SAHELARA:

Guide to improve world environment by water control in Africa

Author: Luc Verschueren luc@vepad.be

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 2 / 92

1. Index

1. Index: Pag. 2

2. Introduction Pag. 3

3. Description of human capabilities Pag. 10

4. Rivers in Africa Pag.16

5. Sahelara Pag. 18

6. Lake Chad Pag. 21

7. Stepwise irrigation of Sahelara Pag. 24

8. Philosophy of channels Pag. 26

9. Philosophy of a network of piping with buffer zones Pag.29

10. The network Pag. 35

11. Determination of project parameters Pag. 39

12. The Nile Pag. 41

13. Stepwise project planning: Pag. 42

14. Effects Pag. 50

15. Algae production Pag. 52

16. Climatic parameters Pag. 57

17. Mineral balance worldwide Pag. 60

18. Tourism Pag. 68

19. Relative budgetary questions Pag. 70

20. Financing: Pag. 75

21. Difficulties to overcome Pag. 83

22. Science fiction or not Pag. 89

23. Personal word of the author Pag. 91

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 3 / 92

2. Introduction World temperature is rising. Ocean level is rising. Several species of animals are going to be die out. CO² level in atmosphere is rising Energy in the future is uncertain business Decent living area is coming scarce Temperature in the Middle East is becoming too high to live in And so on… As it seems, the future for living in our world is not that bright. We are wasting our world and financial interests worldwide avoid that we all together are willing to change our way of life in order to stop this negative spiral of events. At this moment, people are focused more on making profit than on life quality. It is a fact, no matter what positive initiatives are taken, the financial interests of oil companies, car factories, weapon industries block the ability for a fast changing in our way of life. We all are aware of the fact that fossil fuels are destroying our environment. But what is the actual situation? Only for political reasons the oil producing companies are raising their capacity. Just for giving Russia low income for their oil, other countries increase their capacity. The effect is that fuel prices drop and investment in renewable energy sources are not so interesting anymore. As an example here under is given the average price of Diesel oil in Belgium for the last 2 years and compared with the beginning of 2016. The price has dropped in 2 years with +/- 30%. Life is getting more and more expensive, and fossil fuel is getting cheaper. This is an unacceptable contradiction.

The effect is that we are ruining our world, even knowing that we only have one world. When this world is ruined, in despite of all science fiction space travels, we do not have another place to go to.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 4 / 92

Let’s try to put it a little bit in perspective. Calculating on world level is not so easy for the most people. Therefore, let us calculate on a level we all know: our own household. Our house, our living area is chosen in function of several parameters:

• Job • Family • Desired living space • Desired living environment • Budget • Legacy • ….

The moment one – or several – of these parameters change, we have the freedom and the possibility to move to another place. The moment people move to another home, at this point, we can notice clearly the difference in two types of households:

• After leaving the house, the empty house is left in a decent state, ready to receive with minor adaptations the new habitants of the house.

Or:

• After leaving the house, the empty house is left as a ruin, dirty from basement to attic and a lot of things are broken

When the household moves and leaves a decent house, it is obvious that they will live in the same way in the new location. The landlord who owns the house will be very happy to have such habitants in his house. When the household moves and leaves a ruin, they will treat their new home in the same way. It is just their way of living. The problem for these people, at the end, is that new landlords will find out about their reputation and that they are refused in the new houses. At the end, when these people want to move, not one decent landlord will accept them. As a consequence, they will not find a decent place anymore and they go from ruin to ruin. We all execrate people who are living in a ruin. Nobody likes to live near to a neighbor who is living that way. But we all are living in our world and turning it into a ruin by destroying our atmosphere, polluting our rivers and oceans. But, let’s keep this for later. Every household is run by a paterfamilias. (or materfamilias, what’s in a name) It is his duty to keep the house in good shape and have balance between incomings and expenditures. For a household, it is easy to calculate. The paterfamilias knows the incomings of himself and all other members of his household. With the knowledge of the incomings, he has to take care of the following expenditures:

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 5 / 92

• Cost of the house (rent or mortgage), maintenance, … • Food for all the members of the household • Energy, water for the household • Extra’s like education, leisure, • Savings • ….

All these components are well known. When the household is in balance, at the end of each month, all the money is spent or there are some financial savings possible for the time it is needed in the future… As a major part of the study, we will study the balance of the water in a house. As we all know, water is the basis of our biological life. When the household is located in an area where running tap water is available, the people of this household are lucky. The flow of the water is simple:

• The moment water is needed, the tap is opened. • All used water comes in the sewage and is lost for consumption

We are used to the basic rule that water is available when we need it. We just have to open the tap. And the moment when no water is needed, the tap is closed. Just basic common sense in every household. Not one logical thinking person let’s a tap opened the moment no water is needed. To optimize water economics, when possible with the structure of the house, people had the habit to place a drum near the house to collect rain water from the roof. This water is used to water the plants in the garden, to clean the floor and so on.

Free water is collected and used in order to save on the monthly invoice of the water company. At this moment, for new houses to be constructed, it is legally imposed to construct rainwater buffer tanks to use rain water for a lot of purposes. Water for rinsing toilets, water for laundry, … The target at the end is that only (mainly) drinking water comes from the tap and the rest is just natural water.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 6 / 92

Put this in the perspective of wine farmers in Italy: the need water for irrigation. Using tap water is very expensive. So, they take raining water, which is free, and they store it until the moment they need it. They buffer the water on their fields until the moment they need it.

An even bigger example is Israel. The Jordan River, coming from the Golan Heights comes in the Sea of Galilee. This lake has a dam, which holds the water in rainy periods. Level of this lake in summer or wintertime differs several meters. The water from wintertime is blocked and used in summertime to irrigate the whole country. This is possible, even when we take in mind that the Sea of Galilee is a few hundreds of meters below sea level. With this few examples, we see that water economics can work on 3 levels:

• Small households • Bigger farms for big consumptions for irrigation • A complete country

Why don’t we try to extrapolate this way of thinking to global scale. No matter which water system, it always follows the same rules:

• A source • Eventually a buffer • Users • Disposal

In our households, our source with buffering is extern. It is in the basins of the water companies. To use water, there is a bill to be paid. When the invoice is not paid, the supplier will cut off the line. No one will have the urge to open the tap the moment no water is needed, otherwise the amount on the invoice to be paid will be unacceptable high. This basic common sense of every paterfamilias is the basic philosophy in which we should treat our world.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 7 / 92

Accepting that an invoice is to be paid for sweet water, we accept the fact that sweet water has a certain value. For calculating the value of this water, there must be made a breakdown of the price on the invoice. The price is composed of the following components:

• Cost of the network o Pumps and the energy to pump o Pipelines and the cost for maintenance o Labor cost and administration cost

• Cost for the water itself: o Cost for collection:

§ Pumps and energy to pump § Piping § Labor

o Cost for water purification § Chemicals § Labor § …

o Cost for the water At this moment, in Belgium, the water companies take the water out of rivers, canals, sources in the soil. Beside some taxes, there is no cost to be paid for the water. The water as basic components is just free

Conclusion: we are prepared to pay for the network, for the collection of water, for the purification of water, but we accept the fact that the basic component, the basic product – water – is just free available. A product can only be free of charge the moment nobody owns it and there is plenty available for everyone, no matter who and where he lives. Remember the movie: “Once upon a time in the West”? A lot of people were killed just for the ownership of a certain piece of land. At the end, it just seemed that this part of land had a source from which the railroad company could fill his steam boilers for their trains. The water – although free available in the ground – represented a certain value, worth to kill for. Living in this philosophy, it is very strange that – with all the rain we have year after year and worldwide – that we are running out of sweet water sources for our future. It is not because the rain water is a free gift from nature, that we must treat it as an not valuable product. And, still we do it on global scale. In households, small scale, we use free rainy water. In farms, vineyards, glasshouses, farmers use free rainy water. In Israel, on national scale, they block and use free rainy water. On global scale, we are running out of sweet water, although we keep on believing it is free available…

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 8 / 92

We must treat our homes as a good paterfamilias, so we can leave it in a decent state the moment we are getting out: this should be a basic way of life for all of us. When we arrive as new habitants in a new house, we appreciate that it is clean. When we are born, we appreciate the gift of the beauty of the earth we are living on. Consequently, the moment we leave our planet, we should let is in a decent way for the people who come after us. Or even more: when possible, when we leave, we should leave our planet in a better shape than we have found it. But, looking to the actual situation, as described here above, we are turning our world into a ruin. We make fossil fuels cheaper and cheaper and keep on filling the atmosphere with CO². The sweet water we have is just spoiled in several ways. When our private situation on small scale changes, we can move from one city to another. We have that choice. When our national situation on a bigger scale changes, by war f.i., we can escape and try to live in another country. When our world is devastated, there is not one acceptable possibility to move to another world. This world is the only one we have. There are no fairy tales possible for a massive migration of billions and billions of people to another planet. There are no fairy tales possible for artificial islands to house billions of people. The moment we have ruined our planet, it is ruined. No way back. Therefore: let’s treat it as paterfamilias to achieve a perfect household so that we and our children can live in it for the coming centuries. In this paper, no difficult theories will be given. Just looking to what we already have achieved as mankind helps us to see what we can do to prevent our world from devastating in the future. A combination of existing – simple – techniques, coupled to the needs we have and working with a longtime planning will give us a better world to live in. This is just common sense, nothing more. The target of this small bookwork is to prove that we – already at this moment - have the tools to improve world environment with the resources and technologies we have. There is no need for spectacular inventions, no need for paying high prices for scarce raw materials. There is no need for fear that we are running out of sweet water, running out of fertile ground. There is only need for common sense and corporation on global scale. And the will to work on it. Of course, saying that there are not high prices to be paid for raw materials does not mean that the total solution will be cheap.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 9 / 92

As example: rainwater is free of charge. But, when you want to use rainwater the moment you need it, you must invest in a rainwater tank. Rough calculated: a rainwater tank for a household of 4 people will cost very rough 2.500, - Euro. A rainwater collection system for 1.000.000 people may cost consequently 625 million of Euros. And this is only for partially use of the water in the household. The most water still will come from the tap. When we are discussing about global investments, the cost will be high because of the scale of the project. But, once the investment is done, the profit will last for generations and generations. Just common sense and the will to work on the future.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 10 / 92

3. Description of human capabilities As mentioned, the solution to improve water economics on global scale is just an extrapolation of common sense in household management up to this global scale. Pessimists should say that it is impossible to realize projects on global scale with such an effect on global environment. They focus on the big need on change of mentality of human kind in their daily life in order to have a slow but stable improvement on environment worldwide. And they are right: mentality of human kind is very difficult to change. This is a process of generations. In fact, when no law forces us to change habits, we only accept changes when they have a direct positive influence on our way of life. We are prepared to work hard, but only when there is a target in front of us to be reached. And, this target must have a positive effect on our way of life. Very simple the evolution of inventions throughout history: In the beginning, it was very complicated to make a decent wheel. But, knowing the advantages of this wheel, we kept on improving it. Before that, the possibility to control fire. The invention of a lamp? All products starting from a basic idea which becomes common used technology. These small samples given – wheel, fire, lamp – have a direct effect on our daily life in our households. But, for world environment, we have to study projects on global scale. It is not enough that 1 person has a rainwater tank to solve the sweet water problem worldwide. Also, it is not enough that a small country as Belgium forces all inhabitants to use rainwater, that the problem is solved on the other side of the world. We have to be aware of the fact that – as single persons, as small group, as small country – we only have the possibility to improve our personnel effect on the local environment. But, this does not mean that we should hesitate to create ideas which can have effect on world environment for the future. We must be prepared to work on a worldwide project to improve environment for the next generations. Only problem is that, no matter how hard we work on this, the effect is only shown after some decades. We must believe that there is no such thing as a project which is too big to be realized by human kind. As a prove on this, here under some examples where we have proven to be capable to realize enormous projects. The given projects had an enormous effect on life quality of a lot of people. Or, in some cases, there was direct economic profit achieved after realization of the project. It are projects out of the history, even realized with even less technology available as we have now. Projects realized in the past, where most people did not feel the direct advantages but which are at this moment just accepted as being normal. We are able to transport oil thousands and thousands of kilometers in a safe way. Pipelines are constructed. As an example, there is constructed a pipeline from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean. Length of this pipeline is +/- 1.700 km and the cost was +/- 3,5 billions of

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 11 / 92

U$D. The capacity is 1 million drums of oil per day. In liters, this is +/- 160.000.000 liters per day. This gives a yearly capacity of almost 60 million m³. Or, almost 8 liters per year per world inhabitant.

The picture above gives a good view on a typical oil pipeline to transport oil from one side of a continent to another. This can be done for oil and for natural gas. Safety measures for these products make the construction rather difficult and expensive. TAT-14 is the 14th trans-Atlantic cable, mainly used for data transfer. This cable is a connection between Europe and the States and has a total length of more than 15.000 km. This cable was finished in 2001, but we have to remember that the first trans-Atlantic cables were already constructed at the end of the 19th century. At this moment, whole oceans are covered with cables.

Every man – when he has the money – is allowed to buy a car. Personnel mobility for everyone in the world is at this time an achieved human right. A perfect example that we are prepared to work hard to improve life quality.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 12 / 92

The total number of cars produced by f.i. Suzuki, VW, Toyota, Volvo and GM together exceed 35.000.000 of vehicles. With a length of 5 meter, we have a total line of cars of 175.000.000 meter, or a total length of 175.000 km. A string of cars which goes 4 times around the globe. This is calculated only for these 4 brands and without trucks, busses and so on. We have built the Suez channel. A channel to connect two Oceans with a channel having an average depth of 11 meters, 200 meters width and a length of +/- 170 km.

We have built the Panama channel. Since centuries, Holland is protecting his lower parts of the country with artificial channels. Stepwise, with the help of windmills, the water is pumped continuously from lower points to higher points, so that the lower points are accessible for agricultural and living area. The best example this generation lasting project is to be found in the second world war: just breaking the dykes and stopping the pumps showed which effect the pumping of the water has. They even live beneath sea level and protect the land with dykes and pump the water up to sea level. This was even done long time before the invention of electricity. The energy for this was created by the use of windmills. Centuries ago, there was worldwide an enormous use of windmills. Only in the Netherlands, in the year 1750, there were +/- 6.000 windmills operational. That is much more than the wind turbines operating now in the Netherlands. We are forced to promote projects for renewable energy. But, looking at the figures, it seems that we only have to find back what we have lost. We have lost it, because it was so easy to use fossil energy sources. Also, they have won a complete province from the sea. Flevoland. A surface of +/- 1.400 km² is recovered from the North Sea and converted to fertile land and living area. This project is done in combination by converting a part of the North Sea into a sweet water lake: the IJselmeer. With a total surface of 1.100 km² and an average depth of 5,5 m, the total created sweet water buffer exceeds 5 billion m³. In fact, the target was not to create this lake, but to convert the total surface into fertile land. Only, they stopped converting and

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 13 / 92

just built a dyke. On the country side of this dyke, the salt water from the sea slowly changed into sweet water.

The projects in the Netherlands are realized by the people of just a small country with 15 million people at this moment. Possible projects to be realized by a population of 1 billion should be +/- 60 times bigger. Imagine what can be possible when we work together with whole world population with more than 7 billion of people. The total water infrastructure in Israel is constructed in a way that they block 1 river periodically in Sea of Galilee to be able to irrigate the whole country. From this central lake, channels are bringing water to different points in the country. An interesting detail is that the surface of this lake is at 212 meters under sea level. Not only the water is divided from 1 central point to several cities. Also, the user points are some hundreds of meters above the level of the lake. This aspect must be remembered for the points to follow. This picture shows a typical water irrigation channel in Israel.

In Tunisia, they control all rain water and avoid it as much as possible to run to the sea. The water is blocked in artificial lakes, pumped backwards into the country away from the

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 14 / 92

Mediterranean, just waiting to be used. The buffer of water they have in Tunisia should cover a period of 2 years without rain. In our civilized world, all houses are connected to a central sewage system. Pipes and channels under the ground guide all our waste water from using points to disposal points. Most of the disposal points are – or will become – waste water treatment plants. From this waste water treatment plants, the purified water goes into the rivers and back to the oceans. It is very difficult to calculate the total length of sewage canals worldwide, but it must exceed millions and millions of kilometers. Only in London f.i., the length of the sewage system exceeds 20.000 km. As sewage canals, there are mainly two types:

• Free fall channels • Mechanically transported channels

This information also has to be remembered for the points to follow. Not only the realizations of the latest centuries have to be remembered. A very simple but well know example are the aqueducts constructed by the Romans 2.000 years ago. Even with simple tools compared to ours, they were able to distribute sweet water kilometers and kilometers. The picture here under is the “Pont du Gard” in France, constructed by the Romans +/- in the year 40 AC

In contradiction with the enormous works humankind has realized to adapt our world to our needs for growing our civilization, there are some minor points at this moment.

• We are NOT able to control the CO² in the atmosphere • Sweet water availability for the future seems to become a problem.

The projects mentioned above were huge projects on which civilizations have worked for generations and they are still working on it to keep the realized projects in good condition. On all these projects, some extended cost calculations are made, and with these calculations, decisions are taken to proceed with the project or not. But, very often is forgotten that the basic idea of the project is just an idea of 1 man. Nowadays, we are used to the knowledge

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 15 / 92

that there are several cables between the States and Europe. But, very often is forgotten that Mr. Samuel Morse already dreamt of a trans-Atlantic cable in 1840. When he should have made a cost calculation at that moment and when he should have presented a feasibility study, everyone would have laughed at him. The idea for the construction of the first trans-Atlantic cables were not based on cost calculation, but they were based on a dream. In modern economics, very often is forgotten that figures serve economics and not that economics have to serve figures. Looking to the examples: we are able to do enormous things, but we are not able to guarantee our basic needs? We are able to reach the moon, but we cannot guarantee clear atmosphere and sweet water for every person in the world for the coming centuries? This is unacceptable!!! Knowing our capabilities as human kind, this is just unacceptable!!! We must see the financial calculations as a detail of the project and follow the dream of a clean world. And: we have to build it up as a good paterfamilias: step by step, day by day, and never stop.

A PERSON WITH A DREAM AND A VISION IS MORE POWERFUL THAN A PERSON WITH FACTS AND FIGURES

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 16 / 92

4. Rivers in Africa It can seem contradictory, but the best example to demonstrate our blindness in common sense on global scale is to look more deeply in the situation of Africa. Africa: continent of great nature and enormous desserts. On global scale, sweet water is getting scarce is the general opinion. Let’s refer back to our paterfamilias who will never open the tap when no water is needed. Not one drop of water will go un-used into the sewage. Also, when possible, he will use rain water, which is freely available. Just normal common sense. On world scale, the tap water – basically -as source of sweet water is just rain. Simple and plain rain. It can come out of a source from the ground, it can be taken out of rivers, but basically, it is just plain rain water. Even worse: when the tap water is used in a household, they have to pay for it. In contraction with a normal household, on global scale, we are getting this for free, day after day, year after year. Free water for all our lifetime, and we have the impression that we are running out availability of sweet water in the near future. We must do something wrong. All rain water comes on the soil, comes in the rivers and goes back to the oceans. Once in the ocean, it is not sweet water anymore. It is lost for direct consumption until it is evaporated again and re-condensed as rain. Or, we can use the expensive way and transfer it into potable water by expensive Reverse Osmosis systems. The argument that there is not enough sweet water for the future is a joke, knowing which water runs into the oceans every second. As basic for calculation, let’s look to the 4 biggest rivers in the continent of Africa. In the table here under is given the flow PER SECOND which goes to the ocean.:

Nile 2.830 m³/s Congo 41.000 m³/s Niger 5.600 m³/s Zambezi 3.400 m³/s Total 52.830 m³/s 1.666.046.880.000 m³/year

In total, only for these 4 rivers, there goes 1.666.046.888.000 m³ sweet water each year to the oceans, and we are expected to believe that we are running out of sweet water in the future? Every year, in the continent of Africa, for only these 4 rivers, +/- 240 m³ water per world habitant is lost in the oceans, and we are saying that we do not have enough sweet water for our future?

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 17 / 92

Or this is a joke, or it is complete blindness of whole human kind. Assuming that this water is used 100% and divided over all people in the world, and assuming that there are living 8 billion people on earth, every person can have more than 200 m³ sweet water per year, only from these 4 rivers. Bringing back this calculation only to the people living in Africa, being +/-1,1 billion, the figure is even more astonishing. The volume of water going yearly to the oceans from only these 4 rivers equals 1.500 m³ water per year per person. 1.500.000 liters sweet water per year per person is going to the oceans, unused, and millions of people in Africa are dying from lack of sweet water. Unacceptable!!! The moment you realize the basics of this calculation, it is a joke to believe that we are running out of sweet water. We only have to make the conclusion that we are spoiling our sweet water in an enormous way and as a consequence we are also ruining our habitat. When you should do the same in your household at home, everyone will say to you that you are an irresponsible person, spoiling natural resources. Again, we must stop making financial cost analyses and just do what is necessary: stop the water on the land going into the oceans. In the first chapters is showed that human kind is capable to realize enormous projects, including projects on water management and water control. In this vision, it is just normal to imagine that we can supply the whole continent of Africa with sweet water. Referring back to the financial calculations: even the cost of a huge project at the end can be profitable. To compare: In August 2014, construction was launched to expand and widen the Ballah Bypass in the Suez Canal for 35 km (22 miles) to speed the canal's transit time. The expansion is expected to double the capacity of the Suez Canal from 49 to 97 ships a day. At a cost of $8.4 billion, this project was funded with interest-bearing investment certificates issued exclusively to Egyptian entities and individuals. The target was to finish the project in 1 year and for that companies from the US, Belgium and The Netherlands. So, 1 country could bear a billion dollar costing project, which gives profit to whole world economy. And of course, it will bring profit to the economy of Egypt also. Projects to improve world environment may not be decided on cost calculations. It must be choice whether we do it or not. Or better: it may not be the question whether we do it or not. The question must be: when are we starting?

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 18 / 92

5. Sahelara We are running out of sweet water. As we know now, as we have demonstrated in earlier chapters, this is not true. We are just spoiling our sweet water. Also, there should be a lack of decent living area for the near future? Again, this is not true. Focus again on the continent of Africa, where we have seen that there is a lot of sweet water, but that it is being spoiled in the oceans. In the middle of Africa, there are 2 dessert areas near to each other: the Sahara and the Sahel. Decades ago, this was fertile land.

Where we have made a calculation that there is plenty of sweet water available for the whole continent of Africa, we can make a similar calculation on possible population density for the Sahel and Sahara together:

• Sahara: o Surface: 9.000.000 km² o Population density at this moment: less than 1 habitant/km²

• Sahel: o Surface: 3.000.000 km² o Population density at this moment: +/- 8 habitants /km²

F.i. the Sahara was the home of some of the earliest Africans of whom there are definite records. Cave paintings found in Algeria and elsewhere in the desert indicate that the Sahara was once a humid and fertile land. They show pastoral scenes and wild animals of the type associated today with Africa's grasslands far to the south. A drying period that began around 5000 BCE lasted several thousand years and resulted in the gradual withdrawal of the inhabitants. These two dessert areas together, let’s call it the Sahelara. I like the sound of the name. This area is the major subject of this study. (of this dream)

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 19 / 92

In total, the Sahelara has a free surface of 12.000.000 m³, with an average density of +/- 3 habitant / km². This population is concentrated mainly in cities and there are thousands and thousands square kilometers of open land, not used. Just sand. Optimizing the living possibilities, compared to an average European country, f.i. Italy, we can have a population density of 200 habitants /km². This gives a theoretical possible living area for +/- 2,4 billion habitants. Roughly spoken, the Sahelara has living space for +/- 30% of the actual world population and it is almost empty. Why is almost nobody living in this area? The only problem is the lack of sweet water. Besides this, the conditions could be the same as in the southern part of the US. It can have the same living conditions like Mexico, Florida and other states in that area. Or, on the other side, it is on the same height as India and Burma. In these countries live millions and millions of people. This must also be possible in the Sahelara. Only, the lack of water is a problem. But, we should ask us the question: is there indeed lack of water in that region, or are we doing something wrong? Again the same figures with only these 4 rivers:

• Water: 1.666.046.880.000 m³ water per year (1.666 billion m³) • Inhabitants:

o 1.1 billion of habitants at this moment in Africa o 2.4 billion of habitants after optimizing Sahelara o Total: 3.5 billion of habitants

• Water availability: +/- 470 m³ per person, per year, in total Africa, only from these 4 rivers.

Conclusion: even when we triple the population in Africa and we optimize water economics in the whole continent, there is sufficient sweet water for the whole population. Nevertheless, at this moment, people are starving because lack of sweet water. Pessimists should say that it is impossible to block all rivers and keep the water on the land. They are right: it is just not realistic to believe that all water can be blocked. Also, this should give a negative effect on environment in the region of the rivers itself. Also, it is not realistic to believe that we can concentrate world population in Africa and triple the average population density of the continent. But, the extremity of the given figures shows us that there is a lot possible before the limits of sweet water and available living space are reached.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 20 / 92

Realism must be used in the project prognosis. Following items must be considered:

• It is not realistic to believe that the population in the Sahelara will explode in one year to 2.2 billion. When this happens, it is a process of years and years. The need of sweet water will grow slowly. In this period of growing population, an enormous buffer in sweet water can be built up stepwise. (and after a certain moment, there will be local water recirculation)

• Bringing sweet water in the center of the continent this year will make that this water is available the next years. The water will be used for:

o Irrigation: o Human consumption o Pools for decoration and recreation o Pools for fish farms o ……

All these water using points will deposit the used water in nature:

o By evaporation o By precipitation in the soil o As waste water in sewage

The water flows will be recirculated:

o The evaporated water will condense and fall down as rain. o The precipitated water will form lakes under the ground, will come out in a

source somewhere else in the land, where it can be re-used o Waste water in sewages will be treated in waste water plants and can be re-

used. Year after year bringing water to the center of the Sahelara will create a growing sweet water buffer. This will create possibilities for a stable growing population. Of course, at the end all the water will come back in the ocean. But, the more water we bring in the center of the Sahelara, the more it will be used in recirculation. Extremely, the region has the same capabilities as the Amazon Forest. Only, we have to start it up.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 21 / 92

6. Lake Chad For doing good household management, there is no need for new and expensive technologies. Only common sense. Bringing this basic philosophy to the Sahelara, we have to keep in mind that there are billions and billions m³ of sweet water just running to the oceans. As basic example, Lake Chad is well placed. It is well placed due to its location, as well as due to its history.

Lake Chad is located below the Sahel, southern part of Sahelara and therefor on the border of the region we are discussing. The surface of the lake is at +/- 280 meters This lake is a beautiful example of the drying out of the nature in this region. In the middle of the 20th century, the surface of this lake was +/- 26.000 km². Nowadays, the surface is only 1/10th. (last information read on the net: surface of +/- 1.300 km²) A decrease in surface of +/- 90% in +/-50 years. The picture here below shows the changes during the last 50 year.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 22 / 92

Estimations are that, 6000 years ago the surface of this lake was +/- 300.000 km. Even at this moment, some rivers are flowing into this lake. But the consumption of water is bigger than the amount of water which coming in the lake. Most of the water coming in Lake Chad comes from the Chari River. And, the main tributary of the Chari river is the Logone river.

The Logone River has a length of +/- 1.000 km and the average flowrate is +/- 500 m³/sec. This with peak in September of +/- 1.600 m³/sec and in March and April only +/- 50m³ / sec. So, a lake with a surface of +/- 1.300 km² is decreasing in surface with an input flow of average 500m³/sec. This just to demonstrate in which dimensions calculations has to be made. Also, a part of the water in the lake is percolating in the bottom under the lake, from where it goes to different lakes and rivers under the ground. Due to this percolating, in contradiction with the Death Sea, Lake Chad is still sweet water. In perspective: some small rivers come in Lake Chad and the level is decreasing. On the other hand, the 4 rivers mentioned earlier in this text, have plenty of water. The flow of the Niger river is 10 times the flow of the Chari river. Lake Chad is in the south of the Sahel. Bringing extra sweet water to lake Chad can change the total water balance of the area, it can bring stability in this area. It is proven that – as human kind – we are able to realize big things:

• We are able to travel to the moon. • We are able to construct the Suez Channel. • We are able to win wasteland from sea.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 23 / 92

As solution to the decreasing level of this lake, we have to see what we can do, how we can act as a good paterfamilias and avoid the complete drying out of this lake in the future. We must be able to bring an artificial river to Lake Chad, starting from the river The Niger or the Congo. Or why not water from the Nile. After raising the level of Lake Chad, it must be possible to construct channels more to the north, deeper in the Sahel desert and finally in the Sahara. This simple example is a drastic solution to change the climate in this region. Worldwide, we have succeeded – unwillingly – to destroy atmosphere and other environmental parameters. For a change, with international corporation, we could improve environmental parameters in the 12.000.000 km² of the Sahelara. Lake Chad is a natural example. With good planning and corporation of all of us, it must be possible to create artificial lakes. Spread over the surface of the Sahelara, we must able to create artificial lakes with a surface of 50 – 100 km² each. Around these lakes, living and working districts can be created for millions and millions of people. As Lake Chad at this moment has a surface of +/- 1.300 km² and we are discussing at this moment lakes of +/- 100 km², we can calculate the input flow needed to create such lakes. Of course, we may not forget that a major part of the water of Lake Chad is percolating in the bottom under the lake. To create stable lakes, the structure of the bottom has to be studied. Of course, it is inevitable that water percolates in the bottom, but this must be minimized as much as possible.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 24 / 92

7. Stepwise irrigation of Sahelara Rome is not built in 1 day. The construction of the Suez Channel is realized in different stages. Very roughly, the modern Suez Canal is constructed from 1850 until 2015, and still it needs maintenance. Building the dykes in Holland, creating extra agricultural area in Flevoland, keeping the country dry beneath sea level, is a work of generations. The creation of a fertile Sahelara has a bigger effect on world environment, on world economy compared with the given examples. We must not be afraid to start a generation lasting project. Looking to the position of the 4 given rivers, we must be able to make some basic conclusions:

er

• The Zambezi river is located too far to the South to be of importance of our theory. Cost for water transport over this distance probably will be too high.

• The upper stream of the Niger River, before joining the Benue River, is ideal placed to give water to the southwest side of Sahelara. Also, the Benue River, on the east side, is very well placed to supply water. This river is very close to Lake Chad.

• Halfway the Congo river is very well placed to bring water stepwise to Lake Chad. • The Nile river is well located to supply east side of Sahelara with water. It is even

well placed to feed Lake Chad directly with the needed artificial canals.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 25 / 92

To work on this project stepwise, there are 2 possible philosophies to follow for the total installation of the project:

• Philosophy with channels: The basis for the total irrigation of the area are a network of channels, starting from the rivers, going into the land.

• Philosophy of piping and buffer zones: The basis for this philosophy is a network of forced pumping in a network of piping and pumping the water from buffering zone to buffering zone and using points

Different philosophies have different background:

• Channels: high capacity, high investment, long term planning. Only effect after long period of work but after realization, they have a very big capacity.

• Piping: lower in capacity, controllable investment, possibility of stepwise building up of capacity and controllable flows in any direction wanted.

Of each philosophy, different specifications must be studied in order to make a well chosen decision.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 26 / 92

8. Philosophy of channels Water can be used in several ways:

• Drinking water / household water • Irrigation water • Carrier for transport • Leisure (swimming, fishing,…) • ….

To transport water from one point to another, it can be done in open channels or it can be done in closed piping. Closed piping has the advantage that there is no influence from the outer world on the water quality and quantity. Also, for lower cost, with closed piping, it is possible to transport the water over longer distances compared with channels. On the other side, transportation in channels has the advantage that these channels can be used for other things also: inland shipping is – when channels are available – a cheap and environmentally friendly way of transport for bulk products. Taking our 3 rivers (Niger, Congo and Nile), points can be chosen where the surrounding has a low degree of slope, so that for hundreds of kilometers a horizontal channel can be constructed. Half way the , Benué river to Lake Chad is a distance of +/- 1.000 km. The Benué River is accessible for inland shipping almost the whole year. Instead of letting flow 100% of the water to the River Niger, it should be calculated to make a channel to Lake Chad. This has a – direct – triple effect: (later in this chapter a little bit more in detail)

• Water going inland instead of outland • Positive effect on inland transport • Irrigation possible in the surroundings of the river

Downstream on the Congo River, a canal can be constructed straight to the north. Once in the neighborhood of Lake Chad, or passing lake Chad on the eastside, a stable flow of water – useable for inland shipping and as source for drinking water or irrigation – will come into the Sahelara. Of course, a lot of water will be absorbed by the soil in which the channels are built. Also, a lot of water will be evaporated. But, this has no negative effect on the basics of the principle:

• Water going in the ground is natural irrigation and will benefit the nature around the channel

• Water evaporating during daytime will condense in nighttime and will have a positive effect on air humidity in general. Higher air humidity stabilizes temperature differences between daytime and nighttime.

Of course, these effects are not noticeable in the beginning, but will grow year after year. A detailed study perhaps can give answers on these questions.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 27 / 92

The disadvantage of making channels is that the control is rather complex. The water will always go to the lowest point. So, detours must be made around mountains and hills. For passing mountains and hills, channels are more difficult to construct or have to follow big deviations. Another solution is to construct canal locks, but this is in contradiction with the basic principle of the project: water must be able to run in free flow from the riverside into the dry area. To take a decision in way of working, channels or piping, it must be calculated the time before something can be realized. To construct channels, it will take years and years. At first a decent study has to be made about of the optimum route to follow. Decision in size and type of the channel and purpose of the channel also has to be made. Will it be just a channel, excavated in the surface, or will it be a concrete channel. The excavated channel is the cheapest to construct, but most water will disappear in the ground in the first years. The concrete channel is the most expensive, but it will bring the water where it must be. The next question is if the channel only will be used for transport of water, or that it also will be used for inland shipping. At a certain moment, budget calculations will be made. The cost of making channels is difficult to estimate, difficult to calculate. Mostly for this type of jobs is the effective cost after realization always higher, compared to the initial calculated cost. Knowing that it will take years and years before water transport in massive way is possible, the option of the piping and buffer zones must be studied in the first place. As example of a channel, the Benue River can be taken. As seen, the Benue River it the major tributary to the Niger river. But, also, it is the closest to Lake Chad. The total flow of the Niger River on point of confluence, the Niger river has only a flow of 2.500 m³/sec and the Benue River has a flow of 3.600 m³/sec. Having a closer look to this Benue River, the closest one to Lake Chad, we notice that it sources in Cameroon. The river crosses Lake Lagdo in Cameroon, and this on a height of +/- 213 meter. The confluence of the Benue River and Niger River is near Lokoya, which has an elevation of +/- 37 meter. On the other hand, we have seen that Lake Chad has an elevation level of +/- 280 meters.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 28 / 92

This means that the rivers located more south have an elevation level which is lower, compared with the level of Lake Chad. Natural flowing channels, how ideal this solution should be, are impossible. Correction: are almost impossible. Taking back the example of Sea of Galilee in Israel: The elevation level of the Sea of Galilee is minus 216 meter. Nevertheless, the people of Israel succeeded in bringing this water up to sea level and irrigate with this water big parts of the country with irrigation channels. Question only is if this is the best project to start with.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 29 / 92

9. Philosophy of a network of piping with buffer zones We are able to transport oil and gas in pipelines of thousands and thousands of kilometers. Oil is an hazardous product, so that the pipelines have to be of high standard. We are able to transport natural gas over the same distances in explosion proof pipelines. These pipelines are operating under a pressure of 60 bar or more. There are also existing projects for huge water transports, but these are less known in the world. Knowing it is possible, knowing that the technology exists, we must look to the option for using it in an optimum way.

Working with long term planning for the future, a stepwise construction is advisable. The following steps are included:

• Over the length of a chosen river, on different points are constructed collection points near the river.

• In these collection points, there are buffer / sedimentation zones. This to assure that the water is free from sediment because sediment has a negative effect on pipelines.

• Heavy duty pumps for pumping the water in the pipelines • Selected pipelines will guide the water from collection point to collection point in the

direction of the Sahelara. Projects are known with a flow capacity of 4.250 m³ per hour.

• Optimum must be calculated for length of piping, counter pressure, flow and cost of buffer zones. Estimating that every 250 km there is a buffer zone, with +/- 3 – 5 intervals up north, the water of the Niger river is in the center of the Sahelara. (distance of Niger river to center Sahelara: +/- 1.500 km Distance of Congo River to center Sahelara: +/- 3.000 km) In this calculation example, we do not mention the river Nile. The Nile goes from south to north and is parallel to the dessert. To work with this river, piping distances of 100 km gives already a very big effect. F.i., in a direct line, the distance between the Nile and the Siwa oasis is only 500 km. When working from the Nile, option

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 30 / 92

should be studied to go in parallel lines of several buffering points, going from east to west. (option calculated separately later on)

• In each buffer zone, several pipelines come together, or from each buffer zone water is diverted into several directions.

• From each buffer zone, a part of the water is distributed in the direct area, and a part is pumped more in the direction of the center of the Sahelara

• Each buffer zone is the center for a new economic / ecologic area. Working like this, a network of water transporting lines and big buffer zones will be created. Later more about this. In this, it must be mentioned that I have read some other studies about drinking water supply to the dry area of Africa. But, the negative point of these studies is that they start from desalination of salted water. Desalination of water is a continuous cost. Besides the huge investment in the installations, there is always a big operational cost. Our theory is based on the massive flow of sweet water running to the oceans every second. The cost for transferring river water into drinking water if much lower compared to desalination units. In our theory, the major cost is the investment in piping. The same piping which is needed for the transport of the desalinated water. The basics for the setup of the projects are different. When using desalination units to produce potable water and transport this potable water into dry areas, the steps to follow are:

• Collection of salted water in the ocean • Desalination • Transport of water • Arriving in end points, decreasing the input volume with the losses • Dividing the potable water over different users:

o Households o Irrigation o ….

Also it must be calculated with the fact that desalination units are expensive and during production, a lot of energy is needed. So, water losses are very expensive, because all the energy for desalination is lost. In our way of calculation, it is much more simple:

• Collection of SWEET water near rivers • Transport of the water • Arriving in end points, decreasing the input volume with the losses • Dividing the SWEET water over different users:

o Irrigation, without treatment o Drinking water treatment plants, to produce potable water

Knowing that for first option, the desalination unit costs extra investment and energy, it is better not to invest in this and use the available budget for higher investments in pipelines.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 31 / 92

Also the energy saved for not using desalination plants can be used for the transport of the water in the pipelines. Also another small factor which cannot be neglected: salted water for desalination comes from the ocean. Sweet water comes from rivers. Rivers are located more close to the dry areas than the oceans. Having our decision for the transport of river water from south to north, it is easy to make a rough budget estimation of the cost. Calculation should be separated in several parts:

• Collection buffers near rivers • Pump installations • Piping • Intermediate and final buffer zones

It is obvious that the major cost will be the hundreds and hundreds of kilometers of piping. At this moment, it is impossible for me to give an exact cost price per km of pipeline. As Out of literature on the net (project in Dakota, from a series of wells along the Missouri river) the following figures are found:

• Length of pipeline: 400 miles : 640 km • 27,2 millions of gallons water per day = 4.250 m³ per hour • Cost: $360 million. Estimate $=€, so €360 million • Cost per km: €600.000 • Calculating a safety margin for auxiliaries €100.000, which gives a total cost of

€700.000,- per km. The cost of the $360 million is including the pumps and so on, but as safety margin, we only take this cost for pipelines. Exact calculation is much cheaper, but as budget is started with a very big safety margin. Exact calculations, whit exchange rate of 1 Euro = 1,11 U$D, we have the following figures:

640 Km 360 milj. U$D 324 Milj. Euro

506.250 Euro/km

As taken in the calculation a budget of €700.000,- per km and the figures indicate only a need of €506.000,- , there is a safety margin of 40% in these calculations. Also, when the project is bigger, the investment cost per km will be lower. All further calculations will be made with the investment cost of €700.000,- per km. This figures is acceptable for each single pipeline.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 32 / 92

In our calculations, with the target to have very big flow rates per hour, it can be advisable to work with parallel pipelines. As a standard in our calculation, we will work with blocks of 3 parallel pipelines in every section. As we calculate with an investment cost per km per straight single pipeline, the total cost at the end will be cheaper because installation of parallel pipelines is cheaper than single pipelines. But as safety margin, we keep the €700.000,- per km per pipeline. Take the two different rivers and bring water from south to north. From the center of the flow area of each river, we calculate the distance needed to reach the center of the Sahelara. This distance will be taken as calculation figure. For theoretical construction, dimensions are taken from existing piping dimensions. This to be able to calculate back. In the table here under, parallel pipelines are calculated from south to north.

Niger River 5.600 m³/sec Flow per pipe 4.250 m³/hour Cost per km piping, incl. auxiliaries € 700.000,00

number of pipelines total km Total cost in

millions of Euro m³/hour m³/year % of flow of river

3 4.500 € 3.150 12.750 111.690.000 0,06% 6 9.000 € 6.300 25.500 223.380.000 0,13% 9 13.500 € 9.450 38.250 335.070.000 0,19% 12 18.000 € 12.600 51.000 446.760.000 0,25% 15 22.500 € 15.750 63.750 558.450.000 0,32% 18 27.000 € 18.900 76.500 670.140.000 0,38% 21 31.500 € 22.050 89.250 781.830.000 0,44% 24 36.000 € 25.200 102.000 893.520.000 0,51% 27 40.500 € 28.350 114.750 1.005.210.000 0,57% 30 45.000 € 31.500 127.500 1.116.900.000 0,63% Congo River 41.000 m³/sec Flow per pipe 4.250 m³/hour Cost per km piping, incl. auxiliaries € 700.000,00

number of pipelines total km Total cost m³/hour m³/year % of flow

of river

3 9.000 € 6.300 12.750 111.690.000 0,01% 6 18.000 € 12.600 25.500 223.380.000 0,02% 9 27.000 € 18.900 38.250 335.070.000 0,03% 12 36.000 € 25.200 51.000 446.760.000 0,03% 15 45.000 € 31.500 63.750 558.450.000 0,04% 18 54.000 € 37.800 76.500 670.140.000 0,05% 21 63.000 € 44.100 89.250 781.830.000 0,06% 24 72.000 € 50.400 102.000 893.520.000 0,07% 27 81.000 € 56.700 114.750 1.005.210.000 0,08% 30 90.000 € 63.000 127.500 1.116.900.000 0,09%

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 33 / 92

As mentioned, for capacity reasons, because the water availability is very big and the need is also big, the calculation is made with 3 parallel piping lines per section. This also reduces the cost for land labor and the costs related to that. Also, for maintenance reasons, it is better to work with parallel lines instead of single lines.

The auxiliary components are:

• Intermediate buffer zones • Pumps • Infrastructure • Renewable energy installations for the electricity needed for pumping (solar panels,

windmills, ...)

Also, the given figures are only very rough estimation. Also, depending on the “political” decisions, different calculations can be made. It was mentioned that the figures were very rough. Following remarks have to be made:

• The rivers: o Niger: Average estimated distance needed is 1.500 km to bring the water from

the middle point of the river to the middle point of the Sahelara.

o Congo: Average estimated distance needed is 3.000 km to bring the water from the middle point of the river to the middle point of the Sahelara.

• The total investment is in billions of Euro. But, with the investment for the total of 2

rivers and 30 pipelines per river, we come to a total investment of +/- €95 billion. For this money, there is a stable flow of minimum 2.23 billion m³ water per year into the Sahelara. We have to admit that the total is a huge cost. To compare, here under the figure of budgets of defense of 10 European countries:

Country budget (figures 2009) U$D Euro UK $ 69.271.000.000 € 62.343.900.000 France $ 67.316.000.000 € 60.584.400.000 Germany $ 48.022.000.000 € 43.219.800.000 Italy $ 37.427.000.000 € 33.684.300.000 Spain $ 19.409.000.000 € 17.468.100.000 Netherlands $ 12.642.000.000 € 11.377.800.000 Sweden $ 6.098.000.000 € 5.488.200.000 Norway $ 6.098.000.000 € 5.488.200.000 Belgium $ 5.674.000.000 € 5.106.600.000 Denmark $ 4.476.000.000 € 4.028.400.000 Total $ 276.433.000.000 € 248.789.700.000

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 34 / 92

For a capacity of 2.23 billion of m³ sweet water supply to the Sahelara, there is a budget needed of +/- 34% of the yearly budget of defense of 10 European countries. To be realistic, this project is a project for 20 years minimum. The effective cost per year on this project will be 3 – 4 billion of Euro, which is just a fraction +/- 1% of the military budget of 10 countries. To create a stable water flow possibility for irrigation land for millions and millions of people, the basic investment needed is just a fraction of the military budget. It is not my target to eliminate the budget of defense and use the money for this project. I just want to show that the needed budget for this project is only small, compared with the budgets used for defense.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 35 / 92

10. The network: Working with a network of pipelines and buffer zones give possibilities, but dimensions have to be set. Building a network, creating a system of veins in a country doesn’t need much explanation. Comparing a network with the veins of a human body makes it very clear what the target is. Once the veins are designed, the creation buffer zones, the stability of water supply and the energy cost to maintain the network are the main issue. What is the purpose of the buffer zones? The basic idea of the project is that there is a stable part of the flow from our chosen rivers which is pumped into the Sahelara. Theoretically, this is translated in the following remarks:

• Create a buffer for moments that the feeding lines are interrupted, to avoid that the system further in the country has no water anymore

• Create buffer volume for moments that the extracting pumps are broken or other calamities.

Starting from pipelines with a flow of 4.250 m³ per hour, the next estimations of buffer capacity in m³ can be made:

Number of pipes 1 2 3 4 5 6

Weeks of buffering 5 3.570.000 7.140.000 10.710.000 14.280.000 17.850.000 21.420.000

10 7.140.000 14.280.000 21.420.000 28.560.000 35.700.000 42.840.000 15 10.710.000 21.420.000 32.130.000 42.840.000 53.550.000 64.260.000 20 14.280.000 28.560.000 42.840.000 57.120.000 71.400.000 85.680.000 25 17.850.000 35.700.000 53.550.000 71.400.000 89.250.000 107.100.000 30 21.420.000 42.840.000 64.260.000 85.680.000 107.100.000 128.520.000 35 24.990.000 49.980.000 74.970.000 99.960.000 124.950.000 149.940.000 40 28.560.000 57.120.000 85.680.000 114.240.000 142.800.000 171.360.000 45 32.130.000 64.260.000 96.390.000 128.520.000 160.650.000 192.780.000 50 35.700.000 71.400.000 107.100.000 142.800.000 178.500.000 214.200.000 55 39.270.000 78.540.000 117.810.000 157.080.000 196.350.000 235.620.000 60 42.840.000 85.680.000 128.520.000 171.360.000 214.200.000 257.040.000

Table: theoretical buffer capacity in m³, per buffer period and per number of pipelines The project has to start – with maximum capacity in manpower – as close as possible near to the rivers. Starting near to the rivers, the network has to be built stepwise into the direction of the Sahelara. The target is to start pumping as soon as possible. The target cannot be to have from the start water in the center of the Sahelara. Just taking it from the rivers and bringing it in the direction of the Sahelara is the start. The moment water starts pumping, this has to be collected.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 36 / 92

The given figures are meant to be about 50% volume of the buffer zone. After starting pumping, calculating with a buffer period of 1 year (60 weeks for calculation), per pipeline there must be a buffer capacity of 42.840.000 m³ multiplied by 2. The figures can seem to be enormous, but we may not forget it is a long term project. Start pumping the water, start filling the first buffer zone in line, it may take 1 – 2 years before the next part of the pipeline is ready. Also, the moment the first part is ready, local consumption can start. Knowing the number of pipelines to be constructed, knowing the time of buffering, needed surface can be calculated. As estimated depth of buffer zone is 5 meters, the “available lagoon” depth must be 10 meters. This gives us the following possible calculations for surface needed:

Number of pipes 1 2 3 4 5 6 Weeks of buffering 5 71 143 214 286 357 428 10 143 286 428 571 714 857 15 214 428 643 857 1.071 1.285 20 286 571 857 1.142 1.428 1.714 25 357 714 1.071 1.428 1.785 2.142 30 428 857 1.285 1.714 2.142 2.570 35 500 1.000 1.499 1.999 2.499 2.999 40 571 1.142 1.714 2.285 2.856 3.427 45 643 1.285 1.928 2.570 3.213 3.856 50 714 1.428 2.142 2.856 3.570 4.284 55 785 1.571 2.356 3.142 3.927 4.712 60 857 1.714 2.570 3.427 4.284 5.141 Table: surface of buffer zones in hectares

Working with these enormous surfaces, care must be taken on selection of buffer zones. Optimum is to start with natural valleys. To optimize, artificial digging out of some sections can be used. Discussion also must be made about the chosen depth of the lakes. Compare this again with Lake Chad. The surface is +/- 1.360 km, but with an average depth of +/- 1,5 meter. Due to the huge area, a lot of water percolates in the soil. To avoid randomly percolation, best is to have small surfaces and reasonable depths of the lakes. Working on such surfaces, with continuous flow of water, these buffering lakes also can be used for fish cultures. Having these surfaces in natural valleys, in the beginning, a lot of water will be percolated in the soil. This is no problem, because at the end, the water will come out somewhere else. The major target is to bring water to the Sahelara where it is a source of life. The calculation

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 37 / 92

is not only for production of drinking water. The target is to create a basic good environment in which the growth of life in the widest form is possible. As it is on the same distance north from the equator as Florida, this area has perfect climatic conditions for a wealthy nature. Assume that only after the first year of work, 1 line of triple pipelines from the Niger River is ready, 250 km up to the north. This gives 110.000.000 m³ water per year. As always, very rough calculation: 100 m³ per year per inhabitant. This gives water for +/- 1 million of people, 250 km up north. The year after, a second group of 3 pipelines starting from the river, and 3 pipelines going from the first buffer zone more north. This gives in total water for +/- 2 million inhabitants. Just working – with major manpower – at a rate of a triple pipeline, for 250 km, this will give a yearly growth of living possibility for 1 million persons per year. At a certain moment, the calculations have to be made differently. We have assumed 100 m³ per year per person. This is far too much. But the water will percolate in the soil, the water will be used by plants, the water evaporates and come back as rain (at the end, when a lot of water evaporates and condenses). Also, the water used by the inhabitants will be collected in sewage systems, will pass water treatment plants and will be guided to the buffer zones again. There will come a circulation of water and the available amount of water will grow slowly a little bit faster than the input by the network of pipelines. This is the effect of water circulation. Another effect will also take place. The moment the project shows to be successful, more people (and politicians) start to believe in it and more energy (money) will be given to realize and optimize the project. Also, the area will be more accessible and more and more people will be able to work on these pipelines. As basis for calculations, we have mentioned a section of 250 km of triple pipelines per year. This for the first year. Every year, there will come an extra 250 km of pipelines. To be realistic and a little bit optimistic, we can assume there will be an annual growth in pipeline building every year with 10%. This will give the following theoretical calculation

Year km Possible

extra inhabitants

Total possible inhabitants

1 250 1.000.000 1.000.000 2 275 1.100.000 2.100.000 3 303 1.210.000 3.310.000 4 333 1.331.000 4.641.000 5 366 1.464.100 6.105.100 6 403 1.610.510 7.715.610 7 443 1.771.561 9.487.171 8 487 1.948.717 11.435.888 9 536 2.143.589 13.579.477 10 589 2.357.948 15.937.425 Table: theoretical possible growth per year in km of pipelines and inhabitants

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 38 / 92

For this, we have to recognize the following parameters:

• The positive effect on local environment • There are more people available in the neighborhood to work on the pipelines, • There will be created economic activity in the region which gives extra funds

The moment the political decision is fallen to start with this project, this estimation is very pessimistic. It was already stated that the cost for 1 km of pipeline was €700.000. This gives a cost for 250 km of triple pipelines of €525.000.000. Coming back to our calculation for investment, we have stated that, for good progress of the project, there is a need of 3 – 4 billion of Euros per year. Our calculations can be tripled to start with. So, after 1 year, there is water availability for +/- 3.000.000 people. Of course, this is just the calculation for the water availability. Other items like roads, buildings and so on are just an economic calculation. The basis is the water.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 39 / 92

11. Determination of project parameters: What are the exact parameters of the project? The end target is to transfer the Sahelara into a livable area. The major need in this is to bring sweet water to that area. But, there is also another need: creation of residential areas. This needs the construction of roads, houses, energy distribution, sewage and other things. The question raises what is the focus of the project?

• Bringing water to the Sahelara? • Creation of the livable area.

The basis of the project, the main focus must be: bringing water to the Sahelara. Even without people living in this area, it will have effect on the ecological system of the entire world. Big quantities of sweet water will create possibility for massive plant growth. This plant growth will consume big quantities of CO², so that the effect on greenhouse gas in the future will be measurable. Depending on the amount of water which is transported and made available and the start of plant growth, this will have a fast effect or not. The basic is: even without creation of livable area, districts for people to live in, this project is advisable to be started. It will have an effect on the world balance of CO² and whole world population will have profit of it on long term future.. The second part: livable area: is it needed or not, and who will take profit of it? This part has to be separated in two parts:

• Building constructions • Infrastructure

The building constructions are for the profit of the people who use them.

• Houses for the people who live in them • Industrial plants for factories • Sports infrastructure for members • ….. •

Infrastructure is for the community who uses it. Conclusion of this is that investment in the project should be done on 3 levels:

• Water network – as main focus: global responsibility, must be funded by all countries worldwide. Or, because this project is for the Sahelara, located in Africa, it should be funded only by Africa, Europe and the Middle East. The US can have their own projects to

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 40 / 92

fertilize dry areas on their continent. Australia also has his own projects for water distribution.

• Infrastructure: responsibility of local government.

This can be financed by world bank, but the costs at the end must be carried by the people / organizations who use this infrastructure.

o Roads must be financed by road / car taxes o Railways by rail companies o Electricity networks must be paid by the users of the network o Sewage systems: taxes just like in every country worldwide o …..

• Building constructions: must be paid by people who use them. Houses can be built by big real estate companies, but must be rented by, or sold to private persons. Or, at the start of the Sahelara project, cheap land can be sold to private persons who are willing to live there and build their own house. This is comparable with the example in the Netherlands, after winning land from the sea, farmers were promoted to live and invest in that area. For the industrial plants and so the same. And, a lot of industry is possible in this area. Industry mainly focused on energy production and biomass production.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 41 / 92

12. The Nile: As earlier mentioned, starting from the river Nile is different than with the other 2 rivers. The Nile goes from south to north and is very close to the dessert. From the Nile to the Siwa Oasis, it is only 500 km, and this is completely in the center off the dessert. In fact, it should be sufficient to spread the water of the Nile over the area, and we can start building our living districts. Here, we do other calculations than with the Niger and the Congo. We create lines from east to west. Each line starts on the border of the Nile with a multiple pipeline. Description of the sections:

• Each section is – for calculation purposes – 100 km. • Near the Nile, 12 parallel pipelines start • Every 100 km a buffer zone where the next section pipelines starts • The first section will have – for calculation – 12 pipelines. • The second section will have 3 pipelines less.

Nile 2.830 m³/sec Flow per pipe 4.250 m³/hour Cost per km piping, incl. auxiliaries € 700.000,00

Number of pipelines

total km Total cost m³/hour m³/year % of flow

of river

Section 1 12 1.200 € 840.000.000 51.000 446.760.000 0,50% Section 2 9 900 € 630.000.000 38.250 335.070.000 Section 3 6 600 € 420.000.000 25.500 223.380.000 Section 4 3 300 € 210.000.000 12.750 111.690.000 Total cost €2.100.000.000 Working in this way, after completion of 1 line from east to west, we have created 4 buffering zones with each an available water quantity of +/- 110.000.000 m³ per year. Having the same calculation as for the other rivers, having a buffer capacity of 1 year and a depth of 10 meter, the surface of the lakes is +/- 10 km². Working stepwise, the budgets for this project are rather low, compared with the other rivers. Knowing that, with 12 parallel pipelines, we only take 0,5% of the flow of the Nile, it is for the water balance no problem to install 5 or 10 parallel lines over the total length of the Nile. Or, instead of working with pipelines of 4.250 m³ per hour working with bigger pipelines. There is the availability of water, why not use it?

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 42 / 92

13. Stepwise project planning: For a project of this size, it is advisable to work independently and simultaneously on different parts independently, without interference from one part to another. For this, the project has to be divided in its segments. For a total line, starting from river to the final endpoint, the following independent sections can be made:

• Water pumping zone – input buffer zone o Buffer area o Auxiliary complex / pumping facilities

• Pipelines Including intermediate pumping stations to maintain sufficient pressure in the pipe.

• Water receiving zone – exit buffer zone o Buffer area o Drinkwater production and distribution o Living area o Agricultural irrigation system o Infrastructure

At first, 2 types of zones have to be located:

• Extraction zones at the riverside • Buffer zones having optimum natural facilities to be used as lakes

Having these, the next things have to be done: At the water pumping zone:

• Near the rivers have to be installed artificial lakes, in which a part of the water of the river can be diverted. Construction best to compare with swimming pools. It must be big lakes, in order to optimize settling of sand and other disturbing components. The less pollution present in the water, the cheaper the maintenance of the pipelines

• Near the artificial lakes, on overflow points of these lakes where the clean water comes, extraction pits have to be made. It must be in extraction pits on the outside of the artificial lakes. In the artificial lakes, timewise, there must be sludge collection from the bottom, due to settling of sand and other components coming out of the river. To do this in an optimum way, the relation between volume and surface must be designed to allow laminar flow in which sand and other sediments will settle easy. To optimize this, perhaps huge lamellar separators can be installed.

• Fields of renewable energy production has to be installed nearby. This can be solar cells, windmills or a combination.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 43 / 92

This is comparable with the project of Morocco. This country is going to install a solar power plant of 10.000 hectares with concentrated solar power units. (100 km²). The target is a production capacity of 2.000 Mega Watt.

Also, the electricity produced in daytime can partially be transferred into hydrogen, which can be transported or stored to be used elsewhere or later when needed. At the end, there can be 24 availability of electricity. Besides batteries, hydrogen is a clean renewable energy transmitter. Production of hydrogen is simple, storage is difficult. Small buffering has to be made, with respect to all safety parameters needed for hydrogen storage.

At the water receiving areas:

• The surroundings of the buffering lake have to be determined. In earlier calculations, it shows that the lakes will have a surface of 3.000 – 5.000 hectares or even bigger. When we calculate with an average of 4.000 hectares (=40km²), we can calculate the surface around it. It is obvious that around the lake, there will be a rather moist atmosphere, compared with normal conditions in the Sahelara. This is optimum for starting up growth of diverse types of plants. A choice can be made if the plants are for decoration (parks, flower zones, forest area, grass zones, …) or that it will be used as agricultural area. After the area is determined, massive dosing of manure can be executed. Manure in the soil, with a big organic component, holds the water better than dry sand. This area must be a buffer zone between the lake and living areas to be constructed around the lake.

• Area for renewable energy has to be constructed.

Again, comparable with Morocco. The 10.000 ha power plant produces 2000 Mega Watt. With a population of 33 million people, this plant will cover +/- 38% of the needs of the country. Very rough calculated, for 1 million people there is a need of a power plant of +/- 8 km².

• Drinking water plant has to be constructed. This plant takes water from the lake and feeds the living area. Depending on the cost calculation, 2 options are possible:

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 44 / 92

o One big unit for each lake and network of piping starting from this unit o Several smaller units around the lake, for each living unit, and only

interconnecting piping for redundancy. Calculated with the earlier mentioned 40 km², the periphery around the lake is +/- 30 km. Optimum could be on each side of the lake 1 big drinking water plant, with 1 interconnecting pipeline. From this drinking water plant, living areas are fed.

• Starting from the lake, a double water net has to be installed o Water for irrigation in parks and agricultural area o Water for consumption

• Sewage system to collect all used water in an optimum way. In conformity with the

drinking water supply, the sewage system should follow the same lines. Coming near to the lake again, a waste water treatment plant should be installed. The treated water from this waste water plant should flow back to the lake. This sewage system should include some items which are difficult to install in existing networks. Main part is the separation of the solids near to the polluting zones. These solids are mainly organic. Each small district should have a solid collection point. The reason for this is multiple:

o Solids in the sewage system are cause of obstruction. Removal as close as possible to the point of discharge, the long sewage lines to the water treatment plant are always free of solids

o When collected in early phase, this has a double effect: § When solids remain too long in water, hydrolysis takes place. Due to

this hydrolysis, solids become solvable and cannot be removed anymore in a mechanical way. To remove them, the water has to pass a biological waste water treatment plant. The operation of a water treatment plant consumes a lot of energy for mixing the water with oxygen.

§ When organic components are too long in the water, in the absence of oxygen, methane fermentation takes place. This biological process transforms organic components into methane gas, and this comes in the atmosphere. Methane is a greenhouse gas and we do not want this in our atmosphere. Better is to concentrate the organic solids and bring this to a controlled biogas fermenter. In this fermenter, we recuperate the methane and can use it as an energy source.

Collected in early phase, the organics are still valuable as energy source for our methane reactors.

Knowing all these parameters, it is possible to design the optimum structure for a new district.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 45 / 92

A pretty example is to compare with is Paris:

Paris is a beautiful example of a structure build starting from a center and all roads go to that center. In this case, the center is the “Place d’Etoile”, with the “Arc de Triomphe”. In our districts, each center should be the major lake. The structure to follow for building up the district is also very logical:

• In the first years, when the water volume in a lake is not stable yet, the best is to live as near as possible to the lake. This minimizes costs for infrastructure, although plans for further expansion should be ready.

• The longer the system works, the more water availability. A big part in this is also the recuperation of used water by the sewage systems and waste water treatment plants. We are raised with the idea that people consume water. Instead of believing that we are consuming water, we must accept the idea that we just are recirculating water as a catalyst of life.

In the following schema is shown the optimum structure. Knowing that the surface of the lake is +/- 40 km², the following items should be kept in mind:

• Green area: This area is the buffer zone for the increasing or decreasing of water volume in the lake. But besides that, it gives perfect possibilities to create leisure zones.

• Living area:

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 46 / 92

In the beginning phase, before the people come to live in it, attention should be paid to the following structures:

o Shopping centers o Schools o Administration centers o Communication network

Concerning the communication network, a major question should be answered: is it useful to give space to competition for several players or is it better to install 1 big regional network, controlled by the district government (or Sahelara government). In Belgium, there are 2 different networks: cable and phone line. They are competing each other, but finally, it is not clear if the customer, the end user, has profit of this competition. Even with this competition, Belgium is one of the most expensive countries in Europe when it concerns internet costs. In our humble opinion, the big cost for this system can be explained in 2 ways:

o There are 2 different – non compatible – networks, while 1 network should be sufficient. Instead of choosing for 1 type, the rules are made at this moment in a way that a double network has to be constructed. Compare it with the supply of gas, electricity or water. No one will accept that there is a double network of each. On the single networks of electricity and gas, different competitors supply energy to the final customer. The customer can choose his supplier, but there is only one network per product

o Instead of corporation between the competitors, each network has a big budget for publicity to attract customers who are connected to the network of the competitor. A lot of tariff formulae are made to attract the customers, but at the end, the customers do not understand anymore the difference between all the formulae.

Choosing for 1 type of technology, choosing for 1 network, does not mean that there can be no competition in communication suppliers. In Belgium, one of the two different communication networks (Belgacom network) is able to connect the customers with different suppliers. This should also be possible in the districts.

• Outer area: In this area, different items can be located:

o Industry o Renewable energy plants o Algae production units (in a later chapter)

The infrastructure must be foreseen in a way that in the center, the people will live and the working area will be on the outside of each district. With good network of public transport, comparable with the Japanese circular train system, it must be possible to go to work without the use of private cars.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 47 / 92

With a surface of 40 km², working in a circle, the diameter of the lake is +/- 7,5 km. Working in concentric circles, each with extra diameter of 7,5 km, we have the following total diameter per district: 30 km. The following surfaces are included:

Lake

Drinking water plant

Waste water plant

Drinking water plant

Waste water plant

Green zone

Living area

Renewable energy plant

Renewable energy plant

Algae production unit

Algae production unit

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 48 / 92

Diameter Total surface Surface for section Including

km km² km²

7,5 44,16 44,16 Lake

15 176,63 132,47 Drinkwater plant Waste water treatment Leisure space Agriculture Parks

22,5 397,41 220,78 Living district Schools Administration

30 706,50 309,09 Renewable energy plant Algae production Industry in general

To compare a little bit: Paris has a surface of +/- 105 km², and it has +/- 2,2 million inhabitants. This means that, in the living area of the district alone, with a population density almost half of Paris, 1 district can have more than 2 million inhabitants. Just as background information, some figures for dimensioning a district.

• Calculating with the model of Morocco for the solar cells, calculating the need of 2,2 million of people, there is a need of +/- 1.600 ha of solar cells, or 16 km². The available space for industry is more than 300 km².

• When we calculate 100 m³ per year of water per inhabitant – which is the double of the European standard – there is a need of 220 million m³ water per year. This are 6 pipelines of each 4.250 m³ per hour, which we have taken as standard for our calculation.

• Each district, including the lake, including living area, industrial area, has a surface of

+/- 700 km². For long time planning – hundreds of years - estimate that we realize that 10% of the Sahelara is filled with districts. The total surface is 12 million km². 1,2 million km² of surface for districts gives us the possibility of building 1.700 districts. 1.700 districts with each 2,2 million of inhabitants gives us the possibility to house more than 3,5 billion of people in that region, which is at this moment half of world population

• 3,5 billion of people in the Sahelara, each needing 100 m³ water per year, gives us the need of 350 billion m³ water. Having the Nile, The Congo river and the Niger river, in total we have a flow of 49.430 m³/second, or +/- 1.550 billion m³/year.. The need for creating living area for 3,5 billion of inhabitants for the Sahelara needs only

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 49 / 92

+/- 25% of the flow of these rivers, having the pessimistic assumption that there is no recirculation of water after all these years.

• Assuming that each district has 50 km² of algae production (see chapter later in the book). In total, for the 1.700 districts, we have 85.000 km² (8.500.000 ha) of algae production. 200 tons of biomass per year per ha gives 1,7 billion of tons of biomass production per year. Doing this, we have the possibility to control ourselves the CO² content in the atmosphere.

We also can put it a little bit in a political perspective. The moment of writing this, the crisis of the refugees of Syria is actual. Imagining the fact that Turkey is negotiating for 6 billion Euro to help in this problem, perhaps we should use this money to build up a first district in the Sahelara. As calculated, with 6,3 billion, it is possible to install 6 parallel pipelines from the Niger river, up to the north into the Sahelara. This is for a total flow of +/- 225 million m³ water per year. Knowing that it is calculated up to 1.500 km from the Niger river up to the north, knowing that we have to work stepwise, the calculation can be adapted. For the same investment, we could start with 12 parallel pipelines up to halfway the center of the Sahelara, which is still +/- 750 km north from the Niger river. This investment gives a flow of +/- 450 million m³ water per year. This gives us water for 4,5 million of inhabitants. Even better, but more concentrated: when we start with the pipelines from the Nile, the distances are much shorter. When just constructing section 1 pipelines, (12 parallel pipelines from the Nile to the first buffer zone), we only have an investment of +/- 840 million euro. These 12 pipelines give sufficient water for 4,5 million of people. Of course, the investment is only calculated for the installation of the pipelines, with buffering zones. The investment for the infrastructure for the districts has to come from other funds. This is – on global scale – easy to do as will be illustrated in a later chapter.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 50 / 92

14. Effects Pumping water into the direction of the Sahelara, into the dessert gives the following effects:

• Near to the channels and buffer zones by which we are guiding the water to destination, there is a direct growth of plants.

• Raising surfaces of water in the desserts gives a reasonable water evaporation in daytime.

• Evaporation in daytime gives condense in nighttime. In the beginning very little, stepwise it will become more.

• More natural growth of plants is a buffer in CO². (see also the chapter on the algae) • Very, very little, the raise of sea level is decreased, because less water floats to the

oceans. Also, in literature is found that the level of the ocean is not increasing that fast, because of the effect that the globe reacts as a sponge.

Due to the combination of these effects, the temperature during daytime will go down a little bit and the night temperature will not go down so deep. Of course, the stabilization effect of evaporation, rain, growth of plants, the effect of temperature stabilization and so on is only reached after years of continuous pumping water to this area. Pumping water into the dessert seems to be an impossible job. Nothing less is the truth. Coming back to the Suez Channel:

• Total length is +/- 190 km • Average width at 11 meters depth: 225 m • Average depth: 11 meters • Average volume of this channel is 470 million m³

When we convert this volume into a channel of a channel of 5 meters deep and 20 meters width: this gives a total length of +/- 4.700 km. The Suez channel is constructed mainly for trade reasons, to make shipping from the East to Europe shorter in time. Making the channels for bringing sweet water from the River Niger (or Congo, Nile or Zambezi) to the center of Sahelara, this will have a positive effect on environmental conditions worldwide. Also, we may not forget the possible economic effects on global scale. Starting from dessert, we create an extra continent of livable area with enormous possibilities on energy production and biomass production.

• Energy production with solar energy • Biomass production with the installation of huge algae production plants

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 51 / 92

Knowing the positive effects on environment of bringing water in the Sahelara, there are more effects to calculate with.

• Constructing channels needs a lot of working people. • When not only channels are used, but also piping to overcome difficult areas, more

workers and industry is needed. • For creating living area in Sahelara, construction people are needed. • Building new living villages, starting from scratch, optimization in energy generation

and so is possible. • Building living areas in the Sahelara region, it is cheaper in energy consumption for a

household, compared to the industrial areas in the north. Most of the energy the industrialized countries use is for the heating of the houses during winter time.

• Emigrating thousands and thousands (millions) of people to the non-fertile Sahelara creates empty houses and regions in the more moderate climates. There will be positive effect in agricultural and natural area in these regions. At this moment, due to overpopulation, we are forced to destroy natural valuable areas to create living zones.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 52 / 92

15. Algae production Already several items are explained why it is positive to move to the Sahelara region.

• A lot of free space for living area • Only stable water supply is needed to convert this area into fertile land • Good climatic conditions for production of different types of renewable energy

But there is another item which makes this area very suitable to be exploited: algae production. These days, a lot of research is done to optimize algae production to create extra raw material as basis for food, as basis for renewable energy and so on. Besides nutrients, which can be dosed artificially, there is another factor which is needed to optimize algae growth: light. For that, huge batteries with glass pipes are constructed in which the algae liquid circulates in order to give optimum exposure to light.

Picture: typical algae reactor in greenhouse

To optimize algae growth in Northern countries, tests are executed in the following conditions:

• The glass tube batteries are constructed in greenhouses • The construction is made to ensure that all the circulating liquid is exposed as

much as possible to light • In the coldest and darkest periods of the year:

o Artificial heating is needed o Artificial light is needed

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 53 / 92

To have optimum algae growth for 24 hours a day, whole year around, in the northern countries is needed extra energy for light and heating. Looking to the map here under, it is obvious that the Sahelara region is optimum for having an optimum algae production:

Figure: world map of algae biomass productivity (tons/ha/year) at 5% photosynthetic efficiency considering an energy content of 20MJ/kg dry biomass (Tredici 2010) In the whole world, there is not one region so optimum for algae production as the Sahelara region. Where in other places the algae reactors have to be protected by glass houses, or the production is limited in time in the year while being to costly (temperature, light), in the Sahelara all parameters are optimum available. On the map here above is shown that in the region of the Sahelara, it is possible to have biomass production of 200 tons per ha, with peaks up to 240 tons per ha. Compared with the region of Belgium, Germany, this is more than the double.

Here under a few examples of bio algae reactors. These reactors need a lot of space, but space is available.

Picture: typical open-air algae reactor, Wageningen, the Netherlands

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 54 / 92

Picture: tubular algae reactor in open air, no greenhouse structure needed. (no production possible in winter time)

Algae can be used in different ways:

• Food • Renewable energy source • Components for industry

Also, algae processing can be a type of waste water treatment; To optimize algae growth, it is advisable to install these systems in the most optimum regions. Installing several industrial installations for algae growth in the Sahelara region, gives employment to a lot of people. Besides the workers directly needed for the construction of the pipelines, the installation of the total infrastructure of the new districts, there can be direct employment for thousands of people in this algae sector. Raising the idea of bringing water to the Sahelara, the first reaction is that it will only cost money to sustain this area for the future. As algae is regarded to be one of the future important sources of food and energy for all humankind, the Sahelara can be a stable supplying area for this production. Looking for information about this processing, there are a lot of studies explaining the market possibilities. In Europe, a lot of studies are made (f.i. Vito in Belgium, in corporation with the ILU in Germany) Even knowing there is an existing market, the possibilities are not exploited completely. Making the production cost lower (optimizing the area for the cultures is a big issue), studies are made for market possibilities for the future. Separation must be made in type of algae, coupled to possible market outlets. Every outlet has a different sales price. The market estimation for 2020 worldwide on algae production is as follows:

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 55 / 92

Application price/kg biomass Market potential

in Euro in million Euro Human nutrition 100 60 Animal feed (fish and animal) 5-20 3.000 Chemicals 1-4 50.000 Biofuel 0,4 1.000.000.000

Note to the table: biomass is calculated as a complete dry product, without the water, which is always present in organic products like fruits, meat, vegetables. As very rough guideline can be given that most of the organic products have a moisture content of +/- 90%. 1 kg biomass is 10 kg organic product. The sum of market potential for feed, chemicals and biofuel is in the order of billions and billions of Euro per year. In earlier chapters, we have assumed that per district, there is space of more than 300 km² available for industry, renewable energy and algae production. We have assumed that per district, a surface of 16 km² is sufficient to produce the needed energy for the district. Make an assumption for the algae production. As calculation figure, we start with 50 km² for algae production. The following calculation can be made:

• 200 tons biomass per ha per year • Efficiency in surface: 80%, gives 160 tons per year per ha • 50 km² is 5.000 ha. This gives: 800.000 tons biomass per year per district • Financial calculation as follows:

Application Percentage (estimates)

Tons per year Price per kg Market potential

Total production per year 100% 800.000 In Euro Human nutrition 0,1% 800 100 € 80.000.000,00 Animal feed (fish and animal) 2,0% 16.000 10 € 160.000.000,00 Chemicals 5,0% 40.000 2 € 80.000.000,00 Biofuel 92,9% 743.200 0,4 € 297.280.000,00 Total possible turnover € 617.280.000,00

Per district, a possible yearly turnover of more than 600 million Euro is possible. The figures show that algae production can be financially feasible on long term. The calculations were for 50 km² per district. What will happen when we do 100 km² per district? On global level, for biomass production, we do not have to destroy the rainforests in South

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 56 / 92

America to win surface for agriculture. We are just transferring dry dessert landscape into algae production facilities. It is noticeable that per district in biomass production, it is possible to harvest 16.000 tons per year on “dry” animal feed. Dry animal feed, converted to “wet” animal feed can be multiplied by 10. Besides that, knowing that we are almost not limited by surface which can be used, the Sahelara area can be a stable producer for biofuel. Instead of only producing mineral oil, the Middle East, where most mineral oil comes from, can become a stable producer of biofuel. Knowing this, possible investors in the project could be oil producing companies. Besides the financial possibilities, let’s just summarize some benefits.

• Algae consume CO² • Algae grow rather fast, with eventually possible daily harvesting • Algae store energy as oils and carbohydrates. Possible biofuel production of +/-

20.000 liter per hectare per year and more • Production of algae is not in competition with other agricultural or environmental

activities • Possible waste water purifier • A lot of applications are possible:

o Plastics o Chemical feedstocks o Lubricants o Fertilizers o Cosmetics o Food and food additives o Drugs o …

• Creates employment • …

Having space, having light: algae production is a good product for the Sahelara. Only water is needed. And, by coincidence, water is the basis of our project.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 57 / 92

16. Climatic parameters: Bringing water to the Sahelara, isn’t that an unrealistic dream? The water will evaporate due to the climatic conditions in that region. A lake of 25 km² is just a spot without effect. To put this in perspective, we must realize us why this area is so dry. In this area, wind goes from north to south. In a simplistic schema, it goes from the Mediterranean to the equator. Starting at the Mediterranean, the air is humid. Going over the region of Sahelara, the air heats up due to local temperature conditions. Where the relative humidity of the air in the beginning is rather high, due to the heating, this relative humidity goes down. When there is a low relative humidity, no clouds will be formed, no rain will fall. The system at this moment is a vicious circle:

• The relative humidity of the air is to low, no rain will fall • No rain is falling, the environment dries out • The environment dries out, temperature will rise • The temperature is getting higher, relative humidity of air will drop • …..

Is the effect of the lakes of 25 km², with evaporation on the surface, big enough to change this? The answer is simple: no, it will not have sufficient effect to change the relative humidity on big scale. Why do we believe that the total project will have a positive effect on the environment? Because, when we do the total, it will be a combination of factors. Which are the factors to be included:

• Evaporation • Solar energy • Biomass growth

The effect of the evaporation is the most-simple to understand. The lakes have water, it evaporates. The effect here is double:

• Evaporating of water needs energy and this energy is taken from the atmosphere around the lake. The environment cools down.

• Evaporation of water has a positive effect on relative air humidity. The moment the night comes and atmosphere cools down, rain is possible.

The effect of solar energy – although neglected most of the time – is also clear. Solar energy transfers energy of the sun into electricity. But, for doing that, there is an input in energy in the solar cells. Specialists surely will know, or they are able to calculate the effect on temperature when huge areas are filled with solar cells. There is no discussion about the

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 58 / 92

need or the profit of installing these solar energy plants. As all water transport only is possible by the use of pumps, high capacity pumps, there is the need of sufficient electrical power. Also, Morocco has the plan to build a very big electrical solar power plant for the export of electricity. With good planning, it is also possible to do this from several points in the Sahelara. A third factor which cools down the area is biomass growth. In normal natural growth, there are 2 factors:

• Evaporation of water by plants • Conversion by photosynthesis of energy and CO² into biomass

Because of the very dry conditions, it is almost impossible to create a stable growth of plants. Too much irrigation is needed to avoid that all crops, trees, flowers and so on are drying before this is a self-sustaining system, comparable with the Amazon forest in Brazil. Only a few plants are able to survive in these areas. Date palms are an example. But, to start new date palm orchards, much attention must be given to the small plants. In the past as I know, projects were started up to mix water retaining crystals with the soil. These crystals, in contact with water, swallow and retain the water for the plants. This is a very expensive technique and we do not know if it is still used. At first sight, it seems that besides the green areas direct round our buffer lakes are the only places where – with a lot of irrigation – biomass can be produced. This is not true. We have seen the option of the algae production. In this region, it must be possible to produce more than 200 tons biomass per year with algae. And also, we have seen that the algae production is in closed systems. No – uncontrolled – evaporation takes place. Beside the growth of biomass, which needs solar energy, there is another effect. The algae reactors work as heat exchanger and cool down the area around it. A heat exchanger to cool down the areas? It is very simple but just basic. For each type of algae, there is an optimum temperature to grow. In the area of the Sahelara, the temperature can rise up to 50°C and more. This is too high for the algae. So, big tubular algae reactors are placed in the area and they are heated by the atmosphere. You can read also that the atmosphere is cooled down by the algae reactors. In order to have a stable algae process, these reactors have to be cooled down during daytime. Cooling systems are very simple to construct, but here we can do it in a way to optimize the environment. Near every algae plant can be constructed a big lake of some thousands of m³ water. During daytime, the heat generated by the compressors of the cooling systems can be buffered in these lakes. During nighttime, when it is cold, the content of these lakes is circulated over cooling towers. Again, the effect is double:

• The cold nights are not so cold anymore • There will be extra evaporation in the atmosphere to raise air humidity

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 59 / 92

Also, the buffering effect on energy can be re-used during nighttime for maintaining the temperature of the algae reactors when needed. The surface of a lake of 25 km² will have no noticeable effect on the atmospheric conditions. But, creating energy consuming activities in that area, will have an effect at the end. In fact, the real effect on the atmosphere in the Sahelara is the fact that here society is living in the opposite way compared to the way we are used to live. At this moment, we mainly use fossil energy and all energy at the end is dispersed in our atmosphere. This is easy to understand when we know that in wintertime in Europe, the temperature in cities is more elevated than in the country. All houses consume energy, destroy energy and let it out as raise of temperature. Our project takes energy from the atmosphere – in different levels – and transfers it into air humidity and biomass.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 60 / 92

17. Mineral balance worldwide: Until now, only the water and atmosphere problems are described. The water issue is a very easy subject to follow: water is visible, it can be tasted and felt. The atmosphere issue is more difficult to see, but the CO² content and methane content is measurable. But, besides the coming shortness in sweet water in the future and the growing concentration of greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere, there are many other components which we are bringing in unbalance worldwide. We know that we are doing it, but the effects are not easy measurable because we correct the mistakes on small scale and on short time with artificial fertilizers. Because it is not measurable and because it can be corrected, we are neglecting this. In the future, this continuous and growing unbalance will give us problems. The unbalance we are creating worldwide is the natural balance of minerals present in nature. Books can be written about classical mining and transfer of minerals as part of an economical plan. This is controllable. Difficult to do, but it is controllable. We need our minerals which we take out of the mines, and we accept the unbalance. In fact, we do not have to accept the created unbalance, because we are creating a balance. Taking minerals out of mines – locations with high concentrations – and spreading them over the world to places of our needs is creating a balance. This is not the growing unbalance we are talking about. The major problem which most people do not recognize is the unbalance in minerals needed for organic growth. We are transporting billions and billions tons of food from one side of the world to the other side. More specifically, we are transporting fruits, vegetables, cereals, nuts and other products from economically undeveloped countries to our western world. Pineapple from Ivory Coast to Europe, apples from Chili, soybean from Latin America to Europe and so on. A lot of tropical fruits are transported from tropical countries to the colder north. Transport of food in the opposite direction is just a fraction of what the rich countries import. We have the financial power to eat oranges and mangos imported from the South, but they will almost not be able to pay for apples or pears coming from Europe. Also, the fruits in the tropical countries are so cheap and very big in variety that there is no need for these people to buy our fruits. And, it are not only the fruits, but also the derivatives. The mass of juice concentrates coming from tropical countries to our countries is enormous. Food solids are mainly based on starch and sugar composition. This part gives no problems. Starch and sugar components are only composed out of carbon, oxygen and hydrogen. After being digested by us, by our animals, after rotting when not consumed, this part gives only CO² and water in the atmosphere.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 61 / 92

It is not only the starch and sugar which is carbon, oxygen and hydrogen based. It is also the cellulose, major structural part of organic plant cells. Beside the organic carbon-based components, there is also a mineral component involved. The minerals are calcium, potassium, magnesium and others. We are not mentioning the nitrogen part. In proteins, there is also nitrogen which can be a problem in waste water, in manure processing. These components are urea, nitrate and combinations of it with other components. But, at the end, there are a lot of processes available which can transfer the nitrogen parts into neutral N² gas. And this is no problem anymore, because +/- 80% of our atmosphere is nitrogen. One of the major and most valuable minerals in food is the phosphorus component. Phosphorus is a very important mineral for biological life. Without phosphorus, no biological life (plant or animal) can exist. It is part of the fruits, soybeans, cereals which we import. We consume these products and the phosphorus at the end is drained in our sewage systems. About phosphorus, a funny story can be told: years and years ago – we do not remember exactly the period – all our washing powder was phosphate based. It was found that this was not good for the environment. So, washing powders without phosphates were developed, and it was promoted to use phosphate free washing powders. After a while, there was an unexpected negative aspect of the changing to phosphate free washing powders. In the cities, the household waste waters were collected in waste water treatment plants. Where there was in the beginning too much phosphates in the waste water, there were problems for bacterial growth because there was not enough phosphate anymore in the waste water. Where we were using phosphate free washing powders to protect the environment, some waste water treatment plants had to use extra phosphates to have a stable treatment. This just as a small example how unbalance in minerals can have a direct effect. How to put this on global scale? We import the phosphorus, and almost nothing is going back to the tropical countries. Very, very roughly, in the examples here under, is calculated for some products the yearly import in Europe from phosphorus in our food.

Phosphorus content:

• Banana: 280 mg/kg • Dried soybean: 3.000 mg/kg • Orange concentrate: +/- 240 mg/kg

Import in Europe:

• Banana: +/- 5 million tons per year • Soybean: +/- 20 million tons per year • Orange concentrate import: +/- 600.000 tons per year

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 62 / 92

Import phosphorus:

• By banana: 1.400 tons per year • By soybean: 60.000 tons per year • By orange concentrate: +/- 150 tons per year

Only these 3 products give already an import of phosphorus of more than 61.000 tons per year. When only 3 products give this amount of phosphorus, the total mass of phosphorus imported per year must be hundreds of thousand tons. This is an enormous unbalance we are creating, year after year. Even components we do not think in mineral composition give enormous effect. Just a minor example: our daily coffee. In Europe, we consume +/- 2,5 million tons of coffee beans per year. Each ton coffee beans contains 20 kg phosphates. Yearly, this gives an import of 50.000 tons of phosphates. Our used coffee filters with the coffee ground, we just throw away in the garbage bag. Calculating the phosphorus together with the other already calculated components, we come far above 100.000 tons of phosphates per year which we import. Another product which we import in massive form, but nothing is going back: tropical wood. It is not the target of this study to give import figures of every product, but already only for the Netherlands there is a yearly import of tropical wood of +/- 1 million m³. Depending the variety of wood, the mineral content varies between 0,1 – 3%. Very roughly calculated, this gives a yearly import of minerals for the Netherlands based on wood of +/- 10.000 tons. As extrapolation to the whole of Europe, this will give more than 100.000 tons of minerals yearly. (this figure is the complete mineral content, not only the phosphorus content) To see this in perspective: Europe imports yearly thousands and thousands of tons of phosphorus and other minerals in food and other products which comes from areas in food producing countries. To keep the agricultural areas stable, farmers in the food producing countries are forced to use artificial fertilizers to avoid that the soil becomes unfertile. Besides this, because the agricultural land in f.i. southern America is not so fertile as we should expect, the local farmers are destroying thousands and thousands of hectares of the rainforest to create new agricultural surface. In despite of the growth of the rainforest, the soil under it is not so fertile. It is the rainforest itself which recirculates water and minerals over itself and only a small part of the components needed for a fertile land area are present in the bottom. The figures given for the phosphorus story are only a part of the story. Also, we use artificial fertilizers, based on phosphorus which is found in phosphorus mining. The situation at this moment is so that the availability of phosphorus from mining resource is decreasing. This forces us to search for new sources of phosphorus. Recirculation is a big issue in this matter. We have to re-use the phosphorus in our wastes and bring it back in natural circulation as much as possible – which we already do for decades with recirculation of manure. Only, we have to improve this worldwide.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 63 / 92

Even when we have to improve this, we all know that in Europe, we have a problem with our manure. Farmers are controlled on the quantity of manure they bring on the land in order to avoid that there is coming an unbalance in minerals in the soil. Different parameters are controlled:

• Volume • Nitrates • Phosphorus • …..

Also, our sewage systems are full with our toilet wastes, including the same components. Waste water treatment plants are designed to treat as much as possible the COD and the nitrates. (COD: Chemical Oxygen Demand: the quantity of oxygen which is needed to oxidize the polluting wastes in the water) COD which is eliminated is mainly emitted as CO² in the atmosphere. (also a part of the oxygen is needed to oxidize other components, but our focus in this is the carbon component) In this process, there are also some technological contradictions. The COD is mainly composed by organic components, containing starch, cellulose and alike. These components are energy carrying components. To treat them in a biological plant, we need energy to mix oxygen to breath the micro-organisms which transfer this organic component into CO². The contraction is that we destroy energy holding components with the use of energy to create CO², which is a greenhouse gas. We have to avoid this: using energy to destroy energy carrying molecules and produce CO² with in this process. Besides this: nitrates are emitted as nitrogen gas in the atmosphere. For our discussion, this is not important. But, the phosphorus (and other minerals) are concentrated in the sludge. In the food growing countries, there is a constant export of food, no import of food, and compared with our countries little concentration of livestock. This means that there is no natural recirculation of natural available minerals. Mainly export. In our countries, we consume much more than we take out of our own soil and we have to dispose our waste somewhere. We consume massive quantities of tropical fruit, our livestock is fed with imported food components. In despite of all our manure spreading plans, we keep on importing excess quantities of minerals which are valuable in other locations. And, we mainly dispose them on the land. There is a possible solution to react on this problem: when the minerals are not needed here, and can be needed somewhere else, we have to export our excess minerals to areas where they can be valid something.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 64 / 92

At this moment, there is already an international trade in manure as valuable product. To be of any effect on environmental scale, the trade in this has to be augmented massively. It is not only necessary to control our soils on short term. It must be a solution which can last for generations and generations. 100 years ago, every farmer had no problem to dispose his manure on his own land. Now, locally, we are in need of spreading plans and maximum deposal rates per surface. In the very near future, even this will not be enough. Manure and biological sludge from a water treatment plant have 1 quality – besides the mineral content - which may not be forgotten: due to its composition and structure, it has the capacity to hold water. As stated above, we can create new living areas by pumping water into the Sahelara. But, just pumping water is only a part of the solution. The dry soils of the Sahelara will not hold water. As such, it is not a problem. Water which percolates in the soil, will find its way out to another place and will become a well for a new river or something alike. Water is never lost. It also can be evaporated during daytime and will condense in nighttime. It will be disposed somewhere else as rain or fog. After years of pumping, the total atmosphere will be more humid as it is at this time and the flora will grow. But to have stable moisture content in which plants can grow, there must be mixed something with the sand which holds the water. Therefore, to enhance the flora to grow, in selected areas can be disposed massively high quantities of manure or sludge. This sludge has to be mixed thoroughly with the local dry sandy soil and so it becomes water remaining. Transporting manure and sludge from Europe to Sahelare has to be done well controlled. The dry matter content must be rather high. This for several reasons:

• When dry matter content is too low, natural methane fermentation starts during transport and the transport is explosion sensitive.

• Low dry matter content means a lot of water. Liquid manure consists of 90 – 95% of water. Transporting water from Europe to the Sahelara is very expensive. With simple techniques, it is possible to raise the dry matter content up to +/- 30%.

Liquid manure from the picture on the left can be concentrated to a cake like the picture on the right.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 65 / 92

Tests show that in manure separation in dry section and liquid section, there is also separation of the nitrogen part from the phosphorus part. As nitrogen remains mainly in the liquid phase (urea), with good processing it is possible to catch +/- 80% of the phosphorus in the solid phase or more. Nitrogen (urea, nitrates), we can treat in biological plants. The phosphorus stays in solid phase and is good as fertilizer. The dry cake has to be pasteurized, so that all germs and seeds are killed. Bringing fertile soil from one place to another is 1 issue. Including germs and foreign seeds uncontrolled is an option which has to be avoided. How can this manure cake be used in an optimum way? The target is to create new districts in the Sahelara. Districts in which it is good to live in. What are components which make a district viable? The named components are just the components being part of this small study:

• Water: which we import by the network of pipelines • Food: world market, import, local production (algae as being an important factor) • Employment: people working on the pipelines, road construction, house

construction, tourism, factories (like algae plants which must be important in this region), schools, trade in general, …

• Energy supply • ….

Algae production is a very important issue which has to be kept in mind. For the growth of algae, there is need of CO² in the atmosphere. As there will be an enormous algae production in the area for export of energy, the CO² level will drop locally. It is earlier said that dried manure has a very important organic component, containing starch – or starch like components - which can be transformed in CO². Also, proteins will be converted into CO². This converting into CO² will be done by the process of composting of the manure in the soil. Using the manure in massive quantities in the region, having massive production of algae in the region, CO² level will be kept stable. And, it is CO² which we take away from the industrial north. How are we going to use the manure? As it is in the beginning the target to create nice living area around the buffer lakes, and as it was mentioned to have a green zone close to these buffer lakes, it seems logical to mix the manure in the land near to these buffer lakes. Parks can be created and nice natural sites can be built. Only in a second stage, when more and more people come to live in the Sahelara region, the moment there is sufficient manure and water availability to create big farms, manure can be used for farming.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 66 / 92

Or, it can be planned in a different way. To compare: in Saudi Arabia, there are already big farms for cattle. With the controlled and high-tech application, there are at this moment more than 70.000 dairy cows in this country. The total milk production per year is over 1 billion liters. The farms in Saudi took their water out of underground reservoirs where there was millions and millions m³ water available. But the reservoirs are getting empty and at this moment they are looking to have water from other sources. They have done desalination of sea water, but at the end this is too expensive. Also, they are looking to the option of taking water from the River Nile. For that, they need a pipeline of +/- 1.500 km. So, even the Saudis recognize the possibilities. Only, as we have read, they want to take the water from a part of the Nile where the Nile is not so big yet, and it could disturb the flora and fauna in that region. An example of big dairy farms in Saudi is the Almarrai’s Dairy farm. This farm only has more than 40.000 cows. The water needed is 3 liters water per liter of milk. Each cow needs +/- 150 liters of water per day.

Picture: Holstein-Friesians wait to be milked at Almarai's dairy farm in Al Kharj, Saudi When controlled growth of grass, adapted algae production and the right infrastructure, this is also possible in the Sahelara region. Taking back our mineral balance:

• We import manure from the Northern countries in the Sahelara • We fertilize grass and corn fields • Cows are fed with local raised fodder, in combination of grass, corn, algae • Local collection of manure in which we optimize solid / water separation • Local solid phase of manure is brought back on the fields • Separated water is brought back in our water circulation (or it can be used without

treatment as fertilizing liquid on the fields)

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 67 / 92

We have read that each cow needs +/- 150 liters of water per day. 1/3th is found back in the milk. But, 2/3th is in the manure. Manure has liquid and solid components. With good separation, the solid components can be used as manure to fertilize fields. The liquid part can be recirculated over the grass field. The picture here under is with fresh water. But, the systems is also possible with liquid manure, from which all solids are removed.

Doing this, year after year, including the import of manure, the Sahelara region will become more and more fertile. Knowing that Saudi can raise 70.000 cows, and the country has only a surface of 2.2 million km², the surface possibilities for the Sahelara region are much bigger. Only the control of water is needed Water supply and control is the basis of the project

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 68 / 92

18. Tourism:

What has an environmental project on global scale to do with tourism? For this, we have a direct comparison with f.i. Dubai.

In 2013, there was a total revenue of +/- 200 billion of AED. Converted to Euro, the total revenue in 1 year was +/- €50 billion. Only at the end of the eighties, early nineties, Dubai took a strategic decision to emerge as a major international-quality tourism destination. Investments in tourism infrastructure have paid off handsomely over the years. A country (Emirate) with a surface of only +/- 3.900 km² can have a touristic activity of +/- €50 billion per annum. The Sahelara has a surface of +/- 12.000.000 km². Dubai has created this enormous touristic economy in +/- 30 years. Giving travel agencies, tourism organizations the possibility to create holiday destinies in the Sahelara, this creates from the start big economic revenues. Also, it gives employment to thousands and thousands of new immigrated locals. For these new locals, houses have to be build, schools for their children have to be build. Hotel industry, amusement parks, swimming destinations in smaller artificial lakes, safaris in non-developed pieces of desert. You name the activity, and there is almost always a possibility to build it. Normally, I should say that all activities were possible, except skiing and other ice and snow related activities, because it should take too much effort to make snow. But, looking to the project which is realized in Dubai, we have to realize that nothing is impossible when we want to do it..

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 69 / 92

As we all know, with a lot of energy (read: money), Dubai has created several golf courts, has created the biggest shopping centers in the world and other projects. But most people do not know: Dubai has created a covered winter holiday resort. When we see that winter sport in the Middle East is possible, everything is possible.

There is one item we must take care of: the investment in Dubai comes from oil money. The investment in Sahelara must be independent, multi-national. And, it has to come from different sources. The water supply for the basic project must come from international and multinational funding. In this case, multi-national is not a multi-national company, but it means that it has to be realized by more than 1 nation. The investments for tourism – like a ski resort – may come from private investors. This is just a feasibility project.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 70 / 92

19. Relative budgetary questions In an earlier chapter, there was made a budgetary calculation about the cost for the option of buffer zones with interconnecting piping. For practical reasons, this is the best option to start with. Reasons are simple:

• To construct channels, there are difficulties to overcome differences in heights • Pipelines are faster to construct and can be done stepwise

Combination can be pipelines to bring the water to a certain level and then open channels with free flow in the descending zones. These calculations and estimations show that the cost for piping, depreciated per m³ of water, is in acceptable range, when we look to the global effect of it. To have results on global effect, it must be acceptable to work with investments of billions of Euro. As long as the investment cost is much lower compared to state budgets for defense, every possible solution on global scale should to be studied. To be honest in our way of life: it does not give us a positive feeling about human nature that we must accept that budget for defense in each country is too high. Only, realistically spoken, we must accept the world we are living in. And, this world is the world that we – as human beings – have created. Comparing the budget needed for the project with defense budgets, we must realize that the cost for this project is not so high after all. With the political will worldwide, the budget may not be a problem. It is just the will to do so. Also, knowing that the cost per m³ is acceptable, perhaps decisions can be taken to construct more piping. In a combined investment of several countries worldwide, the cost is rather low and can be extended to a higher level. There is also another calculation to make: Estimating that the water pumped into the Sahelara is going for 25% or more into local circulation (evaporation, condense, rain, percolating in the ground and springs a little bit further, used by plants and coming free after rotting of these plants…) there is a continuous growth of the availability of the water. The water which is brought to the center of the Sahelara has to migrate for thousands of kilometers to end in the ocean again, so it is acceptable to assume that a big part just remains there until the area is saturated with water. Recent studies have found out that the land on global scale is acting like a sponge, so the raising of the oceans is not so fast as earlier studies have given. Our Sahelara region will be a big sponge and take a lot of water. Coming back to the water flow per year. Earlier calculations gave the following figures:

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 71 / 92

number of pipelines m³/hour m³/year

3 12.750 111.690.000 6 25.500 223.380.000 9 38.250 335.070.000

12 51.000 446.760.000 15 63.750 558.450.000 18 76.500 670.140.000 21 89.250 781.830.000 24 102.000 893.520.000 27 114.750 1.005.210.000 30 127.500 1.116.900.000

Put it a little bit in perspective:

• Average water consumption per person per year we estimate at 50 m³. this is average for European countries. Most of the water is used for shower and laundry washing machines.

• Estimation that water pumped to Sahelara is used 50% for human consumption, 50% for irrigation and other (industrial and environmental) purposes, dairy farms, …. This includes also the natural evaporation and dispersion of the water in the soil.

• Very roughly calculated: every 100 m³ per year of water pumped in to the Sahelara, gives living availability to 1 person to live in this area

This is just a very rough and basic figure to calculate with. Year after year, per pipeline, the availability of water will grow besides the volume which is pumped into the Sahelara. This is because of the simple fact that there is water recirculation. Bringing this calculation in the calculation of number of pipelines, this gives the following

number of pipelines m³/year

Number of inhabitants

3 111.690.000 1.116.900 6 223.380.000 2.233.800 9 335.070.000 3.350.700

12 446.760.000 4.467.600 15 558.450.000 5.584.500 18 670.140.000 6.701.400 21 781.830.000 7.818.300 24 893.520.000 8.935.200 27 1.005.210.000 10.052.100 30 1.116.900.000 11.169.000

Investment in 15 pipelines per year gives extra water availability for +/- 5,5 million people to live in. Doing a stable investment for 10 years in 15 parallel pipelines, there is possibility to live for 55 million people. This is without calculating the water that is coming in circulation.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 72 / 92

We all know that living space is becoming scarce in the future. Healthy living space must be taken care of. Also, the rise of oceans gives us problems. Parts of livable area is just washed away in the oceans. A lot of scientists and philosophers are thinking about solutions to overcome this as human kind. Besides unrealistic projects to migrate to other planets, I have read more projects. A nice one and one of the price winning concepts was the Lilypad, designed by a Belgian Architect: Callebaut.

Vincent Callebaut Architectures, a Belgian firm lead by architect Vincent Callebaut, designed an ecologically friendly floating city able to house 50,000 people completely self-sufficiently. Inspired by the lilypad of the Amazonia Victoria Regia but enlarged over 250 times, the city is aesthetically pleasing while producing more energy than it consumes and cleanly recycling most of its waste products. At first sight, this seems to be a good idea. Looking more in detail, it is, an enormous investment per city, for just 50.000 people. But, look to the cost. Building one Island has an estimated cost of +/- € 450 billion, which is a cost of +/- €9 million per inhabitant. Studying the internet for solutions gives more nice projects, but only for the investment cost, this is never realistic to think seriously about it. We must realize that we are not talking about 50.000 or 100.000 people to move. We are talking about millions and millions of people we have to give a home and to feed in the next thousands of years. The proposed projects are only for the happy few with a lot of money. Just keep feet on the ground and studying all possibilities on existing soil makes more sense. Again: compare with the price winning Lilypad project which costs € 450 billion for 50.000 inhabitants.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 73 / 92

Then we take the cost for the piping. Again, we take the sum of the 2 rivers:

• Segments of 3 parallel pipelines from the Niger river • Segments of 3 parallel pipelines from the Congo river

number of pipelines per river

Total pipelines

Total cost in billions of Euro

m³/year Number of inhabitants

3 6 9,45 223.380.000 2.233.800 6 12 18,90 446.760.000 4.467.600 9 18 28,35 670.140.000 6.701.400

12 24 37,80 893.520.000 8.935.200 15 30 47,25 1.116.900.000 11.169.000 18 36 56,70 1.340.280.000 13.402.800 21 42 66,15 1.563.660.000 15.636.600 24 48 75,60 1.787.040.000 17.870.400 27 54 85,05 2.010.420.000 20.104.200 30 60 94,50 2.233.800.000 22.338.000

The costs are calculated as follows:

• 3 pipelines from the Congo River • 3 pipelines from the Niger River • Both coming from a random chosen point to the center of the Sahelara

For less than €100 billion, there is supply of sweet water possible for more than 22 million of people. Quintuple this cost, and there is living area, including buildings, industry and so on for more than 22 million of people. For 500 billion Euro, there is living area, houses, schools, working area for more than 22 million of people. 450 billion Euro for living space for 50.000 people is price winning. I wonder what the value of this price is. Everything must be put in perspective of the world we live in. In 2015, the European government has decided to give to Turkey €6 Billion, just to help the refugees in Turkey to survive. It is a beautiful gesture, helping these refugees. This gift will cost each European inhabitant only +/- €10, which is not much. But this money is only given to create a temporarily solution, controlled by 1 country. Using tax money, €10 per European inhabitant to create a temporary solution for refugees is accepted. Why should we not accept a yearly contribution €10, - per year for creating a livable area in the Middle East. A livable area which gives place to millions and millions of possible refugees. Also, this will give the possibility for people who do not feel welcome in Europe to go to this area.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 74 / 92

€25, - per inhabitant, and we have +/- 750 million inhabitants. This gives 7,5 billion Euro per year. Besides this, neglecting the fact if we agree with Erdogan or not, he has proposed to build a new city in the Syrian side of the critical area. Building this city is a project which lasts longer than only temporarily help to refugees. Who will forbid us to think further than this.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 75 / 92

20. Financing: For the realization of this project, enormous investments will be needed. For classical projects, feasibility studies have to be made. This project is not a classical project on which loss / profit calculations can be made. This project has an influence on environment worldwide for decades and decades. But it will only have this effect the moment the project will be realized in total, as it has to be. It is an “all or nothing” project for humankind. Nevertheless, there must be made a separation in parts of financing. There is the basic financing for the water pipelines and / or channels. And there is the financing for creation of the living areas, the villages and the cities. The first part is the most difficult part to finance. It is the basic of the total project, but in this, no direct win / loss calculation can be made. Classical win/loss feasibility studies have control on every component of the calculation. But, in our case, we cannot give an exact figure for the quantity of water which will be evaporate or which will percolate in the soil. So no exact figures of investment cost per m³ water which comes available can be given. The second part is – concerning financing – the most-easy part. Even when the second part is bigger in cost, the calculation is more-easy, and better understandable. Creating living areas is a matter of finding big real instate investors. Once they are found, they will have the possibility to buy land. On this land will be constructed houses, shopping centers, industrial plants and so on. This is just the same as everywhere in the world when waste land is converted into living area. And, once the basic water supply is guaranteed, the more centers are sold in the beginning, the more micro climates are generated with local cash flow and possible tax incomings. The bigger question is the first part of the project, the financing of the basic water supply from the rivers to the Sahelara. To do this prestigious project, how can the financing be organized? It must be a combination of several types of investment, different types of funding. Here under some possibilities.

• Sending people from every country worldwide means that unemployment in every

country will decrease. Unemployment – certainly in countries as Belgium – are a long-lasting cost. Every country worldwide can promote unemployed people to go to the Sahelara – with their families – by given them bonus the moment they leave the country of origin. The bonus can be given in several ways. F.i. a cheap loan for buying a house in the Sahelara. When these people buy a house from the real estate companies, these companies can buy land from the government of the Sahelara and with this money, investments can be made. A very rough calculation. Estimate that there are +/- 20 million of unemployed people in Europe.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 76 / 92

Estimate that 5% of the unemployed people is willing to work in the Sahelara. That is 1 million people. When every country gives, per unemployed person who goes to work in the Sahelara a contribution of €5.000 for f.i. 5 years, then there is a budget of €5, - billion every year in the first 5 years. Make it for the 5 following years 50%, then there is again €1,25 billion available per year. After a few years, there must be some economic activity in the area which will create local cash flow. Therefore, this budget shall be decreased after a while. Unemployed people must not be only workers for the pipelines and other civil works. All professions are needed. There must be bakeries, there must be schools for children, there must be nurses, doctors. The only criteria for selection is the will to go to a new country, and to be prepared to work together with people from all other origins, with open mind to other cultures.

• Building a new stable in corporation between all countries worldwide enhances the relation between these countries. Good relations lowers the necessity of cost of defense. Countries willing to be involved in this project can be invited to donate a few percentage of their defense budget yearly. Referring to the 10 countries listed above and asking them a yearly donation of 1% of their military expenses, there is a direct available budget of +/- 2,5 billion of Euro per year.

Country Budget in 2009

Billions of Euro UK € 62,34 France € 60,58 Germany € 43,22 Italy € 33,68 Spain € 17,47 Netherlands € 11,38 Sweden € 5,49 Norway € 5,49 Belgium € 5,11 Denmark € 4,03 Total € 248,79

Taking more countries in the project, including f.i. countries like China, India, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Russia: this budget could be doubled easily. In the list of countries is not included the US. Reason is geographic. The project handles about Sahelara. No problem that the US is involved and contributes. But, Sahelara is in Africa, under Europe and near Asia. The US are on the other side of the Atlantic and they have their own desserts. This project, on global scale, can be doubled in the US. This does not mean that the US is excluded for the project. For the US, there are other possibilities. Where we, Europeans, are part of the investors in the area for water transport, the US and their multinationals can be part for investing in industry, touristic and other facilities.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 77 / 92

• On one side, there is the budget for defense of each country. But, on the other side,

there is the weapon industry. As they earn their living on the instability of the world, it is for me very logic that they should pay extra taxes to create a better world. Here under the biggest European weapon exporting countries:

Weapon export

Billions of Euro

Russia 5,9 France 1,2 Germany 1,1 UK 1,1 Israël 1,1 Spain 0,8 Italy 0,8 Ukraine 0,7 Netherlands 0,6 Sweden 0,4 Switzerland 0,4 Total 14,1 Taks 5% 0,705

When the weapon industry pays 5% taxes for global environment aid, there is an availability of more than €700.000.000 every year.

o Figures are from 2014 o Not included the States and China, because they have the possibility to

create a similar project on their own continent. Also, for companies dealing in defense systems, there are other possibilities to be part of the projects. Instead of only be forced to donate money, they could also take profit of it. Defense companies in general are big companies and their basics is money. No fairy tales to tell about the target of the weapon industry: just money and profit. It is possible that they, as compensation for the taxes they have to pay, are able to convert a part of their industry into pipeline production. Coming back to the basics of our calculations, there will be the need of more than 100.000 km of pipelines. When over the years 30 parallel pipelines from the Congo river and the river Niger each are constructed to the center of the Sahelara, there is a need of +/- 135.000 km of pipelines. The basic of the project is to bring water to the Sahelara. But, at the end, there will be a network of water comparable with the network we have in each country in Europe. In this, it is not impossible to assume that there is a need of more than 1 million km of pipelines at the end. The target is to control the whole area with water, so we may not stop after a few years.

• Above is stated that Europe gives €6 billion to help refugees in Turkey. Instead giving it to Turkey, just use this money to create new living area as long-term planning. Also, giving 6 billion Euro is just a short time solution and has to be re-done in the future until the problems are solved definitively. Better is to give this to the

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 78 / 92

government of the Sahelara and use this to build a new country. A country where all persons are equal. This money can be used to turn refugees into new land builders. It was stated that a yearly contribution of €10, - per inhabitant gives 7,5 billion per year.

• What about Tobin tax: 'Tobin Tax' could Raise $850bn (...and Market Volatility) A new study by the Institute of Development Studies has found that contrary to popular belief, a Tobin tax might actually increase market volatility. The study has also concluded that a currency transaction tax would be unlikely to destabilize markets if it was designed appropriately. The authors of the study have noted that the estimated revenues outweigh this risk. A 0.005% tax to markets could generate $850 billion in revenue, which is equivalent to seven times the current estimated aid in 2008 from wealthy countries to poor countries. (article by Matt Turner, financial news, 2011)

Estimate that the Tobin Tax could collect +/- €700 billion. The target of the Tobin Tax is to realize projects for the benefit of a stable society worldwide. Our project is certainly a perfect example of a stable project. Take 5% of the Tobin Tax for 15 years, this gives €3,5 billion each year. (given the importance of this project, we even should suggest to have 10% of the Tobin Tax, but in calculations, only 5% is taken.) Again, we have to refer to the situation where we are living in. A lot of “rich” people are against the Tobin Tax. Understandable. To protect your own property, your own company, you should try to pay as less taxes as possible. But, at this moment, we just had the scandal with the Panama papers. Thousands and thousands of companies worldwide have used the possibility to go with their money to the countries were taxes are low. Governments worldwide are trying to find out how they could punish these organizations. Punishing them is 1 point of the issue. The other point is how to avoid this to happen again. Therefore, on long term, Tobin tax could be a good tool. Organizations with a lot of money always will look for the optimum place to pay as little taxes as possible. Just make it legal, but when transfers become too big, just impose the Tobin Tax. It seems acceptable that these organizations pay a small tax fee and therefore they are completely in order with all regulations. In this calculation, I do not take any extra for the fines on the Panama papers. Just a Tobin Tax can be a regulating factor.

• Poverty problems related to climatic changes: It is known that the poorest regions worldwide suffer the most from the climate changings. There are different reports indicating that there is a need for billions and billions of euros to help the poor regions in the battle against climatic changings. This help can be in different ways. Giving the locals a job in another part of the world, where they can start up a new life should be a logical alternative. Coming to the Sahelara will give these people the chance to work on a new future for

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 79 / 92

themselves and for their children. Also, when a part of the local population in the critical zones are leaving, the conditions for the remaining people will become better. It is a win-win situation. Different estimations are made on necessary yearly funds to sustain these poor regions. One of the latest estimations we have read is a yearly budget +/- € 500 billion. When such a budget is available to attack poverty worldwide, it should be discussable that 1% yearly is taken to build up new living area in the Sahelara. €5 billion every year. When the project is successful, this can be increased, but for calculations, only 1%.

• Investors for algae production: It is already motivated that algae production can be a profitable industry for the Sahelara. It can create enormous incomings and creates a lot of stable employment for the future. And, the employment is stable for eternity, because renewable energy source is the future. Knowing this, big oil companies must be motivated to invest in this area. Instead of looking for new fossil oil sources, huge algae “farms” have to be constructed. Estimate the installation of 100 km² of algae production farm per district, the following calculations can be made: (only using algae as biofuel, the component with the lowest value):

Production biomass ton per ha per year 200,00 ton per km² per year 20.000,00 100 km² farm per district ton per district per year 2.000.000,00 Turnover biofuel/year Euro per ha € 80.000,00 0,4 euro/kg Euro per km² € 8.000.000,00 Euro per district € 800.000.000,00 For this yearly turnover figure, with guaranteed sales possibilities, big companies must be prepared to invest in the project of Sahelara. The incomings for the Sahelara project are multiple:

o Purchase of the area for their algae farm by the investors. It is not just waste land they buy, but land connected to water supply and road facilities. Optimum is direct connection to the railway or alike for export of their produced biomass. Having an estimated sales price of €50.000 per ha, including licenses for production, per district can be given an investment of +/- €500 million. For calculation reasons, start-up of 2 projects per year are made. This gives an investment of +/- 1 billion per year.

o Taxes on employment. The cost price of the algae is composed by different factors: investment (land, machines), raw materials, energy and wages for the employees. As the processing is rather automatized, the wages will be reduced to a minimum. Nevertheless, wages must be paid.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 80 / 92

Very rough estimation that employment cost is +/- 10% of the total cost of the end product, it is possible to calculate the incomings of taxes on employment. Assuming that, for easy calculation, a fixed tax rate of 20% on wages can be calculated. We can go for the following calculation: First year only investment, so no tax incomings. Second year, 2 districts with €800.000.000 production: total €1.600.000.000. Wages 10%, which gives €160.000.000. Taxes on wages 25%: €32.000.000 in the second year This 25% is just a random figure. Comparing it with Belgium, my reference, the tax figure is much higher. At basis, there is already +/- 15% social security to be paid – depending contract and so on – and above that, 25 – 50% taxes are paid. This is without the taxes and so on the employer has to pay. In total, the tax figure on wages in Belgium exceeds easily 50%. Also, for calculations, only the employers on the algae processing are calculated. There are massive other industries to start up, which gives a lot of people working in the area. When every year 2 extra districts are started up, this will give the following calculation:

Tunrnover per district € 800.000.000,00 Employment fee per district 10% € 80.000.000,00 Districts per year 2 Taxes per 2 districts 25% € 40.000.000,00 1st year 0 2nd year € 40.000.000,00 3th year € 80.000.000,00 4th year € 120.000.000,00 5th year € 160.000.000,00 6th year € 200.000.000,00 7th year € 240.000.000,00 8th year € 280.000.000,00 9th year € 320.000.000,00 10th year € 360.000.000,00

Of course, it is very optimistic to believe that every year an extra district can be built. But, the construction of algae processing plants can be realized much faster. This is just an industrial implementation of existing technology.

o Taxes on profit: separate discussion

o Dairy farms can follow the same calculation. Only, the budget of the needed surface is smaller and the employment wages will be more multiple.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 81 / 92

These “theoretical available budgets” give the following possible investment for 15 years (in billions of Euros):

Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Unemployment 5 5 5 5 5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 Military savings 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 2,5 Weapon industry 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 0,7 Yearly contribution 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5 Tobin Tax 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 3,5 Poverty based on climate 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 invetment algae 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Taks on wages 0 0,04 0,08 0,12 0,16 0,2 0,24 0,28 0,32 0,36 0,4 0,44 0,48 0,52 0,56

Total per year 25,2 25,2 25,3 25,3 25,4 22,9 22,9 23 23 23,1 23,1 23,1 23,2 23,2 23,3

General total 15 years 357 Problem for realizing this budget could be the will of the countries and the weapon industry to safe on defense or to pay taxes on their weapon profit. As such, this is not a real big problem. The main budgets are just parts of the available budgets at this moment for unemployment, aid to poverty and alike. The biggest “extra” budget is the yearly contribution of the European population. This is the €10 per European inhabitant. We are convinced that, knowing that this will change immigration and world stability, everyone will be pleased to give this money. When you make free donations tax deductible, perhaps bigger amounts could be collected. Beside the given sources which are easy to calculate, a lot of other financing sources are possible:

• Energy companies, water companies: they buy the right for controlling water and energy. F.i. the Suez holding, the Belgian French holding, handles in gas and electricity. They can invest in power distribution lines in the Sahelara. Also, there is the possibility to build enormous solar power plants from which they can transport electricity worldwide, or mainly in the direction of Europe. Also, they can be the direct suppliers of energy for the huge pumping installations. It is also possible / advisable that the energy distribution lines and the water pipelines follow the same route. Investments can be shared with the Sahelara government.

• Rich benefactors donate billions and billions every year to charity. Instead of giving it to charity, ask them to donate their money to create the new living area. A very well-known name as benefactor is Bill Gates. Since a few years, Zuckerberg is also donating big amounts.

• Telecom organization also pay for the rights to be local distributors.

• Big holiday organizations can create holiday resorts near the lakes and pay for the surface they want to have.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 82 / 92

On a smaller scale, here can be made the same calculation as for the algae production units. Buying nice pieces of land, installing holiday resorts, employment wages and so on.

• Big international food companies can buy land for big orchards for tropical fruits.

Companies like Chiquita and Dole.

• CO² certificates

• And so on…… And not to forget: local taxes for the people who come to live there. The billions of investments to be made is mainly for labor cost. The best way for these big investments is to force the executing companies to establish a seat in the Sahelara area. This will have two major effects:

• All employees working on the project are registered in Sahelara and pay taxes and social security in this area.

• All companies located in this area will be taxed on their profit in the area. The more investments are made in the beginning, the more tax revenue. After some years, having revenue from different sources, this area should become self-sustaining.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 83 / 92

21. Difficulties to overcome As it is written, is seems to be very simple. Just a technical construction of channels and piping to pump water from 1 side to the other side. Pumping water from places where there is plenty of water to parts where the water can be very useful. Same as in every household: spraying water from the tap to give water to the garden. When the budget is available, the construction is the easy part. It is a big job, but no problems which we not could overcome. As it is so simple, as it seems so logical, why is there such a drought in the Sahelara and plenty of water only a few thousands of kilometers away. To understand that, we must accept that the realization of a project has 2 parts: a technical part and a non-technical part. The technical part, in this case, is simple. Although the project is very big, on global scale with the existing technology, it is simple. It will be the non-technical part which will be the point of discussion. In fact, the discussion about the project, the route to be taken before the technical part can start will be the main issue. To realize which route has to be followed, some questions has to be answered.

• Is there need for such a project? Knowing the negative spiral in which our environment is going the latest years, any serious project which can bring a positive change has to be studied. In fact, since the industrial revolution, we are living like parasites on our planet. We are using the fossil energy sources, without giving something back. Having the total project, mainly including massive algae production plants, we can reverse stepwise the CO² balance worldwide. 200 tons dry biomass per hectare yearly gives millions and millions of tons on the total surface yearly. (with 100 km² per district, we could do +/- 2 million tons biomass per year per district) Biomass which we can store, biomass which will be an alternative for our fossil energy sources.

• Are there negative points on the project? Of course, there are negative points. The main negative point – when only briefly is looked into the project – is the total cost of this project. But this must be looked in perspective. Just look to the BNP figures of some countries:

Europe 14.000 China 9.250 India 1.900 Turkey 825 Afrika 3.590 Philippines 750 Total 30.315 Quota

0,10% 30,32 0,20% 60,63

Table: Estimated BNP per country / region in 2014. Figures in billions of Euro

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 84 / 92

Having only 0,1% of the BNP of mentioned countries, we already have a yearly budget of 30 billion of Euros. The chosen countries are the countries which could participate on the project because they also could have benefit on the project. Europe and Africa are easy to understand. But why the other?

o China and India are massive economies, with a lot of people. Emigration of some part of the population is not negative.

o Philippines: just an example of which is possible. In my time in Dubai, I have noticed that there were a lot of Philippine workers.

When all these countries invest just 0,1% of their BNP, they could have back a lot of profit by supplying workers, supplying technology and so on. Projects on global scale are always a win-win situation. Investing money means creating employment. Creating employment means creating facilities for all people to live in.

Besides that, we all know that worldwide, billions and billions of Euros in subventions and investments are made for wind energy, for solar cells and all other “green energy” sources. Only creating green energy sources is not enough for our future. We also have to create new living area. Bringing water to the Sahelara is the basis for creating new land. This goes further, compared with the “simple” and commonly accepted investments in green energy. The difficult part is to convince all people worldwide that this project in this location is a possible solution to create a better environment worldwide. There are some questions to be answered:

• Is it politically acceptable to create a new “governmental controlled identity” in this region?

• Is the project on global scale positive for atmosphere? • Can we change the mentality of the people for not migrating from south to north,

but reverse migrating from north to south? • Is the project financial acceptable?

The question if a project is financial acceptable is a different question than asking if the project financially feasible. Having a budget is something different than justify the budget. As indicated above, with only 0,1% of the BNP of some countries, we already have more than 30 billion of euros every year to invest. The money issue cannot be the problem, when the political will to invest in the project is taken. For political acceptance, there are several subjects to be discussed. At first, we have to look to the map of the region in which the Sahelara has to be created:

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 85 / 92

Although the area has a population density of less than 3 inhabitants per km², the Sahelara is in the center of countries like Algeria, Libya, Egypt, Niger, Chad, Sudan, Mali, Morocco and Mauritania. To say it friendly: this is not the most stable region in the world at this moment. When the startup of the project is accepted, 3 different ways can be followed:

• The country borders are politically not touched and the Sahelara is just a region, spread over different countries. When people live in peace, this can be a good way to go for. But we all know the problems which can occur when ethnical groups are spread over several countries. Just look to the problem of the Kurds in Turkey and Syria.

• A new identity is created, taking a part of all the surrounding countries. Also, this seems simple to do, but are the countries in that area prepared to give up a part of their territory to create a new “country”. This new country, when successful, will be the biggest nation in Africa in the future.

• Not touching the country borders, not creating a new region. The created districts are part of the country in which the area is located. On short notice, this is the most-easy way to work. But, the problem in the future is that all the districts with the same level of technology in which they live are all regulated under different country legislations. This will give political competition, which is not good.

The first option seems the fastest way to go ahead, but on long term, this will give the most difficulties:

• All the workers in the Sahelara, all the investing companies, must be able to operate under the same rules. If a certain new created district is located in Egypt or Libya, it is not advisable that these districts operate with different regulations. All tax regulations, all investment climates for the companies, all social security regulations for the employees have to be the same in all these countries.

Sahelara

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 86 / 92

• The workers, the inhabitants of the new districts, will be immigrants coming from all parts in the world. To come there to live and to work, they will create a new population identity. These people, with different backgrounds, working together for a new world, at the end will become one “nation”. It is very dangerous to divide one “nation” over different countries. Again, we see the problems at this moment with the Kurds in Turkey and Syria. People with the same identity should live under the same government or have their own government. Of course, this means that Syrians, Israeli, Germans, Ghanaians, Chinese people, or whatever, when they come to live in the Sahelara, they must accept the governmental rules of the Sahelara. Or basically, religious laws are inferior to national law.

• All the financial transactions in the Sahelara have to be done in the same currency. This to avoid financial speculations for the future. It may be the U$D, the €, the AED or whatever. Or, better is to create a new currency like we have done for the Euro. But, a new currency in the center of all these countries, without creating a new legal identity, gives problems.

Therefore, it seems “logical” to create a new country. Or, comparable with the States: create a United States of Northern Africa. To do this, with respect to the existing countries and cultures, each country has to be split in 2 districts or states:

• Original country • Sahelara part of the country

Looking on the map, the following 10 countries are involved:

• Egypt: • Sudan: • Chad: • Niger: • Mali: • Mauretania: • Morocco: • Western Sahara • Tunisia: • Libya:

Having a part of the country which remains the original country / state, and a part becoming Sahelara state, the total Unites States of Northern Africa (USNA) is composed of 20 states. To solve this, very strict rules must be made for co-existence of different cultures in the same district. The task is double:

• Protecting the old cultures of the existing countries in the part of the territory which is not included in the Sahelara.

• Realizing a co-existence of different cultures in the new Sahelara districts.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 87 / 92

People coming to live in the Sahelara part must accept that a new culture is going to be built in a wasteland. It is comparable with the beginning of the United States of America, but this time without the elimination of the native people. The third option – creating districts in each country, without touching the country laws – can be an intermediate step. Starting up the construction of pipelines is a technical decision. This can go fast. As small example: Microsoft and Facebook have decided to invest together in the installation of a new transatlantic cable of +/- 6.600 km. the decision is taken in May 2016, and the target is to have it operational at the end of 2017. One and a half year for a cable of 6.600 km and an investment of 200 million U$D. A technical decision is taken, and execution is very fast. When the basic idea of districts in the Sahelara is accepted, without having an agreement yet on the new identity on which the Sahelara will be ruled, it must be possible to start already selecting areas and building the first pipelines. The only thing the country on which the district will be installed, is to accept that this district is ruled by an international board to assure that human rights are respected. When this is not guaranteed, the only people who are coming to that area are the workers to install the piping. At the end, the target is to bring complete families to that area, to create a new, modern, society. As second question was asked if the project will have a positive effect on environment on global scale. To answer this, we should not only take in account the transfer of the water, but look to the whole project:

• Of course, water coming in the Sahelara will not come in the ocean. So, level rises not so fast, but the effect is minimum.

• Creating a big algae production unit will act as a very big CO² buffering effect worldwide. This has a positive effect on climate.

• Transporting massive quantities of manure to the Sahelara will have a good effect on mineral contamination in the Northern countries

• Creating living area to millions and millions of people away from the over populated North will have positive effect on local air contamination and waste water flows in the north. Because in the Sahelara, everything can be built up from scratch, living will not have such a polluting effect as living in the old countries

• Creating big renewable energy plants (algae, solar, …) will diminish the need of fossil energy sources. Again, this has a positive effect on pollution worldwide

The answer on this question is definitively positive. The creation of the Sahelara as a new entity, including all investments, will have a positive effect on global environment. Third question: is the project financially viable. In this, major 3 components for investment have to be discussed:

• Investment in channels and / or pipelines: this is the major investment to start with. Even when the investment seems to be huge, it has such a positive effect on employment, creating living space and environment worldwide that this cost may not be an obstacle for deciding to go ahead. Perhaps, again we have to compare it with investments in windmills worldwide. Already billions and billions of euros are invested in this, and investment is going on

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 88 / 92

year after year. Although there are different opinions about the efficiency on long term of these investments, it is politically accepted to spend money for this.

• Investment in roads, living area (houses, apartments, schools, energy plants, …): this is a financial calculation for the investors. Investing in real estate in Europe or in the Sahelara should be the same. Invest and pay-back period. The difficulty is to find investors, but the investment itself should be no problem. When this investment part is taken care of in a good way, together with positive legislation on social security, employment and respect of human rights, automatically interested families will come to live in that area.

• A third point which is not mentioned before: the cost of the water. As it is stated, river water at the end is just rainwater, which is free. But the water is available in certain countries. Question is if these countries agree to give the water for free, or that they want something in return for this. These are political questions. Perhaps, comparable with the CO² quota, there can be given a small payment per m³ water taken. With the total volume of water taken, at the end these countries create basic economy. Even with 0,1 eurocent per m³, each pipeline having a capacity of 4.250 m³ per hour, they have €4,25 per hour per pipeline per hour. This gives +/- €40.000 per pipeline per year as income. Multiply this by the number of pipelines, and this can be a reasonable income for the country, for which they have to do nothing. Just protect the nature around the collecting zones. Anyway, even they are not paid for the supply of the water, they have incomings out of the taxes on the wages of the operators of the pumping stations. Also, the pumping stations need a lot of energy. Therefore, it is advisable that renewable energy plants are constructed. When these plants are constructed and controlled by the country in which it is located, this country has also a stable income of the supply of the energy. At the end, it can be a combination. Just give a little bit more per m³ and give them the freedom to organize themselves the collection areas with the pumps. Of course, as starting investment, a loan should be given by the world bank or similar.

All parameters together, the project should be financially viable, but political discussions have to be made to solve these problems before the kick of is given. Best to have agreements BEFORE the project starts, instead of discussing these terms during the project. To start with, there will be a big role for the United Nations. But, the first action to be taken is to settle a government for the Sahelara. The negotiations for contracts in the total project should be hold by the Sahelara government. As there is not a united population in the region, the government cannot be chosen by elections. The United Nations have to set a government of specialists.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 89 / 92

22. Science fiction or not? As realistic person, I am very well aware of the fact that there are already several studies made to irrigate parts of the dessert by diverting rivers. The text here under is about possible management of Lake Chad, written in Wikipedia:

Plans to divert the Ubangi River into Lake Chad were proposed in 1929 by Herman Sörgel in his Atlantropa project and again in the 1960s. The copious amount of water from the Ubangi would revitalize the dying Lake Chad and provide livelihood in fishing and enhanced agriculture to tens of millions of central Africans and Sahelians. Interbasin water transfer schemes were proposed in the 1980s and 1990s by Nigerian engineer J. Umolu (ZCN scheme) and Italian firm Bonifica (Transaqua scheme). In 1994, the Lake Chad Basin Commission (LCBC) proposed a similar project, and at a March 2008 summit, the heads of state of the LCBC member countries committed to the diversion project. In April 2008, the LCBC advertised a request for proposals for a World Bank-funded feasibility study. Neighboring countries have agreed to commit resources to restoring the lake, notably Nigeria.

All these plans have one very critical parameter: a feasibility study! Only, these feasibility studies are cost analyses concerning direct economy around the lake, compared with the investment cost to be made. Feasibility studies are the basis for lot of investments, but they also ruin a lot of good ideas. When global environment has to be put on the scale, not one feasibility study can include all effects we have to stand for the next decades, including the effects our children have to stand. Feasibility studies always need a period of return in investment to calculate with. The Suez Canal was an enormous investment, but the profit will last for the following hundreds of years. When, calculating with only financial figures, the feasibility for the sewage of Paris is made at this period, figures will show that the total investment at this moment probably is not acceptable to do the project. Nevertheless: the sewage system of Paris is famous, just because it is a project going on for generations and generations. Or, feasibility? Remember the Lilypad Islands from Callebaut. Cost +/- €450 billion euro for living space for +/- 50.000 people. The total GBP of a country like Belgium should be consumed to create living space for 50.000 people? With this money, as shown in the calculations, the Sahelara can be irrigated to give living space for millions and millions of people. Also, the argument that these Lilypads are created to give shelter to climate refugees makes no sense. Reason to live on the ocean is the raising of the ocean level:

• We have to avoid that the level of the oceans raises • When the ocean level raises, there is enough waste land to be developed on the

continents.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 90 / 92

Our example is the Lilypad, but there are several ideas to create extra living space for climate refugees. Even migrating to other planets. It is NEVER possible to migrate all world population. It is unpayable to migrate millions and millions of people on the oceans or to other planets. It are just dreams. We have to concentrate on what we have, and that is a lot of not used waste land. The reason of our writing is not to cancel all feasibility studies. Reason of writing is that we humans, as paterfamilias of our earth, sometimes have to neglect the investment costs in order to do something good for future. To do something good which is everlasting, no matter what the cost may be. This basic text is written with the Sahelara as basic. There are worldwide more dry areas which can be treated this way…..

• Central America • Australia

Our final question is not: are we going to irrigate the Sahelara and similar areas in the world. Our final question is: WHEN are we going to irrigate these areas.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 91 / 92

23. Personal word of the author Pumping water to the Sahelara: a dream or reality? Travelling to the moon: a dream or a reality? This paper in fact is the representation of a dream of me since years and years. Living in Belgium, in a country very “rich” with water, having travelled through several countries like Israel, Turkey, Dubai, Egypt, Morocco and alike, I was wandering why we could not “export” our rainy weather to dry countries. In the beginning, I wanted to write a small paper about bringing water from European rivers – the Schelde, the Rhine,tThe Moldau and others – with simple pipelines to the Sahara. This idea kept on playing in my head and I started to look for positive options to feed this idea. All my thinking about this changed, when I found out that there are very big rivers in Africa, even with a bigger flow than we have in Europe. For me, pumping water to the Sahelara is less spectacular but more realistic than travelling to the moon. And even: we already have been to the moon. When we forget the idea that we are “consuming” water and replace it by the idea that we are “circulating” water, the idea of the project becomes more acceptable. One of the major advantages of the Sahelara is the option for algae processing. Huge algae farms can be installed and an enormous economy can be created around these algae. But, in a negative point of view, we have the idea that for algae, we need a lot of water. Of course, algae grow in water. But, with good mineral control of the water, theoretically, a batch of water can be used for indefinite period. Once we have 100 m³ of water for algae processing, we can use this water for years and years. Compare it with an aquarium in the house: the algae in the aquarium are a pest. It keeps on coming on the glass of the aquarium. These algae can keep on growing as long there is water, even when it is the same water for years and years. Only, you have to control the mineral content and urea content for your fish. Also, the algae concentration is in balance with the fish, when the right population of fish is chosen. The example of algae is easy to understand. Look a little bit different to our own body. We are not consuming water. We are using water as a way of transporting minerals through our body. The excess and not valuable minerals are disposed by water out of our body in our toilets, in our sewage systems. We drink water, which contains different components. We use the components which are in it and we dispose the components which we do not need. It can be said that water in our body is a catalyst, but it is even less. It is just a transport medium. Just like water of our channels is carrying boats, water in our body carries nutrients and wastes. Life without water is impossible. But, the water itself, the pure molecule H²O, is lifeless. It is just a simple component. A very valuable but simple component. We must be trained that bringing water to the Sahelara is not for consumption, but for circulation.

=========================================================================================== Sahelara Pag. 92 / 92

Astronauts are trained to recirculate water to survive. We must do the same in the Sahelara. We must circulate the water in such a way that the atmosphere will become saturated with water – comparable with South America – and avoid that the water is spoiled back in the oceans by rivers.