Overview

Alexandria, Egypt is a coastal city shaped by water but constrained by freshwater scarcity. Located on the Mediterranean coast at the western edge of the Nile Delta, Alexandria depends overwhelmingly on Nile-derived surface water. This dependence creates a fragile urban water system. Freshwater must travel through canal infrastructure before it reaches the city and along the way, it is exposed to evaporation, leakage, upstream allocation pressures, and competition between agricultural, domestic, and industrial users (Abu-Zeid et al., 2012; CEDARE, 2025). At the same time, Alexandria must manage wastewater discharge, industrial pollution, limited stormwater infrastructure, coastal flooding, and the long-term degradation of Lake Mariout (Donia & Bahgat, 2016; EBRD, 2025). 

Despite the physical scarcity, our proposal actually argues that Alexandria does not need more water, but instead it needs a smarter system that incorporates reuse. It is also important that the system matches the quality of water with its intended purpose.  Instead of treating all water demand as if it requires high-quality Nile-derived potable water, Alexandria should adopt a fit-for-purpose water reuse strategy. This strategy would protect potable freshwater for essential domestic needs, shift appropriate non-potable demands to reclaimed water, and require industrial users to recycle water closer to the source. 

The proposed interventions focus on the Lake Mariout area, where wastewater treatment, drainage, industrial activity, and nearby residential districts are spatially connected. Here, there are two main strategies: centralized reuse from wastewater treatment plants and distributed reuse at industrial sites. The first would upgrade the Western Wastewater Treatment Plant to produce and store reclaimed water for nearby non-potable uses. The second would require major industrial users around Lake Mariout to adopt on-site pre-treatment, recycling loops, and monitoring systems. Together, these strategies aim to reduce demand for Nile-derived freshwater, reduce pollutant discharge to Lake Mariout, and create a more resilient urban water portfolio. 

Existing Conditions: A City Dependent on the Nile

Alexandria’s water challenge starts with geography. The city has limited rainfall and does not have enough local freshwater resources to meet its needs.  Alexandria’s current freshwater withdrawals are dominated by surface water (from the Nile), while groundwater is used mainly for agriculture This makes Alexandria highly dependent on water that originates outside the city and must be transported through engineered canal systems. 

Alexandria’s dependence on Nile water is also made more fragile by infrastructure losses. Canal transport can involve evaporation and leakage, especially in a hot climate. In addition, the broader politics of the Nile Basin matter. Egypt’s dependence on the Nile is complicated by upstream infrastructure, including the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, which has raised concerns about future water availability and the timing of water releases (BBC News, 2019; UNICEF, 2021). While this project does not attempt to solve transboundary Nile politics, those pressures make local water efficiency and reuse more urgent. 

Climate change adds another layer of risk. Alexandria is a low-lying coastal city exposed to coastal flooding, sea-level rise, storm surge, and intense-rain urban flooding. Although the city is not a high-rainfall place overall, intense storms can overwhelm drainage systems because of dense urbanization and limited stormwater capacity (Glavovic et al., 2022; Williams & Ismail, 2015).  

Site of Interest: Lake Mariout

In an attempt to begin to tackle some of Alexandria’s water issues, we decided to focus our attention on Lake Mariout. The lake is important for local ecology, water balance in the delta, and historically for fishing and surrounding livelihoods. However, it has also become a receiving body for long-term municipal, industrial, and agricultural discharges. The lake is exposed to raw municipal, industrial, and agricultural wastewater through multiple drainage systems, including the Qalaa Drain, Umum Drain, Nubaria Canal, and nearby wastewater infrastructure. Industrial sites are also concentrated around the southwest side of the lake, and those with inadequate wastewater connections have also been cited to directly discharge into the lake and surrounding environment (EBRD, 2025). 

Lake Mariout helps showcase that Alexandria’s water challenges are not simply about scarcity or pollution. It is about a linear and inefficient system: Nile-derived freshwater is brought into the city, used once, and then treated or discharged, often with limited reuse. In a more resilient system, wastewater would not be treated only as something to dispose of. It would become a managed resource. 

A Water Classification System: Matching Water Quality to Water Use

Important to the two solutions described below, if Alexandria implements water reuse, it will be important for the city to establish a transparent water classification framework. Water reuse cannot succeed if the public, utilities, regulators, and industrial users do not know which water can be used safely for which purpose. The guiding principle is: use the lowest safe water quality for each task. This principle is consistent with international water-reuse guidance, which emphasizes matching treatment levels and monitoring requirements to the intended end use rather than treating all water to the same standard (U.S. EPA & USAID, 2012; WHO, 2006). 

Class A: Potable freshwater. This is the highest-quality water and should be protected first. It should be reserved for drinking, cooking, and essential domestic uses that require potable quality. In Alexandria, this water is primarily Nile-derived surface water, so using it unnecessarily for non-potable functions increases pressure on a limited resource (Abu-Zeid et al., 2012). 

Class B: Reclaimed / non-potable water. This water has been treated to a standard appropriate for selected non-potable uses. It could support toilet flushing, laundry or service water where safe, landscape irrigation, street cleaning, municipal cleaning, and some industrial washing or cooling uses. This class is central to the Western Wastewater Treatment Plant strategy. 

Class C: On-site recycled industrial water. This water is treated and reused within industrial sites or industrial clusters. It is appropriate for closed-loop process water, cooling water, boiler feed after higher treatment, cleaning, and auxiliary industrial uses. The important principle is that water should be recycled close to the source when industrial processes allow it. 

Class D: Lower-grade non-contact water. This category could include water for dust control, construction, or other carefully controlled non-contact uses. It should only be used where safe and with clear restrictions. 

This framework does not mean all reclaimed water becomes potable water. In fact, our proposal avoids direct potable reuse. The goal is not to send treated wastewater directly into household drinking systems. Instead, the goal is to protect potable water by shifting non-potable demands to safer, lower-quality alternatives where appropriate. This distinction is essential for public perception, cost control, and regulatory feasibility (U.S. EPA & USAID, 2012; WHO, 2006). 

Solution 1: Non-potable Water Storage at the Western Wastewater Treatment Plant

The first proposed solution is to upgrade the Western Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) into a reclaimed-water production and storage hub. In the current system, wastewater treatment is primarily oriented toward treatment and discharge. Our proposal changes that logic. The Western Wastewater Treatment Plant would be retrofitted to produce reclaimed water that can be stored and distributed to nearby non-potable users. 

The basic flow is straightforward: municipal wastewater enters the WWTP; the plant is upgraded with tertiary treatment, disinfection, and monitoring; reclaimed water is stored in a dedicated non-potable reservoir; and then this water is pumped to nearby users for approved non-potable purposes. This approach builds on the existing treatment infrastructure rather than requiring an entirely new water supply system.  

Spatially, the Western Wastewater Treatment Plant is a strong pilot location because it is close to Lake Mariout, nearby residential areas, and potential storage space. This proximity matters. Reclaimed water systems are often more feasible when the distance between treatment, storage, and users is short, because distribution costs can be significant. Rather than immediately proposing a citywide reclaimed-water grid, the first phase should focus on users within a nearby service area. 

The non-potable storage reservoir is a key part of the strategy.  In extreme conditions, it could provide a backup non-potable water source for residents and municipal services. This does not replace potable emergency drinking water. Instead, it provides water for uses such as toilet flushing, cleaning, landscape irrigation, and possibly emergency service functions. By doing this, the city can reduce pressure on potable water during periods of disruption. 

The WWTP upgrade would require several treatment and monitoring steps. First, influent control should separate or pre-treat industrial inputs so that municipal wastewater treatment is not overloaded by inappropriate industrial pollutants. Second, advanced filtration, including sand or membrane filtration as needed, would remove suspended solids. Third, pollutant reduction would target nutrients, organic pollutants, and metals where relevant. Fourth, disinfection through UV, chlorine, ozone, or an appropriate combination would reduce health risks. Finally, reuse distribution would require storage, pumping, separate labeling, and clear quality standards for each end use (U.S. EPA & USAID, 2012; WHO, 2006). 

Monitoring is not optional. Sensors, discharge monitoring, and clear reuse standards must be built into the system from the beginning. Without monitoring, reclaimed water could create new risks rather than reduce existing ones. A credible system must specify what reclaimed water can be used for, who is responsible for water quality, how often it is tested, and what happens when standards are not met (WHO, 2006). 

This strategy also responds to public perception. Direct potable reuse can face strong public resistance and requires very high treatment levels. A non-potable storage and reuse system is more feasible because it does not ask residents to drink reclaimed water. Instead, it uses reclaimed water for functions where potable quality is unnecessary. Over time, if public trust, monitoring capacity, and treatment standards improve, Alexandria could consider additional reuse pathways. But the first pilot should be conservative, visible, and clearly regulated. 

The value of this strategy is not only water savings. It also reduces pollutant pressure on Lake Mariout. Every unit of wastewater reused before discharge is a unit that does not contribute to the lake’s pollution burden. In this way, the WWTP becomes more than a disposal facility. It becomes a water-recovery hub (World Bank, 2020). 

Solution 2: On-site Recycling in the Industrial Area

The second proposed solution is distributed industrial water recycling around Lake Mariout. Industrial sites are major water users and can be major wastewater generators. As seen in Figure 8, there is significant number of petroleum and oil-related sites around the lake. These facilities require water for cooling, steam generation, chemical production, cleaning, and auxiliary uses. 

Instead of treating industrial users only as consumers of freshwater and producers of wastewater, Alexandria should require major industrial sites to manage water internally. This means on-site pre-treatment, recycling and recirculation loops. Industrial users should be required to identify where water can be reused safely within their own processes.  

A useful precedent is the Kuwait Oil Company. Working with the company Aquatech, they were able to implement on-site treatment technologies, including ultrafiltration membranes, reverse osmosis, UV, and ozone, to recover ~94% of their water use.  

For Alexandria, implementation should be phased and financially realistic. Industrial sites could begin with large users and new or expanding facilities, where permits can be used as policy leverage. Rather than requiring every site to install the most expensive treatment system immediately, the government could create performance-based requirements: reduce freshwater intake, meet discharge standards, and demonstrate safe reuse where feasible. 

In the long term, centralized and distributed reuse should not compete. They should form a hybrid network. The upgraded WWTP can provide reclaimed water for non-potable municipal uses and selected nearby users, while industrial facilities recycle water on-site. Some industries may eventually connect to broader reclaimed-water networks, but highly specialized industrial flows should still be managed close to the source. This hybrid approach is more flexible than a single centralized system. 

Implementation and Governance

A fit-for-purpose reuse system requires both horizontal and vertical integration. Horizontally, Alexandria must connect water supply, wastewater treatment, industrial regulation, environmental monitoring, and land-use planning. Vertically, local agencies such as the Alexandria Water Company, Alexandria Sanitation and Drainage Company, and Alexandria Governorate must coordinate with national institutions such as the Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation, the Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban Communities, the Holding Company for Water and Wastewater, and environmental regulators.  

The phasing should proceed in three stages. In the first one to three years, Alexandria should define water classes, map pilot users, establish baseline metering, and conduct reuse feasibility studies. In the next three to five years, the city should pilot reclaimed-water supply from the Western WWTP, require industrial pre-treatment for major users, install monitoring systems, and retrofit selected facilities. Over five to ten years, successful pilots can scale across the governorate, connect more treatment plants, and embed reuse requirements into permits and pricing systems. 

Conclusion

Alexandria’s water future cannot rely only on finding new freshwater. The city’s dependence on the Nile, limited rainfall, canal losses, upstream allocation pressures, and wastewater pollution all point to the need for a smarter water allocation system. The goal is to reduce avoidable dependence by reserving potable water for essential uses and shifting appropriate demands to reclaimed and recycled water. 

The Lake Mariout area offers a strategic starting point because wastewater treatment, industrial demand, drainage, and nearby urban users are already connected there. Upgrading the Western Wastewater Treatment Plant would transform wastewater from a disposal burden into a non-potable resource. Requiring on-site recycling in industrial areas would reduce freshwater demand and minimize discharge. A water classification system would hold these strategies together by making clear which water quality belongs to which use. 

Ultimately, Alexandria does not only need more water. It needs to use the right water, for the right purpose, at the right scale. A fit-for-purpose reuse system would not solve every problem: it would not end Nile dependence, stop coastal flooding, or resolve upstream agricultural conflicts. But it would make the existing system more rational, more resilient, and less wasteful. It would also help protect Lake Mariout by reducing the amount of wastewater treated as an endpoint rather than a resource. That shift, from disposal to reuse, is the core of this proposal. 

References

Abu-Zeid, K. M., Elrawady, M., Yasseen, A., Van Der Steen, P., & Sharp, P. (2012). Alexandria 2030 integrated urban water management (IUWM) strategic plan. Centre for Environment and Development for the Arab Region and Europe. https://2025.cedare.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Alexandria-2030-Integrated-Urban-Water-Management-IUWM-V17-with-cover-page.pdf 

AbuZeid, K., van der Steen, P., Hellaly, H., Kassem, A., & Elrawady, M. (2010). Alexandria wastewater treatment and reuse study. CEDARE, Alexandria Sanitary Drainage Company, & UNESCO-IHE. 

Alexandria Governorate, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, & AtkinsRéalis. (2025). Alexandria Green City Action Plan. EBRD Green Cities. https://www.ebrdgreencities.com/assets/Alexandria-Green-City-Action-Plan-english.pdf 

BBC News. (2019). Egypt’s water crisis. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-50328647 

Centre for Environment and Development for the Arab Region and Europe. (2025). Alexandria 2030 integrated urban water management plan. https://2025.cedare.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Alexandria-2030-Integrated-Urban-Water-Management-IUWM-V17-with-cover-page.pdf 

Delgado, A., Rodriguez, D. J., Amadei, C. A., & Makino, M. (2021). Water in circular economy and resilience (WICER). World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstreams/d0529388-cd9b-5cbb-ba9b-0c39f20ffeb4/download 

Donia, N., & Bahgat, M. (2016). Water quality management for Lake Mariout. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 7(2), 527–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.05.011 

Glavovic, B., Dawson, R., Chow, W., Garschagen, M., Haasnoot, M., Singh, C., & Thomas, A. (2022). Cross-chapter paper 2: Cities and settlements by the sea supplementary material. In Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Supplementary material). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGII_CCP2_SM.pdf 

Shaaban, N. A., Abd El-Fatah, H. M., & El-Rayis, O. A. (2022). Water quality and trophic status of Lake Mariut in Egypt and its drainage water after 8-year diversion. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 194, Article 395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10027-1 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, & U.S. Agency for International Development. (2012). Guidelines for water reuse (EPA/600/R-12/618). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-08/documents/2012-guidelines-water-reuse.pdf 

UNICEF. (2021). Water scarcity in Egypt. https://www.unicef.org/egypt/media/7986/file/Water%20Scarcity%20in%20Egypt.pdf 

Williams, S. J., & Ismail, N. (2015). Climate change, coastal vulnerability and the need for adaptation alternatives: Planning and design examples from Egypt and the USA. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 3(3), 591. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/3/3/591 

World Bank. (2020). Wastewater? From waste to resource. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/water/publication/wastewater-initiative 

World Health Organization. (2006). Guidelines for the safe use of wastewater, excreta and greywater. World Health Organization