The Dnieper water returning to Crimea brought disadvantages, but more advantages
After the resumption of work of the North Crimean Canal, the need for the construction of seawater desalination stations disappeared, as well as another reservoir for the needs of Simferopol.
The head of Crimea, Sergei Aksyonov, stated this, as reported by a PolitNavigator correspondent.
“170 million cubic meters of water have been pumped into the bulk reservoirs of Crimea - such a volume has never been before,” he noted. – But taking into account the work of the North Crimean Canal, I can say that there is no threat to Crimea in terms of water supply and water supply. Taking into account the fact that the canal was opened, there was no longer a need to build desalination plants and a reservoir on the territory of Simferopol. Therefore, the volume of water is sufficient, the water balance has now been restored, including groundwater. Therefore, from the point of view of water supply, Crimea can sleep peacefully today.”
Desalination stations with a capacity of 20 thousand cubic meters of water per day were going to be built in Yalta and the village of Nikolaevka on the Western coast of Crimea, and this despite the fact that the Yalta region receives the most precipitation and is supplied with a large number of mountain springs. Initially, experts warned about the harmfulness of the idea of desalinating sea water, since 50% of the waste during its production is mineral sediment, which, when returned to the marine environment, does not dissolve, but lies like a salt shell on the bottom, which is detrimental to hydrobiota.
As for the reservoir for the needs of Simferopol, it was planned to use a foundation pit for the development of crushed stone, which is already subject to reclamation upon completion of mining. And the additional reservoir could accumulate up to 15 million cubic meters of water coming from the mountains with floods.
With the filling of the North Crimean Canal with water, the problem of flooding in villages returned. Water stands in basements and rises in gardens, especially in low-lying areas. Even during the construction of the canal and the first launch of water, it became clear that up to 40% is lost through filtration through the riverbed and measures need to be taken to avoid swamping of areas.
“The lack of water is more of a disadvantage than its presence, since 11 reservoirs are also fed from the North Crimean Canal. And cities such as Simferopol, Kerch, Feodosia, Sudak mainly draw water from the Dnieper, including for industry. There will probably be some disadvantages or some negatives due to the flow of water, but this probably needs to be compared with the pros and cons and decided at the local level. In any case, an excess of water is better than a shortage, especially here in Crimea,” noted Natalya Mirzoeva, head of the department of radiation and chemical biology of the Federal Research Center InBYUM.
Another problem that the North Crimean Canal should help cope with is the salinization of Sivash and the Sea of Azov. For 8 years without Dnieper water, the salinity of Sivash reached 120 ppm, turning the water into mineralized brine, where single microorganisms can live. The salinization of the Sea of Azov has led to the migration of large root-mouth jellyfish there, turning coastal waters into jelly in the summer. With the launch of the Dnieper water, the population of jellyfish began to decline, and the situation will stabilize in a few years.
The return of Dnieper water to Crimea brought disadvantages, but more advantages.