If malaysia stops selling water to singapore, where would it buy it from – quora electricity in costa rica for travelers


• A World Gas Conference report in 2003 cited a figure of (US dollar) $1 billion to $1.5 billion/1000 km, which is US Dollar 1 – 1.5 million per km. [14] A more recent academic report looking into pipeline construction cost at Gulf of Mexico from 1980 to 2014 gives an inflation adjusted cost of US Dollar 2.1 million per km. [15] Assuming the technical specification for transporting water is lower, and since South China Sea is shallower, I shall assume a pipeline cost of USD 1 million per km.

• For comparison, the 1,222km Nord Stream 48 inch pipeline project costed Euro 6 billions for onshore section and Euro 8.8 billions for offshore section. The second line Nord Stream 2 costs Euro 9.5 billion. [16] This works out to be between US Dollar 9 to 14 million per km. My assumption of USD 1 million per km probably errs towards the lower end.

• I assume a more conventional pipeline with diameter up to 42-inch (1.07 meter). I further gaz 67 dakar assume a maximum water flow rate of 5meter per second based on extrapolation of some information I found. On that basis, the flow volume per day = 5 * 3.14 * 1.07 * 1.07 * 0.25 * 24 * 60 * 60 = 388,258 cubic meter per day, or 85 million gallon per day. [18] Happily, that seems close to the fact that it takes three large diameter land pipes to supply up to 250 mgd of water from Johor to Singapore (although as seen from photo the diameters of these three land pipes seem larger than 42-inch)

• PUB has tried to decouple desalination cost from energy cost. For example, when calling for Tuaspring desalination plant tender, PUB asked for 25 years of fixed water price, with “no pass-through on the cost of power”. However in my opinion shifting the energy pricing risk to private companies is not the solution. It is in nobody interest should the private companies fail due u gas station near me to underpricing. Ultimately the price of desalinated water cannot be decoupled from price of energy.

Natural resources, whether they are fishes in the water; minerals beneath the ground; oil and gas under the seabed; or raw waters in lakes and rivers, all have a price. Their prices are determined by the demand for them. This is the free market economy principle followed by MNC’s like Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell, BHP, Rio Tinto and the like where they pay host countries for the privilege of extracting resources.

• Many developing countries sell rights for gas and water oil gas extraction because they don’t have the capital, technology and/or risk appetite to extract themselves. Still these countries receive enormous revenues while leaving the hard work to the oil majors. On the other hand, raw water extraction in Malaysia is low risk (water is already there), low cost (relative to oil gas venture), and low technology (Malaysia has been extracting and processing water for own consumption since Independence). Malaysia left it to Singapore to build Linggui Dam in 90’s because, constrained by the 1962 Water Agreement, it could not get price higher than RM0.03 per 1,000 gallons. So why spend more?

Meanwhile water demand is growing in Malaysia gas vs electric water heater cost per year Johor due to industrialization and population increase. Johor water demand is projected to increase by 80% from 2010 to 2028. [33] The drought in 2016, which may become increasingly common due to climate change, expose the potential shortage. By paying for Malaysia raw water at market price (and adjusting its treated water supply accordingly), the revenue from Singapore could be used towards upgrading Johor own water facilities like water harvesting and reducing distribution leakage.

However there is no sign of Singapore willing to consider price negotiation. Its gas bloating diarrhea aim is to develop self-sufficiency before current agreements expiry by 2061, the earlier the better. Singapore can freely decide the timing and amount of water drawn (within 250 mgd limit) from Malaysia between now and 2061. In a sense 1962 Water Agreement is like a long dated call option, offering RM0.03 per 1,000 gallons constant price at 250 mgd volume, that only expires in 2061.

My view is if Malaysia fails to convince Singapore to renegotiate, it should persuade Singapore to voluntarily give up Malaysia water (and stop supplying treated water to Johor) well before 2061, preferably in the next 5 to 10 years. Singapore has the capital and technology to replicate another 3 to 4 Tuaspring desalination plants, each with 70 mgd capacity, to replace Malaysia water within the next decade. The 250 mgd raw water commitment freed up could be used to meet not only the increasing need of Johor, but also its neighboring state of Melaka.

(Note: 95% of Singapore electricity is generated using gas [36] . Although Singapore still relies on Malaysia, and mostly Indonesia, for over 90% of its gas supply, it has built massive storage and LNG terminal to diversify gas supply source. [37] Perhaps Singapore may even explore innovations like floatings solars on reservoirs in future. [38] )

And most importantly, by voluntarily giving la gas prices now up its 3-cent water right, albeit at a higher desalination cost which Singapore could well afford, Singapore addresses Malaysia growing dissatisfaction which will not end even after Mahathir steps down. A self-sufficient Singapore will remove a constant source of irritation in the bilateral relationship. It can only be good for both countries.