (salinity, nitrates) and not used for producing drinking water (OTUI, 1998).

Figure 12: Distribution of agricultural areas

4. Treatment Requirement

As noticed from previous tasks, the treated wastewater requirements should normally meet the health parameters set by FAO for irrigating all types of crops. The treatment process which results in accepted quality of water may consist of preliminary (screening, degritting and degreasing), primary and secondary that cause a very significant drop in the content of (suspended solids, organic matter, total nitrogen, potassium) and tertiary treatment (fine sand filtration and disinfection).

In general according to Engelberge criteria, water used for irrigation must contain:

- Less than 1000 fecal coliforms per 100 ml, and - Less than 1 helminth egg per liter,

Given these biological criteria, the water should be suitable for use in irrigation without restrictions (OTUI, 1998).

5. Crops

Although the quality of the effluent from Gaza and Beit Lahia WWTPs would nearly meet Class C standards which is progressively match irrigating citrus, fodder crops and olives , the reuse of treated wastewater is very restricted to a few illegal irrigation sites beside the treatment plants (Ouda and Al-Agha, 2000). On the other hand the effluent of Gaza plant contains high levels of N and P than the recommended levels (Pescod, 1992). Although these elements are important for soil refreshment and reduce the use of fertilizers and hence saving money, their high content in wastewater could cause many problems to plants.

The wastewater effluent of the three planned WWTPs will meet Class D standards in terms of having lower BOD and COD. Certain precautions will be considered to overcome the presence of fecal coliforms by implementing a chlorinating unit at the pumping station. Such reclaimed wastewater will be expected to irrigate a broad spectrum of crops. The use of reclaimed wastewater for irrigation will not have any negative effect on the yield of olive or almond trees but a maximum of 25% yield reduction may occur with citrus trees (PWA, 2001). This could be attributed to the high level of salinity of Gaza effluent. However, the selection of citrus to be irrigated with treated wastewater is a function of many factors including crop pattern predominance in Gaza Strip particularly in the Northern Governorate and citrus is considered the main consumer of water (PWA, 2002, Yassin and Abd Rabou, 2002).

It is advisable to cultivate alfalfa as a substantial crop needed in Gaza Strip for livestock husbandry. Also, alfalfa is characterized with highly crop water requirement estimated around 1500 m3/dunum/year. This will ensure a real chance to expand the cultivated area with maximization the quantity of treated wastewater used. Other crops should be tested for their viability to wastewater irrigation to meet the food need options for the nation.

6. Irrigation Methods

It is recommended to use (micro-irrigation) bubblers, drippers and mini-sprinklers irrigation systems which will be suitable for citrus, fruit trees and fodder crops. Using such methods

will avoid the direct contact with water by both framers and plant and the quantity of water supplied to the plants, the soil and the groundwater can be closely controlled (OTUI, 1998).

Subsurface drip irrigation is also reported to be successful with the use of treated wastewater, as it has a good potential for the control of nitrate and salt at an optimum level with high yields and with no losses of water (Phene et al., 1995).

7. Public Acceptance And Attitude

The reuse of wastewater effluent for irrigation will no doubt save potable water for human usage in addition to introducing solutions for some environment problems. To ensure the successful use of wastewater in agriculture, perception of farmers toward wastewater reuse should be investigated. This was explored through conducting a questionnaire first among the farmers of the rural area in Beit Hanoun. It is obvious that the majority of the interviewed farmers 68 (86.1%) agreed completely to use the treated wastewater for irrigation of 2856 dunum (80.7%) of the total targeted area. Only eight farmers (10.1%) rejected the idea. More than 90 % of farmers in the southern area accepted the immediate WW reuse where the fresh water is scarce and have high price. Although most of the farmers 71 (89.9%) sought help e.g. irrigation network, extension, fertilizers and protective gear, also the majority of them 71 (89.9%) are welling to pay for wastewater. This is encouraging start to move toward the strategy of wastewater reuse for agriculture (Khalil et al., 2003).

As noticed before, the public acceptance of wastewater reuse is a key factor in reuse policy success. The main reasons behind the high level of agreement of interviewed farmers to use wastewater for irrigation include increasing salinity level in the local agricultural wells, increasing fuel price and maintenance cost. This is obvious in the acceptance of most farmers to pay for wastewater. On the other hand the health and religious aspects are the major concern of people. A great effort should be made to introduce safe wastewater as a water resource and to increase public awareness.

8. Wastewater impact

The main problem with the use of wastewater is the threat to public health, the soil and water if reuse is not done carefully. While the main impact on health from reuse in developing countries is from diseases caused by helminths, such as roundworm, hookworm and guinea worm, microbial pathogens pose the second largest threat. The worst-case situation occurs when untreated wastewater is used to irrigate vegetables or salad crops that are then eaten raw.

Unfortunately, there are many on-going instances of raw wastewater reuse which, without doubt, result in occasional gastro-intestinal illness, but have the potential for causing widespread illnesses.

For example, due to water scarcity, the irrigation of market vegetables such as eggplant and cucumber with raw wastewater flowing in the Jordan Valley, West Bank is common. Components in wastewater that are most toxic to some crops include sodium, chloride and boron.

Raw wastewater can also salinise soils, and the grease in this water can reduce soil permeability and aeration by clogging pores. Both microbial pathogens and nitrates from wastewater can contaminate shallow aquifers (Naser, 2002).

C) Conclusion and Recommendations

After the previous discussion of the feasibility of using treated wastewater in agricultural production, the followings can recommended:

1) Rehabilitation of all existing overloaded treatment plants should have the priority.

2) All future sewage collection and treatment strategies should integrate reuse possibilities wherever practical in order to improve the current deterioration of aquifer quality and save fresh water sources for the rapidly expanding municipal and industrial demand.

3) The quality of treated effluent should be in accordance with the following standards: a) WHO microbiological guideline A: ≤1000 fecal coliforms/100 ml and ≤1 egg/l intestinal nematodes can be adopted for general irrigation.

b) The more stringent WHO guideline: ≤200 fecal coliforms/100 ml and ≤1 egg/l intestinal nematodes can be adopted where direct contact with the public is possible or for spraying of crops which will be consumed uncooked.

c) Suspended solids, biological oxygen demand and Nitrate levels of the effluent should be to the following targets:

- Interim target: SS≤15, BOD≤ 10 and N≤30. - Areas of Nitrate problem: SS≤15, BOD≤10 and N≤10 for coastal region recharge.

References:

Abdoh, F., Hind, M., Meerbach, D., and Itleib, H., (2003). Agricultural reuse of reclaimed water from the Hebron Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant: feasibility, progress and challenges. Proceeding of the First Regional Water Ruse Conference, Amman, Jordan.

Abu Hijleh O.H. (1997). Minimizing water consumption and environmental pollution from stone-cutting industry in the West Bank. MSc thesis, IHE, Delft, Netherlands. Al-Bireh Muncibality. Al-Bireh, Palesine.

ARIJ (1996). Environmental profile for the West Bank, Vol.4, Applied Research Institute-Jerusalem, Palestine.

Beuchat, L.R. and Ryu, J.H. (1997). Produce handling and processing practices. Emerging Infectious Diseases 3 (4): 459-465.

CEC (1997). Effluent and sludge reuse study for Al-Bireh wastewater treatment plant. Draft conceptual report, Consulting Engineering Centre, Amman, Jordan.

CH2M HILL, Inc. (2003). Demonstration projects of reclaimed wastewater and biosolids composting and reuse. Final Report, CH2M HILL, Ramallah, West Bank, Palestine.

CH2M HILL, Inc. (2003). Detailed feasibility study of Hebron Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant reclaimed wastewater and residual management. CH2M HILL, Ramallah, West Bank, Palestine.

G. Kamizoulis, A. Bahri, F. Brissaud, and A.N. Angelaki (2003). Wastewater Recycling and Reuse Practices in Mediterranean Region (Recommended Guidelines). Available from: http://www.med-reunet.com/docs_upload/angelakis_cs.pdf , .

Ihab Barghothi, (2004). Water Scarcity in the Middle East: Regional Cooperation on International Relations, House Committee on International Relations. Available from: wwwc . house . gov / international _ relations / 108 / bar050504.pdf .

Kabbouneh, S., (1996). Effects of the chemical quality of the reclaimed wastewater. MSc thesis, Al-Najah National University, Nablus, West Bank, Palestine.

Khalil M. Tubail, Jamal Y. Al-Dadah and Maged M. Yassin (2003), Present and Prospect Situation of Wastewater and its Possible Reuse in the Gaza Strip. Available from: http://www.med-reunet.com/05ginfo/05_case.asp.

MenA (1999). Palestinian environmental strategy. Main report, Ministry of Environmental Affairs, West Bank, Palestine.

MoA, PWA and Palestinian Hydrology Group (2004). Technical Report and Partial results for the 2003 season of Agricultural Monitoring Development Support Program (Beit Lahia Site). The program is developed by the Palestinian Ministry of Agriculture and the French cooperation

Naser I Faruqui. (2002). Wastewater Treatment and Reuse for Food and Water Security, International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada. Available from: http://www.ruaf.org/no8/20_mena.pdf.

Nashashibi M. (1995). Wastewater treatment strategies in Palestine. MSc thesis, IHE, Delft, Netherlands.

Ouda, O.K. and Al-Agha, M.R. (2000). Treated wastewater use in Gaza District: The Question of public acceptance. Fifth International Water Technology Conference, Alexandria, Egypt 471-481.

OTUI (1998). Feasibility Study of the Reuse of Treated Wastewater for the Entire Gaza Agglomeration. Phase 3, Draft Final Report. MOPIC.

Palestinian Water Authority (2000). Water Sector Strategic Planning Study, Final Report, Volume III: Specialist studies, Part B: Focal areas.

Palestinian Water Authority (2001). Coastal Aquifer Management Program (CAMP), Integrated Aquifer Management Plan (Task 25), Gaza.

(2002). Water resources and management issues (Gaza Strip/Palestine), July Report.

Palestinian Water Authority (2003). Wastewater Management Plant. Palestinian Water Authority.

Pescod, M.B. (1992). Wastewater treatment and use in agriculture. FAO irrigation and drainage paper 47, Rome.

Peter G. (2000). Appropriating Water Between Israel and Palestine: Environmental Concerns of Final Status Negotiation. Available from: http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~wws401c/peter.pdf.

Phene, C.J.; Ruskin, R. and Lamm, F.R. (1995). Potential of subsurface drip irrigation for management of nitrate in wastewater.

Suer A., Ercan Y., and Yasemin S. (2003). Provisional Regulatory Guidelines for Best Reuse and management of Wastewater in Agriculture in Turkey, Mediterranean Network on Wastewater Reclamation and Reuse. Available from: http://www.med-reunet.com/docs/seminar/suer_anac.pdf.

UNEP (2000). International Source Book On Environmentally Sound Technologies for Wastewater and Stormwater Management, Newsletter and Technical Publications. Available from: http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/Publications/TechPublications/TechPub-15/3-2AsiaWest/2-4.asp.

UNEP (2003). Deck study on the environment in the occupied Palestinian territories. United Nations Environment Program, Nairobi, Kenya.

WESC (1997). Nablus wastewater treatment and reuse demonstration project. Intepretation Report, Water and Environmental Studies Center, Al-Najah National University, Nablus, West Bank, Palestine.

World Health Organization (1989). Health guidelines for the use of wastewater in agriculture and aquaculture. Technical Report Series 778, Geneva.

WSI (2004). Hygienic Assessment of Al-Bireh reclaimed wastewater for processed crops irrigation: guidelines development. Second progress report, Med-Reunet II.

Yassin, M.M. and Abd Rabou, A.N. (2002): Perception of sludge use among farmers in Northern Governorate, Gaza Strip. Bull. Fac. Agric., Cairo Univ., 53(4): 517- 530.

Appendix 1: Crops and equipment items used in Al-Bireh reuse demonstration project

Site preparation and planting Washing basins, potable water points, closets units 3Agricultural soil trucks 150Almond (Marbolan Grafted) trees 2Apricot (Marbolan Grafted) trees 2Peach (Marbolan Grafted) trees 2Plum (Marbolan Grafted) trees 2Orange trees 4Lemon trees 4Grapefruit trees 4Pistacio trees 2Pecan trees 2Fig trees 2Walnut trees 2Pomegranate trees 4Mango trees 5Persimmom trees 3Banana trees 3Cherry trees 3Guave trees 3Avocado trees 3Brightion trees 5Graps stocks 30Sweet corn (seeds) kg 5Pinenut trees 3Carob trees 3Bougainvillea shrubs 10Rose bushes 30Date palm palm 15Roses bushes 50Landscaping flowers and shrubs m2 700Greenhouse eggplant m2 100Olives trees 20

Disinfection Equipment16” Media filter with automatic backflush pcs 11.5” disk filter pcs 1Electric dosing pump for chlorine pcs 132” media filter vessel-empty for retention pcs 1

Piping, connectors, coupling

Irrigation equipmentMulti-valve irrigation computers pcs 4Single-valve irrigation computers pcs 2Automatic valve 1.5” w/pressure control pcs 4Automatic valve 1” wo/pressure control pcs 14Pressure control devices pcs 21” disk filters pcs 11.5” disk filters pcs 3Fertilizer injection valves pcs 6Fertilizer pressure tank pcs 1Polyethylene pipes m 1200Drip line w/ in-line emitters-pressure compensated m 3600Connectors, couplings, tools, plugs

Bulk equipmentGreen house 19*36*4 meters pcs 1Shading net 60% m2 700

Gardening toolsLawn mower pcs 1Grass trimmer pcs 1Pruner pcs 1Dutch hoe pcs 1Handle pcs 1Lawn rake pcs 1Grass shear pcs 1Gloves etc. pcs 10

Nursery itemsAgricultural soil trucks 2Agricultural sand (red) trucks 1Black plastic bags kg 2*150Plastic mulch bundle 1Growing plates plates 42Planting tables tables 7Wheel barrow pcs 3Axe pcs 3Hoe pcs 3Pruner pcs 3Overall pcs 4Shoes pcs 4

Peatmoss liter 300Vermiculite liter 100Herbicide liter 2Insecticide liter 2Fungicide liter 2Growth hormone kg 1Fertilizer kg 100