Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

The solar pump revolution could bring water to millions of Africans but it must be sustainable and fair | Alan MacDonald

News Feed
Monday, September 9, 2024

It’s a truly dreadful irony: for many of the 400 million people in sub-Saharan Africa who lack access to even a basic water supply, there is likely to be a significant reserve in aquifers sitting just a few metres below their feet.Groundwater – the water stored in small spaces and fractures in rocks – makes up nearly 99% of all of the unfrozen fresh water on the planet. Across the African continent, the volume of water stored underground is estimated to be 20 times the amount held in lakes and reservoirs.The opportunity that groundwater presents for increasing access to water is widely recognised, with more than half of the global population already believed to be relying on it for drinking water.When you add the ability of solar energy to power the necessary infrastructure and the fact that groundwater supplies are much more resilient than surface water during drought, the potential for harnessing this water source to provide a clean and regular supply to communities in chronic need comes into focus.With the ability to pump large volumes of water comes the possibility of overexploiting and depleting groundwater resourcesThe opportunity presented by solar technology for increasing groundwater pumping for drinking and irrigation will be discussed this week at the International Association of Hydrogeologists’ (IAH) World Groundwater Congress in Davos, Switzerland.Much of the debate centres on how to best deploy this increasingly affordable solar technology to unlock groundwater potential; not just in terms of drinking water, but also in terms of irrigating crops – unleashing the ability to address both water and food insecurity without the need for fossil fuels.The IAH congress comes at a time when the ability to map groundwater availability across the continent has never been greater. New understanding of African geology is helping local hydrogeologists predict which areas have the most potential for solar pumps and new, easy-to-use technology is being developed to help better assess the quality of groundwater.Communities are helping determine the most sustainable management models for water supply, while donors and governments are taking increasing interest in the quality of rural supply chains.Momentum is building, and with it comes the chance to deliver meaningful, lifesaving change.The fly in the ointment, however, is the complexity that comes from moving the hypothetical into the real world. There are two issues that will need to be at the centre of the discussions in Davos if we are to secure a sustainable route forward.A drip-irrigation scheme in Lodwar, near Lake Turkana, Kenya. Photograph: Jörg Böthling/AlamyFirst is the potential for overuse. With the ability to pump large volumes of water comes the possibility of overexploiting and depleting groundwater resources. This is a significant point of concern across parts of Asia, the Middle East and the US.Second, we must not lose sight of the geological and environmental limitations of the technology to benefit fully from this opportunity. The ability to reach all parts of the region does not yet exist: about 30% of Africa’s rural population live on ancient rocks that may not be able to support the higher pumping rates demanded by large solar pumps.A recent study by the organisation I work for, the British Geological Survey, alongside partners from Paris-Saclay University, showed that geology was the key limiting factor to solar pumping, not the availability of sunshine.It is essential that a focus on solar pumps does not distract attention from the most vulnerable communitiesI will be calling for caution among those who see this solar-pumping revolution as a panacea – those who are focusing solely on the installation of large-scale systems that extract large volumes of groundwater that can then be piped directly to homes or to the farmers that need it.Such programmes can provide a balance between investment and impact, and as such they are attracting increasing interest and financial backing. So they should, as when they work they will change the lives of many millions of people.However, alongside the big projects, there should continue to be investment in small-scale use of groundwater for rural water supply, and for technologies such as handpumps or low-yielding solar-powered pumps that are more appropriate for the geology.These smaller pumps could improve access to water for rural communities while providing additional safeguards against overuse by matching pumping rates to the geology.Where the geology is complex and yields from wells are low, small solar systems can pump throughout the day and store the water for domestic or productive use when it is actually needed.We should measure our success in combining the power of solar technology with groundwater not in terms of people helped, but in those left behind. This approach would help focus our minds on a comprehensive solution – securing sustainable solutions that enhance access to clean drinking water for all.Technological breakthroughs are exciting and progress is exhilarating. But it is essential that a focus on solar pumps does not distract attention from the most marginalised and vulnerable communities.I would invite everyone to see this “solar groundwater pumping revolution” in terms of equity. Through that lens, we have the chance to ensure that this precious resource is sustainably and fairly unlocked to all those who are still waiting for a safe and reliable water supply. Prof Alan MacDonald is head of groundwater at the British Geological Survey and head of the IAH groundwater network for international development

Solar power could enable 400m Africans without water to tap into groundwater aquifers. However, we must ensure smaller projects do not lose out in the rush for new technologyIt’s a truly dreadful irony: for many of the 400 million people in sub-Saharan Africa who lack access to even a basic water supply, there is likely to be a significant reserve in aquifers sitting just a few metres below their feet.Groundwater – the water stored in small spaces and fractures in rocks – makes up nearly 99% of all of the unfrozen fresh water on the planet. Across the African continent, the volume of water stored underground is estimated to be 20 times the amount held in lakes and reservoirs. Continue reading...

It’s a truly dreadful irony: for many of the 400 million people in sub-Saharan Africa who lack access to even a basic water supply, there is likely to be a significant reserve in aquifers sitting just a few metres below their feet.

Groundwater – the water stored in small spaces and fractures in rocks – makes up nearly 99% of all of the unfrozen fresh water on the planet. Across the African continent, the volume of water stored underground is estimated to be 20 times the amount held in lakes and reservoirs.

The opportunity that groundwater presents for increasing access to water is widely recognised, with more than half of the global population already believed to be relying on it for drinking water.

When you add the ability of solar energy to power the necessary infrastructure and the fact that groundwater supplies are much more resilient than surface water during drought, the potential for harnessing this water source to provide a clean and regular supply to communities in chronic need comes into focus.

The opportunity presented by solar technology for increasing groundwater pumping for drinking and irrigation will be discussed this week at the International Association of Hydrogeologists’ (IAH) World Groundwater Congress in Davos, Switzerland.

Much of the debate centres on how to best deploy this increasingly affordable solar technology to unlock groundwater potential; not just in terms of drinking water, but also in terms of irrigating crops – unleashing the ability to address both water and food insecurity without the need for fossil fuels.

The IAH congress comes at a time when the ability to map groundwater availability across the continent has never been greater. New understanding of African geology is helping local hydrogeologists predict which areas have the most potential for solar pumps and new, easy-to-use technology is being developed to help better assess the quality of groundwater.

Communities are helping determine the most sustainable management models for water supply, while donors and governments are taking increasing interest in the quality of rural supply chains.

Momentum is building, and with it comes the chance to deliver meaningful, lifesaving change.

The fly in the ointment, however, is the complexity that comes from moving the hypothetical into the real world. There are two issues that will need to be at the centre of the discussions in Davos if we are to secure a sustainable route forward.

A drip-irrigation scheme in Lodwar, near Lake Turkana, Kenya. Photograph: Jörg Böthling/Alamy

First is the potential for overuse. With the ability to pump large volumes of water comes the possibility of overexploiting and depleting groundwater resources. This is a significant point of concern across parts of Asia, the Middle East and the US.

Second, we must not lose sight of the geological and environmental limitations of the technology to benefit fully from this opportunity. The ability to reach all parts of the region does not yet exist: about 30% of Africa’s rural population live on ancient rocks that may not be able to support the higher pumping rates demanded by large solar pumps.

A recent study by the organisation I work for, the British Geological Survey, alongside partners from Paris-Saclay University, showed that geology was the key limiting factor to solar pumping, not the availability of sunshine.

I will be calling for caution among those who see this solar-pumping revolution as a panacea – those who are focusing solely on the installation of large-scale systems that extract large volumes of groundwater that can then be piped directly to homes or to the farmers that need it.

Such programmes can provide a balance between investment and impact, and as such they are attracting increasing interest and financial backing. So they should, as when they work they will change the lives of many millions of people.

However, alongside the big projects, there should continue to be investment in small-scale use of groundwater for rural water supply, and for technologies such as handpumps or low-yielding solar-powered pumps that are more appropriate for the geology.

These smaller pumps could improve access to water for rural communities while providing additional safeguards against overuse by matching pumping rates to the geology.

Where the geology is complex and yields from wells are low, small solar systems can pump throughout the day and store the water for domestic or productive use when it is actually needed.

We should measure our success in combining the power of solar technology with groundwater not in terms of people helped, but in those left behind. This approach would help focus our minds on a comprehensive solution – securing sustainable solutions that enhance access to clean drinking water for all.

Technological breakthroughs are exciting and progress is exhilarating. But it is essential that a focus on solar pumps does not distract attention from the most marginalised and vulnerable communities.

I would invite everyone to see this “solar groundwater pumping revolution” in terms of equity. Through that lens, we have the chance to ensure that this precious resource is sustainably and fairly unlocked to all those who are still waiting for a safe and reliable water supply.

Prof Alan MacDonald is head of groundwater at the British Geological Survey and head of the IAH groundwater network for international development



Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Scientists identify previously unknown compound in drinking water

An international team of scientists have discovered a previously unknown compound that is prevalent in U.S. drinking water, sparking concern about potential public health risks. The mystery compound is called "chloronitramide anion," which forms from the decomposition of inorganic chloramines — disinfectants used to safeguard people from diseases like typhoid and cholera, the researchers found...

An international team of scientists have discovered a previously unknown compound that is prevalent in U.S. drinking water, sparking concern about potential public health risks. The mystery compound is called "chloronitramide anion," which forms from the decomposition of inorganic chloramines — disinfectants used to safeguard people from diseases like typhoid and cholera, the researchers found in a study, published on Thursday in Science. In the United States alone, more than 113 million people, or about a third of the country's population, drink chloraminated water, or water that contains these disinfectants, according to the study authors. While the toxicity of chloronitramide anion is still unknown, the researchers expressed alarm about both its prevalence and its similarities to other problematic substances. "Its presence is expected, quite honestly, in all chlorinated drinking waters to some extent, because of the chemistry," senior author David Wahman, an environmental engineer at the Environmental Protection Agency, said during a press call prior to the article's publication. "It has similarity to other toxic molecules," Wahman added. The authors therefore emphasized an urgent need for further research to evaluate whether the chemical poses a public health risk, stressing that merely identifying the compound was a challenge. "Because this compound's so small, we couldn't really break it apart," co-author Juliana Laszakovits, a postdoctoral researcher at ETH Zurich, said in the press call. "The fragments that formed weren't able to be detected by the mass spectrometer." But by combining classic synthesis methods with advanced analytical techniques, including both high-resolution mass spectrometry and nuclear magnetic resonance spectrometry, the scientists were ultimately able to isolate and identify chloronitramide anion. They measured the compound's concentration content in a range of chloraminated U.S. water systems, detecting levels as high as about 100 micrograms per liter — surpassing most regulatory limits for other disinfection by-products, which hover between 60 and 80 micrograms per liter. The researchers also noticed that the compound was absent from water systems that use disinfectants other than chloramines. Lead author Julian Fairey, an associate professor of civil engineering at the University of Arkansas, stressed in a statement that even if the new compound is not toxic, there is much knowledge to gain from their study and future related research. “Finding it can help us understand the pathways for how other compounds are formed, including toxins," Fairey added. "If we know how something is formed, we can potentially control it.”

California water agency considers spending $141 million on Delta tunnel project

The Metropolitan Water District's board is set to vote in December on whether to spend $141.6 million for planning of the proposed Delta tunnel project.

The powerful board of Southern California’s largest urban water supplier will soon vote on whether to continue funding a large share of preliminary planning work for the state’s proposed water tunnel in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.The 38-member board of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California is set to consider approving $141.6 million for planning and preconstruction costs at its Dec. 10 meeting.Gov. Gavin Newsom and his administration have requested additional financial support from suppliers that would eventually receive water from the project, and the MWD is being asked to cover its share of nearly half the initial costs.The district, which provides drinking water for about 19 million people in Southern California, has spent $160.8 million supporting the project since 2020, and is expected to help foot the bill as requested by the state.Newsom has said building the proposed Delta Conveyance Project is critical for California’s future. The 45-mile tunnel would transport water beneath the Delta, creating a second route to draw water from the Sacramento River into the aqueducts of the State Water Project.The state has estimated the total cost at $20.1 billion, and Newsom has said he hopes to have the project fully permitted to move forward by the time he leaves office in early 2027.Supporters and opponents of the project made their arguments to MWD board members at a meeting Monday. The discussion ranged widely from the vital role of the Delta’s water in California’s economy to potential alternative investments aimed at boosting the state’s supplies.Supporters, including leaders of business and labor groups, said they believe building the tunnel would improve water-supply reliability in the face of climate change, sea-level rise and the risks of an earthquake that could put existing infrastructure out of commission.“On the climate front, warming temperatures have put water storage capacity of the Sierra Nevada mountains in long-term decline,” said Adrian Covert, the Bay Area Council’s senior vice president of public policy.Covert said the project would be a cost-effective way for the state to adapt, and that reliable water will also figure in future efforts to address the state’s chronic housing shortage. “Our great concern is that, without action, water scarcity will emerge as a major constraint on housing production across California,” he said.For now, the MWD board will only be deciding on whether to agree to the state’s funding request for the next three years. The board is not expected to vote on whether to participate in the project until 2027.“We encourage you not to pull out, stay the course and fund the study so that we can learn whether it’s good or not to buy into for the long run,” said Tracy Hernandez, chief executive of the Los Angeles County Business Federation.She said the funding will enable the water district’s leaders to “continue shaping this project.”Hernandez said her organization views the project as an affordable way of ensuring water reliability. Other supporters cited a recent cost-benefit analysis by the state Department of Water Resources, which concluded that building the tunnel would deliver water at lower cost than investments in seawater desalination, wastewater recycling or stormwater capture.Opponents of the project have argued the state’s analysis is flawed and underestimates the costs while overestimating the benefits. They’ve called the tunnel a boondoggle that would harm the Delta and its deteriorating ecosystem, and have argued the project would saddle ratepayers with high costs.“Please, stop throwing good money after bad,” said Pat Hume, a Sacramento County supervisor and chair of a coalition of Delta counties. “If these costs are this high before the project even begins, imagine what will happen to the projected costs to actually deliver the project.”Different versions of the plan have been debated for decades — at first calling for a canal around the Delta, and later twin tunnels beneath the Delta, followed by Newsom’s current proposal for a single tunnel. Environmental groups, Indigenous tribes, fishing organizations and local agencies have filed lawsuits seeking to block the project. They have argued the state should instead invest in other approaches in the Delta, such as strengthening aging levees and restoring natural floodplains to reduce flood risks, while changing water management and improving existing infrastructure to protect the estuary’s health.“I believe there are a lot of alternative projects that could be explored and potentially delivered, in a more timely and more cost effective manner,” Hume said. Focusing instead on strengthening levees in the Delta and restoring tidal marshlands, he said, would ensure that water is “delivered to the doorstep of your existing pumps reliably.”Other critics argued that California’s efforts to address its housing affordability aren’t constrained by water but rather by other issues. They noted that tribes and environmental groups are currently challenging related state water-management decisions in the Delta, and said more legal challenges are likely. Some called for continuing to increase investments in local water supplies in Southern California to reduce reliance on imported water from the Delta and the Colorado River.“When you’re building something that creates environmental harm, environmental damage, that impacts local communities, there’s a cost to that. It impacts tribes, there’s a cost to that,” said Bruce Reznik, executive director of the group Los Angeles Waterkeeper.Pumping to supply farms and cities has contributed to the ecological degradation of the Delta, where fish populations have suffered declines in recent years. State water managers say the tunnel would enable California to capture more water during wet periods. They also say the tunnel would lessen limitations on water deliveries linked to fish protections at the state’s existing pumping facilities. Reznik said Southern California has a great deal of untapped potential to boost supplies locally through investments such as recycling wastewater and capturing stormwater. “There is so much we could be working on together,” he said.The state Department of Water Resources has asked MWD to provide about 47% of the $300 million in planning and preconstruction costs, with 17 other water agencies funding the remainder. The state’s current plans call for starting construction of the tunnel in late 2029. Construction would take about 15 years. Deven Upadhyay, MWD’s interim general manager, called Monday’s discussion a “fantastic dialogue” that allowed board members to hear from those on different sides of the debate.In a separate project, the district is also moving ahead with plans to build the largest wastewater recycling plant in the country. The facility in Carson, called Pure Water Southern California, is projected to cost $8 billion at full build-out and produce 150 million gallons of water daily — enough to supply about half a million homes.The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation announced this week that the federal government will provide $26.2 million to support the project, adding to $99.2 million in federal funds committed earlier this year. The Metropolitan Water District’s managers say the plant could start operating and delivering water in 2032.The water recycling project will benefit the entire state and the Southwest, said Adán Ortega, Jr., chair of the MWD board.“It will help lower demands on our imported water sources from the Colorado River and on the Northern Sierra,” Ortega said. “And it will help keep the economic engine of Southern California running, regardless of the future drought conditions we may face.”

Cambodia's Flagship Canal in Hot Water as China Funding Dries Up

By Francesco GuarascioPHNOM PENH (Reuters) - At a ceremony in August, Cambodia's leader Hun Manet knelt to receive blessings from saffron-robed...

PHNOM PENH (Reuters) - At a ceremony in August, Cambodia's leader Hun Manet knelt to receive blessings from saffron-robed monks as fireworks and balloons heralded the breaking of ground for a canal he hopes will transform his country's economic fortunes.Addressing hundreds of people waving the Cambodian flag, Hun Manet said China would contribute 49% to the funding of the Funan Techo Canal that will link the Mekong River to the Gulf of Thailand and reduce Cambodia's shipping reliance on its neighbour Vietnam.Cambodia's government estimates the strategic, if contentious, infrastructure project will cost $1.7 billion, nearly 4% of Cambodia's annual gross domestic product.But months later, China's financial contribution remains in doubt.Four people directly involved in the investment plans or briefed about them told Reuters Beijing has expressed misgivings about the project and has not made definitive commitments on its funding."It is normal business practice for Chinese companies to assist Cambodia in exploring the construction of comprehensive water conservancy projects in accordance with market principles," China's foreign ministry said in an emailed statement to Reuters when asked about the canal.The Chinese ministry did not answer a direct question about the funding but said the two countries were "ironclad friends," a comment echoed by Hun Manet in late October.Cambodia's government declined requests for interviews, and its press officers did not reply in recent weeks to requests for comments about the canal's funding.China's lack of clear commitment could jeopardise the entire plan, given uncertainty over the project's costs, its environmental impact and financial viability, experts, officials and diplomats say.It also underscore how Beijing is drastically downsizing its overseas investments as its domestic economic struggles, even in countries it considers strategic partners, such as Cambodia.Once a prime example for Western-backed "nation-building" after the long civil war that followed the fall of the Khmer Rouge regime, Cambodia has in recent times been widely seen by diplomats and foreign policy experts as a Chinese client state, owing to Beijing more than one-third of its total state debt.But Chinese investment in the Southeast Asian nation is now plunging, after a series of unsuccessful infrastructure projects, amid concerns over criminal gangs targeting Chinese nationals, and dropping tourist numbers.The 180km (112 mile) canal would greatly expand an existing waterway and divert water from the fragile rice-growing Mekong Delta to the Gulf of Thailand, cutting Cambodian shipping through Vietnamese ports.In the months after the Cambodian government signed an "investment framework agreement" in October 2023 with China Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC), a state-owned construction company, Cambodian officials went public about China's financial involvement. The text of the deal is not public.In an interview with Reuters in May, the minister in charge of the project, Deputy Prime Minister Sun Chanthol, said CRBC would develop the canal and "totally" cover its costs, getting a multi-decade concession in return.But at the August groundbreaking, the prime minister put CRBC's share in the project at 49%, with the remainder covered by Cambodian companies.The same day, his father and Cambodia's decades-long leader Hun Sen posted a statement on Facebook calling on Japan to invest in the canal.China's official Xinhua News Agency did not mention any Chinese involvement in its report about the groundbreaking.A few days later, a communication officer for Sun Chanthol told Reuters that ownership for the canal's section to be developed together with CRBC remained "to be determined".When asked about Cambodian assertions that CRBC would have a 49% stake, an official for the company told Reuters in mid-October the figures circulating publicly were not definitive. "It's very complicated," said the official, who did not elaborate.CRBC and its parent company did not reply to requests for comment.One person directly involved in the investment plans told Reuters in early November there was no Chinese money on the table at that stage, confirming the account from another official.A source from one of the Cambodian investors in the project said it would not be a surprise if China did not invest in the canal at all.A fourth official briefed on the matter said China earlier this year had privately criticised Cambodian officials for announcing Chinese funding for the project that had not been decided.They all declined to be named because of the issue's sensitivity.More than three months after groundbreaking, the site of the ceremony on the bank of the Mekong laid abandoned, a Reuters reporter observed.Dithering over the canal comes as Chinese official development assistance to Cambodia, including infrastructure funding, is falling.China's disbursements to Cambodia are projected to drop to $35 million in 2026 from more than $420 million in 2021. There have been no new Chinese loans in the first half of this year, down from $567 million in 2022 and $302 million last year, according to Cambodian official data.Chinese funding for overseas projects is also falling elsewhere, but in Cambodia the impact "could be very pronounced," said Grace Stanhope of the Lowy Institute, a Sydney-based think tank.China is still building roads and other infrastructure but has pulled out from the construction of the new Phnom Penh airport, where it had initially committed $1.1 billion.That disengagement came as an expressway built by CRBC connecting Phnom Penh to the coastal city of Sihanoukville remained under-utilised by Cambodian motorists and truck drivers who to avoid tolls prefer the crowded but free old road, a Reuters reporter observed, confirming accounts from multiple Cambodia-based officials.Another recently completed Chinese-backed airport at Siem Reap to serve the UNESCO world heritage site of Angkor Wat "is very quiet," said Ou Virak, head of Cambodian think tank Future Forum, noting investors may face losses.Chinese private investment remains high, but multiple Phnom Penh-based diplomats and financial experts point to once large inflows of Chinese informal funds destined to the gambling industry and real estate sector having dried up.Chinese tourism, once a major source of income for Cambodia, has also struggled to recover from the COVID pandemic.That has coincided with a prolonged Chinese campaign warning tourists of risks linked to an online scams industry in Cambodia.As relations between China and Cambodia evolve, the canal project's fate and its sustainability remain uncertain."With so many unknowns, it's no surprise to me that investors are getting cold feet on this project and have yet to show up with their money in hand," said Brian Eyler, an expert on the Mekong region at U.S.-based think tank Stimson Center.(Reporting by Francesco Guarascio in Phnom Penh; additional reporting by Liz Lee and Yukun Zhang in Beijing; editing by David Crawshaw and Lincoln Feast.)Copyright 2024 Thomson Reuters.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.