Protecting the Gulf’s Marine Ecosystems from Pollution

Edited by A.H. Abuzinada, H.-J. Barth, F. Krupp, B. Böer and T.Z. Al Abdessalaam
© 2008 Birkhäuser Verlag/Switzerland

Impacts of seawater desalination plants on the marine

environment of the Gulf

Sabine Lattemann and Thomas Höpner

Institute for Chemistry and Biology of the Marine Environment (ICBM)

Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Germany

Abstract: Many coastal areas in the Gulf experience a rapid industrial and urban
growth. This development is sustained by an increasing number of seawater
desalination plants in the region which satisfy the growing demand for fresh
water. The combined seawater desalination capacity in the Gulf countries exceeds
11 million cubic metres per day and accounts for 45% of the total world capacity.
The predominating process is multi-stage flash distillation (MSF), whereas only a
minor amount of the drinking water is produced by reverse osmosis (RO) plants
and other processes (together < 15%). Due to their waste water discharges to the
sea, desalination plants - and especially MSF plants - must be considered a main
source of pollution in the Gulf. It is estimated that the combined discharge of all
MSF plants in the Gulf amounts to a waste water flow of about 1,000 m3 per
second - which is the equivalent of a major river. This waste water is
characterised by increased salinity and elevated temperature. It additionally
contains substantial amounts of chemical pollutants, such as chlorine (which is
used for biofouling control in the plants), antiscalants (which are used for scale
inhibition) and heavy metals (which are present due to corrosion). This paper
gives an overview on the waste water characteristics of the two main desalination
processes (MSF, RO), presents estimates of total chemical discharges to the Gulf
for two selected pollutants (chlorine, copper) and discusses the potential impacts
of seawater desalination activity on the Gulf’s marine environment.
192 Sabine Lattemann and Thomas Höpner

Introduction
Worldwide, the demand for freshwater is rising rapidly, especially in coastal areas
where nearly three quarters of the world population is expected to live by 2020. It
is therefore not surprising that desalination of seawater is gaining in importance.
Seawater is a seemingly unlimited resource, and many coastal states and islands
have no other option than to exploit it for drinking water production. Desalination
is a highly beneficial technology, but like many technologies, it may have adverse
impacts on the environment that need to be investigated and managed.
Similar to the worldwide trend, coastal areas in the Gulf experience a tremen-
dous industrial and urban growth. The Gulf harbours three strategic fluids for this
rapid development: oil, gas and desalinated water. Regarding seawater
desalination, the situation in the Gulf still remains unrivalled to date, although
capacities in other parts of the world, such as the Mediterranean, are increasing
rapidly. The Gulf, with an installed seawater desalination capacity of about 11
mill. m3/day, presently accounts for almost half the world’s capacity of 24 mill.
m3/day (IDA 2006) (Fig. 1). Most of the plants are situated along the shallow
southern shoreline of the Gulf (Fig. 1), i.e. in Kuwait (1.7 mill. m³/day), Saudi
Arabia (2.3 mill. m³/day), Bahrain (0.4 mill. m³/day), Qatar (0.9 mill. m³/day), and
the United Arab Emirates (5.7 mill. m³/day), whereas only few can be found on
the northern Iranian coast (0.1 mill. m³/day).
The list of potential environmental impacts of desalination plants is long and
in some aspects, such as land use, energy consumption and air pollution, similar to
other development projects. Effects more specific to desalination plants can be
attributed to the intake of large quantities of seawater: the impingement of larger
organisms such as fish and turtles on intake screens and the entrainment of smaller
organisms into the plant. Both are often fatal for the organisms and may affect
population and ecosystem dynamics (Khordagui 2002). A key concern of
desalination plants, however, are the impacts of the highly saline waste stream on
the marine environment. Depending on the technical process, this waste stream
may also be increased in temperature, contain residual chemicals, heavy metals
from corrosion, or intermittently used cleaning agents. Emission of this multi-
component waste into the sea might have adverse effects on water and sediment
quality, impair marine life or the functioning and intactness of coastal ecosystems.
Due to their waste discharges, desalination plants were identified as a main source
of land-based marine pollution in the Gulf (UNEP 1999). For illustration, the
installed capacity of multi-stage flash distillation plants in the Gulf - about 9.7
mill. m3/day - roughly corresponds to a freshwater production of 115 m3/sec and
a waste water flow rate of more than 1000 m3/sec, which is a substantial volume
of water compared for example to the river runoff into the Gulf. The Shatt Al-
Arab river, which is a main freshwater source and has a major influence on Gulf
seawater properties, has an average annual flow of only 1,456 m3/sec (UNEP
1999).
Impacts of seawater desalination plants 193

Figure 1. Seawater desalination capacity of MSF and MED plants (above) and RO plants
(below) in the Gulf (Lattemann and Höpner 2007; raw data based on IDA 2006). Included
are all plants that are presumed online or in construction, with capacities > 1,000 m3/d. The
total capacity of each riparian state is given, as is the installed capacity in the sea region.
194 Sabine Lattemann and Thomas Höpner

Desalination technology
In the Gulf region, water and electricity are usually produced by large co-
generation plants. The lower temperature steam from the low pressure end of the
turbine is used as heat source for desalination, after much of the steam’s energy
has been used to generate electricity (Buros 1999). Thermal desalination
processes therefore predominate in the Gulf region. Most of the water is produced
by the process of multi-stage flash distillation (MSF, 88%), and only a minor
amount by reverse osmosis (RO, 5%) and multi-effect distillation (MED, 6%)
(IDA 2006). All modern desalination plants operate by a complex process that
maximizes plant efficiency. In essence, distillation plants consist of a large
number of successive vessels (stages) that operate at gradually changing
temperature and pressure values to induce boiling in each vessel without adding
extra heat. The seawater flows from stage to stage, where part of the water
evaporates, while the seawater increases in salt content and gradually turns into
brine. Distillation plants have lower recovery rates than RO plants and require
water for cooling. The seawater flow rate therefore has to be 3-4 times higher than
the feed to RO plants for the same amount of product water extraction (Morton et
al. 1996).
Reverse osmosis is a membrane separation process that uses semi-permeable,
synthetic membranes and pumping pressure of the feedwater to separate
freshwater from saltwater. Water molecules readily diffuse through the
membranes, but salts and larger molecular weight compounds are rejected, so that
the salt content of the seawater gradually increases.

Environmental impacts
The impacts of a desalination plant on the marine environment depend on the
hydrographical and biological features of the receiving environment. Enclosed
and shallow sites with abundant marine life can generally be assumed to be more
sensitive to desalination plant discharges than exposed, high energy, open-sea
locations (Höpner and Windelberg 1996). Equally relevant are the physical and
chemical properties of the desalination plant reject streams. These are partly
different for distillation and RO plants due to different process designs and
pretreatment systems for the incoming seawater (Tab. 1). This section focuses on
MSF and RO as the two main processes in the Gulf. To assess the impacts of their
reject streams on the marine environment, information on the individual
constituents of the discharge as well as the sensitivity of the accepting ecosystem
is required. One approach is the evaluation of chemical concentrations in the
reject stream with regard to toxicity to marine organisms. Another is to estimate
total discharge volumes and loads with regard to the carrying capacity of the
coastal ecosystem in terms of dilution and degradation.
Salinity, temperature and dissolved oxygen are environmental factors
controlling the distribution of marine species. These normally occur where
favourable environmental conditions exist. Most species can adapt to minor
Impacts of seawater desalination plants 195

deviations from optimal conditions, and might even tolerate extreme situations
temporarily. The long-term exposure to warm, saline effluents with low oxygen
content, however, can be harmful to marine life and can cause a lasting change in
community structure. For example, observations in the Gulf show that benthic
communities in naturally saline environments, such as the Gulf of Salwah, lack
many species of corals, molluscs and echinoderms. Lower species abundance and
diversity is generally observed for salinities above 45, which stresses the
importance of this factor even for the “hardy marine species” in the Gulf (Coles
and McCain 1990).

Table 1. Typical effluent properties of RO and MSF plants.

Effluent parameter RO MSF

Salinity typically 60 – 70 psu around 50 psu
Temperature ambient seawater temperature + 5 – 15 °C above ambient
Plume density negatively buoyant positively, neutrally or
negatively buoyant
Oxygen decreased as a very low by physical
side-effect of chlorine deaeration and use of
neutralization oxygen scavengers
(using sodium bisulphite)
Chlorine neutralized approx. 10 – 25 % of dosage
Halogenated varying composition and
organics concentrations
Coagulants 1 – 30 ppm not used
3+ 3+
(Fe , Al )
Coagulant aids (e.g. 0.2 – 4 ppm not used
polyacrylamide)
Antiscalants 1 – 2 ppm 1 – 2 ppm
(e.g. polymaleic
acid)
Acid (H2SO4) pH 6 – 7 pH 6 – 7
Antifoaming agents not used 0.1 ppm
(e.g. polyglycol)
Heavy metals (in iron, chromium, nickel, copper, nickel
varying molybdenum (from heat exchangers)
concentrations) (from stainless steel)
Cleaning chemicals alkaline (pH 11-12) or acidic (pH acidic (pH 2) solution
2-3) solutions containing containing corrosion
detergents (e.g. dodecylsulphate), inhibitors such as
complexing agents (e.g. EDTA), benzotriazole derivates
oxidants (e.g. sodium perborate)
and biocides (e.g. formaldehyde)
196 Sabine Lattemann and Thomas Höpner

RO reject streams, which have a higher density than seawater, will sink to the
bottom and spread over the sea floor in shallow coastal waters. Here, they may
affect benthic communities as a consequence of high salt concentrations and
residual chemicals. In contrast, reject streams of distillation plants, which are
typically positively or neutrally buoyant, will more likely affect the pelagic
community. However, it must be pointed out that mixing and dispersal of a
discharge plume is to a large extent controlled by site-specific oceanographic
conditions, such as currents, tides, water depth, bottom and shoreline topography.

Physical properties of reject streams

Salinity and temperature of the reject stream are the most prominent parameters in
studies concerned with the environmental impacts of desalination plants. Both
parameters depend on the desalination process used and ambient seawater
properties. They influence the density of the reject stream, which affects
spreading of the plume in the discharge site and therefore the dispersal range and
dilution rate of chemical constituents in the reject streams.

Salinity
RO plant reject streams usually have a salinity of 60-70 psu, depending on
feedwater salinity and the concentrating effect of the process. The brine blow-
down of distillation plants may also have a salinity of around 70 psu, but it is
diluted with a threefold amount of cooling water to a value of around 50 psu
before discharge. Dilution with cooling water in thermal plants results in a salt
concentration that is rarely more than 15% higher than ambient seawater salinity
(Mickley 1995), whereas the RO brine may contain twice the seawater
concentration.

Temperature
Thermal discharges are produced by distillation plants only, where both brine and
cooling water are increased in temperature. Differences of 5-15 °C above ambient
seawater temperature are common, whereas the temperature of the RO concentrate
is close to ambient.

Density
Reject streams of RO plants have a higher density than seawater due to high salt
concentrations. The discharge plume will therefore sink to the bottom and spread
over the sea floor in shallow waters unless it is dissipated by a diffuser system.
For MSF plants, the influence of temperature on density must further be
considered. As both parameters have contrary effects on density, the distillation
discharge may either be positively, neutrally or negatively buoyant depending on
ambient density stratification, but will in most cases be neutrally or positively
buoyant due to the higher effect of temperature.
Impacts of seawater desalination plants 197

Dissolved oxygen
Oxygen becomes less soluble in seawater with increasing temperature and salinity
levels. The desalination process may therefore affect dissolved oxygen levels in
seawater. However, the main influence on oxygen levels in thermal plants will be
due to deaeration and dosing of oxygen scavengers like sodium bisulfite (SBS) to
inhibit corrosion. SBS is also commonly used for removal of residual chlorine
from the RO feedwater to prevent membrane damage. This may deplete oxygen as
a side-effect, especially when overdosing occurs.

Pre-treatment and chemical properties of reject streams

Chemical pre-treatment of the intake water is a necessity in most desalination
plants to improve plant performance and to increase intervals between shutdowns
for cleaning or replacement of components. In thermal plants, the heat exchanger
systems in contact with seawater and brine are particularly prone to biological
fouling, scaling and corrosion. In RO plants, the most vulnerable point of the
system is the membrane, which is permeable to water but not to most dissolved
and suspended compounds that may accumulate on the membrane and cause
“fouling” by micro-organisms, suspended matter or scale deposits. Conventional
pre-treatment steps in both types of plants include scale and biofouling control.
Basic differences are the removal of suspended material in RO plants, and the
control of corrosion and foaming in distillation plants. The residuals and by-
products of pre-treatment and cleaning chemicals are often discharged along with
the concentrate to the marine environment. Composition of the concentrate mainly
depends on the quality of the intake seawater at the location of the plant, the
desalination process and the pre-treatment and cleaning scheme.

Chlorine
Chlorine is usually injected either as chlorine gas or added as hypochlorite at the
plant’s intake. Typical chlorine doses range between 0.5-2 mg/l in desalination
plants, which is comparable to the treatment often applied for power plant cooling
waters. Most oxidative capacity is lost during the desalination process due to self-
decomposition and the oxidant demand of the intake seawater.
As most RO plants operate on polyamide membranes, which are sensitive to
oxidizing chemicals, residual oxidative capacity is typically neutralized, usually
with sodium bisulfite, before the feedwater enters the RO units to avoid
membrane damage. Consequently, most RO discharges are characterized by very
low to non-detectable levels of residual oxidants. However, it is possible that non-
oxidizing biocides are used and discharged along with the brine. Residual chlorine
levels are a major concern of distillation plant reject streams, as removal is usually
not required in these plants unless environmental standards demand so.
Approximately two thirds of the intake water is used for the purpose of cooling in
thermal plants, while only one third serves as feedwater for desalination. In the
Gulf, where large thermal plants predominate, both cooling water and desalination
198 Sabine Lattemann and Thomas Höpner

feedwater are treated with chlorine. Discharge levels of residual oxidants range
between 0.2-0.5 mg/l (Lattemann and Höpner 2003). A disadvantage of
chlorination is the need for intermittent shock treatment. Chlorine decomposes
organic material into smaller fragments, which provides nutrients to surviving
micro-organisms and often causes heavy re-growth. To control re-growth,
chlorine concentrations are increased on a periodic basis, which can be as often as
once or several times per day, with chlorine doses ranging between 6-8 mg/l in
distillation plants (Lattemann and Höpner 2003). Due to environmental problems
caused by residual chlorine and disinfection by-products, several neutralisation
and alternative pre-treatment methods have been considered. Different chemicals
can be used for neutralisation, of which sodium bisulfite is most commonly used
in RO plants. Alternatives like sulphur dioxide and hydrogen peroxide have been
suggested to treat thermal plant reject streams (Shams El Din and Mohammed
1998, Khordagui 1992).

Heavy metals
Metals may pass into the reject streams as a result of corrosion inside the plants.
Copper-nickel alloys are common materials for heat exchanger surfaces in
distillation plants, and brine contamination with copper is a problem frequently
encountered in thermal desalination processes. Non-metal equipment and stainless
steels prevail in RO desalination plants. The RO brine may thus contain traces of
iron, nickel, chromium and molybdenum, but contamination with metals is
generally below a critical level in plants that mainly use stainless steels.

Antiscalants
Antiscalants are added to the feedwater in both thermal and RO plants to prevent
scale formation on heat exchanger surfaces, inside tubes, or on RO membranes.
The term refers to polymeric substances with different chemical structures, in
particular polyphosphates, phosphonates, polymaleic acids and polyacrylic acids.
Polyphosphates and also sulphuric acid are still in use, though at a limited scale
and predominantly in RO plants. The toxicity of all antiscalants to aquatic life is
relatively low. Only problems of eutrophication have been observed near the
outlets of desalination plants in the Gulf where polyphosphates were in use.

Coagulants and coagulant aids (RO plants)

Coagulants like ferric- or aluminium chloride are added to improve the filtration
of suspended material from the RO feedwater. To enhance coagulation, coagulant
aids (i.e. organic substances with high molecular masses like polyacrylamide) may
be used, and pH of the feedwater is typically controlled with sulphuric acid.
Coagulants and coagulant aids have a very low toxic potential. However, the
discharge of solid material may cause a coloration of the reject stream if ferric
salts are used (“red brines”), increase turbidity that could reduce light penetration
and thus primary production, or could bury sessile benthic organisms.
Impacts of seawater desalination plants 199

Antifoaming agents (thermal plants)

To reduce foaming in thermal plants, antifoaming agents like polyethylene and
polypropylene glycol are typically added to the feedwater. Polyglycols are not
toxic, but may be rather persistent in the environment due to a poor
biodegradability. Adverse environmental effects are not to be expected with
regard to generally low dosage levels and sufficient dilution following discharge.

Cleaning chemicals (RO plants)

RO cleaning intervals are typically three to six months depending on the quality of
the intake water and the efficiency of the pre-treatment scheme. The cleaning
procedure depends on the type of membrane fouling.
Alkaline solutions (pH 11 - 12) are used to remove silt deposits and biofilms
from membranes, while acidic solutions (pH 2 - 3) are applied to dissolve metal
oxides or scales. Cleaning solutions often contain additional chemicals to improve
membrane cleaning, such as detergents (e.g. dodecylsulphate, dodecylbenzene
sulphonate) or oxidants (e.g. sodium perborate, sodium hypochlorite), which may
be harmful to aquatic life if discharged without treatment. After cleaning or prior
to storage, membranes are typically disinfected. For this purpose, either oxidizing
biocides such as chlorine and hydrogen peroxide or non-oxidizing biocides like
formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde or isothiozole can be applied to the membrane. All
biocides are highly effective substances and hazardous to aquatic life if
discharged to the marine environment.

Cleaning chemicals (thermal plants)

To remove alkaline scales from heat exchanger surfaces, distillation plants are
typically washed with warm acidic seawater. Chemical inhibitors (e.g. benzo-
triazole derivates) are often added to protect the plant from corrosion. As dosage
of inhibitors is low, acutely toxic effects are unlikely to occur, but biotic and
abiotic degradation of this substance is relatively slow.

Impacts on the Gulf

Although most of the chemical constituents of desalination plant reject streams
may have adverse effects on the marine environment, some compounds are of
particular concern for marine organisms, such as biocides or heavy metals. The
focus of this section will be on chlorine and copper discharges by MSF distillation
plants. Estimates of total discharge loads are presented for the entire Gulf. As the
geographical distribution of desalination plants defines the pattern of chemical
discharges, the highest inputs occur in the shallow southern areas of the Gulf.
To calculate chemical loads, information on effluent concentrations and
effluent volumes of desalination plants is required. Typical effluent concentrations
of chlorine and copper were derived from a literature review, while effluent
volumes depend on the product water recovery rate and the amount of freshwater
produced. It is assumed that capacities equal one tenth of the intake seawater in
200 Sabine Lattemann and Thomas Höpner

MSF plants. As the combined intake (cooling water and desalination feedwater) is
usually chlorinated, residual chlorine levels are present in the cooling water and
brine discharge. The estimated chlorine load is therefore based on a product to
effluent ratio of 1:9. In contrast, a product to brine ratio of 1:2 is assumed for
copper. Copper concentrations found in literature usually refer to the brine blow-
down only, whereas copper concentrations in cooling water discharges of
desalination plants could not be obtained.

Chlorine loads
A typical chlorine level in the MSF discharge is 0.25 mg/l, although higher levels
were occasionally reported (Lattemann and Höpner 2003). Assuming that the
trend is towards low chlorine doses for economic and ecological reasons, the
estimate of chlorine loads will be based on an effluent concentration of 0.25 mg/l.
With a product to effluent ratio of 1:9, a fixed ratio of 2.25 kg chlorine per day
per 1,000 m3/day can be established between product capacity and chlorine load
(Höpner and Lattemann 2002). With regard to the installed MSF capacity of 9.7
mill. m3/day, chlorine discharges into the Gulf may amount to 21.9 tons per day.

Copper loads
Copper concentrations in the brine of MSF plants were reviewed by Oldfield and
Todd (1996), who pointed out that levels will be less than 100 μg/l in modern
plants with good corrosion control. The lowest reported value was 15 μg/l in the
MSF plant in Al Jubail, Saudi Arabia (Mannaa 1994). Based on a level of 15 μg/l
and a product to brine ratio of 1:2, the standard ratio between product capacity
and chemical load is 30 g copper per day per 1,000 m3/day (Höpner and
Lattemann 2002). Projected to the installed MSF capacity in the Gulf, the daily
discharge load is approximately 292 kg of copper. With regard to the unknown
contribution of MSF plant cooling water and possibly higher effluent
concentrations, the value should be understood as a conservative estimate.

Environmental fate and impacts of chlorine

Following discharge, chlorine levels are rapidly reduced by dilution and self-
degradation. Shams El Din et al. (2000) reported a high decomposition up to 90 %
in direct sunlight and warm seawater within 45 minutes. Assuming a discharge
level of 0.25 mg/l, of which 90 % are decomposed, the environmental chlorine
concentration near the outlet could be around 25 μg/l. For comparison, Ali and
Riley (1986) observed levels of 30-100 μg/l in the discharge site of a desalination
plant, and Abdel-Jawad and Al-Tabtabaei (1999) estimated a level of 50 μg/l in
1 km distance from the outlet, both referring to the coastal waters of Kuwait.
Several toxicological studies have shown that chlorine is highly toxic to many
aquatic species, even at low concentrations in the range of 100 μg/l or less.
Chlorine must therefore be classified as a major pollutant of desalination plant
reject streams, for which concentration limits should be established to maintain
water quality and to avoid toxic conditions to marine life. Based on toxicological
data from a wide spectrum of marine species, the U.S. EPA recommends a long-
Impacts of seawater desalination plants 201

term water quality criterion for chlorine in seawater of 7.5 μg/l and a short-term
criterion of 13 μg/l (EPA 2006). The environmental risk assessment of the EU for
hypochlorite has determined a PNEC (predicted no effect concentration) for
saltwater species of 0.04 ȝg/l free available chlorine (ECB 2005).
Besides toxic effects, a major drawback of chlorination is the formation of
halogenated organic by-products. In seawater, chlorine oxidises naturally present
bromide ions to bromine, and both halogens react with organic seawater
constituents. As only a few percent of the total added chlorine will be recovered
as by-products, and by-product diversity is high, the environmental level of each
substance is comparatively low. However, halogenated organics, in particular
trihalomethanes such as bromoform, can clearly be detected in the vicinity of
distillation plants in the Gulf (Ali and Riley 1986, Saeed et al. 1999). Although
concentrations are probably below acutely toxic levels, the substances are still
potentially harmful to marine life. Sufficient evidence exists that some have
carcinogenic properties or may cause chronic effects during long-term exposure.

Environmental fate and impacts of copper

The presence of copper does not necessarily mean that it will adversely affect the
environment. Natural concentrations range from 0.1 μg/l in oceanic environments
to 100 μg/l in estuaries (Kennish 1997). In the Gulf, elevated copper levels were
reported for coastal areas close to ports and heavy industry but decreased further
offshore. For example, a gradual decline from 3.4 μg/l to 0.6 μg/l was observed
on a transect from Doha, Qatar, to open Gulf water (Abdel-Moati and Kureishy
1997), while levels up to 25 μg/l were observed near Doha, Kuwait (Bou-Hamad
et al. 1997). It is generally difficult to distinguish between natural copper levels
and anthropogenic effects caused by industrial outfalls, offshore oil exploitation
or the Gulf War oil spills (UNEP 1999). The reported discharge concentrations of
desalination plants, however, are well within the range that could increase coastal
copper concentrations.
As copper is an essential micro-nutrient for most organisms, it might only
become toxic if excess amounts become biologically available. Low brine
contamination levels of 15 μg/l or less and dispersion following discharge reduce
the risk of toxic conditions for aquatic life. Copper is - like most metal ions -
removed from the water column by transport into sediments. The accumulation in
sediments, however, is a major concern of point discharges containing heavy
metals, as sediment concentration could be significantly increased in the long
term. From sediments, metals could be re-mobilized after a sudden change in
environmental conditions, e.g. from aerobic to anaerobic, or could be assimilated
by benthic organisms, which often form the basis of the marine food chain.

Conclusion
High concern must be expressed over the chemical discharges, in particular of
chlorine and copper, into the Gulf’s marine environment. This concern is based on
the high toxicity of chlorine and the risks associated with copper accumulation in
202 Sabine Lattemann and Thomas Höpner

sediments. Besides the concern over single pollutants, it should be kept in mind
that desalination plant effluents are multi-component wastes. The different waste
components may have strengthening effects on each other, i.e. marine organisms
may be affected by different toxic pollutants and may also be under stress from
elevated salinity and temperature levels. However, little is known about the
additive effects of high salinity, temperature and/or chemical residues on marine
species, or about secondary (indirect) effects of the discharges on coastal
ecosystems. A holistic study that investigates the impacts of desalination plants on
the Gulf’s marine environment is still lacking.
An in-depth study becomes even more pressing as desalination capacities
continue to increase and the total discharge volume of plants reaches an order of
magnitude that is comparable to fluvial runoff into the Gulf. Considering this
dimension, it is not surprising that desalination plants were classified as a main
source of land-based pollution in the Gulf (UNEP 1999). It must be assumed that
desalination plant effluents affect seawater properties, though effects will in most
cases be limited to the vicinity of outfalls. The dispersal range of many chemicals
is limited by processes such as degradation (e.g. chlorine) or transport into
sediments (e.g. copper). A daily discharge of 21.9 tons of chlorine and 292 kg of
copper will therefore not produce measurable changes to the Gulf as a whole, but
local pollution will certainly have a significant effect on coastal ecosystems in the
near range of the discharge site, e.g. by causing increased mortality through toxic
pollutant concentrations, or by increasing pollutant concentrations in marine biota
(bio-accumulation) and in the food web (bio-magnification).
This is especially true for the shallow areas along the Arabian shoreline, where
capacities are high and desalination plants adjoin like pearls on a string. These
areas also accommodate important ecosystems, such as algal mats, seagrass beds,
coral reefs, saltmarshes and mangroves, which are particularly prone to
desalination plant discharges due to their physical and ecological features (Höpner
and Windelberg 1996). On the one hand, they are characterized by reduced water
exchange and sediment mobility, which increases the residence time of pollutants,
and on the other hand they are highly productive and diverse habitats that play an
important role in the food web of the Gulf. In essence, they are key ecosystems of
the Gulf’s marine environment that should be preserved and degradation by
human activity, including desalination, avoided.
In the Bay of Kuwait, for example, effluents with high concentrations of
chlorine have been reported to affect Sulaibekhat and Dawhat Kazima mud flats
(Scott 1995). The intertidal flats are known to be highly productive ecosystems
that sustain numerous migratory birds as well as commercial fish and shrimp
species. The chlorine pollution is probably attributed to the outfall site of Doha
West power and desalination plant, which is located in the intertidal area of
Sulaibekhat Bay. The plant has a seawater intake of about 10 mill. m3/day and
effluent levels of chlorine may reach a maximum of 500 μg/l (Abdel-Jawad and
Al-Tabtabaei 1999). The total daily chlorine load may amount to 4,500 kg.
Considerable plume spreading has to be expected as most areas are shallower than
2 m with a maximum water depth of 5 m where the inlet opens into Kuwait Bay.
Impacts of seawater desalination plants 203

In contrast, signals of copper contamination in water, sediment and organisms

attributed to desalination activity are so far missing. Copper levels along the Saudi
Arabian coastline, for example, are comparable to elsewhere in the Gulf and show
no correlation to plant locations, but to organic-rich, fine-grained particles and are
therefore higher in seagrass beds (Coles and McCain 1990).

What can be done to mitigate impacts?

The impacts of a desalination plant on the marine environment depend on various
factors of influences. This includes project specifics (e.g. plant size, type of
process, use of chemicals, etc.) as well as the hydrographical and ecological
characteristics of the site. It is therefore difficult to offer ready-made solutions for
mitigating the environmental impacts of desalination plants.
In general, discharges of pollutants should be minimized by avoiding and
substituting harmful substances (such as chlorine) and by treating or disposing
wastes adequately (e.g. cleaning chemicals). The hydrographical conditions in the
discharge site should be able to dilute and disperse the salt and heat input, and to
dilute, disperse and degrade any residual pollutants. The load and transport
capacity of a site will primarily depend on water circulation and exchange rate as
a function of currents, tides and surf, water depth, bottom and shoreline
morphology. In general, exposed rocky or sandy shorelines with strong currents
and surf may be preferred over shallow, sheltered sites with little water exchange.
Water exchange will determine the ecosystem‘s time of exposure to pollutants.
Sites of biological importance should also be avoided, for example natural
habitats that are unique within a region (e.g. riffs on an otherwise sandy
shoreline), that are worth protecting on a global scale (e.g. coral reefs,
mangroves), that are important in terms of productivity or biodiversity, that are
inhabited by protected, endangered or rare species, that are important feeding
grounds or reproductive areas for a larger number of species or certain key species
within a region, or that are important fishing or marine harvesting grounds.
In order to identify all potential impacts of a project, it is recommendable to
conduct a detailed Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study for every major
desalination project. The main objective of an EIA is to promote environmentally
sound and sustainable development through the identification of appropriate
alternatives and mitigation measures in order to avoid, minimize, remediate or
compensate for any adverse impact resulting directly or indirectly from a project.
An EIA usually adopts a broad definition of “environment”, including also socio-
economic and environmental health effects as an integral part of the process. The
World Health Organization and its Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office
(EMRO) are in the process of preparing a guidance document on “Desalination
for Safe Water Supply”, which offers guidance on the health aspects of
desalination and the requirements of EIA studies for desalination plants.
204 Sabine Lattemann and Thomas Höpner

Acknowledgements
This paper presents the final step in a series of projects and publications we were
involved in, including the publication of the book “Seawater Desalination,
Impacts of Brine and Chemical Discharges on the Marine Environment”
(Desalination Publications, L'Aquila, Italy), the preparation of a Guidance
Document for the “Environmentally Sound Management of Seawater Desalination
Plants in the Mediterranean” (In: MAP Technical Reports Series No. 139,
UNEP/MAP/MEDPOL, Athens, Greece), the participation in the research project
“Assessment of the Composition of Desalination Plant Disposal Brines” funded
by the Middle East Desalination Research Center (MEDRC, Muscat, Oman), and
finally the contribution to the World Health Organization (WHO/EMRO) project
“Desalination for Safe Water Supply”. We gratefully acknowledge the support we
received from the before mentioned organizations. The findings and conclusions
of this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or
opinions of the supporting organizations.

References
Abdel-Jawad, M. and Al-Tabtabaei, M. 1999. Impact of current power generation and
water desalination activities on Kuwaiti marine environment. Proceedings of IDA
World Congress on Desalination and Water Reuse, San Diego, September 1999, 3:
231-240.
Abdel-Moati, M. and Kureishy, T. 1997. Dissolved copper, cadmium and lead in the
coastal waters of Qatar, Arabian Gulf. Indian Journal of Marine Sciences, 26: 143-
149.
Ali, M. and Riley, J. 1986. The distribution of halomethanes in the coastal waters of
Kuwait. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 17: 409-414.
Bou-Hamad, S., Abdel-Jawad, M., Ebrahim, S., Al-Mansour, M. and Al-Hijji, A. 1997.
Performance evaluation of three different pretreatment systems for seawater reverse
osmosis technique. Desalination, 110: 85-92.
Buros O. 1999. The ABCs of desalting, 2nd edition. FMC Corporation, published by the
International Desalination Association (IDA), Topsfield, Massachusetts, USA and
sponsored by the Saline Water Conversion Corporation (SWCC).
Coles, S. and McCain, J. 1990. Environmental factors affecting benthic infaunal
communities of the western Arabian Gulf. Marine Environmental Research, 29: 289-
315.
EPA 1998. National recommended water quality criteria. U.S. EPA, National Center for
Environmental Publications and Information, 11029 Kenwood Road, Cincinnati,
Ohio 45242, USA, http://www.epa.gov/ost.
Höpner, T. and Lattemann, S. 2002. Chemical impacts from seawater desalination plants -
a case study of the northern Red Sea. Desalination, 152: 133-140.
Höpner, T. and Windelberg, J. 1996. Elements of environmental impact studies on coastal
desalination plants. Desalination, 108: 11-18.
IDA 2006. IDA Worldwide Desalting Plant Inventory, No. 19 in MS Excel format, Media
Analytics Ltd., Oxford, UK.
Impacts of seawater desalination plants 205

Kennish, M. 1997. Practical handbook of estuarine and marine pollution, 2nd edition. CRC
Press, Boca Raton, 524 pp.
Khordagui, H. 1992. Conceptual approach to selection of a control measure for residual
chlorine discharge in Kuwait Bay. Environmental Management 16, 3: 309-316.
Khordagui, H. 2002. Environmental impacts of power-desalination on the gulf marine
ecosystem. In: Khan et al. (eds), The Gulf Ecosystem: Health and Sustainability,
Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp. 173-191.
Lattemann, S. and Höpner, T. 2003. Seawater Desalination - Impacts of Brine and
Chemical Discharges on the Marine Environment, Desalination Publications,
L'Aquila, Italy, 142 pp.
Mannaa, A. 1994. Environmental impacts of dual purpose plants. Desalination and Water
Reuse, 41: 46-49.
Mickley, M. 1995. Environmental Considerations for the Disposal of Desalination
Concentrates, Desalination and Water Reuse, 54: 56-61.
Morton, A., Callister, I. and Wade, N. 1996. Environmental impacts of seawater distillation
and reverse osmosis processes. Desalination, 108: 1-10.
Oldfield, J. and Todd, B. 1996. Environmental aspects of corrosion in MSF and RO
desalination plants. Desalination, 108: 27-36.
Saeed, T., Khordagui, H. and Al-Hashash, H. 1999. Contribution of power/desalination
plants to the levels of halogenated volatile liquid hydrocarbons in the coastal areas of
Kuwait. Desalination, 121: 49-63.
Scott, D. 1995. A directory of wetlands in the Middle East. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and
IWRB, Slimbridge, U.K., 560 pp.
Shams El Din, A. and Mohammed, R. 1998. Kinetics of reaction between hydrogen
peroxide and hypochlorite. Desalination, 115: 145-153.
Shams El Din, A., Arain, R. and Hammoud, A. 2000. On the chlorination of seawater.
Desalination, 129: 53-62.
Shriadah, M.M.A. 1999. Heavy metals in mangrove sediments of the United Arab Emirates
shoreline (Arabian Gulf). Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 116: 523-534.
UNEP 1999. Overview on land-based sources and activities affecting the marine
environment in the ROPME sea area, UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies No.
168. UNEP/ GPA Coordination Office, P.O. Box 16227 2500 BE The Hague, The
Netherlands and Regional Organization for the Protection of the Marine Environment
(ROPME), Box 26388, Safat 13124, Kuwait, 127 pp.

Internet Sources
ECB (2006): Risk Assessment Report for Sodium Hypochlorite, DRAFT of November
2005, European Chemicals Bureau (ECB) http://ecb.jrc.it/existing-chemicals/
EPA (2006): National Recommended Water Quality Criteria,
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/nrwqc-2006.pdf