A Report onNile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Submitted to: Laura Basco Carrera Submitted By: Sudish Lal Maskey (43584 / 227) Karim Morsy (45880 / 277) A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 9 1.1 Location and Study Area..................................................................................................................................... 9 1.2 Use of RIBASIM to analyse the Basin .................................................................................................................. 9 2. Characterization of the Nile Water Resources .............................................................................................10 2.1The Stakeholders ............................................................................................................................................... 11 3. Problem Identification for the Present Situation .........................................................................................15 4. Objective and Criteria (including the Work Plan) .........................................................................................16 5. Nile RIBASIM Schematization ......................................................................................................................17 5.1 Reservoirs (Merowe Dam) ................................................................................................................................ 17 5.2 Karadobi Dam ................................................................................................................................................... 17 6. Model data, calibration and assumption .....................................................................................................19 7. Base case analysis including the water demands (for each water user) for the present and future situation (Reference Case) ..................................................................................................................................................21 7.1 Water requirements for public and livestock water supply in present case ..................................................... 21 7.2 Water Demand for Irrigation in present case ................................................................................................... 22 7.3 Analysis of Problems in Present case (Base Case) ............................................................................................ 29 7.3.1 Public Water Supply ...................................................................................................................................... 29 7.3.2 Irrigation Water Shortage ............................................................................................................................. 30 7.3.3 Energy Production ......................................................................................................................................... 33 7.4 Water requirements for public and livestock water supply in present case in Future Case (Reference Case) . 33 7.4 Water Demand for Irrigation in future case (Reference Case) ......................................................................... 35 7.5 Analysis of problems in future situation 2030 .................................................................................................. 37 7.5.1 Public Water supply ....................................................................................................................................... 37 7.5.2 Irrigation Water Demand .............................................................................................................................. 39 7.5.3 Energy Production ......................................................................................................................................... 40 7.6 Comparison of Base case and Reference Case ................................................................................................. 41 7.6.1 Public Water Supply ...................................................................................................................................... 41 7.6.2 Irrigation Demand ......................................................................................................................................... 42 7.6.3 Energy............................................................................................................................................................ 43 8. Scenario Conditions .....................................................................................................................................44 8.1 Proposed Objective ........................................................................................................................................... 45 9. Formulations of possible measures for the future horizon (2030) ...............................................................46 2 A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 10. Design and analysis of alternative strategies ...............................................................................................47 10.1 Strategy 1 ....................................................................................................................................................... 48 10.1.1 Public Water Supply .................................................................................................................................... 48 10.1.2 Irrigation Water Supply ............................................................................................................................... 49 10.1.3 Energy.......................................................................................................................................................... 50 10.2 Strategy 2 ....................................................................................................................................................... 51 10.2.1Public Water Supply ..................................................................................................................................... 51 10.2.2 Irrigation Water Supply ............................................................................................................................... 52 10.2.3 Energy.......................................................................................................................................................... 53 10.3.1 Public Water Supply .................................................................................................................................... 53 10.3.2 Irrigation Water Supply ............................................................................................................................... 54 10.3.3 Energy.......................................................................................................................................................... 55 10.4 Scorecard for better decision making ............................................................................................................. 55 11. Conclusion and Recommendation ...............................................................................................................63 11.1 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................................... 63 11.2 Recommendations .......................................................................................................................................... 63 12. References ..................................................................................................................................................64 13. Appendices ..................................................................................................................................................65 3 ................................... 32 Figure 14 Ribasim Graph showing time step shortage in Irrigation Water Supply.9 Figure 2 Nile River Basin ..................... 60 Figure 33 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Sudan ...................................................... 40 Figure 22 Shortage Comparison Chart for Irrigation ......A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 List of Figures Figure 1 Overview of the Nile Basin ....................................... 50 Figure 25Comparative Study of Energy Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 1 ............................................................................... 49 Figure 24Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Supply in Reference case and Strategy1 ................................. 15 Figure 6 Schematization of the Nile Basin showing Atbara River Confluence ........................................... 17 Figure 8 Data for calibration .. 38 Figure 19 Shortage of Water for Irrigation in Reference Case .................................................... 31 Figure 13 Ribasim Graph showing Shortage in Irrigation in ......... 60 4 ......................................................................................... 11 Figure 5 Problem Identification ..................................................................................................... 59 Figure 31 Radial Plot of Strategy with reference case for Sudan and South Sudan .................................................... 53 Figure 28 Comparative Study of Public Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 3 ................9 Figure 3 Integrated Water Resource Management Framework................................... 32 Figure 15 Shortage in Energy in base case ...................................................................................... 54 Figure 29 Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 3 ............................................................................................................................................... 30 Figure 11 Graph obtained from Ribasim ................................................... 43 Figure 23Comparative Chart for Public water shortage in reference case with strategy 1 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 30 Figure 12 Shortage in Irrigation Water Supply ..................................................... 40 Figure 21 Ribasim graph showing a time step of shortage in irrigation water supply in Reference Case..................................................... 59 Figure 32 Radial Plot of Strategy with reference case for Egypt .............. 39 Figure 20 Ribasim Graph showing the Shortage Irrigation Water Supply in Reference Case ....................... 55 Figure 30 Radial Plot of Strategy with reference case for Ethiopia .... 17 Figure 7 Merowe Dam .......................................................................................................................... 51 Figure 26 Comparative Study of Public Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 2 ........ 38 Figure 18 Ribasim Graph showing Shortage in Irrigation Water Supply in Reference Case ......................... 33 Figure 17 Graph showing shortage in Public Water Supply in Reference Case ............................. 19 Figure 9 Results of Calibration ................................. 11 Figure 4 Stake Holder Analysis ........................... 20 Figure 10 Shortage in Public Water Supply....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 52 Figure 27 Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Supply Shortage in Reference Case and Strategy 2 ................................................................................................................................... 33 Figure 16 Shortage in Energy ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. .....................................................................................................................A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Figure 34 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Egypt ...................... 61 Figure 36 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Ethiopia............. 62 5 ..................................................... 61 Figure 35 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Ethiopia............................... ........ 28 Table 23 Total Net water Requirement for all types of crop 2005 ............. 34 Table 30 Water needed for livestock 2030 .................................. 25 Table 20Expected rainfall per irrigation scheme in Egypt 2005 .................................................. 21 Table 7 Water needed for livestock 2005 ..................................................................... 34 6 ............................... Sudan and South Sudan...................................................................................... 21 Table 6 Livestock details 2005 ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... area currenlty irrigated and required irrigation per country 2005 ...........Vegetables and Sugarcane 2005 .................................. 34 Table 27 Water needed by the population in the four riparian countries 2030 ....................... 29 Table 24 Shortage in Public Water Supply .... 23 Table 14 Comparision area equiped for irrigation......................................... 15 Table 2 Data Analysis for Calibration and model input ..... 24 Table 16 Area Currently irrigated for egypt........................................ 31 Table 26 Population in Egypt........................................................................................ 22 Table 11 Potential yield for wheat......................................... 27 Table 22Net water requirements for Sugarcane for "Fir_Nile Valley Delta"irrigation Scheme 2005 ......... 21 Table 5 Population and Water Demand for the Riparian Countries 2005 ............... 24 Table 17 Crop Evapo-transpiration per irrigation scheme in sudan and Egypt 2005 ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 34 Table 31 Population and Water Demand of Livestock 2030. Sudan and South Sudan......................................................................................... 25 Table 19 Calendar of the cropping plan for Sudan and Egypt 2005 ............................................................................................................... and Ethiopia 2030 ........................................................................................................................................................A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 List of Tables Table 1 Problem Identification............................................................................................. 34 Table 29 Livestock details 2030 .. and Ethiopia 2005 ............................................................................................ 19 Table 3 Population in Egypt............................................................... 22 Table 10 Energy Table 2005 .................................................................. 34 Table 28 Population and Water Demand for the Riparian Countries 2030 ............................................................................. 22 Table 9 Total Water Demand 2005 .............................................................................................................................................. 22 Table 12 Required Irrigation Area 2005 ....................................................... Ethiopia and Sudan and South Sudan 2005 .. 21 Table 4 Water needed by the population in the four riparian countries 2005 ................. 21 Table 8 Population and Water Demand of Livestock 2005 .................... vegetables and sugarcane 2005 ..................................................................................... 29 Table 25 Irrigation Shortage in Base case ........................................................ 23 Table 15 Cropping Pattern per country for the present situation 2005 .... 23 Table 13 Current Irrigated area for the Nile River Basin 2005...................... 26 Table 21 Net water requirements for Wheat and Vegetables for "Fir_Nile Valley Delta"irrigation Scheme 2005 ......................................................................................................................... 25 Table 18 Crop factors for Wheat....................................... .. 37 Table 42 Shortage in Public Water Supply in Reference Case ...................................................................................................................... 47 Table 51 Reservoir operation Rules adopted fir alternative strategies ........................................ 39 Table 44 Shortage in Energy in Reference Case................................... 60 Table 64 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Egypt .................................................................................. 35 Table 33 Energy Table 2030 .......................... 56 Table 61 Coloured Representation of Score card .................................................................................................................................................................................... 42 Table 48 Comparison of Shortage Situation .................................................................................. 37 Table 41 Irrigated area per crop in each country ..................................................... 48 Table 52 Comparison of Shortage in Public Water Supply with reference case and strategy 1 .. 38 Table 43 Shortage in Irrigation Water Supply in Reference Case ............................................................................................................... 36 Table 37 Irrigated areas in base case and reference case 2030 ...................................................... 49 Table 53 Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 1 ........ 55 Table 60 Criteria and Values obtained from calculations and ribasim for all the countries with different strategies............................................... 50 Table 55 Comparative Study of Public Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 2 .............................................. 50 Table 54Comparative Study of Irrigation Energy Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 1 ... 51 Table 56 Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 2 ........... 42 Table 47 Comparative Study of Shortage Situation of Public Water Supply ........................................................ 47 Table 50 Net Irrigation Demand after change in cropping time ................................................................................................................................ 36 Table 38 Cropping patterns for 2030 ...... 58 Table 63 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Sudan ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Table 32 Total Water Demand 2030 ............................ 53 Table 58 Comparative Study of Public Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 3 ................... 41 Table 45 Shortage of Energy in Reference Case ...................................................................................................................................................................... vegetables and sugarcane 2030 ..................................... 61 7 .............................................. 35 Table 34 Potential yield for wheat................ 37 Table 40 Distribution of irrigated area per country for 2030 ............... 36 Table 36 Irrigation developments for 2030 ................ 57 Table 62 Score Card showing the preference level of each objectives with strategies ................................................. 36 Table 39 Irrigation Area Gap .......... 54 Table 59 Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 3 ............................................................................................................ 41 Table 46 Comparative study of Shortage situation Public Water Supply ........................................... 35 Table 35 Required Irrigation Area 2030 ...... 42 Table 49 Assumed population and Public water supply .................................................................................................................................................. 52 Table 57 Comparative Study of Energy Shortage in Reference Case and Strategy 2 ............................. ............................................................A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Table 65Complete Analysis of all three cases .......... 11 8 ....................... The drainage area of the Nile basin is roughly 3. Within the Nile basin. Nile River has two main tributaries. The population living in this basin represents about 54% of the total population of the riparian countries. It has a total length of 6700 km. Kenya. Figure 2 Nile River Basin 1.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 1.2 Use of RIBASIM to analyse the Basin To analyse the Project and its different components River Basin Simulation (RIBASIM) is used as a tool. Kenya. Tana and Nasser) with a surface area larger than 1000 km2 1. appropriate schematization is to be done during modelling in RIBASIM 9 . This software was developed by Deltares. Democratic Republic of Congo. Tanzania. South Sudan. Albert. Kyoga. with and average discharge of 2800m3/s. providing freshwater resources to a population of about 200 million people. This model is used for large water resources development and also operational of water management systems dealing with multi sector of water supply. Zaire and Uganda and Blue Nile with its sources in the Ethiopian highlands. Tanzania. Eritrea and Egypt. Ethiopia. Sudan. Delft Hydraulics which is mainly used in water management studies for the simulation of river basin management. Introduction The Nile River is a major north-flowing river in north eastern Africa and generally regarded as the longest river in the world The Nile river basin comprises of 11 riparian countries which are Burundi. Egypt is wholly dependent upon water that originates from the upstream Nile Basin. To address all the problems related to water resources and water supply. Rwanda.1 Location and Study Area Figure 1 Overview of the Nile Basin The Nile extends over a wide band of latitude from 4°S to 32°N. Rwanda. White Nile with its sources from Burundi. Uganda.4 million km2. The river flows from highland region in the tropical climate zone with abundant moisture to lowland plains under severe arid conditions. there are five major lakes (Victoria. Components of Socio-Economic System (SES) Water uses and related activities Dams constructed for irrigations and hydropower like the Rosieres and sennar in the blue Nile. Characterization of the Nile Water Resources The components that should be included in planning IWRM in the Nile Basin are as follows: Components of Natural Resource System (NRS) The physical system The average annual rainfall over the basin differs considerably from upstream 2500mm/year to downstream 0mm/year In the south. etc. maximum rainfall gradually shifts towards a single maximum in JulyAugust. Fluctuations in the Nile flows are primarily driven by the variation in rainfall over the Ethiopian highlands The considerable amount of water is lost through evaporation The chemical system and The biological system-response of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem. the size of feeder canals. Tanzania and Uganda) in 1929. Kenya.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 2. flooding Control variables – Change of Reservoir operation rule curve. with a second maximum between September and November In the north. sedimentation problems in the reservoirs. the highest rainfall volume is accumulated in the month of April. Egypt and Sudan in 1959 and Egypt and Ethiopia in 1993 Central Government Regional government Coordinating bodies between the countries 10 . Sudan.between the countries like the agreement of Egypt and Great Britain ( Repr. Aswan in the Main Nile Regulated lakes like Lake Tana Water supply both for municipal and industrial Future plans for expansion of those schemes Tourist attraction Control variables –Governed by legislative and regulating measures Components of the administrative and Institutional System (AIS) International Agreement. A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Figure 3 Integrated Water Resource Management Framework 2. Stakeholders in a process are actors (persons or organizations) with a vested interest in the 11 .1The Stakeholders The stake holder analysis is done based on this format Power/influence of stakeholders Meet their needs Key player Least important Show consideration Interest of stakeholders Figure 4 Stake Holder Analysis Stakeholder analysis is a process of systematically gathering and analysing qualitative information to determine whose interests should be taken into account when developing and/or implementing a policy or program. governors). labour (unions. commercial /private for-profit. national political (legislators. social security agency. These stakeholders. non-profit (nongovernmental organizations [NGOs].” can usually be grouped into the following categories: international/donors. 12 . medical associations). ministry of finance). foundations). public (ministry of health [MOH]. and users/consumers. civil society. or “interested parties.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 policy being promoted. with representatives from the three bordering countries 3 2 3 Definitive Environmental NGOs Local and larger groups concerned about the environmental state of the lake 1 3 3 Dependent Local people Residents of the area 2 1 1 Dormant Recreational Users Primarily boat and property owners from other places who visit the lake frequently 2 3 1 Dangerous Tourism Largest economic sector in region 1 2 1 Demanding Universities/Research centres Researchers interested in the region 1 1 3 Discretionary Consumers People who would buy the fish produced in the region 1 2 1 Demanding A scoring system was used to more easily decide on a ranking.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Stakeholder HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Description Scoring (3-high. as it was difficult to say definitively if groups had power (legitimacy and urgency) or not. 13 . For the Venn diagram values of 2 and 3 were included in the circle. and a scale more accurately reflected the differences between groups. with 1 excluded. 1-low) Power 3 Urgency 3 Legitimacy 2 Stakeholder type Aquaculture/Fisheries Local industry who wish to maintain traditional fishery or develop a new economic sector of aquaculture using the lake Definitive Governmental Consortium The lake management organisation. links to NGOs at different scales Local people Power available to push for change Depend on information. and make plans without undue pressure Able to block progress. especially with veto power for all countries Environmental NGOs Build awareness in general population and inform governments All NGOs may be vulnerable to actions of one group How their Salience can be improved? Production of scientific research and reports.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Stakeholder HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 How could these stakeholders influence the sustainable management of the region? Aquaculture/ Fisheries Positive Important part of the local economy and an influence on local government Negative Potential to overdevelop aquaculture and put ecosystem and tourism at risk Governmental Consortium Mediate between stakeholders. Legitimacy. increased community support. Furthermore. L L P. understanding tourism's value to society Provide legitimacy to other groups through focused research Lack of urgency and connection to region may affect results Collaboration with other stakeholders Drive economic decisions affecting the development of the region But. which has not been considered in this approach. drive economic decisions affecting the development of the region Altering/coordinating buying decisions. power often simultaneously raises when legitimacy is increased. Urgency) L P U. Greater role in planning process Recreational Users Able to support good management vocally and financially Lack of legitimacy means they may be misinformed or follow narrow interest Increase their awareness through posters/news etc. L P. and require motivation. greater understanding of objections and other perspectives Collaboration with other stakeholders. In addition. their action and their influence frequently depend on the interaction between each other. increased awareness of problems Universities/ Research centres Consumers Lacking (Power. depending on its intensity and the perspective of the stakeholder on the issue. L Several actions of a certain stakeholder can be both positive and negative. This became obvious when the salience of the stakeholders was tried to improve in the direction towards a definitive one 14 . change to more inclusive lake governance. Could be used Awareness and Education. U P. Tourism Care greatly about water quality and the aesthetic value of the place and can make governments aware Interests depend on tourists (who may also support fishing) Increased power through collaboration. high costs .environmental effects -Diseases Table 1 Problem Identification Agriculture Crop Yield Economy Health Problems Health Problems Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Food insecurity Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Health Problems Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Population Growth Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Health Problems Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Water Shortage Water Allocation and Equity Health Problems Dams (reservoirs) High Sediment Trap Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Dams(reservoirs) (reservoirs) Dams Environmental Effects Dams (reservoirs) Floods Power Supply Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Dams (reservoirs) Figure 5 Problem Identification .A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM 3.Quantity of flow in the canals.Quantity of domestic and industrial effluents. . which in turn depends on irrigation demands.environmental effects Water quality (as shown in figure 4) . effects Measures Implications -uneven rainfall -increased demand economic losses reservoirs . Problem Identification for the Present Situation Basin system phenomena Shortage of water Insufficient food Causes Socio-econ.hydropower . Effects Health issues Along the Nile basin . Socio-econ. Improve equity in income distribution 4.Total annual benefits development in an economically efficient way . Support economic development in an economic .Sectorial value added .Total O&M costs . Self-sufficiency food Coverage [%] 2.Foreign currency required .NPV .GRP 16 . Increase income of people net income of the farmers .Improve income position of farmers .Number of temporally jobs 3.Total capital required .A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 4. Objective and Criteria (including the Work Plan) Objectives Evaluation Criteria 1. Increase the export production .B/C ratio .Total construction costs .Total annual costs .Export value 5. Improve employment Increase of employment .Number of permanent jobs . 7km down stream of its confluence with Guder River at about 135km (air distance) north west of Addis-Ababa. Nile RIBASIM Schematization The Nile Basin except the Atbara River till the confluence was provided by the lecturer. Reservoirs nodes and diversion nodes which were connected by the links. fixed irrigation nodes. surface irrigation nodes. as well as controlling the flood. 17 . siltation. the main purpose behind building this dam is hydropower generation. For the analysis of this basin. Figure 7 Merowe Dam 5. The schematization includes different natural systems as well as manmade systems. in 1998. So the schematisation of Atbara River with different structures in the river was made as shown in figure 7. The proposed dam site is located 1.000 m3/yr evapotranspiration rate and this loss is almost 8% of the total water in Sudan. This dam is located in north Sudan in the capital Khartoum.1 Reservoirs (Merowe Dam) Figure 6 Schematization of the Nile Basin showing Atbara River Confluence Merowe dam is a potential project proposed to be built on the Nile river basin in 2002. irrigation and water conservation. The creation of the reservoir lake will increase the surface area of the Nile about 700 km2. The project was studied at reconnaissance level in the Abbay River Master Plan Project by BCEOM. with 1500.2 Karadobi Dam Karadobi projects is expected to provide improvements to the downstream riparian countries with regards to flooding. Confluence nodes. The flood water level is expected to be 300m with a discharge 9999 m3/s with expected 1250MW of electricity. This was done by adding confluence points and connecting them with the links and calibrating them. schematization at Atbara River includes different types of nodes Variable inflow nodes. The Karadobi hydropower project is located on the Abbay River ( Blue Nile ). this project is considered as the largest contemporary hydropower project in Africa.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 5. 5. 40. The reservoir area full level has an area of 445km 2 with a capacity of. to undertake pre-feasibility and feasibility studies of Karadobi hydropower projects respectively. The goal of the Project is to: Promote regional economic development through provision of more renewable hydropower energy at a reasonable cost 18 . 2004.200 Mm3. The study of the Karadobi Multi-Purpose Project indicate a rolled concrete gravity dam of maximum structural height of 260m and length of about 684 m at the crest. with a corresponding installed capacity of 1600 MW.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 The Ministry of Water Resources had entered an agreement and signed a contract with the international consultants. Norplan-Norconsult.Lahmeyer (with local associates) on May 10. Model data. In this Basin the variation between the simulated and monitored may be due to heavy evaporation loss in the basin. Table 2 Data Analysis for Calibration and model input Figure 8 Data for calibration 19 .A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 6.e in the storage node. This Value was used in the model as shown in the figure 4. The chart showing the calibrated data with simulated and monitored data is as shown in figure 5. to compensate this error surface area and initial storage was calculated by assuming average depth of 10m. The calculation is shown in table 1 below.i. calibration and assumption Calibration of the model data means a cross check of the variation between the simulated and monitored data. So. A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Figure 9 Results of Calibration 20 . 471.00 247.2 Egypt 50 Table 6 Livestock details 2005 Country Water Needed for Livestock(l/cap/day) Ethiopia 20 Sudan and South Sudan 20 Egypt 20 Table 7 Water needed for livestock 2005 21 .00 Sudan and South Sudan 26.000. Country Population*10^6 in 2005 Ethiopia 27.6 Sudan and South Sudan 31.000.00 1.000.000.000. Base case analysis including the water demands (for each water user) for the present and future situation (Reference Case) 7.100.1 Water requirements for public and livestock water supply in present case For the current situation the water demand is computed by translating population and livestock statistics into food demand. using the table 5 and 6 below the water demand for the livestocks was calculated and is shown in table 7 below.4 Egypt 72 Table 3 Population in Egypt. Sudan and South Sudan.00 Table 5 Population and Water Demand for the Riparian Countries 2005 Similarly. Country Population Population water demand (McM) Ethiopia 27. Country Water Needed for population (l/cap/day) Ethiopia Sudan and South Sudan Egypt 25 25 56 Table 4 Water needed by the population in the four riparian countries 2005 The datas from table 2 and 3 was then used to calculate the total water demand for each riparian countries. and Ethiopia 2005 The water needed per country is given in table 3 below. The food demand is used for determining the required irrigation area. The population in Egypt.287.1 Sudan and South Sudan 26. Sudan and South Sudan.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 7.400. Country Livestock (in*10^6 TLU) Ethiopia 10.900.00 240. and Ethiopia is indicated in table2.000.500. The result obtained is illustrated in table 4 below.680.00 Egypt 72. 00 247.2 Water Demand for Irrigation in present case Two assumptions were made for the computation of irrigated area.00 1. 1.500.00 10.000.600.00 31.000.000.000.660.000.000.058 16.30 14.000.867.000.00 50. Energy requirement per capita per day assuming light activity level (Kcal) 2100 Nutritional Value of 1000gm cereals / wheat (Kcal) 3400 Table 10 Energy Table 2005 Potential yield (kg/ha/yr) Wheat Vegetables Sugarcane Ethiopia 1160 40000 125000 Sudan and South Sudan 1600 40000 125000 Egypt 8000 40000 125000 Country Table 11 Potential yield for wheat.836.705 28.287.00 Sudan and South Sudan 26.000.00 77.86 58.100.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 10.882 5.000.900.00 Sudan and South Sudan 31. 7.24 Table 9 Total Water Demand 2005 The results were then used as the values for public water supply nodes in Ribasim.00 365.680.760.667.000.00 240.00 Egypt 72.380.231.00 365.109.000.680.0 Country Ethiopia Population Population water demand Livestock (McM) Egypt Table 8 Population and Water Demand of Livestock 2005 Then the total water demand was calculated per country as follows: Country Population Population water demand (McM) Population Population water demand Livestock (McM) Total water demand PWS (McM/year) Total water demand PWS(m3/s) Ethiopia 27.000.000.000.00 50.764.000.00 324.000.380.292.471.00 10.647. vegetables and sugarcane 2005 Country Total cereals/wheat requirements per year(Mton) Ethiopia Sudan and South Sudan Egypt Total 6.000.760.647 22 .000.000.951.00 227.000.400.00 1.00 77. Only wheat is considered to fulfil cereal requirement 2.200.000.00 468. the food demand for the population was calculated using the datas in table 9 and table 2.000.500. Sugarcane is entirely for export and does not contribute to food of local population For the agricultural water demand.00 227.600.000.455.200. Then using table 10 required Irrigation area was calculated which is as shown in table 11. A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Required cereals/wheat area (Mha) Required Irrigation Area (Mha) HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 5,266,772 3,719,779 2,028,970 11,015,522 5,266,772 3,719,779 2,028,970 11,015,522 Table 12 Required Irrigation Area 2005 The irrigated area in present situation according to the country is as shown in table 12. Country Node Ethiopia Sudan and South Sudan Egypt Basin Level Fir_Et_SmallScaleHumer aMetemaIrr(P) Total Fir_Su_NewHalfaIrr Fir_Su_GeziraMenagilSu kiGeneidAbuNamaSel Fir_Su_MainNile_Merow eNasser_Irr Total Fir_Eg_ToshkaPumpSche me Fir_Eg_NileValleyDelta Total Total Total irrigated area Total irrigated % Area 2005 (ha) from area 2005 (ha) distribution software 1800 0 1800 105000 650000 0 105000 650000 12.43% 76.92% 90000 90000 10.65% 845000 250000 845000 250000 100.00% 8.20% 2800000 3050000 3896800 2800000 3050000 3895000 91.80% 100.00% Table 13 Current Irrigated area for the Nile River Basin 2005 However there is a difference between the area currently irrigated (2005) and the area that is equipped for irrigation. For this the datas were taken from AQUASTAT as per the country and a comparison was made based on it as follows: Country Ethiopia Ethiopia basin (20%) Sudan and South Sudan Egypt Area equipped for irrigation (ha) Area currently irrigated (ha) Required irrigation(ha) 289,530 - 5,266,772 57,906 - 5,266,772 1,863,000 845,000 3,719,779 3,422,178 3,050,000 2,028,971 Table 14 Comparision area equiped for irrigation, area currenlty irrigated and required irrigation per country 2005 From the above table we can conclude that currently Ethiopia is not irrigated at all along the nile basin using the water from nile, whereas in Egypt the irrigated area is more than required areas. But Sudan and south sudan has a lack of irrigation land even if they irrigate all the potential land similar to Ethiopia. Finally the irrigated are is divided into areas growing wheat and sugarcane using table 14 as a base. The area irrigated with wheat and sugarcane in each country is then given in table 15 below. 23 A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Cropping pattern (2005) Country Wheat and vegetables (%) Ethiopia basin (20%) 100 Sudan and South Sudan 80 Egypt 90 Sugarcane (%) 20 10 Table 15 Cropping Pattern per country for the present situation 2005 Country Area Irrigated Wheat (ha) Area Irrigated Sugar cane (ha) Ethiopia Ethiopia basin (20%) Sudan and South Sudan Egypt 0 0 169,000 305,000 0 676,000 2,745,000 Table 16 Area Currently irrigated for egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan and South Sudan 2005 To ensure that the irrigated area is sufficient for covering the required food production in all the countries, the average irrigation water requirements per country was calculated. The net irrigation water requirements for the present situation were computed based on the Evapo-transpiration (ETc), effective rainfall (Peff) and land preparation using the following formula: IRRnet = ETc - Peff + land Preparation--------1 Using the table 16 as the reference crop evapotranspiration (ETo) and the crop factors (Kc) per country per project, the evapotranspiration is calculated as follows ETc = ETo*Kc The crop factor for wheat, vegetables and sugarcane based on the country is shown in table 17, whereas the cropping calendar is shown in table 18. For the net water requirements, the expected rainfall from table 19 was used and the rainfall effectiveness was assumed to be 70% for all irrigation schemes in Egypt and Sudan. Using above tables and the formula (1), the net water demand was calculated, the result of which is shown in table 20 and 21 for different crops. Ref Eto (mm/day) Month January February Mar April May June July Fir_Su_Gezir aMenagilSuki GeneidAbuN amaSel 5.40 6.41 7.32 7.66 7.98 7.50 6.52 Fir_Su_New HalfaIrr Fir_Su_MainNile_ MeroweNasser_Irr Fir_Eg_Toshka PumpScheme Fir_Eg_Nile ValleyDelta 4.80 5.46 6.53 7.22 7.23 7.34 6.23 5.29 6.49 7.54 8.83 9.49 9.30 8.44 3.37 4.64 6.53 8.38 10.22 10.83 10.46 2.25 2.97 4.11 5.56 6.96 7.47 6.88 24 A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM August September October November December 5.85 6.07 5.85 5.90 5.36 5.43 5.83 5.39 4.91 4.61 HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 8.10 8.01 7.66 6.12 5.09 10.15 8.99 6.93 4.66 3.43 6.26 5.44 4.30 2.90 2.19 Table 17 Crop Evapo-transpiration per irrigation scheme in sudan and Egypt 2005 Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Kc Wheat Vegetables Sugarcane 0.50 0.78 0.40 0.72 0.95 0.82 1.15 1.05 0.82 1.15 1.05 1.25 0.32 0.75 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 0.75 0.75 Table 18 Crop factors for Wheat,Vegetables and Sugarcane 2005 Type of Crop Wheat Vegetables Sugarcane Calendar cropping plan Sudan Egypt June October December April January January Table 19 Calendar of the cropping plan for Sudan and Egypt 2005 Ref Eto (mm/day) Month January February Mar April May June July August September October November December Fir_Su_GeziraMena gilSukiGeneidAbuN amaSel Fir_Su_New HalfaIrr Fir_Su_MainNile_ MeroweNasser_Irr Fir_Eg_Toshka PumpScheme Fir_Eg_Nile ValleyDelta 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.37 0.84 2.42 2.88 1.36 0.37 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.55 1.30 3.48 3.67 1.89 0.34 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.13 0.19 0.59 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25 116 for computing the NWR (l/s. ha) 26 . following formulas were used to calculate table 20 and 21 for different crop types NWR=Sub-NWR (Sub-NWR>0) NWR =0(Sub-NWR<0) And multiplying NWR (mm/day) times 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Table 20Expected rainfall per irrigation scheme in Egypt 2005 Also. 59 0.area) Month January Feb Mar April May June July August Septembe r October November December 90 Evapotranspiration Land Preparation Land Land Prep Prep .59 0.84 7.59 0.25 0.11 0.97 4.61 7.84 7.54 Table 21 Net water requirements for Wheat and Vegetables for "Fir_Nile Valley Delta"irrigation Scheme 2005 .96 7.19 0 0 0 0 70 70 0 0 2.25 2.91 0.34 6.19 1.75 2.56 6.11 5.15 2.61 7.34 6.22 4.l dose (mm (mm) /day) 0 0 0 0 50 1.30 0.67 0.52 0.22 4.67 1.00 4.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Crop Wheat-Vegetables Octobe r Startime Area (% of Total irr.61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Effective Rainfall Net water Requirements 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 Effective rainfall (mm /day) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 1.70 2.70 0.5 0.15 0.3 2.9 0.15 2.78 0.88 6.15 2.15 2.09 0 0 31 2.05 0.44 0 0.61 4.61 7.61 4.52 2.34 6.84 7.24 0 0 70 0 2.32 0 0.09 2.50 0.29 Length (days) Ref Eto (mm /day) Kc Crop ET 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 2.09 0.22 4.00 50 1.84 0.05 1.52 0 Expected rainfall (mm /day) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rainfall effectiveness (%) Sub-NWR (mm/day ) IRR net NWR (mm /day) NWR (l/s.67 31 30 4.47 6.ha) 2.77 0.95 1.19 0.72 2.26 1.95 1.70 30 5.95 0.95 1. 79 0 0 0 70 0 3.28 0 0 0 70 0 3.82 0. ha) (mm/day) (mm/day) (%) (mm/day) IRR net (mm) 0 0 0 70 0 0.75 0.83 7.25 0 0 0 70 0 0.23 2.97 4.25 1.95 0.25 0.00 0.56 6.80 0.l rainfall effectiveness rainfall (mm/day) dose (mm/day) (l/s.70 1.82 1.26 5.18 2.00 Table 22Net water requirements for Sugarcane for "Fir_Nile Valley Delta"irrigation Scheme 2005 The Net water requirement for all types of crops is calculated in table 22 below 28 .96 7.19 0.4 0.70 8.11 5.95 8.25 1.90 2.44 3.90 0.47 6.00 0.3 2.37 0 0 0 70 0 2.18 0.00 Land Preparation Effective Rainfall Net water Requirements Land Land Prep Expected Rainfall Effective Sub-NWR Prep NWR NWR .37 3.34 9.44 2.34 1.60 8.90 0.83 6.25 1.88 6.60 1.area) HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Sugarcane January 10 Evapotranspiration Month Length (days) Ref Eto (mm/day) Kc Crop ET January February March April May June July August September October November December 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 2.81 0 0 0 70 0 8.91 0 0 0 70 0 6.37 6.34 8.80 6.39 0 0 0 70 0 6.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Crop Startime Area (% of Total irr.00 0 0 0 70 0 7.23 0.10 0 0 0 70 0 2.44 4.9 2.25 1.00 0.01 0 0 0 70 0 9.23 3.70 9.25 1.75 0.60 7.80 3.25 2.18 0.95 6.83 0.08 0 0 0 70 0 8.44 0.37 0. 3 Analysis of Problems in Present case (Base Case) After entering all the datas that was calculated into the Ribasim we get the following results in all the water shortages in the present case.00 0.00 0. net water requirements for all the projects were calculated and then the values obtained was entered in RIBASIM as shown in figure 10.00 0.82 June 7.27 Month Table 23 Total Net water Requirement for all types of crop 2005 Similarly.10 Mar 1.00 0.18 October 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 December 2.03 Sudan and South Sudan 2005 0.99 July 7. Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Ethiopia 2005 0.00 0.42 Feb 1.00 0.00 0.3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 Table 24 Shortage in Public Water Supply 29 . 7.00 0.00 0.60 May 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM NWR (mm/day) January 2.00 0.00 0.79 April 4.36 August 5.00 0.00 Egypt 2005 0.1 Public Water Supply The table below shows the summary of the results obtained.00 0. 7.00 0.00 0.01 September 2.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 November 2. we can say that the shortage is maximum only June for Ethiopia and the rest two countries have no impact in the present case.3.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 The graph of the same is as follows: Shortage in PWS 0.350 Discharge (m3/s) 0.300 0. Figure 11 Graph obtained from Ribasim By observing the above graphs.200 0.250 0.150 0.050 0.2 Irrigation Water Shortage The irrigation conditions in the present condition was analysed and summarised as shown in the table below: 30 . 7.100 0.000 Jan Feb Mar Ethiopia Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Month Sudan Oct Nov Dec Egypt Figure 10 Shortage in Public Water Supply The Graph of the same was also obtained from the Ribasim software which is presented below. 95 666.00 0.32 7.00 0.99 4.00 Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Sudan and South Sudan 2005 21.00 0.39 6.00 0.35 6.00 8.00 0.00 0.71 108.00 0.00 0.51 252.00 0.96 432.00 0.00 0.12 5.00 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Ethiopia Month 2005 0.09 379.00 0.42 365.87 188.56 178.00 0.77 Table 25 Irrigation Shortage in Base case The Graph of the same is shown in the following figure: Shortage in Irrigation Water Supply 1400 Discharge (m3/s) 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month Ethiopia 2005 Sudan and South Sudan 2005 Egypt 2005 Figure 12 Shortage in Irrigation Water Supply The graph clearly shows the shortage of irrigation water supply in Sudan and Egypt whereas there is no shortage in Ethiopia.00 0.00 0. Results from Ribasim is shown below 31 .94 935.21 0.97 41.74 Egypt 2005 7.44 904.68 24.64 1191. A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Figure 13 Ribasim Graph showing Shortage in Irrigation in Figure 14 Ribasim Graph showing time step shortage in Irrigation Water Supply 32 . 00 830.33 Figure 15 Shortage in Energy in base case The figure below shows the shortage graphically.36 2 0.00 0. 7.00 830.00 0.00 830.00 0.3 Energy Production The Results from Ribasim tells us that Ethiopia has power shortage in the present case as presented in the table below Month Sudan Egypt Ethiopia 1 0.00 830.00 830.00 11 0.00 Total 0.4 Water requirements for public and livestock water supply in present case in Future Case (Reference Case) For the future situation.00 0.3.00 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 823. water demand is computed by translating population and livestock statistics into food demand similar to the present case or base case of 2005.00 5 0.00 830.00 0. Power (GWh) Shortage in Energy 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month Sudan Egypt Ethiopia Figure 16 Shortage in Energy The table and graph illustrates that Ethiopia has energy shortage in present case but the other two has no shortages of energy.00 0.00 4 0.00 0.00 829. The food demand is used for 33 .00 830.00 7 0.00 6 0.00 0.00 830.00 830.00 0.00 0.00 830.00 9 0.00 830.00 10 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 7.00 0.00 3 0.00 12 0. 00 Table 28 Population and Water Demand for the Riparian Countries 2030 Similarly.300.000.000.000. The result obtained is illustrated in table 24 below. Country Population Population water demand (McM) Ethiopia 48.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 determining the required irrigation area. Sudan and South Sudan. and Ethiopia 2030 The water needed per country is given in table 24 below. The population in Egypt.00 Population water demand Livestock(McM) 95. using the table 25 and 26 below the water demand for the live stocks was calculated and is shown in table 27 below.800.000. and Ethiopia is indicated in table23.00 Egypt 90.000.800.000.00 Sudan and South Sudan 41.000.080.187.000. Country Ethiopia Sudan and South Sudan Egypt Water Needed (l/cap/day) 25 25 56 Table 27 Water needed by the population in the four riparian countries 2030 The datas from table 23 and 24 was then used to calculate the total water demand for each riparian countries. Country Livestock (in*10^6 TLU) Ethiopia 13.000.00 2.8 Egypt 107 Table 26 Population in Egypt.000.000.00 Sudan and South Sudan 44. Population*10^6 in 2030 Country Ethiopia 48 Sudan and South Sudan 44.630.00 299.00 Table 31 Population and Water Demand of Livestock 2030 34 .000.00 438.000.1 Sudan and South Sudan 41 Egypt 90 Table 29 Livestock details 2030 Country Water Needed for Livestock(l/cap/day) Ethiopia 20 Sudan and South Sudan 20 Egypt 20 Table 30 Water needed for livestock 2030 Country Population Ethiopia 13. Sudan and South Sudan.000.000.100.00 408.00 Egypt 107.000.000.000.00 657. 800.000.312.187.147.00 90.844. 7.000.00 708.00 408.328.470.821.4 6.8 9.705.099.00 2.000.00 41.000.4 45. Sugarcane is entirely for export and does not contribute to food of local population For the agricultural water demand.000. Energy requirement per capita per day assuming light activity level (Kcal) 2100 Nutritional Value of 1000gm cereals / wheat (Kcal) 3400 Table 33 Energy Table 2030 Potential yield (kg/ha/yr) Wheat Vegetables Sugarcane Ethiopia 1160 40000 125000 Sudan and South Sudan 1600 40000 125000 Egypt 8000 40000 125000 Country Table 34 Potential yield for wheat.275.00 95.656.015.92 22.000.058.300.000.6 10. the food demand for the population was calculated using the datas in table 30 and table 23.100.000.352.000.19 Table 32 Total Water Demand 2030 The results were then used as the values for public water supply nodes in Ribasim.000.000.080. vegetables and sugarcane 2030 Country Total cereals/wheat requirements per year(Mton) Required cereals/wheat area (Mha) Ethiopia Sudan and South Sudan Egypt Total 10.9 24.000.100.000.000.00 533.00 299.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Then the total water demand was calculated per country as follows: Country Population Population water demand (McM) Population Population water demand Livestock(McM) Total water demand PWS(McM/year) Total water demand PWS(m3/s) Ethiopia 48.800.00 16.000.764.122.176.00 13.630. Then using table 31 required Irrigation area was calculated which is as shown in table 32.45 90. 1.000.000.000. Only wheat is considered to fulfil cereal requirement 2.00 Egypt 107.1 35 .600.630.00 438.205.00 2.229.000.00 Sudan and South Sudan 44.080.043.882.000.9 3.7 18.000.4 Water Demand for Irrigation in future case (Reference Case) Two assumptions were made for the computation of irrigated area.00 657. 000. This implies that the area for wheat will increase and the area of sugarcane remains the same as shown in table 34.00 0 Cropping pattern Reference case (2030) Area Irrigated Wheat(ha) Area Irrigated Sugarcane (ha) 2700.000.00 1800.355. Country Ethiopia basin Sudan and South Sudan Egypt Cropping Pattern base case (2005) Area Area Irrigated Irrigated Sugarcane (ha) Wheat(ha) 0.00 305.000.9 3. Because it depends on set of factors such as availability of labour force.7 Irrigated Areas (2005) Estimated irrigation area (2015) Estimated irrigation area (2030) 0.000.500. Assumptions considered for the computation of irrigated area in 2030 are only wheat is considered as to fulfil cereal requirement and the other is sugarcane is entirely for export and does not contribute to food for locals people.394.00 169.00 Required Irrigation (ha) Table 36 Irrigation developments for 2030 Estimated irrigation land for Egypt was more than maximum potential so the maximum potential was taken for calculation purpose.275.00 3.220.00 845. favourable political conditions and economic development. financial and human resources capacity.00 0 676.00 5.115.00 2.00 6.328. The table below shows the result. Assuming that all the riparian countries experience an expansion of the current potential irrigated area by 10% in the period 2005-2015 and by 50% in the period 2015-2030 and all the irrigation schemes will be active.500.600.000.000.4 1.420. infrastructure.225.745.352.312.000. Table 35 gives the cropping pattern in both base case and reference case.032.00 305.000. Country Ethiopia basin (20%) Sudan and South Sudan Egypt 2700.250.00 1.88 12.00 4.00 4.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Table 35 Required Irrigation Area 2030 For the computation of the required irrigation area versus potential irrigation area we considered that a country can only reach its potential irrigation area in the long term.015.000.750.90 Table 38 Cropping patterns for 2030 36 .000.000.00 9.000.00 929.00 (Max) Potential irrigation (FAO) 2.250.050.00 169.00 Table 37 Irrigated areas in base case and reference case 2030 Country Ethiopia basin Sudan and South Sudan Egypt Cropping Pattern base case (2005) Cropping pattern Reference case (2030) Wheat (%) Sugarcane (%) Wheat (%) Sugarcane (%) 100 0 100 0 80 20 87.00 2.000.12 90 10 93.10 6.00 3. 00% Sudan and South Sudan Egypt Basin Level % Area distributio n Table 40 Distribution of irrigated area per country for 2030 Country Area Irrigated Wheat (ha) Area Irrigated Sugar cane (ha) Ethiopia Ethiopia basin(20%) Sudan and South Sudan Egypt 0 1.275.700.08 100.700.00 9.724.74 4.978.5 Analysis of problems in future situation 2030 All the final values were then put into Ribasim and the following datas were observed.850 442.65% 845000 250000 1.41 2. 37 .115.000 0 0 278.00 1.250.20% 2800000 3050000 3896800 4.394.057.26 Ethiopia basin Sudan and South Sudan Egypt Table 39 Irrigation Area Gap Finally the distribution of irrigated area in 2030 was calculated.704.92% 90000 148. 7.250.00 362.225.600.500.000 Table 41 Irrigated area per crop in each country 7. which is tabled below Country Node Total irrigated area 2005 (ha) from software Total irrigated area 2030 (ha) Ethiopia Fir_Et_SmallScaleHumera MetemaIrr(P) Total Fir_Su_NewHalfaIrr Fir_Su_GeziraMenagilSuki GeneidAbuNamaSel Fir_Su_MainNile_ Merowe Nasser_Irr Total Fir_Eg_ToshkaPump Scheme Fir_Eg_NileValleyDelta Total Total 1800 2.43% 76.015.295.00 5.352.00 173.099.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Then the irrigation area gap was calculated as the difference between required irrigation area and estimated area as shown in the table below.000.250.00 .325.5.00 1800 105000 650000 2.900.072.102.00 5816950 91.000.80% 100.92 4.312.400 3.1. Country Required irrigated Area (based on population) Estimated irrigated Area for wheat Irrigation area gap 9.94 3.420.700.087.1 Public Water supply The shortage was increased related to base case in Egypt but remains same in Ethiopia and Sudan which is shown in the table below.500.41 6.115.00 10.00 12.328.00% 8.94 1. 000 0.000 0.249 0 Table 42 Shortage in Public Water Supply in Reference Case Shortage in Public Water Supply Discharge (m3/s) 3.008 0.000 Mar 1.456 0.371 0.000 0.000 Total 1.751 0.000 May 3.000 0.000 November 0.027 0.000 0.735 0.000 December 0.000 October 0.247 0.000 0.503 0.5 Egypt Dec Oct Sep Nov Month Ethiopia Aug Jul Jun May April Mar Feb Jan 0 Sudan Figure 17 Graph showing shortage in Public Water Supply in Reference Case Results obtained from Ribasim Figure 18 Ribasim Graph showing Shortage in Irrigation Water Supply in Reference Case 38 .5 2 1.5 3 2.000 August 0.000 September 0.000 0.000 0.002 1.000 0.000 0.5 1 0.048 0.876 0.668 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Month Egypt Ethiopia Sudan January 0.000 July 0.000 April 2.000 Feb 1.000 June 2.239 0.000 0.408 0. 00 659.04 1713.75 0.00 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 7.90 0.00 0.31 910.22 0.28 4413.95 143.98 183.54 943.27 0.5.71 0.00 0.00 738.00 1600.37 228.27 270.01 615.2 Irrigation Water Demand Similarly the results from Irrigation was obtained as follows: Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Sudan and Ethiopia South Sudan 2030 2030 0.00 0.49 1181.77 0.33 0.62 188.00 217.43 3805.83 119.46 2714.00 0.04 Table 43 Shortage in Irrigation Water Supply in Reference Case The above table can be graphically represented as follows: Discharge (m3/s) Shortage in Irrigation Water Supply 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month Ethiopia Sudan and South Sudan Egypt Figure 19 Shortage of Water for Irrigation in Reference Case The results obtained from Ribasim is as follows: 39 .00 5.05 1895.09 551.47 0.00 1.00 0.28 Egypt 2030 250.00 0. A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Figure 20 Ribasim Graph showing the Shortage Irrigation Water Supply in Reference Case Figure 21 Ribasim graph showing a time step of shortage in irrigation water supply in Reference Case 7.5.3 Energy Production Similar to shortage of Public Water Supply and Irrigation Water supply. shortage of energy in future case was observed and summarised below in the table. Month Egypt Sudan Ethiopia 1 0 0 823.36 2 0 0 830 3 0 0 830 4 0 0 830 5 0 0 830 6 0 0 830 7 0 0 830 8 0 0 830 9 0 0 830 40 . The table shows that the shortage of energy prevails only in Ethiopia and which should be taken into consideration while designing the strategies for all the cases. 000 Sudan and South Sudan 2005 2030 0.000 Egypt 2005 2030 0.00 0.000 0.00 1.00 1.33 Table 44 Shortage in Energy in Reference Case The graph showing the result is as follows which basically the same with base case.735 0.239 0.371 0.00 0.00 0. Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Ethiopia 2005 2030 0.6 Comparison of Base case and Reference Case To know how the system will behave and what will be the change in scenario of water demand.668 0.503 0. 7.751 0.1 Public Water Supply In the table below.31 1.000 0. a comparative study of base case and reference case was used. The situation will be worst in Egypt comparing to Ethiopia.002 0.01 0.000 0.00 3.00 0.247 0.408 0.000 0. which clarifies that actually the shortage of water will occur in both Ethiopia and Egypt and Sudan will remain unaffected.876 0.00 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Month Egypt Sudan Ethiopia 10 0 0 830 11 0 0 830 12 0 0 830 Total 0 0 829.6.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.000 41 . This will also help in defining and focusing our priority towards the projects and its measures.00 2.000 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.008 0.00 0.00 0. Power (GWh) Shortage in Energy 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month Sudan Egypt Ethiopia Table 45 Shortage of Energy in Reference Case 7.456 0.048 0. the highlighted values shows the changes in the situation.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 265 24.00 0. From table we can conclude that the situation is getting worst for both Sudan and Egypt.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Egypt 2005 2030 0.458 379.21 551.000 0.51 216.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0. 42 .000 365.00 0.39 270.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.000 21.000 432.32 143.000 0.494 Table 48 Comparison of Shortage Situation The graph of the table shows it even better to illustrate the situation.00 0.00 0.00 0.046 1191.000 HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Sudan and South Sudan 2005 2030 0.00 0.001 0.00 0.94 2714.00 0.000 0.96 738.56 3805.768 0.42 1713.000 0.00 5.950 5.64 1600.000 8.036 904.371 7.00 1.2 Irrigation Demand The table below shows a change in situation of water shortages in future based on base case.97 228.000 0.09 910.71 659.00 0.434 666.00 0.00 0.090 108. Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Ethiopia Sudan and South Sudan 2005 2030 2005 2030 0.000 0.00 0.615 6.000 0.99 188.00 0.68 943.00 0.753 0.12 250.995 Egypt 2005 2030 7.95 4413.327 0.00 0.000 0.35 119.00 0.00 0.281 935.833 4.266 0.6.218 0.000 Table 46 Comparative study of Shortage situation Public Water Supply SHORTAGE COMPARISION CHART Ethiopia 2005 Ethiopia 2030 Sudan 2005 Sudan 2030 Egypt 2005 Egypt 2030 DISCHARGE (M3/S) 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 JAN FEB MAR APRIL MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH Table 47 Comparative Study of Shortage Situation of Public Water Supply 7. The highlighted values mean the situation is getting worst and needs some attention.00 0.44 1895.474 0.00 0.000 0.900 0.00 0.979 6.00 0.709 0.539 178.309 41.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Month Sep Oct Nov Dec Ethiopia 2005 2030 0.00 0.00 0.87 183. 6.3 Energy The situation remains the same for Energy. 43 .A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 SHORTAGE COMPARISON CHART Ethiopia 2005 Ethiopia 2030 Sudan 2005 Sudan 2030 Egypt 2005 Egypt 2030 5000 DISCHARGE (M3/S) 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 JAN -1000 FEB MAR APRIL MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH Figure 22 Shortage Comparison Chart for Irrigation 7. so the comparison study was not done. 4. Operating both of the two potential reservoirs together. 2. Scenario Conditions Three strategic scenarios are proposed in this section depending on enhancing the irrigation efficiency. Finding better solutions to reduce the evaporation loss. 2. Reducing/controlling the population growth by 10 %. 3. Operating both of the two potential reservoirs together. reducing the population growth and the optimum usage of the potential reservoirs (Karadobi & Merowe). Reducing/controlling the population growth by 10 %. Enhancing the irrigation efficiency in the three countries to achieve better agriculture as follows: - Crop pattern: changing the crop time as per FAO. These scenarios are presented as follows: Scenario 1: scenario 1 aims of: 1. 2. - The present and future irrigation efficiency is predicted to be: Egypt Sudan Ethiopia Current Efficiency % 70 45 45 Future Efficiency % 80 70 70 Scenario 3: scenario 3 aims of applying all the above mentioned solutions. 3. 1.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 8. 3. Reducing/controlling the population growth by 10 %. also taking into consideration that the crops which require more water are planted on wet seasons and those which require less water on dry season - Planting time: trying to find the best plant time during the year which decreases the water consumption. Scenario 2: scenario 2 aims of: 1. Operating both of the two potential reservoirs together. Enhancing the irrigation efficiency in the three countries to achieve better agriculture as follows: 44 . Finding better solutions to reduce the evaporation loss. More cooperation between the three countries by using the Egyptian knowledge/experience in agriculture. 2. Sudan and Ethiopia as follows: 1. Enhancing the irrigation efficiency in the three countries to achieve better agriculture by changing the crop patterns by finding another alternative of the crops which needs a lot of water such as rice and sugar cane. 3.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM - HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Crop pattern: changing the crop time as per FAO. Also by trying to find the best plant time during the year which decreases the water consumption. using the water controlled by the Ethiopians to cultivate more land area in the Sudan (which has the best fertile land suitable for agriculture).1 Proposed Objective The objectives of the above mentioned strategic scenarios are demanding a better living standard for the three countries Egypt. Mainly to provide sufficient amount of food that covers the three countries needs/requirements. 45 . also taking into consideration that the crops which require more water are planted on wet seasons and those which require less water on dry season - The present and future irrigation efficiency is predicted to be: Egypt Sudan Ethiopia Current Efficiency % 70 45 45 Future Efficiency % 70 70 80 8. More cooperation and system understanding (locally) between the boarder countries. Reuse of treated brackish water after treatment in WTP 3. Construct more storm water networks and involve it after treatment in irrigation 2. Two child policy for controlling the population Control 5. 2. Maintenance of the existing networks to prevent water leakage (water loss) 3. Applying IWRM principals to achieve the optimum usage of water and ecosystem services 46 . Formulations of possible measures for the future horizon (2030) Infrastructure Measures 1. More negotiation processes should be carried on between countries with the involve of international organizations 4. Build more WTP and use its water for irrigation purposes 4. we can use dripping ( sprinklers) irrigation Soft measures 1. Optimum application of International agreements and policies 2. Applying soft engineering instead of building dams and harming the environment Policy measures 1. Modern irrigation systems should be used instead of using the surface irrigation.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 9. 3. Optimum usage of water by reuse the irrigation water once and twice if it is still reusable. 00 40.00 90.00 41.89 1.30 107.63 667.84 0.85 4.66 9.39 MeroweNasser alternative 5.37 2187.53 5.55 1.61 Table 50 Net Irrigation Demand after change in cropping time Similarly.00 20.47 7.89 5.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 10.Design and analysis of alternative strategies For the different alternatives.63 2.83 1.83 533.63 95.10 20.20 48.05 Su_Gezira 5.00 25.08 5. The table also shows the comparison with the reference case.39 6. the table below shows the reservoir operation rules that was created for different projects.59 4.20 438.00 20.89 1.00 56.37 7.10 20.65 Toshka Delta 2.00 489.29 5.92 408.12 1. 47 .89 0.12 NewHalfa alternative 4.81 4.07 10.32 0.08 13.00 657. The following table shows the data assumed for estimating the populations and water demand for Public water supply.00 20.29 5.45 83.80 96.40 4.58 4.82 2.00 25.74 5.80 1968.14 5.92 21.47 10.00 25.00 13.37 22.81 8.85 7.87 5.63 299.95 5.32 44.00 41.62 2.30 299.32 0.97 0.73 2.05 7.59 4. Country Ethiopia Cases Population (Million) Water Need (l/cap/day) Population Water Demand (MCM/year) Livestock (Million TLU) Water Need (l/cap/day) Livestock Water Demand (MCM/year) Total Water Demand PWS (MCM/year) Total Water Demand PWS (m3/s) Sudan and South Sudan Egypt New New New Reference Reference Reference Assumed Assumed Assumed 43.96 4.00 25.19 Table 49 Assumed population and Public water supply The cropping time was changed so as to prepare the land on when the water supply is less as it demands less water and use the water to the full capacity when it is available.25 90.89 4.74 8. the population was supposed to be decreased by 10% to the assumed data in the reference case which would result in less demand of public water supply and also food demand.28 3.00 95.13 5.00 56.77 0.27 4.84 3.16 2625.00 367.30 657.81 7.00 90.61 6.53 16.00 20. The table for net irrigation demand looks like this Month January February March April May June July August September October November December Eg_NileValley Delta 1.00 394.68 3.25 0.22 15.35 4.56 4.88 4.02 5.46 4. 67 1. 10.00 0.0 0.00 0.46 1.74 3.46 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.41 0.25 0.1 Public Water Supply As the population was assumed to be less compared to the reference case.37 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 48 .0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.45 2.05 2.24 1.00 Sudan Egypt Ref case S1 Ref case S1 0.) 480 480 480 479 480 477 480 475 480 473 480 472 480 471 480 470 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 Khasmel Girba Ref Case New Target Level (m.75 2.00 0.0 0.63 2.01 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.41 0. Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Ethiopia Ref S1 case 0.75 2.e.00 0.25 0.01 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Karadobi Month Ref Case New Target Level (m.0 0. it actually helped to reduce the peak shortage in 4 months but it shifted to june and july which is highlighted in the table below.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0. it was assumed that only regulation of reservoir would solve the problem but the table below shows a conflicting result i.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.63 3.50 0.00 0.) January February March April May June July August September October November December 1146 1146 1146 1146 1146 1146 1146 1146 1146 1146 1146 1146 1146 1143 1140 1137 1135 1130 1125 1130 1135 1146 1146 1146 HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Roseires New Ref Target Case Level (m.1 Strategy 1 Using this strategy is the cost effective measure as this only considers the reservoir operation and promoting the population strategy.88 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.88 1.00 0.00 0.1.00 0. The following results were obtained in this strategy 10.) 473 473 473 473 473 473 473 473 473 473 473 473 473 473 472 471 471 470 470 470 471 473 473 473 Table 51 Reservoir operation Rules adopted fir alternative strategies Using the above table the strategies that were defined were applied to get the results which is discussed below according to the respective strategies. 50 3. Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Ethiopia Sudan Egypt Ref case S1 Ref case S1 Ref case S1 0.08 0.00 659.00 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Month Nov Dec Ethiopia Ref S1 case 0.00 188.62 0.50 0.25 HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Sudan Egypt Ref case S1 Ref case S1 0.00 1600.22 1495.27 1290.47 1786.00 0.09 0.43 4754.00 2.37 163.1.00 738.00 0.90 286.52 910.00 0.00 1.46 1027.05 0.00 0.55 0.83 205.21 143.49 0.95 293.46 0. The table below shows the comparative study of both the case.80 0.09 551.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 943.00 1.50 2.00 0.31 261.25 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.63 250.00 0. 10.27 7.00 Discharge (m3/s) 3.28 2947.0 0.42 228.50 1.0 0.01 4413.00 0.71 1335.58 0.13 Table 52 Comparison of Shortage in Public Water Supply with reference case and strategy 1 The situation can be better understood by looking into it graphically which is as follows: With Strategy -1 4.62 290.00 0.00 Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Axis Title Egypt-S1 Sudan-S1 Ethiopia-S1 Ethiopia Ref case Sudan Ref case Egypt Ref case Figure 23Comparative Chart for Public water shortage in reference case with strategy 1 The graph suggest that the scenario is getting worse than before for the Egypt.00 270.2 Irrigation Water Supply In this strategy no change was made to cropping but the required food production was reduced as the population was reduced so we expect some changes in demand.77 448.75 313.99 49 .00 0.00 1.54 4253.02 0.74 3805.00 0.05 1895.00 0.00 1.04 1713.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.41 2714. 71 Month Nov Dec Total Egypt Ref case S1 119.00 217.98 163.00 0.76 Table 54Comparative Study of Irrigation Energy Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 1 50 .54 0 0 0 0 830 43.43 0 0 0 0 830 53.30 0 0 0 0 830 72.00 1000.31 0 0 0 0 830 42.36 0.00 119.00 0.00 829.59 0 0 0 0 830 43.00 0. Irrigation With Strategy -1 5000.82 0 0 0 0 830 42.33 0.10 183.53 1181.00 0.04 1323.3 Energy Similarly for Energy the table was obtained as follows. Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Sudan Egypt Ethiopia Ref case S1 Ref case S1 Ref case S1 0 0 0 0 823.00 5.63 0.53 0 0 0 0 830 84.00 0.00 Jan Feb Mar April -1000.1.00 0.26 0 0 0 0 830 41.00 3000.00 Discharge (m3/s) 4000.63 0 0 0 0 830 80.72 Table 53 Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 1 The table suggests it actually helps sudan to reduce the shortage but increases the shortages in Egypt which can be better illustrated in graph which is as belows.49 233.00 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Ethiopia Sudan Ref case S1 Ref case S1 0.28 482.01 0.36 53.75 0 0 0 0 830 42.00 2000.01 615.00 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Axis Title Egypt-S1 Sudan-S1 Ethiopia-S1 Ethiopia Ref case Sudan Ref case Egypt Ref case Figure 24Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Supply in Reference case and Strategy1 10.45 53.61 0 0 0 0 830 44. 00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.88 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.41 0.2.00 0.00 0. And the results are grouped and discussed below.0 0.0 0.24 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.41 0.25 0.00 0.0 0.2 Strategy 2 In this strategy.37 1.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.0 0. 10.88 0. we are going to increase the cropping efficiency and also reduce the population growth with operation rules for two potential dams only.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.1Public Water Supply For the public water supply we obtained following results : Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Ethiopia Sudan Egypt Ref case S2 Ref case S2 Ref case S2 0.00 0.25 0.01 0.67 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.00 Table 55 Comparative Study of Public Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 2 51 .00 0.00 0.88 1.74 0.01 0.88 0.50 0.00 1.0 0.05 0.0 0.54 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 The Table shows that the energy shortage significantly reduces in Ethiopia only which can be expressed graphically as follows Discharge (m3/s) Energy With Strategy -1 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Axis Title Egypt-S1 Sudan-S1 Ethiopia-S1 Ethiopia Ref case Sudan Ref case Egypt Ref case Figure 25Comparative Study of Energy Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 1 10. 00 0.00 0.50 2.00 2.47 755. With Strategy -2 3.58 217.43 2698.00 0.33 0.00 0.22 777.00 1.04 0.00 943.00 0.37 68.00 0.00 0.45 183.36 0.12 551.00 0.32 250.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.07 1895.00 0. That’s why the result was tabled as follows: Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Ethiopia Ref case S2 0.00 0.00 0.52 3805.31 121.62 137.75 122.00 0.77 38.20 1.55 4413.00 0.68 910.00 270.54 2534.00 119.00 0.48 143.27 793.43 0.50 Discharge (m3/s) 3.49 71.38 659.2.28 1601.00 0.90 88. 52 .00 188.11 0.00 0.46 505.27 3.42 228.54 1713.50 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 This strategy was able to reduce the shortage to some extent but is still not able to eradicate the problem which can be better explained by using a graph.03 2714.00 Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Axis Title Egypt-S2 Sudan-S2 Ethiopia-S2 Ethiopia Ref case Sudan Ref case Egypt Ref case Figure 26 Comparative Study of Public Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 2 10.67 1600. if this works for reducing or eliminating shortage in irrigation we could come to a conclusion.05 0.00 0.00 Sudan Egypt Ref case S2 Ref case S2 738.04 0.46 Table 56 Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 2 The table suggests that actually the strategy is helping to reduce the peak demands in both sudan and Egypt which is shown in the chart below.83 72.2 Irrigation Water Supply As we saw a reduction in shortage in public water supply with this strategy.71 249.50 1.95 101.26 5.98 61. 26 0 0 0 830 0 41.63 0 0 0 830 0 80.43 0 0 0 830 0 53. all the conditions remained same with strategy only the table is shown below.3.1 Public Water Supply In this strategy. a comparative study result is shown below.00 1000.54 0 0 0 830 0 43.3 Energy As per Energy.00 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Irrigation With Strategy -2 Discharge (m3/s) 5000.00 Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Axis Title Egypt-S2 Sudan and South Sudan Sudan-S2 Ethiopia Ethiopia-S2 Ethiopia Ref case Sudan Ref case Egypt Ref case Figure 27 Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Supply Shortage in Reference Case and Strategy 2 10. 53 .82 0 0 0 830 0 42. Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Sudan Egypt Ethiopia Ref case S1 Ref case S1 Ref case S1 0 0 0 823.00 2000.00 0.00 0.31 0 0 0 830 0 42.00 4000.45 53.36 53.59 0 0 0 830 0 43.00 3000.00 0.76 Table 57 Comparative Study of Energy Shortage in Reference Case and Strategy 2 10. we are considering that we increase efficiency.36 0.53 0 0 0 830 0 84.00 829. change the operation rules of all the reservoirs and control the population growth.00 -1000. We are hoping to find a better result in this strategy.30 0 0 0 0 830 0 72.2.75 0 0 0 830 0 42.61 0 0 0 830 0 44. 00 1.07 0.50 S3 2.00 0.37 1.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0. The table below shows a comparative study: 54 .00 0.50 S3 Ref case 1.01 0.00 S3 1.48 Table 58 Comparative Study of Public Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 3 As expected the peak shortage was significantly reduced but it also created a new shortage in December which is better described by the graph below.46 0.00 0.00 0.50 Discharge (m3/s) 3.00 0.00 0.3.88 0.2 Irrigation Water Supply As new and modern technology with change in cropping pattern and reservoir regulations we are hoping to better results.00 2.00 0.01 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 1.00 0.00 Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Axis Title Figure 28 Comparative Study of Public Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 3 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.37 0.25 0.50 0.50 Ref case 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.41 0.00 1.50 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.46 1.00 0.00 0.88 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.00 2.00 0.00 1.75 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Ethiopia Ref case S3 0.00 0. With Strategy -3 3.00 0.00 Ref case 0.00 0.25 HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Sudan Egypt Ref case S3 Ref case S3 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0. 55 0.94 0.46 922.15 2714.79 0.00 0 0.23 0.43 0.00 0.71 199.49 3805.28 1033.00 0 1600.39 0.90 480.86 228.77 145.47 56.00 64.95 64.00 0 217.00 0 0.00 0 1713.00 270. first the criteria was analysed as per the technical aspects and also based on the datas that can be directly expressed from our calculations and outputs obtained from Ribasim which is shown in the table below 55 .08 183.93 119.60 250.27 628.62 805.00 943.43 120.00 0 738.00 0 659.22 228.33 12.59 143.3 Energy No changes were made compared to Strategy 2 so no change is expected.83 212.73 910.30 0.00 0. the method of scorecard was used to identify the better project.98 36.37 0.75 581. 10.4 Scorecard for better decision making As all the strategies were not able to satisfy all the demands.00 0.31 395.49 19.21 0.08 4413.00 0 1.00 0 0.54 764.67 Table 59 Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 3 As per the results no difference was found from strategy 2 which is clearly shown in the graph below Irrigation Shortage With Strategy -3 5000 4500 Discharge (m3/s) 4000 3500 S3 3000 S3 2500 S3 2000 Ref case 1500 1000 Ref case 500 Ref case 0 Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month Figure 29 Comparative Study of Irrigation Water Supply Shortage in Reference case and Strategy 3 10.27 9.00 0 5.30 0.00 188.00 0 1895.00 0 551.3.39 0. For the scorecard system.37 150.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Month Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Ethiopia Sudan Egypt Ref case S3 Ref case S3 Ref case S3 0. 02 1112. In the table below red color means the worst case and green means the best but the case is relative to the reference case and as discussed there is no scenario and strategy that is completely fulfilling all the demands. The yellow was assumed as mean and light blue indicates that there was no change.0 8.0 44.8 1.2 40.000.05 1339.0 2.8 107.0 8.160.02 0.34 712.0 4. The table illustrated below 56 .69 0.600.0 1.02 0.14 0.0 8.2 40.11 0.3 442.02 0.95 0.0 8.0 4.84 154.32 442.0 1.51 Table 60 Criteria and Values obtained from calculations and ribasim for all the countries with different strategies The table was then given some colors to identify the worst scenario and the best scenario.34 490.600.11 0.3 830 0 0 52 0 0 52 0 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 1600 1250 0 1600 1250 0 1600 1250 0 1.320.11 0.160.0 0.0 1.00 0.2 40.3 96.3 43.000.3 96.0 45 45 70 45 45 70 70 70 80 70 70 80 48.000.84 154.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Reference Objective Food Security Economic Water Security Household and Urban Water Security Indicators/Criteria Increased agricultural yield (kg/ha/yr) Increased irrigation efficiency (%) Number of Population Shortage of Firm Energy (GWh) Increase capacity of power production (MW) from base case Shortage of water irrigation (m3/s) Shortage of water PWS (m3/s) Et Su Strategy 1 Eg Et Su Strategy 2 Eg Et Su Strategy 3 Eg Et Su Eg 1.0 0.3 0.000.320.0 2.95 0.3 96.000.3 43.0 43.000. 0 0 8.84 154.000.34 712.95 0.0 0 8.3 43.000.0 0 8.32 442.69 0.600.11 0.8 4 1.51 Table 61 Coloured Representation of Score card The score card was then standardised which is as follows: 57 .3 96.2 40.0 0 1.0 0 8.84 154.02 1112.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Reference Objective Food Security Economic Water Security Househol d and Urban Water Security Indicators/Criter ia Increased agricultural yield (kg/ha/yr) Increased irrigation efficiency (%) Number of Population Shortage of Firm Energy (GWh) Increase capacity of power production (MW) from base case Shortage of water irrigation (m3/s) Shortage of water PWS (m3/s) Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Et Su Eg Et Su Eg Et Su Eg Et Su Eg 1.8 107.11 0.2 40.32 442.000.000.02 0.14 0.02 0.600.3 96.0 0 45 45 70 45 45 70 70 70 80 70 70 80 48.0 0 4.0 0 4.000.3 830 0 0 52 0 0 52 0 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 1600 1250 0 1600 1250 0 1600 1250 0 1.160.2 40.0 0 2.11 0.0 44.06 0.06 0.00 0.05 1339.95 0.0 0 1.3 96.0 0 1.160.0 0 2.0 43.02 0.3 43.320.3 8 0.320.34 490.000. 40 0.90 0.00 1.00 1.90 0.63 0.67 0.65 0.00 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Objective Food Security Economic Water Security Household and Urban Water Security Indicators/Criteria Increased agricultural yield (kg/ha/yr) Increased irrigation efficiency (%) Number of Population Total Shortage of Firm Energy (GWh) Increase capacity of power production (MW) from base case Shortage of water irrigation (m3/s) Total Shortage of water PWS (m3/s) HERBD/43584/227/45880/277 Reference Et Su Eg Et Strategy 1 Su Eg Strategy 2 Et Su Eg Strategy 3 Et Su Eg 0.03 0.64 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.00 1.00 1.74 0.00 1.06 0.80 0.e.67 0.00 1.00 0.95 0.68 0.54 1.00 1.00 1.88 0.00 1.00 1. the worst case.00 1.11 0.54 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Table 62 Score Card showing the preference level of each objectives with strategies In the above table.71 1.00 0.00 1.90 0.00 1.00 1.63 0.64 0.00 1.59 0.68 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.40 0.00 0.13 0.06 0.00 1.00 1.64 1.00 1.23 0. The radial plot of these were also made to graphically visualise all three strategies with reference to the countries based on the table shown above.33 0.00 0.88 1.00 0.35 0.67 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.95 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.64 0.67 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 0.00 0. 1 means it is the best we could achieve within the three strategies in each country but it does not resemble that it was able to completely eradicate the problem and 0 means it was not able to change anything from the reference case i.00 0.00 1.50 0.09 0.00 1.50 0.95 0. 58 .00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.33 1.63 0.11 1. 00 Household and Urban Water Security Economic Water Security Figure 30 Radial Plot of Strategy with reference case for Ethiopia Sudan and South Sudan Reference Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Food Security 1 0.40 0.2 0 Household and Urban Water Security Economic Water Security Figure 31 Radial Plot of Strategy with reference case for Sudan and South Sudan 59 .Assignment of Water Resources Development HERBD/43584/227 Ethiopia Reference Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Food Security 1.6 0.60 0.80 0.00 0.20 0.4 0.8 0. 1 2.0 3. For this we used a table below and the results is clearly shown in the radial graph which is thought to be clearer to the decision makers.0 5.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 2.9 3. Sudan and South Sudan Food Security Economic Water Security Household and Urban Water Security Reference Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Ideal Case 1.Assignment of Water Resources Development HERBD/43584/227 Egypt Food Security 1 0.8 0.0 2.1 1.0 0.9 2.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 0.0 Table 63 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Sudan Sudan and South Sudan Food Security 5.9 2.2 0 Household and Urban Water Security Reference Economic Water Security Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Figure 32 Radial Plot of Strategy with reference case for Egypt But this charts were not clearly showing if these were able to fulfil all the demands or not so a scale of 1 to 5 was used where 5 means fulfilment of all the requirements and 1 means unsatisfactory result.0 5.6 0.9 2.0 Household and Urban Water Security Reference Economic Water Security Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Ideal Case Figure 33 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Sudan 60 .4 0. 1 0.6 3.0 3.0 Strategy 3 2.0 Strategy 3 3.0 Table 64 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Egypt Egypt Reference Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Ideal Case Food Security 5.0 3.7 2.0 1.0 5.0 0.0 3.4 Strategy 1 2.0 2.0 3.Assignment of Water Resources Development Egypt Food Security Economic Water Security Household and Urban Water Security HERBD/43584/227 Reference 1.0 Ideal Case 5.0 3.0 5.0 Household and Urban Water Security Economic Water Security Figure 34 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Egypt Ethiopia Reference Food Security Economic Water Security Household and Urban Water Security 2.0 1.0 0.3 0.0 2.0 5.6 1.0 5.0 Ideal Case 5.4 Strategy 1 1.2 1.8 0.9 0.0 Figure 35 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Ethiopia 61 .3 Strategy 2 3.3 Strategy 2 2.0 1.0 4. 0 3.0 2.0 0.0 Household and Urban Water Security Economic Water Security Figure 36 Comparison with the Ideal Case for Ethiopia 62 .0 Strategy 3 Ideal Case 4.Assignment of Water Resources Development HERBD/43584/227 Ethiopia Reference Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Food Security 5.0 1. All the riparian countries agree to implement the population growth measure as it is the heart of this analysis.1 Conclusion As seen in the strategy analysis. 11.2 Recommendations As per the study results we strongly recommend the following things to be considered before going for the project establishment. we have reached to the conclusion that all the strategies that were considered were not good enough to solve the problem. Further. climate change e. The strategy to be implemented depends on the amount of money available so a proper source budget to be defined beforehand. But the real world cannot be modelled. They were able to reduce the future problems but a long list of measures. more strategies should be taken into considerations regarding environmental flows and evaporation loss in the lake. All the riparian countries should be equally benefited. the result obtained are hypothetical and a factor of safety should be considered regarding the factors that cannot be controlled by us like population growth. rules and regulations will have to be followed in order to attain the required result as obtained from the model.Assignment of Water Resources Development HERBD/43584/227 11.tc. 63 .Conclusion and Recommendation 11. ORG/ iii.Assignment of Water Resources Development HERBD/43584/227 12.WIKIPEDIA. WWW.ORG 64 . RIBASIM MANUAL v.ORG/WIKI/ ii. PROCEDURE PREPARED TO USE THE RIBASIM vi. HTTP://WWW.NILEBASIN.References i. LECTURE NOTES OF EELCO VAN BEEK iv. HTTPS://EN.FAO. Assignment of Water Resources Development HERBD/43584/227 13. This should be done for three conditions: with equal weights for all criteria . 100 and 50 k€. The project start to generate benefits in year 5. Assignment: Apply a multi-criteria evaluation approach on this scorecard to select the ‘best’ strategy out of the 4 alternatives. 150. The operation and maintenance costs (O&M) are 10 k€ per year during the 25 years that the project generates benefits. to be made in year 30.Appendices The assignments HERBD 05 -River Basin Development 2014/2016 Topic: Water Resources Development Assignment A of lecture 5: A water resources development project has the following characteristics: The project has a life time of 30 years The construction time is 4 years (year 1. The scorecard distinguishes 8 criteria and 4 alternative promising strategies. The discount rate that will be used in this project is 8%. 3 and 4). Assignment: a) Calculate the B/C ratio (discounted) of this project (using Excel) b) Do the same for a discount rate of 10% c) Provide your comments and conclusions on the difference between the results of a) and b) Assignment B of chapter 5: Take the scorecard on the right. 2. are constant over time and will last for 25 years (will end in year 29). the cost of that removal is 100 k€. After that the construction has to be removed. divided of the 4 years as follows: 100. these benefits are 60 k€ per year. 65 . Cost of construction: 400 k€. and with triple weights for the economic criteria (1) total investment costs and (2) total benefits.g. e. are they different and why is that?) 3.g. a very short description of your application and the results (for all three conditions). etc. if you like the method. 66 . First select a standardization method and describe the approach and results of this standardization. (2) pollution and (3) fisheries). your own comments and judgment on this application. 2. your conclusions with respect to the outcome of the three conditions (e. In your assignment report (maximum 2 pages) I like to see: 1.Assignment of Water Resources Development HERBD/43584/227 with triple weights for the more environment and socio-related criteria (1) drinking water price. what kind of advantages and disadvantage you see in applying MCEM. 00 €50.73 €391.00 -79.16 19.93 13 €60.89 18 €60.00 €10.00% 2 €0.00 €50.00 11.17 25.78 €371.99 19 €60.20 6.00 €10.00 €50.00 29.00 €10.48 14 €60.00 €10.00 17.11 €0.22 Benefit Cost Ratio 1.81 28 €60.00 15.00 €100.00 €50.00 10.91 Discount rate 8.97 Time horizon 30 30 3 €0.66 Internal Rate of Return 9.00 €50.00 €50.00 €10.00 €50.00 31.00 -€150.00 €10.01 21.20 10 €60.28 11 €60.00 €10.47 29 €60.76 11.00 -€50.00 €10.90 6 €60.94 -5.38 14.43 21 €60.02 13.73 7.31% 9.00 €10.26 3.14 23 €60.00 7.00 27.00 -36.80 3.17 15 €60.13 Present worth benefits 470.05 Net Present Value 45.00 6.00 €50.00 €50.00 -92.00 -128.00 5.00 €50.00 €50.00 €10.15 30 €0.00 €10.00 8.00 €10.58 24 €60.00 -€100.93 6.01 23.00 25.00 €10.00 €10.88 5.00 €10.00 23.00 €50.00 14.00 34.00 €50.Assignment of Water Resources Development HERBD/43584/227 1) Solution Year Benefit Cost Cashflow NPV (8%) NPV (10%) Conclusion 1 €0.03 31.05 -19.59 10.00 -9.00 €10.33 9 €60.00 €50.00 €10.00 €50.59 -90.97 16 €60.00 €100.75 -34.00 €100.00 5.86 15.30 4.08 25 €60.00 €10.37 3.89 5 €60.00 €50.00 €50.00 -€100.00 €50.00 €10.98 Present worth 4 €0.00 €10.38 -75.61 26 €60.76 22 €60.00 €50.00 -€100.00 €10.44 17.00% 10.00 €50.00 €50.00 7.00 €50.00 €50.52 5.51 8.76 4.00 €10.00 €10.00 18.00 21.00 9.60 -123.88 17 €60.73 45.59 8.00 €50.00 9.00 6.52 12 €60.05 -€19.00 €50.31% 8 €60.18 20 €60.00 €150.90 Total NPV 67 .00 12.51 28.00 €10.20 27 €60.51 9.95 7 €60.00 €10.00 19.15 investment 425.00 13.00 €50. C) It was found that with low discount rate the present worth of money was more than that of high discount rate.31 % with a discount rate of 10%.Assignment of Water Resources Development HERBD/43584/227 A) The B/C ratio for this case was calculated to be 1. Also. B) The B/C ratio for this case was calculated to be 0. 68 . IRR was 9.11.95. IRR was 9. and is found to be less than discount rate so it can be said that it is not feasible project. ie the B/C ratio was more for low discount rate and vice-versa. it was same with B/C ratio. So with respect to B/C ratio and NPV the project with low discount rate is preferred.31 % with a discount rate of 8%. But the internal rate of return remained the same which is also known as a efficiency indicator of investments. 00 0.08 0.00 0. Case –II with triple weights for the more environment and socio-related criteria (1) drinking water price.06 0. and Case-III with triple weights for the economic criteria (1) total investment costs and (2) total benefits.00 0.00 0.82 pollution ppm 0.75 0.00 0.67 fisheries ton/yr 0.92 4.43 1.50 safety from flooding % 1.83 1.34 5.99 0. First of all a standardized score card was made as follows Promising Strategies Agricultural Industrial Antipollution Mixed Strategy Strategy strategy Strategy Water water water Storage conservation storage Irrigation Strategy Components Units Water Groundwater Storage use canal Pumps improvemen t Impacts Criteria Total Investment Cost Total Benefits m euro/yr m euro/yr Increased agricultural m ton/ production year drinking water price euro/m 3 purification tax on water use purificatio n etc etc etc etc 1.00 Total 5.75 0.50 69 .23 0.00 0.50 power production MW 0.19 0.16 1.97 1.75 0.17 1.25 1.04 0.88 0.43 0.00 0.00 0. (2) pollution and (3) fisheries).64 1.58 0.Assignment of Water Resources Development HERBD/43584/227 2) Solution Case –I with equal weights for all criteria .92 4. which was also seen in case I and II but in cases III the order was 1>3>4>2.67 0.83 Multi-criteria evaluation is a fundamental step of the rational decision-making process.74 0.63 Antipollution (3) 0.69 0.67 Total 2. While strategy 4 was found to be average with less variability in all the cases. It is undertaken to make a comparative assessment between the projects. Strategy 2 and 4 had no significant changes in all the cases but strategy 3 has a huge change from case I to Case III. it seems for all the given weightage Strategy I was found the best. overall the standard score card tells that Strategy I is already in higher position than other strategies as the sum of its criteria is the highest among all the strategies. The purpose of evaluation is to gain reliable information on strengths. So. weaknesses and overall utility of each option. The standard score card reveals that the decision will be somewhat like strategy 1>4>2>3.Assignment of Water Resources Development HERBD/43584/227 Conclusion Strategy Case I Case II Case III Agricultural ( 1) 0.70 Mixed (4) 0. Also.65 0.61 0. 70 . the decision makers are driven towards the first strategy.54 0.43 2.83 Industrial (2) 0.55 0.58 2. As per the conclusion above.55 0. As the investment and benefit for Strategy I was more it was obvious to have great influence in Case III . 06 0.67 Total Benefits Increased agricultural production 1 1 1 0.01 0.06 0.10 0.08 Total 8 14 12 0.083 0.08 0.11 0.01 0.13 0.08 0.18 0.19 0.11 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.071 0.125 0.083 0.06 0.01 0.74 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.13 0.55 Table 65Complete Analysis of all three cases 11 .15 0.14 0.00 0.06 drinking water price euro/m3 1 3 1 0.25 0.01 0.250 0.12 0.071 0.63 0.125 0.09 0.083 0.00 0.83 0.13 0.21 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.11 m euro/yr 1 1 3 0.214 0.214 0.12 0.125 0.071 0.214 0.67 0.69 0.07 0.125 0.11 0.21 m ton/ year 1 1 1 0.05 0.11 0.05 0.13 0.07 pollution ppm 1 3 1 0.08 0.01 0.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM Promising Strategies Agricultural Strategy Components Units Weightage Contribution to Strategy Goal Irrigation Industrial Strategy Antipollution strategy Mixed Strategy Water Storage Water Storage Groundwater use Pumps Impacts Criteria Case I Case II Case III Case I Case II Case III Case I Case II Total Investment Cost m euro/yr water conservation water storage purification purification canal improvement tax on water use Case III etc Case I Case II Case III Case I Case II Case III Case I Case II Case III 1 1 3 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.19 0.01 0.08 0.02 0.08 0.16 0.07 0.05 0.13 0.125 0.06 fisheries ton/yr 1 3 1 0.70 0.02 0.13 0.09 0.08 0.083 0.04 power production MW 1 1 1 0.61 0.07 0.01 0.65 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.13 0.083 0.125 0.071 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.071 0.54 0.09 0.25 0.125 0.083 0.07 0.02 0.10 0.03 0.125 0.05 0.08 0.04 safety from flooding % 1 1 1 0.07 0.21 0.08 0.05 0.06 0.03 0.07 0.02 0.07 0.08 0.250 0.45 0.13 0. But it only gives an idea not a concrete solution as the preference can be manipulated. one should be very careful about the weightage given and should consider various scenarios before coming to a conclusion. And also expert advice will be essential while giving weightage. 11 . While using this method. The only advantage is it can show us how important one factor is compared to the other. the results cannot be totally relied on. But this will not be a good method to decide when we have sufficient reliable datas.A Report on Nile Integrated River Basin Master Plan Using RIBASIM I think this method is very useful during the feasibility study of the project when we have very less data but have an idea about the preferences to be made in the project.