Life cycle assessment of the supply and use of water in the Segura Basin.

Purpose: In this paper, the combined life cycle assessment of the water supply alternatives and the water use in a water-stressed watershed in Spain (the Segura) is presented. Although it is a dry area, agriculture and tourism are very profitable sectors with high water demands. Thus, external water supply alternatives including water transfers or desalination partly balance the reduced natural water availability to cover the existing water demands. Methods: In order to integrate both the impact of water supply alternatives and water use, the ReCiPe method was used to assess the water supply alternatives at the endpoint approach with the three specific damage categories: human health, ecosystem diversity and damage to resources availability. At the same time, the water use impact was calculated and grouped in the same categories. Firstly, one average cubic metre of water at the user's gate in the Segura Basin area was taken as the functional unit. As irrigation and drinking water constitute the principal water uses, it was considered that to separately analyse 1 m used for irrigation and 1 m destined to drinking purposes could provide interesting information. Then, these units were also considered as functional units. Then, three additional hypothetical scenarios were introduced: two of them defined by a strong variability in rainfall and the third by a sudden diminution of water transferred from a neighbouring basin. Results and discussion: Regarding the facilities to provide 1 m at user's gate in the Segura Basin, results showed that the seawater desalination plants obtained the highest score for all the three considered damage categories, followed by the Tajo-Segura water transfer, the groundwater, the local surface waters and the water reuse. In relation to the water use impact, the damage to ecosystems diversity was very representative with respect to the one coming from water supply infrastructures because irrigation constituted 85 % of the total demand. Conclusions: The diversification of water supply alternatives within a region considerably increases any environmental impact, primarily stemming from the additional required infrastructures, and frequently from the use of external water sources for their uses. Thus, users and policy makers should be aware of the costs that a guaranteed water supply entails. In water-scarce territories, the use of external solutions such as desalination or water transfer either increase the environmental impact due to their high energy consumption or they are limited by existing climate variability. Therefore, they cannot be considered as the definite solution, which would be a balance between renewable sources and existing demands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]