Economics of ASR – Case Study of the Nizwa Site, ASR Pilot Project of Sharjah Electricity & Water Authority

Asam A. Almulla* , Mayada Bardan*, AlaEldin M.E.H*,
Walid Labaky**
*Sharjah Electricity and Water Authority, P.O. Box 150, Sharjah, UAE
Tel. +971 (6) 5671114; Fax +971 (6) 5670008;
Emails:  asam.almulla@sewa.gov.ae: Mayada.bardan@sewa.gov.ae;
 drala@sewa.gov.ae;
**Schlumberger Water Services, P.O. Box: 9261, Dubai, UAE
Tel. +971 4 306 7494; Fax. +971 4 329 3196
Email:  WLabaky@abu-dhabi.oilfield.slb.com

Maintaining fresh water reserves for use in emergency situations or during scheduled plant maintenance shutdowns is essential for utilities providers. In general, this can be attained via two methods of storage: storage in surface tanks and storage in groundwater aquifers. The costs associated with such activities are of key importance to decision makers. This paper presents a financial comparison between surface and subsurface storage options for the same volume of water (400 MIG) based on the conditions at the Nizwa site in Sharjah, UAE.
The comparison has taken into account the following assumptions:

• Two methods of storage: ASR and surface tanks
• The comparison considers upfront capital costs not operational costs
• The comparison is based on existing conditions in the Nizwa site and is not necessarily intended as a one model-fits all scenarios
• Cost figures used in the comparison were relevant at the time of the study and may not necessarily represent true market values at all times
• The feasibility study takes into account pre-construction exploration costs at the ASR site
• The targeted storage capacity is ~400 MIG

The result of this comparison has shown that the ASR cost represents ~10% of the surface storage cost for a 400 MIG storage capacity. The results indicate that in the case of Nizwa, opting for an ASR solution can be of vital economic benefit in addition to having a considerable strategic value. While the numbers may differ from one site to another and may also change with time, the comparison presented here may be beneficial to any decision maker assessing options for water storage.