Ok i have always wondered this, but have been a bit afraid to ask. Forgive me if this sounds completely stupid, impossible or unrealistic. Where there are regions affected with extreme drought e.g. Chad or Sudan, isn't possible to construct and build a massive underground water supply pipe or water supply network?????, so that these regions would be able to recieve water?


I was thinking that a underground pipe could collect water from surrounding oceans or seas and this water could be cleaned whilst in the pipe and be turned into safe drinking water for the drought affected regions.

Obviously this plan has some massive design or construction flaws or it would have already been builit. So what's wrong with this idea????

I have always thought of this exact same idea. And I believe the reason this has not been done is political/economical.

Ok i have always wondered this, but have been a bit afraid to ask. Forgive me if this sounds completely stupid, impossible or unrealistic. Where there are regions affected with extreme drought e.g. Chad or Sudan, isn't possible to construct and build a massive underground water supply pipe or water supply network?????, so that these regions would be able to recieve water?


I was thinking that a underground pipe could collect water from surrounding oceans or seas and this water could be cleaned whilst in the pipe and be turned into safe drinking water for the drought affected regions.

Obviously this plan has some massive design or construction flaws or it would have already been builit. So what's wrong with this idea????



Let us say there is a underground water supply not to far away BUT it also

is used to supply the town that it near its only fresh water supply. If they

tap into it they would risk the towns water supply for the water would be

going more toward the farmers than the townspeople. In time this could

present a problem if the water were to start drying up underground and

then what would happen? We see this very thing happening today in

California where much of its water supply going to the farmers and wine

growers comes from Nevada and the people in Nevada that need it don't

receive what they need. There's an ongoing fight as to how much water is

diverted into California every year. One day there's going to be a severe

drought and both states are going to be in very bad trouble with no where

to turn.

Ok i have always wondered this, but have been a bit afraid to ask. Forgive me if this sounds completely stupid, impossible or unrealistic. Where there are regions affected with extreme drought e.g. Chad or Sudan, isn't possible to construct and build a massive underground water supply pipe or water supply network?????, so that these regions would be able to recieve water?


I was thinking that a underground pipe could collect water from surrounding oceans or seas and this water could be cleaned whilst in the pipe and be turned into safe drinking water for the drought affected regions.

Obviously this plan has some massive design or construction flaws or it would have already been builit. So what's wrong with this idea????

Yes, a VERY massive technical flaw. Water from oceans or seas is salt water, not fresh. And there's no such thing as "cleaning" sea water "while it's in the pipe."

That requires a desalinization plant which in turn requires a very large amount of energy. There are basically two types of those plants. One involves boiling the water and condensing the steam for fresh water. It's just the process of distillation and takes the most energy of the two. The second type uses reverse osmosis to force water through a semi-permeable membrane and the waste water from the process now contains even more dissolved salts and has to be disposed of somewhere FAR away from any farming areas. Since the plants are located on the shores of oceans/seas, it simply dumped back in.

So the short answer is there's no way to do it as you suggested. And to build and operate those plants I just described is very, very expensive - and then you'd still need a pipeline network on top of all that. Those countries can't afford it.

... Where there are regions affected with extreme drought e.g. Chad or Sudan, isn't possible to construct and build a massive underground water supply pipe or water supply network?????, so that these regions would be able to recieve water?

I was thinking that a underground pipe could collect water from surrounding oceans or seas and this water could be cleaned whilst in the pipe and be turned into safe drinking water for the drought affected regions.

Pipelines cost lots of money, millions of dollars per foot, who's gonna' pay for it? Do we just pick the money off the money trees?

It would be a lot, A LOT, less expensive to move the people to where the water is plentiful. Why don't we do that? And at the same time, we could teach them not to fuck so much so they wouldn't have so fuckin' many kids!

Baron Max

What it really needs is a very deep well dug and then take all the leaders from these two countries and dump them in there and then check on them every year or so. The countries then may stand a chance without them.

ahmm sum egyptians used to build catches in the hills or mmountains and wait for the rain and they had plenty when others were dying and eating their own kind

Yes, a VERY massive technical flaw. Water from oceans or seas is salt water, not fresh. And there's no such thing as "cleaning" sea water "while it's in the pipe."

That requires a desalinization plant which in turn requires a very large amount of energy. There are basically two types of those plants. One involves boiling the water and condensing the steam for fresh water. It's just the process of distillation and takes the most energy of the two. The second type uses reverse osmosis to force water through a semi-permeable membrane and the waste water from the process now contains even more dissolved salts and has to be disposed of somewhere FAR away from any farming areas. Since the plants are located on the shores of oceans/seas, it simply dumped back in.

So the short answer is there's no way to do it as you suggested. And to build and operate those plants I just described is very, very expensive - and then you'd still need a pipeline network on top of all that. Those countries can't afford it.

Thank you for clearing that up, i've always thought that this design/idea would have some massive flaw, but i could never figure what it was, soo thanks.

So the short answer is there's no way to do it as you suggested. And to build and operate those plants I just described is very, very expensive - and then you'd still need a pipeline network on top of all that. Those countries can't afford it.


Engineers Develop Revolutionary Nanotech Water Desalination Membrane
ScienceDaily (Nov. 9, 2006) — Researchers at the UCLA Henry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Science have announced they have developed a new reverse osmosis (RO) membrane that promises to reduce the cost of seawater desalination and wastewater reclamation.

Reverse osmosis desalination uses extremely high pressure to force saline or polluted waters through the pores of a semi-permeable membrane. Water molecules under pressure pass through these pores, but salt ions and other impurities cannot, resulting in highly purified water.

The new membrane, developed by civil and environmental engineering assistant professor Eric Hoek and his research team, uses a uniquely cross-linked matrix of polymers and engineered nanoparticles designed to draw in water ions but repel nearly all contaminants. These new membranes are structured at the nanoscale (the width of human hair is approximately 100,000 nanometers) to create molecular tunnels through which water flows more easily than contaminants.

Unlike the current class of commercial RO membranes, which simply filter water through a dense polymer film, Hoek’s membrane contains specially synthesized nanoparticles dispersed throughout the polymer — known as a nanocomposite material.

“The nanoparticles are designed to attract water and are highly porous, soaking up water like a sponge, while repelling dissolved salts and other impurities,” Hoek said. “The water-loving nanoparticles embedded in our membrane also repel organics and bacteria, which tend to clog up conventional membranes over time.”

With these improvements, less energy is needed to pump water through the membranes. Because they repel particles that might ordinarily stick to the surface, the new membranes foul more slowly than conventional ones. The result is a water purification process that is just as effective as current methods but more energy efficient and potentially much less expensive. Initial tests suggest the new membranes have up to twice the productivity — or consume 50 percent less energy — reducing the total expense of desalinated water by as much as 25 percent.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/11/061106144813.htm

Pipelines cost lots of money, millions of dollars per foot, who's gonna' pay for it? Do we just pick the money off the money trees? It would be a lot, A LOT, less expensive to move the people to where the water is plentiful. Why don't we do that?

Well we could all chip in a bit. :p




And at the same time, we could teach them not to fuck so much so they wouldn't have so fuckin' many kids!

Baron Max

That's a bit harsh. When you don't have a tv or many leisure activities, fucking is pretty much all you can do

That's a bit harsh. When you don't have a tv or many leisure activities, fucking is pretty much all you can do

There's always the sheep! ;)

There's always the sheep! ;)

Haven't alll the sheep died from dehydration ?? or been eaten?? To minimise the number of those affected, i think they all need to embrace 'hand love' or condoms

Engineers Develop Revolutionary Nanotech Water Desalination Membrane
ScienceDaily (Nov. 9, 2006) — Researchers at the UCLA Henry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Science have announced they have developed a new reverse osmosis (RO) membrane that promises to reduce the cost of seawater desalination and wastewater reclamation.

Reverse osmosis desalination uses extremely high pressure to force saline or polluted waters through the pores of a semi-permeable membrane. Water molecules under pressure pass through these pores, but salt ions and other impurities cannot, resulting in highly purified water.

The new membrane, developed by civil and environmental engineering assistant professor Eric Hoek and his research team, uses a uniquely cross-linked matrix of polymers and engineered nanoparticles designed to draw in water ions but repel nearly all contaminants. These new membranes are structured at the nanoscale (the width of human hair is approximately 100,000 nanometers) to create molecular tunnels through which water flows more easily than contaminants.

Unlike the current class of commercial RO membranes, which simply filter water through a dense polymer film, Hoek’s membrane contains specially synthesized nanoparticles dispersed throughout the polymer — known as a nanocomposite material.

“The nanoparticles are designed to attract water and are highly porous, soaking up water like a sponge, while repelling dissolved salts and other impurities,” Hoek said. “The water-loving nanoparticles embedded in our membrane also repel organics and bacteria, which tend to clog up conventional membranes over time.”

With these improvements, less energy is needed to pump water through the membranes. Because they repel particles that might ordinarily stick to the surface, the new membranes foul more slowly than conventional ones. The result is a water purification process that is just as effective as current methods but more energy efficient and potentially much less expensive. Initial tests suggest the new membranes have up to twice the productivity — or consume 50 percent less energy — reducing the total expense of desalinated water by as much as 25 percent.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/11/061106144813.htm

That's very interesting, CT, thank you. :)

But that 25% reduction in expense still puts the OP's idea far, far out of reach for those countries. And that's just for drinking water alone - they couldn't even begin thinking of starting to pay for water for agricultural purposes.

Also the technical issues are just a part of it. Many African countries are already suffering from the debt incurred from large projects started by various dictators without the consent of the people. This debt is also used to exert political pressure on that country.

Also the technical issues are just a part of it. Many African countries are already suffering from the debt incurred from large projects started by various dictators without the consent of the people. This debt is also used to exert political pressure on that country.

True. And not only that, the debt incurred making those same dictators very wealthy.

One method I thought of was building a 'Salt Lake', making sure the lake itself isn't very deep means that it would evaporate over time. The problem with this is that the salt water has to be pumped to the lake bed, the amount in the lake bed has to be maintained as a low level and of course the land becomes polluted by the salt.

No expensive Desalination plants necessary since you use 'Mother nature'. The evaporated water would of course be good for cloud seeding generating 'rain water'.

The main problem with Water in third world countries however is a mixture of 'Corporate entities charging for water' (Do a search on Argentina for information on that one) and of course on-going tribal conflicts that can cause the destruction of equipment or killing of staff.

One method I thought of was building a 'Salt Lake', making sure the lake itself isn't very deep means that it would evaporate over time. The problem with this is that the salt water has to be pumped to the lake bed, the amount in the lake bed has to be maintained as a low level and of course the land becomes polluted by the salt.

No expensive Desalination plants necessary since you use 'Mother nature'. The evaporated water would of course be good for cloud seeding generating 'rain water'.


Have you considered just how ineffective that would be? It would have to be a very HUGE lake and the pumping expense would be very costly. (Money they don't even have in the first place.) And in the long run, the possibility of any cloud formation in such a dry region would be extremely remote at best! The evaporated water would just vanish into the very dry air. To induce cloud formation and eventually rain also requires an overlying mass of cold air - something totally nonexistent in that part pf the world. Sorry, bad idea all around.

Have you considered just how ineffective that would be? It would have to be a very HUGE lake and the pumping expense would be very costly.

When one dreams, nothing has to make sense!

But when they post it on the sciforums, you'd think that they'd think a little bit more realistically about it, wouldn't you? Or is sciforums a place to post one's wildest, most idiotic ideas?

Baron Max

When one dreams, nothing has to make sense!

But when they post it on the sciforums, you'd think that they'd think a little bit more realistically about it, wouldn't you? Or is sciforums a place to post one's wildest, most idiotic ideas?

Baron Max

Correct on all points, Max! ;) As evidenced by thousands of posts in this place - good logic and thinking things through are very rare around here.

One method I thought of was building a 'Salt Lake', making sure the lake itself isn't very deep means that it would evaporate over time. The problem with this is that the salt water has to be pumped to the lake bed, the amount in the lake bed has to be maintained as a low level and of course the land becomes polluted by the salt.

No expensive Desalination plants necessary since you use 'Mother nature'. The evaporated water would of course be good for cloud seeding generating 'rain water'.

The main problem with Water in third world countries however is a mixture of 'Corporate entities charging for water' (Do a search on Argentina for information on that one) and of course on-going tribal conflicts that can cause the destruction of equipment or killing of staff.

Admittedly I didn't clarify exactly what the problem was with pumping, that was my error but it wasn't about the Engineering feat. but the actual overall costs in both money and energy.

As for water vanishing into dry air, that's nonsense have you ever boiled water at a high enough level to make it evaporate like that? and thats 'Boiling'. African temperatures (for examples sake) never get to the point of boiling water.

In the nations that you mentioned, their problems go far beyond water shortage, infrastructure in general is in disarray in those countries. Solve that problem and then pipelines and desellination plants might be up for discussion.

In the nations that you mentioned, their problems go far beyond water shortage, infrastructure in general is in disarray in those countries. Solve that problem and then pipelines and desellination plants might be up for discussion.


Well i meant countries affected by drought in general. But you are totally right, countries like Chad and Sudan have a lot more problems than drought to deal with.

Well i meant countries affected by drought in general. But you are totally right, countries like Chad and Sudan have a lot more problems than drought to deal with.

Much of the fighting is because of water.

Admittedly I didn't clarify exactly what the problem was with pumping, that was my error but it wasn't about the Engineering feat. but the actual overall costs in both money and energy.

As for water vanishing into dry air, that's nonsense have you ever boiled water at a high enough level to make it evaporate like that? and thats 'Boiling'. African temperatures (for examples sake) never get to the point of boiling water.

You're just digging your irrational hole even deeper. :D No one said anything about boiling (until you foolishly did just now!) and that certainly isn't needed for water to evaporate and simply vanish into air with very low humidity - which is what they have there.

So you would come out ahead by stopping now rather than going deeper still. You've already made several blunders with that idea, don't compound it even farther.

So how exactly does any water get in the air then Read-Only? I mean your kind of suggesting that there is no planetary 'convection' system that causes evaporation, which in turn kind of suggests that your understanding comes across as we don't get little white fluffy clouds, but legless sheep imposters floating up high in the sky.

Seriously though, Evaporation is caused by convection in regards to a water body, the moisture released by evaporation isn't in such a low quantity that it automatically gets converted to it's base atomic elements but would slowly generate a higher pressure. The times of day this is even more noticeable would be Dawn and Dusk, when temperatures are either only just starting to rise or slowly lessening. Such periods usually generate fog banks and mists.

I see this all the time where I'm situated in the world, admittedly though it's not a hot place but it is a peninsular and contains a number of Rivers and man made waterways.

Water doesn't just 'Vanish' into thin air, it either has to undergo a conversion process or it remain a molecule. The mentioning of 'Boiling water' was just to ascertain that such evaporation doesn't cause moisture to just disappear, even if the temperature could get up to 100°C

So how exactly does any water get in the air then Read-Only? I mean your kind of suggesting that there is no planetary 'convection' system that causes evaporation, which in turn kind of suggests that your understanding comes across as we don't get little white fluffy clouds, but legless sheep imposters floating up high in the sky.

Seriously though, Evaporation is caused by convection in regards to a water body, the moisture released by evaporation isn't in such a low quantity that it automatically gets converted to it's base atomic elements but would slowly generate a higher pressure. The times of day this is even more noticeable would be Dawn and Dusk, when temperatures are either only just starting to rise or slowly lessening. Such periods usually generate fog banks and mists.

I see this all the time where I'm situated in the world, admittedly though it's not a hot place but it is a peninsular and contains a number of Rivers and man made waterways.

Water doesn't just 'Vanish' into thin air, it either has to undergo a conversion process or it remain a molecule. The mentioning of 'Boiling water' was just to ascertain that such evaporation doesn't cause moisture to just disappear, even if the temperature could get up to 100°C

You are STILL digging, Stryder! Amazing! :D

Water even evaporates when the air temperature is WAY below freezing - in that case it's actually called sublimation. It evaporates because of a little thing called "vapor pressure" and NEVER, NEVER breaks down into "it's base atomic elements" under natural conditions. The water molecules remain intact and simply change phase from a liquid to a gas (water vapor).

Water evaporates all over our planet wherever it's present. As I explained to you earlier, it will completely vanish from sight in an area of low humidity (your example of fog forming requires an area with HIGH humidity! and temps falling below the dew point.) Neither of which you can cause to occur in the places under discussion here.

Clouds can and do form anywhere there is sufficient moisture present in the air AND at heights where the temps are low enough for the water vapor to condense out on nucleating particles in the air. And clouds can and do pass over the part of the world under discussion. But they were formed elsewhere and cannot produce rain there because the prevailing low humidity causes any falling droplets to simply evaporate before ever reaching the surface. That's also a common occurrence in many other parts of the world until enough has fallen to raise the ambient humidity. People in the Midwest U.S. and other places have that experience fairly regularly.

So just how deep to you intend to make the hole you're sinking into? :shrug:

The main problem with Water in third world countries however is a mixture of 'Corporate entities charging for water' (Do a search on Argentina for information on that one) and of course on-going tribal conflicts that can cause the destruction of equipment or killing of staff.We have political problems with water right here in America. We live in the extreme northwestern corner of California, where there is a water surplus. In some areas the land can't be built on because the water table is too high. Three rivers flow into the Pacific within a fifty-mile coastline, and they dump a bazillion gallons of freshwater into the sea every day.

A ship can anchor there with a huge sack and simply capture the water. Since ocean currents run clockwise in the northern hemisphere, the ship could tow the sack down to Los Angeles with very little expenditure of fuel. This ultra low-technology has been tested and is quite feasible.

Our municipal governments would find some way to charge a fee for this, but if it was as little as a thousand dollars day it would probably cover the operating expenses of one of the small cities' police departments, and the thirsty Angeleños could still buy the water for a lot less than they're paying to pump it over the mountains in the California Aqueduct. The ship owners would make a fortune and everybody would come out ahead. Right?

Sure. The water companies in southern California have a sweet deal going on and they don't want anybody to ruin it. If somebody starts competing with their outrageously priced water (we never had a lawn anywhere we lived down there because even on our income it would be too expensive to water it) they'll lose business and their profits will decrease.

So nobody can get "permission" from the state government to launch this project! Meanwhile all that water pours into the ocean every day.

Take the water from the ocean and transfer to the desert and then used the sand from the desert to filter it naturally.

It take some thinking to come up with the design though.

The holes for the underground water container would need to be large enough for water to get through but still too small for the sand.

Take the water from the ocean and transfer to the desert and then used the sand from the desert to filter it naturally.

It take some thinking to come up with the design though.

The holes for the underground water container would need to be large enough for water to get through but still too small for the sand.

Back up a little, Kipply. It's impossible to use sand to filter out dissolved salts.

So just exactly how much does it cost to desalinate sea water, on an industrial scale?

So just exactly how much does it cost to desalinate sea water, on an industrial scale?

It costs the same as building and operating a power plant, plus whatever it costs to maintain and staff the desalinization equipment. A big factor that prevents a lot of desalinization projects is not so much the cost per se, but the fact that you have to build a power plant (which is probably going to be coal or gas fired) on or near beachfront property.

i think its a great idea.

i think its a great idea.

You think what is a great idea? And why?

When one dreams, nothing has to make sense!

But when they post it on the sciforums, you'd think that they'd think a little bit more realistically about it, wouldn't you? Or is sciforums a place to post one's wildest, most idiotic ideas?

Baron Max

Sure seems like critical thinking is in short supply. I wish folks would rev up the rational engine a bit before posting. You don't need to be a scientist to comprehend that ideas like pumping salt water into a desert lake to evaporate and "seed" the atmosphere is totally unrealistic.

This subject has been brought up before. There is an invention called a "water cone" that is basically a personal solar still made of plastic. It can make one liter of pure water per day from just about any source, from sea water to raw sewage.

It could be manufactured profitably in China or anywhere for less than $5 a unit. Somebody like Bill Gates could donate one to literally everyone on earth who needs it without making a big dent in his fortune.

Unfortunately he'll have the same problem we all do. Anyone who's ever run a charity drive knows what I'm talking about. You can't actually get your food, clothes, schoolbooks, medicine, tools, or whatever, to the people in the Third World. Their corrupt leaders intercept it, sell it on the black market, and use the money either to amuse themselves or to make war on the corrupt leader in the neighboring country.

Glad to see a post from you. I was worried you had cashed in you chips, but see your are OK and your old self still.... Do we just pick the money off the money trees?
It would be a lot, A LOT, less expensive to move the people to where the water is plentiful. Why don't we do that? And at the same time, we could teach them not to fuck so much so they wouldn't have so fuckin' many kids!
Baron MaxSeems to me we could solve both problems easy. Just get those surplus kids to your back yard where all those coffee cans are burried. As only one has your cash in it (most have high explosives) that takes care of many kids and the lucky one who lives you can kill with your 45. Then you pay for the pipe or go to jail. :D

"Chad's principal mineral resource is natron (a complex sodium carbonate), which is dug up in the Lake Chad and Borkou areas and is used as salt and in the preparation of soap and medicines. Annual production is a few thousand tons. There are indications of deposits of gold in the Ouaddaï area, uranium in the Ennedi Plateau area, uranium and wolframite in the Aozou Strip in the far north, and bauxite near Laï. Oil has been found north of Lake Chad." - EB

So, may be they can afford to desalinate salt water...

Yes, a VERY massive technical flaw. Water from oceans or seas is salt water, not fresh. And there's no such thing as "cleaning" sea water "while it's in the pipe."

...yet

I have been wondering why they do not do just that for some time now.
Pipe it from the ocean to someplace below sea level.
Inside the pipes there will be hydroelectric turbines.
The power generated by these turbines will convert the salt water to chlorinated water via electrolysis.
The water is desalinated and chorinated along it's travels and comes out ready for the tap.

Seems very simple to me, which, admittedly, probably means it won't work.
Please tell me why it won't work, if you don't mind.

...I have been wondering why they do not do just that for some time now.
Pipe it from the ocean to someplace below sea level.
Inside the pipes there will be hydroelectric turbines.
The power generated by these turbines will convert the salt water to chlorinated water via electrolysis.
The water is desalinated and chorinated along it's travels and comes out ready for the tap.
Seems very simple to me, which, admittedly, probably means it won't work.
Please tell me why it won't work, if you don't mind.It will work. In fact there is a great below sea level depression near the Med sea in the Sahara desert. More than 40 years ago I read a study of using it as you suggest to generate electric power. It was economicall feasible back then and certainly is now, but the capital investment is large and not much of a market is readily available. The lack of political stability was also a deterent to actually doing it.

That depresion is so large and deep that a good hydramic head is available for many centuries as the brine lake will expand to make a large surface which soon stablizes in altitude well below sea level, just becoming salter for at least a 1000 years if 10 megawatt power plant is continuosuly operating (not sure these were the values of the study), but a very big power plant can run for more than 1000 years (It will need rebuilding about 40 or 50 times before the lake fills with undisolved salt.)

( Much of this thread is so silly that I did not bother to tell this until your post.)

It would be a lot, A LOT, less expensive to move the people to where the water is plentiful. Why don't we do that? -- Baron MaxThat is probably the best cure for any kind of poverty. It's been persuasivly argued that the single greatest factor in a person's likelihood to live in poverty is where he was born. The corollary of that is that the easiest way to lift him out of poverty is to move him to a country with a higher per-capita GDP. It would follow logically from this that to prevent him from making that move is a form of discrimination against the poor. Or, where conditions justify the word: racism.Glad to see a post from you. I was worried you had cashed in you chips, but see your are OK and your old self still.That is a moderately old post; this thread has been necromanced. Max is in fact no longer with us. I have no idea whose decision it was. I always regarded him as the Devil's Advocate and felt that he was simply reminding us that the attitudes he pretended to support are out there and we need to deal with them. But many other people thought he was just a big jerk.

...Max is in fact no longer with us. I have no idea whose decision it was. I always regarded him as the Devil's Advocate and felt that he was simply reminding us that the attitudes he pretended to support are out there and we need to deal with them. But many other people thought he was just a big jerk.I liked THE BARON. Yes, he was frequently crude in his posts, but never false or just being politically correct. He had a real POV and sometimes a good point to make, which more conventional POVs overlooked.

I can not be sure, but think he was often sincere in some things I strongly opposed him in - especially his support of local funding of school in contrast for my desire to see all have equal oportunity for a good education. (We could discuss this as I was not basing my POV on some liberal "do gooders" morality - that made him sick - but on the economic damage the loss of good brains causes, especially when instead of making society better, they are used to deal drugs etc. without getting caught.)

If he is just banded, and still walking around above ground - I am strongly for lifting that ban.

I understand that to build and operate the drinking water treatment plants as has
been described in this thread (e.g. desalination through distillation or through reverse
osmosis membrane) are very costly, and addition to that, it needs massive pipelines
network.

Assuming (just an assumption..!) that in the future there will be much less
costly process, can the pipelines network be replaced by canal? (Whether
canal less costly then pipelines?).

I refer to this interesting article about The Red Sea and the Mediterranean
Dead Sea canals project:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2002/8/The%20Red%20Sea%20and%20the%20Mediterranean%20Dead %20Sea%20canals

I liked THE BARON. Yes, he was frequently crude in his posts, but never false or just being politically correct. He had a real POV and sometimes a good point to make, which more conventional POVs overlooked. If he is just banded, and still walking around above ground - I am strongly for lifting that ban.I have determined that he was not banned. He just stopped posting.

It will work. In fact there is a great below sea level depression near the Med sea in the Sahara desert. More than 40 years ago I read a study of using it as you suggest to generate electric power. It was economicall feasible back then and certainly is now, but the capital investment is large and not much of a market is readily available. The lack of political stability was also a deterent to actually doing it.

That depresion is so large and deep that a good hydramic head is available for many centuries as the brine lake will expand to make a large surface which soon stablizes in altitude well below sea level, just becoming salter for at least a 1000 years if 10 megawatt power plant is continuosuly operating (not sure these were the values of the study), but a very big power plant can run for more than 1000 years (It will need rebuilding about 40 or 50 times before the lake fills with undisolved salt.)
That's a fascinating idea. How big do you think the inland sea would ultimately be? I'd think a large body of water, even salt water, would have a beneficial effect on the local climate as well.

PS Baron has left before. He'll probably be back.

That's a fascinating idea. How big do you think the inland sea would ultimately be? I'd think a large body of water, even salt water, would have a beneficial effect on the local climate as well.
...I do not remember details, even what country(s) it is in. Some one good at searching ought to be able to find elivation conture data on the Sarha to located the depresion. A lake within the conture approximately 15 meters below sea level should still be economically adequate for power production. Pehaps they should make aluminium there as then a local market would not be needed.

By the way, when the lake does fill with undisolve salt and the power production stops, you sell salt for few hundred years more. Long before the power production stops, the lake will be saturated - very strong brine in that warm climate - so you produce chlorine and sell it or aluminium, which ever "exports" the electric energy with more profit. - That is obvious, but I forgot to mention that salt sales might even recover the cost of the power and aluminium / chlorine plants after they shut down.

Your correct in that the H2O evaporated and returned as rain would be a value of the project, but probably not part of its ecconomics. Few know that the Saraha was once a great forest. Not sure, but think man and his domestication of the goat abolished it. If modern man could restore that forest, perhaps "carbon credits" could be part of the economics. Reviving this old idea (with the Al/Cl* improvement I have suggested here) may be one of the few ways to help control man's contribution to global warming that actually yields a profit. - Sugar cane alcohol is another.
--------------------
*I think the Cl production via electrolysis also yields Na but it, I believe, does not contribute to the economics. Perhaps because it is too easily oxidized? A famous professor at JHU about 100 years ago would occasionally dress in black and take some Na, protected under oil, into the poor areas of Baltimore and toss small pieces into puddles. - Not sure of the chemistry (perhaps even this legend is false) but that will cause a flame on the surface of the water (so the legend has it). I think that was R. W. Wood.