Water Resour Manage (2015) 29:1385–1397

DOI 10.1007/s11269-014-0901-y

Is Desalination Affordable?—Regional Cost

and Price Analysis

Jadwiga R. Ziolkowska

Received: 9 October 2014 / Accepted: 7 December 2014 /

Published online: 18 December 2014
# Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract Desalination has proven to be a reliable and efficient water supply option in many
countries, especially in times of water scarcity. However, high desalination costs and high
prices for desalinated water (twice or three times higher than those from traditional water
sources) have been hindering an uptake and the development of desalination in many
countries. Applied desalination technology, capital and operational costs, production capacity,
water salinity are just a few factors determining the final cost of desalinated water that varies
considerably between $1.7–9.5/kgal ($0.45–2.51/m3). The final prices for desalinated water
and the related costs for local municipalities are among the most crucial determinants of the
overall short- and long-term effectiveness of desalination processes. This paper provides an in-
depth analysis on economics of desalination with country specific examples. It depicts a
comprehensive picture of cost variability of desalinated water and points out challenges for
cost-effective desalination in the future.

Keywords Desalination . Brackishgroundwater . Seawater . Watermanagement . Economicanalysis

1 Introduction

In 2013, the total global desalination capacity amounted to ~16 BGD (billion gallons per day)
(60 million m3), with approximately 8,770 desalination plants operating worldwide. The
desalination market has been growing rapidly in the recent decades; while the global produc-
tion capacity increased by 27 times since 1995 (GWI 2013). The market has been driven only
slightly by the increase in water demand, but more significantly by technological advances and
the reduction in desalination costs over time (Ghaffour et al. 2013). Yet, capital and operational
costs are the main factors determining the price of desalinated water and, in many cases, high
anticipated costs hinder investments in desalination.
Desalination is independent from climatic conditions, and thus, it is more reliable than other
water supply sources (Crisp and Swinton 2008; Ghaffour 2009; Ghaffour et al. 2013). The
price of desalinated water depends mainly on desalination technology (membrane or distilla-
tion processes), capital and operational costs, production capacity (MGD—million gallons per

J. R. Ziolkowska (*)
Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability, The University of Oklahoma, 100 East Boyd
St., Norman, OK 73019-1081, USA
e-mail: jziolkowska@ou.edu
1386 J.R. Ziolkowska

day) and water salinity (feed water for desalination: brackish groundwater or seawater).
Nowadays, membrane technology (and reverse osmosis—RO) belongs to the most efficient
technologies used commercially. In 2013, 71 % of desalinated water at the global scale was
treated with RO (GWI 2013). According to Global Water Intelligence (GWI 2013), globally
seawater desalination is predominant (58.9 %), while the rest on the desalination market is
provided through brackish groundwater desalination (21.2 %) as well as surface water and
other saline water desalination.
The main impediment for desalination is high costs of constructing and operating desali-
nation facilities, which directly translates to the cost of desalinated water, paid by the
communities and the final consumers. Different approaches have been discussed to optimize
economics of desalination in the long run. Improvement of membranes (for membrane
desalination) and thermal processes (for distillation technologies), reduction of energy costs
and designing an optimal size of desalination plants for regional purposes could help reduce
capital and operational costs. Cost-effectiveness of desalination depends not only on the capital
and operational costs per se, but also on the longevity of desalination plants that is determined,
among others, by the demand for desalinated water. The demand for desalinated water is
directly intertwined with the costs of desalination and the final price for desalinated water. In
the face of unexpected weather events and/or long-term drought in many countries in the world
(US, Australia, Europe), desalination has been considered for many years as a prospective and
necessary solution to water scarcity (Drouiche et al. 2011; Helfer et al. 2014; Tapsuwan et al.
2014). In the drought situation, the economic necessity naturally creates demand for desali-
nated water, regardless of water prices. However, when the economic necessity is mitigated, it
is the water price that determines the demand for desalinated water in the first place. This is a
case when favorably changing weather conditions allow for aquifers and rivers to be
replenished, while desalination becomes superfluous and too expensive for local communities.
Several examples from Australia and the US are known where desalination plants were
mothballed or decommissioned, with local water authorities being locked in 20–30 year long
debt service contracts for the construction of desalination plants. As the uncertainty related to
constructing and operating desalination plants is very high and the weather changes cannot be
anticipated long in advance, is it impossible to predict the long-term success or failure of a
newly built desalination plant. On the other hand, it is indisputable that reducing the cost of
desalinated water to the level of water prices from traditional water sources could be a solution
to maintaining desalination as an integral part of water portfolios, without the pressure for
mothballing and/or decommissioning them.
The prices for desalinated water are highly variable. In 2010, they ranged between $0.2–
1.2/m3 ($0.8–4.5/kgal) for desalinated brackish groundwater and $0.3–3.2/m3 ($1.1–12.1/
kgal) for desalinated seawater (with technologies using conventional energy sources) (Gude
et al. 2010; Karagiannis and Soldatos 2008). Prices for desalinated water have historically been
and still are twice or three times higher than prices for water from traditional water sources
(Afgan et al. 1999; Daniels and Daniels 2003). Examples from the practice show that there is
no one solution for successful and efficient desalination. However, considering local geo-
graphic and economic conditions of the countries and regions in the process of designing
desalination plants can increase plants’ effectiveness and efficiency.
As economics of desalination is the major factor determining its effectiveness in the short
and long-term, many studies have addressed cost aspects of establishing and operating
desalination plants (Zhou and Tol 2005; Wittholz et al. 2008; Akgul et al. 2008; Becker
et al. 2010; Baten and Stummeyer 2013). Also, in recent years, an increasing number of studies
have been focused on environmental impacts of desalination and the question of sustainable
desalination processes (Haddad 2013; Lattemann and Hopner 2008; Sadhwani et al. 2005;
Is Desalination Affordable? 1387

Einav et al. 2003; Tsiourtis 2001). Most of those studies focus on a specific desalina-
tion plant or region, which is a feasible way to estimate local costs and environmental
implications first-hand. This paper extends the research in the field by a comparative
regional analysis with country specific examples. It presents a broader perspective on
the cost and price analysis of desalination, both at the global and regional scale and
addresses problems related to economic feasibility of desalination plants in the short-
and long-term. In this way, the paper takes a more holistic approach than previous
studies in the field. The results of the paper can be used by water authorities and
communities to optimize desalination processes, based on experiences from other
regions and countries.

2 Methods and Data

The cost and price analysis in this paper is based on several information and data sources. The
literature overview sets the background for the discussion on economics of desalination at the
regional and global scale. Further, the DEEP 5 model by the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA 2013; Kavvadias and Khamis 2010) has been used as a data source for country
related desalination specifications and calculations. Moreover, the paper contains author’s
calculations and scenarios for different regions and countries, based on the Desaldata.com
by the Global Water Intelligence (GWI 2013) and the CAPEX (capital cost expenditures)
calculator.
The analysis of desalination costs and prices is challenging due to data paucity.
The data sets available in the literature are, in most cases, incongruent, dispersed or
outdated. The application of the Desaldata.com provides the most comprehensive
picture of the developments and patterns on the desalination market worldwide.

3 Results and Discussion

3.1 Cost of Desalination

Costs of desalination vary considerably from country to country and from region to region.
They are determined by geographical, socio-economic and environmental conditions as well as
regulations regarding establishing and operating desalination plants. Therefore, a direct com-
parison of desalination costs between different countries and regions is neither possible nor
recommended. Comparing costs from different facilities is also complicated, mainly due to the
lack of detailed data and a common method for cost estimation (Lapuente 2012). Different
factors would need to be considered in order to provide a congruent comparison analysis even
for two different plants in the same region. The paper does not provide a perfect solution to the
above mentioned problems. Rather, it offers an in-depth analysis with regional and country
specific examples, which is the most holistic approach in the face of limited data and
information sources.
The costs of desalination are a function of:

a) Capital costs (CAPEX) occurring as a one-time investment in the construction phase of

the desalination plant, and
b) Operational and maintenance (O&M) costs (OPEX) occurring continuously during the
operation period of the plant.
1388 J.R. Ziolkowska

While some authors neglect capital costs in their analyses, other authors report all costs
including delivery costs or design costs that do not ultimately reflect actual operating expenses
(Miller 2003). Therefore, comparing costs between different plants requires caution and a more
holistic approach to avoid biases.
In order to determine full costs of establishing desalination plants also opportunity costs
would need to be included that are defined as the value of each alternative forgone to both
government bodies and general public. In addition, defining costs of externalities would allow
for monetizing environmental impacts of desalination. However, as of today, neither opportu-
nity costs nor external costs of desalination have been discussed sufficiently yet and evaluating
them is a challenging task, mainly due to data paucity. Those challenges could be overcome,
when the following conditions apply: alternative technologies to desalination have been
specified and a detailed and extensive data set is available to analyze costs and benefits of
establishing both the desalination plant and an alternative solution. For the evaluation of
externalities, marginal social costs and marginal private costs would need to be determined
separately.
Generally, the costs of desalinating water and the final water prices can vary significantly
due to changes of capital costs or interest rates, in the first place. Major project delays can
contribute to the increase of capital costs. Moreover, operational and maintenance (O&M)
costs can change over the lifetime of a desalination plant due to changes in input costs or the
lifetime of major equipment.
Another relevant cost determinant is energy costs. According to the Australian Government
(2008), energy costs make 60 % of the total O&M costs of operating seawater desalination
plants. Also, the lifetime of membranes that typically last 5–7 years, and their exchange
frequency, need to be accounted for and would impact short- and long-term costs.
The cost of desalinated water is especially sensitive to changes in production capacity. As
the unit cost of desalinated water is determined by dividing the annual O&M costs by the
amount of water produced, changes in the capacity of the produced water (either increase or
decrease) will impact the final prices for desalinated water. In most cases, operating a
desalination plant below the estimated full capacity will result in considerable price spikes.
There is no consensus about the percentage of CAPEX and OPEX costs in the total costs of
desalination plants and the resulting final price of desalinated water. The numbers are
determined by the location of the plant, production capacity, feed water, technology, energy
source and other parameters impacting both the capital and operational costs. For instance,
Verdier (2011) stated that in a SWRO (seawater reverse osmosis) plant located in the
Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean with the energy use of 2,400 kWh/m3/yr fueled by
natural gas, 30 % of the total annual costs constitute capital costs, 48 % are energy costs, while
the remaining 22 % are other OPEX costs.

3.1.1 Capital Costs

Capital costs of establishing a desalination plant depend on several factors and can be specified
as follows:

a) Construction costs
- Preliminary costs (design & construction)
- External works
- Structural costs
- Civil costs (design of production and injection wells)
- Mechanical and process work costs
Is Desalination Affordable? 1389

b) Other capital costs

- Architectural and landscape related costs
- Land acquisition (production and injection wells)
- Electrical costs
- Costs of controlling and instrumentation
- Pre- and post-construction testing & studies (including commissioning)
- LEED design (Leadership & energy-environment development—establishing energy
efficiency of the plant)
- Solar panels (most desalination plants have solar panels on-site, even though they do not
provide any significant energy source in most cases)
- Labor work & management costs
- Permitting
- Overheads
- Costs of annual debt service on capital.

According to GWI (2013), the total capital costs of constructing desalination plants have
been fluctuating over years and amounted to ~$10.5 billion in 2013. The costs are estimated to
increase up to $18.5 in 2016, which will be driven, among others, by the total investment
increase in the desalination market. As SWRO is the dominating technology and also requires
high expenditures for better quality membranes, the total capital costs of establishing those
plants make the highest percentage in the annual capital expenditures for desalination. SWRO
is also expected to be the leading technology in the years to come. At the same time, the share
of the other desalination technologies (~30 % of the annual capital costs) is not expected to
change over years (Fig. 1).
The breakdown analysis of capital costs in a typical RO desalination plant shows that
equipment and materials constitute the highest percentage (25.4 %) of all capital expenditures,
followed by civil engineering costs (15.8 %) and piping costs (12.3 %). Thus, economic
environment in different countries and prices of the materials will determine the final water

Fig. 1 Annual capital expenditures by desalination plant type in the world (2007–2016). Source:
DesalData.com, GWI (2013). Legend: MED multiple-effect distillation, MSF multi-stage flash distillation,
BWRO brackish water reverse osmosis, SWRO seawater reverse osmosis
1390 J.R. Ziolkowska

price. The remaining capital costs are equally distributed and make approximately 5–7 % of
the total capital costs (GWI 2013).
Capital costs also vary subject to water salinity and the size of the desalination plant
(production capacity). According to Reddy and Ghaffour (2007) and Sauvet-Goichon (2007)
capital costs in a seawater RO plant can fluctuate between $2,272–3,030/kgal ($601.0–801.6/
m3), while they vary between $909–1,515/kgal ($240.5–400.8/m3) in a brackish groundwater
RO desalination plant (Vince et al. 2008; Yun et al. 2006). Higher capital costs in SWRO
plants result mainly from higher membrane costs, higher expenditures for more resistant
materials for the intake and outfall pipes transporting highly concentrated brine as well as
higher pretreatment costs compared to BWRO (brackish water reverse osmosis) plants.
Our regional analysis for selected leading countries in the desalination market was based on
the DEEP 5 model developed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA 2013;
Kavvadias and Khamis 2010). The regional differences in the plan siting were accounted for
by including country specific parameters for energy prices, costs of materials and equipment,
interest rates for building a desalination plant, etc. The highest capital costs of RO desalination
in 2013 were found for China ($965.4 million) and the US ($707.2 million). This can be
explained by the highest increment to capacity in those countries in that year. The lowest
capital costs were observed in Israel ($20.1 million) (Table 1).

3.1.2 Operational and Maintenance Costs

The OPEX costs reflect changes in costs and prices during the operation of the plant. They
include, among others, the following cost components:

– Energy costs
– Chemical costs
– Labor and management costs
– Upkeep & membrane exchange costs
– Disposal costs
– Institutional charges (compliance and regulatory costs, access charges).

According to the study by Bennett (2011, 2012), operating costs of desalination plants have
fallen in the last 20 years from an average of $4.74–5.68/kgal ($1.25–1.50/m3) in the early
1990s to less than $2.84/kgal ($0.75/m3) nowadays. In a typical SWRO plant, the highest
percentage of operational costs constitute energy costs ($0.24/m3 =$0.90/kgal) and labor
costs ($0.10/m3 =$0.38/kgal) (GWI 2013). According to GWI (2013) and Ghaffour et al.
(2013), the operating costs of a RO plant are lower than those of distillation plants (both

Table 1 Normalized average capital costs of RO technology per unit of produced water in selected countries in
2013

Country Output water (mil gal) Total costs (mil $) Cost ($/kgal)

Australia 502.9 160.7 319.5

China 970.8 965.4 994.4
Israel 477.3 20.1 42.2
Saudi Arabia 2060.4 300.0 145.6
US 2040.6 707.2 346.5

Source: Author’s calculations based on the IAEA DEEP 5 model (2013)

Is Desalination Affordable? 1391

MSF—Multi-stage flash distillation and MED—Multiple-effect distillation). For the

desalination plants using distillation processes, thermal and electrical energy costs make
the biggest share of the total OPEX costs. As energy prices can change unexpectedly and
rapidly due oil price changes, the final costs of desalination (and prices for desalinated
water) are very volatile. The costs of both labor, chemicals and parts are at a similar level
regardless of the applied desalination technology (Fig. 2).
Another relevant OPEX component is brine disposal, while different brine disposal
methods (surface water discharge, disposal to sewer, subsurface injection, evaporation ponds,
landfills, or land applications) generate different expense levels (Greenlee et al. 2009; Graves
and Choffel 2004; Koyuncu et al. 2001; Miller 2003; Sethi 2007).
Disposal costs are accounted for both in the construction phase (building disposal infra-
structure) and throughout the entire lifetime of operating a desalination plant. According to
Wetterau (2010), the costs of constructing disposal pipes (intake/outfall infrastructure) can vary
between 5 % and 50 %, with an average of 30 % for seawater desalination plants and around
8 % for brackish water desalination plants. According to DesalData.com (GWI 2013) and its
CAPEX estimates, establishing disposal infrastructure for seawater desalination plants makes
around 9 % of the total capital costs of constructing a plant. Seawater desalination does not
normally generate brine disposal costs, as brine is discharged directly back to the ocean.
However, costs of disposing brine in brackish groundwater desalination plants can make up to
5 % of the total annual O&M costs (Wetterau 2010).
According to Greenlee et al. (2009), there is a positive relation between the cost of
concentrate disposal and the price of desalinated water. Surface water disposal is considered
the least expensive option, although piping and pumping costs can significantly increase when
the plant is not located directly at the coast. Evaporation ponds and brine concentrators are the
most expensive options due to stringent groundwater regulations and energy requirements.
Nowadays, technologies are being developed that would use the Zero Liquid Discharge
(ZLD) systems to avoid liquid waste products. In this way, all feed water could be converted
into drinking water or it would evaporate during the process, leaving only dry, solid constit-
uents behind, thus eliminating brine discharge and any harmful impacts on the marine

Fig. 2 Relative operating costs of the main seawater desalination processes. Source: DesalData.com (2013);
Miller (2003). Note: The figure represents OPEX costs of seawater desalination plants. Disposal costs are not
listed as brine is discharged directly to the sea without additional costs to the desalination process
1392 J.R. Ziolkowska

environment. Solid brine wastes could be easily treated, for instance, through a disposal in
landfills (Muenk 2008; Sobhani et al. 2012; Barrington and Ho 2014; Cob et al. 2014).

3.2 Price for Desalinated Water

The cost of desalinated water at a plant is calculated as a ratio between the sum of
amortized capital costs and annual O&M costs and the average annual water produc-
tion (Pankratz 2014). The main challenge for evaluating the final price for desalinated
water is the lack of international/transnational reporting standards and thus a direct
cost/price comparison is impossible and almost meaningless. Therefore, to ensure
viability, both the specific project scope, technical and commercial aspects need to
be considered in the cost analysis.
The studies by Miller (2003) and Sethi (2007) have shown that the unit water prices for
desalinating brackish groundwater with the RO technology range between $0.10–1.00/m3
($0.38–3.8/kgal), while the prices for desalinating seawater with the same technology vary
between $0.53–1.50/m3 ($2–5.7/kgal). The review studies by Younos (2005) and Miller
(2003) showed that water prices vary between $0.80–5.36/m3 ($3.0–20.3/kgal) at MSF
seawater desalination facilities, between $0.45–6.56/m3 ($1.7–24.8/kgal) at RO seawater
desalination plants and between $0.18–0.70/m3 ($0.68–2.64/kgal) at RO brackish groundwater
desalination plants.
Voutchkov (2010) found that economies of scale can decrease the final price for desalinated
water. Also Colley and Ajami (2012) confirmed this relation and reported that a decrease in
desalination capacity from 50 MGD to 10 MGD can cause an increase in the final unit cost of
desalinated water from $2.17/m3 ($8.21/kgal) to $7.96/m3 ($30.13/kgal) Based on the param-
eters in the IAEA (2013) DEEP 5 model, we found that with an increasing plant capacity, the
average water price decreases, regardless of the power source (nuclear, oil, coal, gas).
However, the decrease is very slight [$0.07/kgal ($0.02/m3) for the capacity change between
13 MGD and 40 MGD (50,000–150,000 m3/d) for the nuclear steam cycle RO desalination plant].
This makes only 2.3 % decrease in water price per unit with 300 % increase in production capacity.
Our analysis found that salinity and energy costs have a direct impact on the final price of
desalinated water. In a typical steam cycle RO desalination plant with the capacity of
10,000 m3/d (26.4 MGD) the change in the salinity levels of the feed water between 1,000
and 55,000 TDS impacts the final energy and water cost. The estimated energy costs range
from $0.48/MWh to $1.49/MWh, while the prices for desalinated water vary between $3.94/
kgal ($1.04/m3) and $7.72/kgal ($2.04/m3). In addition, there is a linear relationship and a very
strong correlation between the energy pieces ($/MWh) and the final water prices ($/kgal)
(Fig. 3). With an increase in energy costs of $1/MWh, the final cost of desalinated water
increases by $3.77/kgal ($1.00/m3). A similar linear tendency has been confirmed by Mabrouk
et al. (2010) who analyzed changes in desalinated water prices subject to changing oil prices.
He found that energy costs make between 46 % and 73 % of the total water cost, depending on
the salinity levels.
Studies have shown variations in prices of desalinated water produced with con-
ventional and renewable energy. Using conventional energy for desalination is most
cost-efficient: $0.2–1.3/m3 ($0.76–4.9/kgal) for desalinated brackish groundwater and
$0.2–3.2/m3 ($0.76–12.1/kgal) for desalinated seawater. Brackish groundwater desali-
nation in remote areas is even more cost-effective than long-distance transfers of
water to those areas. Using wind energy doubles or triples the final costs of desali-
nated water, while using photovoltaic (PV) energy makes desalination the most
expensive option (Gude et al. 2010; Karagiannis and Soldatos 2008).
Is Desalination Affordable? 1393

Fig. 3 Relation between water and energy costs for water salinity levels between 1,000 and 55,000 TDS.
Source: Author’s calculations based on IAEA (2013)

The country specific analysis shows no clear pattern in the final price for desalinated water,
regardless of the country, capacity, feed water or applied desalination technology (Table 2).
The most expensive plant among the analyzed facilities (Tianjin in China) does not necessarily
provide water at the highest price per unit ($/kgal). Also the plant with the lowest capital costs
in this analysis (Southmost in Brownsville, Texas) does not provide the lowest water price.
Moreover, there is no relation between the plant capacity and the final price for desalinated
water for the analyzed examples. The Sydney desalination plant and the plant in Carlsbad
(currently under construction) operate at high capacities; however, the final water prices are
higher than in the plants operating at lower capacities. Even though it is commonly understood
that seawater desalination plants are more expensive, the case study analysis proves it not to be
correct in each single case. The Ashkelton plant in Israel and the Tampa Bay plant offer water
at lower prices than other brackish groundwater plants using the same RO technology and
powered by the same energy source. Thus, the results indicate that each desalination plant
should be evaluated separately and independently, including geographical and economic
settings in each country and each region.
Desalination has proven to be a viable water supply source in many countries. Due to the
high prices for desalinated water compared with water prices from traditional water sources,
desalination should not be used as a single and exclusive water supply technology, but rather
as one among many measures in the broader water portfolio. A study by AMTA (2007)
emphasized that a combined water supply and mixing water from traditional sources with
desalinated brackish groundwater could be the most effective strategy (Table 3). It would
prevent drastic changes in water prices for the final consumers, as most desalination projects in
the US are subsidized to some degree. According to Cooley et al. (2006), 90 % of the capital
costs for the construction of the Tampa Bay project were funded with tax monies from the
State. Also, desalination projects in California have been subsidized at a rate of about $0.75/
1394 J.R. Ziolkowska

Table 2 Selected desalination plants in the analyzed countries

Location/Name Country Capacity Online Capital costs Water cost Water Technology Power source
of plant (MGD) date (million $) ($/kgal) source

El Paso US, TX 27 2007 95 5.26 BW RO Power plant

San Antonio US, TX 27 2026 300 3.1 BW RO Power plant
Southmost US, TX 7.5 2004 26.2 2.4 BW RO Grid
Carlsbad US, CA 54 2016 1000 6.5 SW RO Power plant
Tampa Bay US, FL 25 2008 158 2.5 SW RO Power plant
Perth Kwinana AUS 38 2006 360 3.6 SW RO Wind
Sydney AUS 66 2008 1700 5.6 SW RO Wind
Ras Alkhair SA 192 2014 1460 n.a. SW MSF-RO Power plant
Shoaiba 3 SA 109 2014 1060 n.a. SW MSF Power plant
Tianjin China 40 2007 4000 3.6 SW RO Power plant
Ashkelon Israel 86 2001 200 2 .0 SW RO Power plant

The water cost ($/kgal) includes capital and operational costs only. It does not comprise transport costs of
desalinated water or environmental externalities
Source: Author’s presentation based on: Stanford University (2014), GBRA (2013), Water Technology (2014a, b,
c), Alstom (2014), Pankratz (2008, 2014), Mandel (2012)
BW brackish water, SW seawater, n.a. not available, RO reverse osmosis, MSF multi-stage flash distillation, SA
Saudi Arabia

1,000 gal. Thus, through subsidies some of the additional costs of desalinated water are shifted
from the ratepayer to the taxpayer.

4 Conclusions, Perspectives and Challenges for Cost-Effective Desalination

Desalination costs have been decreasing for all desalination technologies, particularly for RO
desalination. Due to constant market fluctuations, it is difficult to project the future develop-

Table 3 Total water costs by supply type in the US

Supply type Cost to consumer ($/kgal)a Total family water costs ($/month)b

Existing traditional supply 0.90–2.50 10.80–30.00

New desalted water
Brackish (1,000–5,000 TDS) 1.50–3.00 18.00–36.00
Seawater (30,000–35,000 TDS)c 3.00–8.00 36.00–96.00
Combined supply
Traditional (50 %)+brackish (50 %) 1.20–2.75 14.40–33.00
Traditional (90 %)+seawater (10 %) 1.11–3.05 13.32–36.60

Source: AMTA (2007)

a
Prices include all costs to consumers including water treatment and delivery
b
Cost is based on a family of four using 100 gal/day/pp, for a total monthly use of 12,000 gal
c
Cost is for a typical urban coastal community in the USA. Costs for inland communities may be higher
Is Desalination Affordable? 1395

ments of desalination, while scientific opinions about the prospects for desalination are
incongruent. Some authors do not predict the prices for desalinated water to decrease in the
next years, mainly due to instable prices of crude oil, currency fluctuations and anticipated
increases in membrane prices. Also, due to prospective environmental standards, the costs of
permits and manufacturing of chemicals might limit developments in the desalination markets
(Ghaffour et al. 2013). Other authors, e.g. Voutchkov (2010), claim that the desalination
market will grow in the future. Through an improved membrane quality, doubled or tripled
membrane productivity within the next 20 years and a longer membrane life span (10–15 years
in 20 years compared to 5–7 years nowadays), the energy use for SWRO plants can decrease
by around 40–50 %. At the same time, the final water cost can be reduced by 20 % in the next
5 years and by 50 % in the next 20 years.
Even though the energy costs for desalinating 1 m3 of water have fallen, energy requirements
for desalination are still high, regardless of the applied technology. On the one hand, energy
requirements can pose a potential challenge to the desalination development, on the other hand;
however, they can be mitigated with new technologies (nanofiltration, ultrafiltration, forward
osmosis, biomimetics), UV treatment and ‘green additives’ (to prevent membrane fouling).
Another relevant challenge for desalination is the related risk of constructing, operating and
maintaining a desalination plant, including permitting, design and technology, financing,
market and policy regulations (Colley and Ajami 2012). Economic feasibility of a desalination
plant will be achieved when the benefits from operating the plant equal the costs spent for
establishing and maintaining the plant. With the current state of knowledge and data paucity, it
is impossible to fully evaluate benefits and costs of desalination plants, mainly because
environmental externalities are not accounted for in economic analyses. Also, the risk factor
determines the feasibility of desalination plants in the mid- and long-term. Mothballing or
decommissioning plants can be economically infeasible, and it could generate more costs than
benefits to the municipalities and water consumers. In some situations, use of deployable
mobile units for seawater and brackish groundwater desalination can be considered, when only
temporary or small-scale water supply is needed. Desalination skids with high recovery and
high rejection membranes can supply water in emergency regions, affected by tornados,
droughts or affected otherwise by unexpected weather events. Mobile units are marketed by
water treatment companies, such as SevenSeasWater, Osmoflo, Aquamove, Aquatech and
others, while the lease price and thus the final price for 1 m3 of water depend on the length of
the lease, O&M costs and the production capacity. The product water is free of 90–99.9 % of
the raw water’s TDS, however high purchasing/leasing costs ($700,000–3,000,000) for the
production capacity between 200,000 GPD and 1 million GPD might be a limiting factor for
the uptake of this solution (BenJemaa 2009).
Due to high capital costs, transportation costs, significant maintenance requirements and a
shorter operating lifetime than traditional water treatment plants, it is recommended to apply
desalination as one among several water supply options in a differentiated and balanced water
portfolio. The future of desalination and its long-term affordability will depend mainly on
water demands and technological developments. Improved technology can help reduce capital
and operational costs and thus lower the final price for desalinated water that could be then
seen as an alternative to water from traditional sources.

Acknowledgments The author acknowledges the STARR (State of Texas Advanced Resource Recovery
Program) project for providing the desalination data base license. The initial work has been conducted at the
University of Texas at Austin. The paper has been prepared and completed at the University of Oklahoma.
1396 J.R. Ziolkowska

References

Afgan NH, Darwish M, Carvalho MG (1999) Sustainability assessment of desalination plants for water
production. Desalination 124(1–3):19–31
Akgul D, Cakmakci M, Kayaalp N, Koyuncu I (2008) Cost analysis of seawater desalination with reverse
osmosis in Turkey. Desalination 220(1–3):123–131
Alstom, Alstom completes Shoaiba III power plant ahead of schedule (2014) http://www.alstom.com/press-
centre/2012/5/alstom-completes-shoaiba-iii-power-plant-ahead-of-schedule/ (05/14/2014)
AMTA (American Membrane Technology Association), Membrane Desalination Costs, AMTA (2007)
Australian Government, National Water Commission (2008) Emerging trends in desalination: a review.
Waterlines Report Series 9
Barrington DJ, Ho G (2014) Towards zero liquid discharge: the use of water auditing to identify water
conservation measures. J Clean Prod 66:571–576
Baten R, Stummeyer K (2013) How sustainable can desalination be? Desalin Water Treat 51(1–3):44–52
Becker N, Lavee D, Katz D (2010) Desalination and alternative water-shortage mitigation options in Israel: a
comparative cost analysis. J Water Resour Protect 2:1042–1056
BenJemaa F (2009) Water use and efficiency branch. Water recycling and desalination. Logistics for Deploying
Mobile Water Desalination Units, State of California—Department of Water Resources
Bennett A (2011) Cost effective desalination: innovation continues to lower desalination costs. Filtr Separat
48(4):24–27
Bennett A (2012) Cost effective desalination: innovation continues to lower desalination costs. http://www.
filtsep.com/view/23919/cost-effective-desalination-innovation-continues-to-lower-desalination-costs/ (04/
29/2014)
Cob SS, Güner FEG, Hofs B, van Spronsen J, Witkamp GJ (2014) Three strategies to treat reverse osmosis brine
and cation exchange spent regenerant to increase system recovery. Desalination 344:36–47
Colley H, Ajami N (2012) Key issues for desalination in California: cost and financing. Pacific Institute, Oakland
Cooley H, Gleick PH, Wolff G (2006) Desalination with a grain of salt. A California perspective
Crisp G, Swinton EA (2008) Desalination in Australia: a review. Water 35(2):94
Daniels T, Daniels K (2003) The environmental planning handbook for sustainable communities and regions.
APA/Planners Press, Chicago
Desaldata.com, Desalination data base. Global Water Intelligence (2013) http://www.desaldata.com/
Drouiche N, Ghaffour N, Naceur MW, Mahmoudi H, Ouslimane T (2011) Reasons for the fast growing seawater
desalination capacity in Algeria. Water Resour Manage 25(11):2743–2754
Einav R, Harussi K, Perry D (2003) The footprint of the desalination processes on the environment. Desalination
152(1–3):141–154
GBRA (2013) A publication of the Guadelupe-Blanco Water Authority, River Run
Ghaffour N (2009) The challenge of capacity-building strategies and perspectives for desalination for sustainable
water use in MENA. Desalin Water Treat 5:48–53
Ghaffour N, Missimer TM, Amy GL (2013) Technical review and evaluation of the economics of water
desalination: current and future challenges for better water supply sustainability. Desalination 309:197–207
Graves M, Choffel K (2004) Economic siting factors for seawater. Desalination Projects along the Texas Gulf-
Coast, Technical Papers, Case Studies, and Desalination Technology Resources. Texas Water Development
Board
Greenlee LF, Lawler DF, Freeman BD, Marrot B, Moulin P (2009) Reverse osmosis desalination: water sources,
technology, and today’s challenges. Water Res 43:2317–2348
Gude VG, Nirmalakhandan N, Deng S (2010) Renewable and sustainable approaches for desalination. Renew
Sust Energ Rev 14:2641–2654
GWI (Global Water Intelligence) (2013) Market profile and desalination markets, 2009–2012 yearbooks and
GWI website. http://www.desaldata.com/ (05/23/2014)
Haddad BM (2013) A case for an ecological-economic research program for desalination. Desalination 324:72–
78
Helfer F, Sahin O, Stewart RA (2014) Bridging the water supply–demand gap in Australia: coupling water
demand efficiency with rain-independent desalination supply. Water Resour Manage 1–20. doi:10.1007/
s11269-014-0794-9
IAEA (2013) DEEP 5. Desalination Economic Evaluation Program. IAEA, Vienna
Karagiannis IC, Soldatos PG (2008) Water desalination cost literature: review and assessment. Desalination 223:
448–456
Kavvadias KC, Khamis I (2010) The IAEA DEEP desalination economic model: a critical review. Desalination
257:150–157
Is Desalination Affordable? 1397

Koyuncu I, Topacik D, Turan M, Celik MS, Sarikaya HZ (2001) Application of the membrane technology to
control ammonia in surface water. Water Sci Technol 1(1):117–124
Lapuente E (2012) Full cost in desalination. A case study of the Segura River Basin. Desalination 300:40–45
Lattemann S, Hopner T (2008) Environmental impact and impact assessment of seawater desalination.
Desalination 220(1–3):1–15
Mabrouk AN, Nafey AS, Fath HES (2010) Steam, electricity and water costs evaluation of power-desalination
co-generation plants. Desalin Water Treat 22(1–3):56–64
Mandel M (2012) Water from the sea: the risks and rewards of israel’s huge bet on desalination. http://www.
ibtimes.com/water-sea-risks-and-rewards-israels-huge-bet-desalination-723429 (05/14/2014)
Miller JE (2003) Review of water resources and desalination technologies. Available from: Sandia National
Laboratories. http://www.prod.sandia.gov/cgi-bin/techlib/access-control.pl/2003/030800.pdf (05/09/2014)
Muenk F (2008) Ecological and economic analysis of seawater desalination plants. Diploma Thesis, University
of Karlsruhe, Institute for Hydromechanics, Karlsruhe
Pankratz T (2008) Total water cost discussion rages on. Water Desalin Rep 44(34), GWI
Pankratz T (2014) Desalination data base
Reddy KV, Ghaffour N (2007) Overview of the cost of desalinated water and costing methodologies.
Desalination 205:340–353
Sadhwani JJ, Veza JM, Santana C (2005) Case studies on environmental impact of seawater desalination.
Desalination 185(1–3):1–8
Sauvet-Goichon B (2007) Ashkelon desalination plant—a successful challenge. Desalination 203:75–81
Sethi S (2007) Desalination product water recovery and concentrate volume minimization (DRAFT). American
Water Works Association Research Foundation Project #3030. Carollo Engineers, U.S. Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Reclamation
Sobhani R, Abahusayn M, Gabelich CJ, Rosso D (2012) Energy footprint analysis of brackish groundwater
desalination with zero liquid discharge in inland areas of the Arabian Peninsula. Desalination 291:106–116
Stanford University (2014) The Colorado river’s salty tears: evaluating the Yuma desalination plant. http://west.
stanford.edu/students/soco/yuma-desalination-plant (05/14/2014)
Tapsuwan S, Burton M, Mankad A, Tucker D, Greenhill M (2014) Adapting to less water: household willingness
to pay for decentralised water systems in Urban Australia. Water Resour Manage 28(4):1111–1125
Tsiourtis NX (2001) Desalination and the environment. Desalination 141(3):223–236
Verdier F (2011) MENA regional water outlook. Part II: desalination using renewable energy. Task 1—
desalination potential. Fichtner, Stuttgart
Vince F, Marechal F, Aoustin E, Breant P (2008) Multiobjective optimization of RO desalination plants.
Desalination 222(1–3):96–118
Voutchkov N (2010) How much does seawater desalination cost? Water Globe Consulting, Texas Innovative
Water
Water Technology (2014a) Ras Al Khair desalination plant, Saudi Arabia. http://www.water-technology.net/
projects/-ras-al-khair-desalination-plant/ (05/14/2014)
Water Technology (2014b) Shoaiba, Saudi Arabia. http://www.water-technology.net/projects/shoaiba-
desalination (05/14/2014)
Water Technology (2014c) Ashkelon, Israel. http://www.water-technology.net/projects/israel/ (05/14/2014)
Wetterau G (2010) Cost trends in desalination. Border Governor’s Binational Desalination Conference; May 26–
27, 2010
Wittholz MK, O’Neill BK, Colby CB, Lewis D (2008) Estimating the cost of desalination plants using a cost
database. Desalination 229(1–3):10–20
Younos T (2005) The economics of desalination. J Contemp Water Res Educ 132:39–45
Yun TI, Gabelich C, Cox MR, Mofidi AA, Lesan R (2006) Reducing costs for large-scale desalting plants using
largediameter, reverse osmosis membranes. Desalination 189:141–154
Zhou Y, Tol RSJ (2005) Evaluating the costs of desalination and water transport. Water Resour Res 41(1–10):
269–287