Effect of Construction Overflow Weir Across Euphrates River in the Chibayish Marshes Region

Abstract

Developing integrated marches management for restoration of the southern marshes in Iraq require
adequate reliable plan. The aim of this study is developing the Chibayish region. In this study, economic feasibility
and cost analysis for constructing embankment across Euphrates River and overflow weir are conducted. These
structures are used to regulate the Euphrates River during the flood season and the deficit period and improve the
quality of water in central marshes. In addition, this feasibility study examines the effect of establishing the
controlling regulator on increasing the area of cultivation of the Malha irrigation project and improving the livestock
with fish capturing in the region. The economic analysis and feasibility calculations showed that the time of payback
period is equal to 7 years after 3 years from the construction time and the rate of the benefit cost B/C is equal to one
when the discount rate is equal to 22%. By these results we can consider the project to be economically feasible and
can improve the income of local people at Chibayish Marshes region.

Full text

Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 15(2): 47-56, 2018
DOI: 10.19026/rjaset.15.5291
ISSN: 2040-7459; e-ISSN: 2040-7467
© 2018 Maxwell Scientific Publication Corp.
Submitted: August 7, 2017 Accepted: October 10, 2017 Published: February 15, 2018
Corresponding Author: Haitham A. Hussein, Civil Engineering Department, Alnahrain University, Baghdad, Iraq, Tel.:
+9647702662997
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (URL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
47
Research Article
Effect of Construction Overflow Weir Across Euphrates River in the
Chibayish Marshes Region
1Alaa H. Alshami, 2Haitham A. Hussein and 2Mohammed A. Ibrahim
1Civil Engineering Department, AlFarabi University,
2Civil Engineering Department, Alnahrain University, Baghdad, Iraq
Abstract: Developing integrated marches management for restoration of the southern marshes in Iraq require
adequate reliable plan. The aim of this study is developing the Chibayish region. In this study, economic feasibility
and cost analysis for constructing embankment across Euphrates River and overflow weir are conducted. These
structures are used to regulate the Euphrates River during the flood season and the deficit period and improve the
quality of water in central marshes. In addition, this feasibility study examines the effect of establishing the
controlling regulator on increasing the area of cultivation of the Malha irrigation project and improving the livestock
with fish capturing in the region. The economic analysis and feasibility calculations showed that the time of payback
period is equal to 7 years after 3 years from the construction time and the rate of the benefit cost B/C is equal to one
when the discount rate is equal to 22%. By these results we can consider the project to be economically feasible and
can improve the income of local people at Chibayish Marshes region.
Keywords: Chibayish marshes region, cost analysis, economic feasibility, irrigation and drainage system,
sensitivity analysis
INTRODUCTION
Every construction project should give benefits for
the investor. These benefits consist of profit, business
development, resources utilization, job opportunities,
etc. Profits are achieved in long period and should have
an accurate investment forecast so that the investors can
still have the willingness to invest their money.
Effective and efficient use of land not only reduces the
routine expenditures but also exchange into income
source (Firmansyah et al., 2006). The economic
feasibility study of a project is an estimate of the
potential profitability of that project, or a study that
measures the expected benefits from a certain project
relative to its cost (Johnson and McCarthy, 2001).
Project feasibility study is used to get the alternatives of
optimal land use that give the highest profits.
Feasibility study analysis also gives information about
the value of investment and the benefits that investors
will get. Definite return of investment can be seen from
feasibility study. Commonly, Net Present Value (NPV),
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) and Payback Period are
values used by investor to consider if this project is
feasible or not (Firmansyah et al., 2006). Abou-Zeid
et al. (2007) presented an overview of feasibility study
procedure than been used in public sector in some Arab
countries along with their inconsistency items,
advantage and disadvantage. A pilot experimental study
was conducted for 91 highways public project in Egypt.
The study showed a great inconsistency in the
procedures used for different projects. Blank and
Tarquin (2005) showed problems and controversies
with cost benefit analysis application to public project
appraisal. This study consists of five parts, which there
are distinguished public goods, key assumptions to
public project appraisal, discount rate issues, the main
rules of cost benefit analysis and a background of
project choice. Generally, there are no standard
procedures to carry out the feasibility study, especially
for public projects, in Arab countries (Abou-Zeid et al.,
2007). Massive expenditures on infrastructure projects
need to be weighed against the expected benefits
resulting from these projects to the public and the
national economy. Therefore, economic feasibility
studies need to be conducted prior to the construction of
infrastructure facilities (Hyari and Kandil, 2009).
The aim of this study is to study the economic
feasibility to know whether the construction of the
controlling overflow weir is beneficial for increasing
the area of cultivation of the Malha irrigation project,
improving the livestock and fish capturing in the
Chibayish Marshes region.
The purpose of construction Al Chibayish overflow
weir across the Euphrates River is to help water to enter

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 15(2): 47-56, 2018
48
Fig. 1: Study area at Iraqi map and location of over flow weir across Euphrates River
from the Euphrates River at upstream overflow weir to
the Central marshes then the water enters from Central
marshes to the Euphrates River at downstream overflow
weir. By this operation the mixing of water will happen
and the water will be directed to the intake of the Malha
irrigation project. In addition, the overflow weir will be
controlling the Euphrates River during flood and also in
the deficits in the Euphrates River. Figure 1 shows the
Iraqi map (MOWR, 2006b) and location of the
overflow weir across Euphrates river.
STUDY AREA
The overflow weir is located on the Euphrates river
between central marshes Lat. (30° 50' N) Long. (46°
45'E) with an area equal to 35 thousand ha. Hammar

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 15(2): 47-56, 2018
49
marshes is located Lat. (30°35'N) and Long. (46°25'E)
with an area equal to 35 thousand ha (MOWR, 2006a).
The water in the central marshes will be regulated from
the downstream with series of projected water
regulators structures along the canal that run from north
to south until the Euphrates River.
PHYSICAL AND ECOLOGICAL FEATURE OF
THE MARSHES
Central marshes: Central marshes comprise of a vast
complex of mostly permanent fresh water with
scattered area of open water to the west of the river
Tigris and to the north of the river Euphrates. The
marshes are fed by both rivers and the maximum
flooding covers an area of about 3000 km2, almost all
of the effective areas are covered in tall read- beds of
parasites and Typha. The marshes are boarded to the
north and east of cultivated planes with extensive rice
fields and sugar cane polders. Portion of the central
marshes which are known or thought to have been of
special importance for wildlife.
Al-Hammar marshes: Al Hammar marshes
surrounding marshes and neighboring of temporary
inundation comprise some of 3500 km2 of almost
continues wetland habited south of the river Euphrates
and west of the Shutt al Arab. The marshes itself is the
longest lake in the lower Euphrates approximately 120
km long up to 25 km wide. It is boarded in the north by
the Euphrates river in the west by the southern desert
and in the east by the Shatt al Arab. The lake is entropic
and generally shallow with maximum depth almost 1.8
m at low water level and in early winter end about 3.0
m. High water level in late spring long parts of the
littoral zone dry and during period of low water and
banks and island appear in many places. The main
source of water in the Euphrates which flow along the
northern edge of the marshes and joint the Tigris at
Qarmat Ali where the combined flow between Shatt Al
Arab. However, the lake may also receive a very
substantial amount of water from Tigris Via central
marshes and there is permeability also some recharges.
Some ground water portion of this vast wetland which
are known to be special wildlife.
SCOPE OF RESEARCH
Increasing the cultivation area in the chibyish
region: Al Malha project is located on the right side of
the Euphrates River in Thi-Qar province see Fig. 1 plan
and location of Malha project. The area of this project
is a drain from the Hammar marshes and the area used
for cultivation is equal to 45000 Dons, the cropping
pattern suggests that the cultivation area is for Winter
crops (Wheat, Barley, Barseam, Broad Beans) with
total intensity equal to 75% and Summer crops (Maize,
Summer vegetable, Rice) with total intensity equal to
18% and the perennial which are mostly fodder with
14% intensity. The amount of the water requirement is
calculated by using the revised pen-man method and on
the basis of the Al-Nassiyriah metrological station
which is close to the site area of the project. The format
of calculation of the Eva-transpiration ET0 is shown in
Fig. 2 as a sample for January (FAO, 1977).
The maximum water duty requirement is 0.605
L/s/hec for April which is used as the discharge for the
water requirement to Al-Malha project and is equal to
8.324 m3/s at the intake of the main canal of the project
area. The monthly discharge and volume of water
required for the cropping pattern is shown in Table 1.
Increasing the activity of the fish capturing: In Iraq,
fishing efforts are considered to be relatively low,
detailed data on the number of fish are lacking but it is
reported that fishing has always been far less important
than agricultural, reed collecting and buffalo farming.
The total population of marshes before drainage has
been estimated between 35000 and 500000 (USAID,
2006) including men and women, old and young.
Assuming 5% of these numbers were engaged in
fishing on full time equivalent basis, then there may be
about 20000 fishers in the marshes land fishery at its
peak.
As an average, this translates to a pre drainage
fishermen density of 2.2 fisherman/km^2 (UNEP,
2005), with annual caches of 12000 to 15000 tons per
year, corresponding to catch per unit area per year of
about 15 kg/ha. During February 2004, fishermen
reported that catch rates are about 10 times lower than
the pre drainage catch rates. Respondents claimed to
catch between 150 and 400 kg/day prior to drainage and
often being able to fill their boats with fish.
Current catches range from 2.4 kg/day for some
respondents up to 17-25 kg/day. Estimates of current
fishing pressure are similar before drainage with both
water level and fishermen numbers decreasing similar
promotion. Department of fisheries staff estimates that
around 3000 fishermen are now working in the
marshes. This corresponds to a fishermen density of
2.3/km2 of 1297 km2 water area estimated by United
Nation Environment Program (UNEP). Fishermen are
concentrated in the small areas, where higher number
are at the top of north-south section of the prosperity
river. Densities were also high near Al-FAHOOD
village on Abu Zarig marshes at the Chibayish fish
market over 50% of the represented fish were Common
carp and Crucean carp.
In order to find the quantity of fishes in tons per
year, we use the following data:
• The south central marshes are considered to be
more effective in the Chibayish region
• The area flooded for this part is equal to 899 km2
according to CRIM (2008)

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 15(2): 47-56, 2018
50

Fig. 2: Chart of calculation of the Evap-transpiration (ET 0) for Malha irrigation project in Chibayish region
Table 1: Monthly discharge and volume of water required for the cropping pattern
Month Discharge m3/s Volume million m3
October 4.50 12.10
N
ovembe
r
3.14 8.14
December 2.37 6.35
January 3.00 8.04
February 5.28 12.78
March 7.45 19.95
April 8.31 21.55
May 4.77 12.78
June 5.38 13.94
July 5.5 14.62
August 4.66 12.49
September 4.73 12.25
Total 155
The water duty for Al-Malha irrigation ( existing ) is equal to 1.32 L/s/hec and in the head of the canal = 1.32/0.9 = 1.47 L/s/hec; Actual area
cultivated is equal to 8000 Dons; Hence the discharge = 1.47×8000×(4×1000) = 2.94 m3/s; Total quantity of water used in the winter season
(Wheat and Barley) and the summer season (rice) is equal to 2.94×365×24×3600 = 92.72 Million m3; Net water required is equal to 155-92.72 =
62 .3 Million m3
FORMAT FOR CALCULATION OF PENMAN METHOD
Penman reference crop ETo= c [W.Rn+(1-W)f(u)(ea-ed)]
DATA
Tmean 11.5° C
RHmean 66%
or T wetbulb
depression
or T dewpoint
U? 212.89 km/day
Tmean 11.5°C
altitude 7.5 m
month January
latitude 31N
month January
latitude 31N
(? =0.25)
Tmean 11.5°C
ed 8.87 mbar
n/N 0.667
Tmean 11.5°C
altitude 7.5m
Uday/Unight 1.19
RHmax, Rs
Country:
Period : Place: Latitude :
LOngitude : Altitude:
ea mbar
RH /100
ed mbar calc
data
(5)1/
(5) or (6) (ea - ed) mbar calc
f(u) (7)
(1-W) (8)
(1-W) f(u)(ea-ed)mm/day calc
Ra mm/day (10)
n hr/day data
N hr/day (11)
n/N calc
(0.25+0.50 n/N) calc (12)
Rs mm/day calc
Rn1=f(T)f(ed)f(n/N)mm/day cals
f(T) (13)
f(ed) (14)
f(n/N) (15)
Rn1 = f(T)f(ed)f(n/N)mm/day calc
Rn = Rns - Rn1 calc
W (9)
w.Rn calc
c (16)
ETo = c[W.Rn + (1-w)f(u)(ea-ed)] mm/day
2/
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
+
-
÷
-
81% 4.69
0.824
2.775
1.035
0.572
1.81
1.80
0.667
0.208
13.01
4.819
0.565
0.63
10.34
6.5
8.53
3.614
8.94
0.66
13.55
4.61
0.881
0.428 1.74
1/ Nembers in brackets indicate Table of reference (FAO,No.24,1977).
2/ When Rs data are available Rns = 0.75 Rs.
2.45
IRAQ
2010 Nassiryah 31N
46E 7.5

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 15(2): 47-56, 2018
51
• The production is considered to be equal to 15
kg/hec
• Total production per year is equal to 1350 ton/year
• The amount is low as compared to the production
amount between (1950-2005) which is equal to
range between 5000-30000 ton per year (FAO,
1977)
• Total amount income of fish per year is equal to
2700 million ID (Iraqi Dinar)/year
Increasing livestock and dairy products: Milk
productivity from water buffalo is very low and is about
five kilograms in Hammar and Al Chibayish which may
be because the forage. Buffalos are milked once a day
in the evening upon return from pasture beyond the
settlement. Cattle provide 6 kg of milk in Hammar and
Al Chibayish daily. These low yields are largely related
to the amount of food given to animals. Sheep are shorn
once a year for their coarse wool which is sold for
about 1000 ID/kg. Sheep in the marshes reproduce
three times every two year on average. Owners sell the
male when they weigh about 30 kg for slaughtering.
Females are kept for breeding. Buffalos and Cattle
reproduce every ten months.
The livestock procedure has been relatively
successful with their traditional system of low input,
output per head despite less per animal productivity.
Return of investment in livestock is not low in most
traditional livestock systems. Animals are held because
they usually provide high and secure economic return
relative to other investment options. Depending on the
species, returns are realized in the form of milk, meat,
dung for fuel, manure hides, skins, wool and hair.
Livestock are often the most important and secure form
of investment and saving available. Livestock do not
necessary require land ownership as investment or
saving. Livestock provide security and can draw on for
food purchases, family emergencies, ceremonies and
social events.
The net profit realized from kilograms of live
weight for Buffalo, Cattle and Sheep are 1275 ID, 1166
ID and 1674 ID respectively.
The explicit objective of the task is to raise income
in the marshes through improved livestock and daily
production as a part effort to develop strategies to
restore the Iraqi Marshes, which includes: The
construction, the overflow weir and the proposed
regulator which can improve the situation and controls
the water between Euphrates River and Hammar and
Central Marshes.
METHODS AND CALCULATIONS
The economic analysis of the construction of the
weir and the regulator on the existing embankment with
100-meter width in the Chibayish can be achieved by
calculating the cost of all items of the project and the
benefits gained during the life production of the project.
Cost analysis: In order to find the feasibility of the
construction of the weir, it is necessary to find the rate
of 1 m3 used in the project. In other words, to find the
accumulation cash flow during the life production of
the project it is necessary to find the cost of the items of
the projects. The items of the project are:
• Agricultural activities for irrigation
• Fishing capturing activities
• Livestock and dairy activities
The cost can be divided into the following:
• Capital cost
• Running cost (yearly cost)
The capital cost included the following:
• Cost of irrigation and drainage system
• Cost of purchasing the fingering
• Cost of purchasing the animals
And the running cost included the following:
• Maintenance cost
• Operation staff cost
• Replacement cost
• Cost of machines used for agricultural purpose
• Cost of production requirement
Cost of irrigation and drainage system:
• This cost is based on the design of the Malha
project by the study and design center (Ministry of
water resources) including the irrigation and
drainage system and irrigation structures based on
the quantities of earth excavation, earth filling and
number of structures.
• Land leveling cost.
• Cost of ancillary work which consists of
construction building for the period of construction
of the project.
Cost of livestock: The livestock of the animals in the
Chibayish region are consisting mainly from Buffalo
and sheep. The expected number purchasing for three
years equal to 6000 for buffalo and 40000 for sheep.
Cost of purchasing the fingering: There are currently
nine to ten operating private sector hatcheries near
Babylon, Kut and Baghdad that produce the grass and
silver fingering distributed advanced fingering to the
south for 300 ID per fingering, this price is hugely
inflated because there is no competition, the
governmental hatchery produces fingering for 7-9 ID
per fingering.
• Initially for coal, there was three to five million
fingering. However, the program was able to
restock only approximate 3000000 fingering.

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 15(2): 47-56, 2018
52
Table 2: Number of agricultural field machines
N
o. Agricultural machines No, first year No. second year No. third year
1 Tractor (DT-75) 12 24 36
2 Tractor Anntar 70 12 24 36
3 John Dear Harvester 5 10 15
4 Four furrow plough 12 24 36
5 24- Disk morrow 12 24 36
6 Land plan 12 24 36
7 Seed Drill 5 10 15
8 Ridged 3 6 9
9 Cultivator 3 6 9
10 Mower 2 4 6
11 Ditcher 13 26 39
• In this research, the private cost of fingering is
equal to 300 ID per fingering and the total number
of fingering is equal to 3000000
• The total capital cost equals to 3000000×300 = 9.0
million ID
Distributed capital cost as main item: The main
capital costs are:
• Irrigation system
• Drainage system
• Hydraulic irrigation and drainage structures
• Land leveling
• Cost of machines
• Cost of ancillary work
• Cost of livestock and dairy production
• Cost of purchasing the fingering
o The total capital costs are estimated to be equal to
63005.25 million ID
o The percentage of the foreign currency is equal to
14% from the capital investment cost
o The capital cost is distributed in 3 years as period
of construction
Running cost: This cost should be paid each year in
order to operate the project continually without any
problems and keep the project with best productivity
(Kulkarni et al., 2004). The cost consists of the
following:
• Cost of the staff operation for the project
• Maintenance cost of the project starting from the
beginning of operation up to the end life of the
project (50-year)
• Cost of electricity
• Replacement cost for the parts needed to be
replaced during the life production of the project
which includes the land leveling, machines
operation for agricultural purpose and site vehicles
• Cost of production requirements which is
considered the cost of mechanical of agricultural
activities as shown in the Table 2, cost of
seeds(field crops and vegetable), cost of fertilizer,
cost of pesticide and cost of land and water rate (in
Iraq is free of cost)
• Cost of existing agricultural production
• Cost of the net requirement of the production
Total project cost: The total project cost is consisting
of the total cost of the yearly cost and the capital cost of
the project and this cost is presented in the Table 3.
Benefit from the project development: The benefit of
the agricultural production is achieved by increasing the
intensity of the cropping pattern and increasing the
yield of the production, by using technical management
such as: The mechanical cultivation, experimental farm,
improved livestock production and also improving the
fishing activities by using the advanced method of the
breading and increasing the quality and quantity of the
fish capturing. All these activities can be obtained by
constructing the regulator to develop the situation of
water in quantity and quality.
The price of the product of the agricultural
production can be divided in two categories:
• Strategic crops which considers the rate price
according to the international rate (CIF) such as
wheat, barley, maize, in addition to meat and fish,
this is taken from the ministry of trade.
• The vegetable crops fodder and milk are
considered according to their rate at the local
market price and these price are obtained from the
local market in Chibayish.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Accumulating cash flow: The cash flow represents the
total cash flow during the operation of the agricultural
project with 50 years’ life production and with total
amount of cash flow equal to 385463.97 Million ID as
shown in Table 4.
Benefit of construction of the overflow structure:
Due to construction, the overflow weir and the
proposed regulator, the total output will be considered
as the productivity of 1 m3 of water as calculated from
the cash flow as shown in Table 4 to be equal to 50
ID/m3. Hence, this rate will be considered as the basis
of the benefit of the water which can be used for
developing the Chibayish region and the quantity of
water used in cultivation for this development.

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 15(2): 47-56, 2018
53
Table 3: Total project cost in million ID
Yea
r
Total yearly
cos
t
Capital cos
t
Total project
cos
t
Yea
r
Total yearly
cos
t
Capital cos
t
Total project
cos
t
1 0.0 18654.1 18654.1 26 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
2 0.0 26073.3 26073.3 27 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
3 0.0 18272.8 18272.8 28 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
4 2098.52 0.0 2098.52 29 9024.59 0.0 9024.59
5 3489.55 0.0 3489.55 30 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
6 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 31 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
7 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 32 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
8 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 33 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
9 9024.59 0.0 9024.59 34 10499.69 0.0 10499.69
10 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 35 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
11 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 36 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
12 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 37 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
13 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 38 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
14 10499.69 0.0 10499.69 39 9024.59 0.0 9024.59
15 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 40 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
16 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 41 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
17 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 42 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
18 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 43 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
19 9024.59 0.0 9024.59 44 10499.69 0.0 10499.69
20 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 45 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
21 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 46 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
22 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 47 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
23 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 48 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
24 10499.69 0.0 10499.69 49 9024.59 0.0 9024.59
25 4426.59 0.0 4426.59 50 4426.59 0.0 4426.59
Table 4: Accumulation cash flow
Years Total future
benefit Total cost Cash flow Cumulative
cash flow Years Total Future
Benefit Total cost
Cash
flow Cumulative
cash flow
1 720 18654 -17934 -17934 26 15251 4426 10825 151603
2 720 26073 -25353 -43287 27 15251 4426 10825 162428
3 720 18272 -17552 -60840 28 15251 4426 10825 173253
4 3411 2098 1313 -59526 29 15251 9024 6227 179480
5 9573 4426 5146 -54380 30 15251 4426 10825 190305
6 15251 4426 10825 -43555 31 15251 4426 10825 201130
7 15251 4426 10825 -32730 32 15251 4426 10825 211955
8 15251 4426 10825 -21905 33 15251 4426 10825 222780
9 15251 9024 6227 -15678 34 15251 10499 4751 227532
10 15251 4426 10825 -4853 35 15251 4426 10825 238357
11 15251 4426 10825 5971 36 15251 4426 10825 249182
12 15251 4426 10825 16796 37 15251 4426 10825 260007
13 15251 4426 10825 27621 38 15251 4426 10825 270832
14 15251 10499 4751 32373 39 15251 9024 6227 277059
15 15251 4426 10825 43198 40 15251 4426 10825 287884
16 15251 4426 10825 54023 41 15251 4426 10825 298709
17 15251 4426 10825 64848 42 15251 4426 10825 309534
18 15251 4426 10825 75673 43 15251 4426 10825 320359
19 15251 9024 6227 81901 44 15251 10499 4751 325111
20 15251 4426 10825 92726 45 15251 4426 10825 335936
21 15251 4426 10825 103551 46 15251 4426 10825 346761
22 15251 4426 10825 114376 47 15251 4426 10825 357586
23 15251 4426 10825 125201 48 15251 4426 10825 368411
24 15251 10499 4751 129953 49 15251 9024 6227 374638
25 15251 4426 10825 140778 50 15251 4426 10825 385463
Hence the total cash flow per year = 385463.97/ 50 = 7709.279 million ID; Total cash flow per Dons = 7709.279 /45000 = 0.171 million ID;
Total water used for the project equal to 155 million m3; One cubic meter per Dons = 155/45000 = 3444.4 m3/ Don; ID / cubic meter = 0.171
×1000000/3444.4 = 49.65 ID say 50 ID
• Total water requirement from Table 1 which is
equal to 155 million ID
• Already water used for existing Summer and
Winter crops (Wheat and Barley and Rice) for area
equal to 8000 Dons, the existing water duty 1.47
L/s/hec, hence the total water used equal to 92.72
million cubic meter
• Hence the net water required for the project 155-
92.72 = 62.3 million m3
• The total income of the water rate equal to 62.3
million m3×50 ID = 3115 million ID/year
Economic analysis: The purpose of the economic
analysis is to know the preponderance of the benefit of
the project over total cost or vice versa and the result
can be considered economically feasible or not. The
economic analysis used number of factors to examine
the project.

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 15(2): 47-56, 2018
54
Fig. 3: Relation of the cost and benefit
Net present value: The net present value of the project
can be calculated using the following relation (Blank
and Tarquin, 2005):
N.P.V =∑


 (1)
where,
N.P.V. = Net present value
Bi = The yearly benefit obtained
Ci = The yearly cost expected
r = Discount rate %
n = The economic life of the project:
Discount rate factor = 
 (2)
Net present value for all life production of the
project (50 years) are listed for different discount rates
(1-25) %. It is found that the net present value is 4.734
million ID for a discount rate equal to 22% and B/C
equal to 1.0. The relation between the cost, benefit and
discount rate shown in Fig. 3.
Payback period: By the payback period, the time
period for returning the capital cost of the overflow
weir which invested in the project can be known (Ye
and Tiong, 2000). The net yearly cash flow is presented
in Table 5 in order to find the payback period time.
Also, Table 5 represents the accumulative yearly cash
flow for all period of the project. The time period for
returning the capital cost can be calculated as follows:
• Net yearly cash flow for the year sixth (6) =
2053.575 + 890.205 = 2943.78 Million ID.
• Then payback = 6 +2053.575/2943.78 = 6.7 years
The payback period can be achieved after 6.7 years
or after 7 years from the operation time of the project
(the construction period is 3 years).
Benefit cost ratio: According to these variables, we
can justify the efficiency of the investment of the
capital cost. This variable can be calculated by finding
the ratio B/C which can represent the present value of
the benefit to the present value of the cost:
Benefit cost ratio B/C = ∑



∑



(3)
Table 5: Net yearly cash flow
Years Total Future
Benefit Total cost Cash flow Cumulative
cash flow Years Total future
benefit Total cost
Cash
flow Cumulative
cash flow
1 0 3302 -3302. -3302 26 3115 171.22 2943 56822
2 0 3849 -3849 -7151 27 3115 171.22 2943 59765
3 0 3849 -3849 -11000 28 3115 171.22 2943 62709
4 3115 94 3020 -7979 29 3115 171.22 2943 65653
5 3115 132 2982 -4997 30 3115 171.22 2943 68597
6 3115 171 2943 -2053 31 3115 171.22 2943 71540
7 3115 171 2943 890 32 3115 171.22 2943 74484
8 3115 171 2943 3833 33 3115 171.22 2943 77428
9 3115 171 2943 6777 34 3115 171.22 2943 80372
10 3115 171 2943 9721 35 3115 171.22 2943 83316
11 3115 171 2943 12665 36 3115 171.22 2943 86259
12 3115 171 2943 15609 37 3115 171.22 2943 89203
13 3115 171 2943 18552 38 3115 171.22 2943 92147
14 3115 171 2943 21496 39 3115 171.22 2943 95091
15 3115 171 2943 24440 40 3115 171.22 2943 98034
16 3115 171 2943 27384 41 3115 171.22 2943 100978.
17 3115 171 2943 30328 42 3115 171.22 2943 103922
18 3115 171 2943 33271 43 3115 171.22 2943 106866
19 3115 171.22 2943 36215 44 3115 171.22 2943 109810
20 3115 171.22 2943 39159 45 3115 171.22 2943 112753
21 3115 171.22 2943 42103 46 3115 171.22 2943 115697
22 3115 171.22 2943 45046 47 3115 171.22 2943 118641.
23 3115 171.22 2943 47990 48 3115 171.22 2943 121585
24 3115 171.22 2943 50934 49 3115 171 2943 124528
25 3115 171.22 2943 53878 50 3115 171 2943 127472
0%2% 4%6%8%10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
22%
24%
26%
28%
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
Cost and benefit millin ID
Cost
Benefit

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 15(2): 47-56, 2018
55
Fig. 4: Relation between benefit cost ratio B/C and the
discount rate%
Table 6: Details of the sensitivity analysis
N
o. Condition Internal rate of
return (IRR) for
1 Actual values of the cost and
benefits 22%
2 Increase the cost 10% and keeping
the benefit constant 20%
3 Increase the cost 20% and keeping
the benefit constant 18%
4 Decreases the benefit 10% and
keeping the cost constant 20%
5 Decreases the benefit 20% and
keeping the cost constant 17%
6 Increases the cost 10% and
Decreases the benefits 10% 18%
7 Increases the cost 20% and
Decreases the benefits 20% 15%
where,
B/C = The ratio of the benefit to the cost
Bi = The yearly benefit obtained
Ci = The yearly cost expected
r = The discount rate %
N = The economic life of the project
The ratio B/C is equal to 1 when the discount rate
is 22% as shown in Fig. 4.
The sensitivity analysis: The sensitivity analysis is
worked in order to examine the economic analysis and
find the effect of the Internal Rate of Return (IRR) as
shown in Table 6.
CONCLUSION
The current agricultural location to the south of the
country is clearly remarked as the agricultural is highly
unproductive and the water is wasted. Some gapes in
the knowledge still exist to be able to clearly identify to
cause of these problems but it is clear that an increase
of the water efficiency must be achieved. The major
benefit of the agricultural water efficiency are:
Increasing agricultural productivity: Usually
irrigation system improvement first focuses on the
conveyance network followed by on-farm
improvement. Combination of both is necessary to
achieve higher yields.
Improving the water quality: The current use of water
resources could limit the salinization of soil, the
percolation of the salt and the contamination of the
ground water. It can eliminate run off that could pick up
salt and contaminate water resources allocated for
irrigation in different parts of water shade basin.
Construction of the regulator weir:
• Due to construction of the regulator, this it will
allow the water exchange between central marches,
Euphrates River and Hammar marshes. This
process will decrease the salt in the water.
• Enable to control water level of the marshes in the
region which can help the population to re-settle.
• Increasing the quantity of fish capturing operation.
Also, it will be increasing the number of the
animals specially buffalos and cattle.
o According to the above information, an economic
analysis was worked taking all the cost of the
activities of the agricultural requirement and
livestock. The benefits and the economical
parameters such as: Internal Rate of Return (IRR),
Benefit Cost ratio (B/C), payback period, net
present values for different discount rate and
accumulated cash flow.
o Construction of the regulator in the Chibayish
region on the Euphrates River will improve the
district by developing the agricultural situation and
will increase the product of the livestock and fish
capturing. Additionally, the economic analysis
showed that the time of the payback period is equal
to 7 years after 3 years for construction time and
can be considered economic feasible. The results of
the construction of the overflow weir will give rate
of water of 50 ID to cover the total cost of the
project during the life of production.
REFERENCES
Abou-Zeid, A., A. Bushraa and M. Ezzat, 2007.
Overview of feasibility study procedures for public
construction projects in Arab countries. Eng. Sci.,
18(1): 19-34.
Blank, L.T. and A. Tarquin, 2005. Engineering
Economy. 6th Edn., McGraw-Hill, Boston.
CRIM, 2008. The Center for Restoration of the Iraqi
Marshlands. Study of Restoration of the Central
Marshes.
FAO, 1977. Crop Water Requirements. Food and
Agriculture Organization Irrigation and Drainage
Paper No. 24, FAO, Rome.
0%2% 4%6%8%10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
22%
24%
26%
28%
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Benefit-Cost Ratio (B/C)

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 15(2): 47-56, 2018
56
Firmansyah, B.A., A.Veronika and B. Trigunarsyah,
2006. Risk analysis in feasibility study of building
construction project: Case study-PT. Perusahaan
Gas Negara Indonesia. Proceeding of the 10th East
Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering
and Construction. August 3-5, 2006, Bangkok,
Thailand.
Hyari, K. and A. Kandil, 2009. Validity of feasibility
studies for infrastructure construction projects.
Jordan J. Civil Eng., 3(1): 66-77.
Johnson, R.C. and M.R. McCarthy, 2001. Essential
Elements and Risks in Bankable Feasibility Studies
for Mining Transactions. Behle and Latimer, Salt
Lake City, Utah.
Kulkarni, R.B., D. Miller, R.M. Ingram, C.W. Wong
and J. Lorenz, 2004. Need-based project
prioritization: Alternative to cost-benefit analysis.
J. Transport. Eng., 130(2): 150-158.
MOWR, 2006a. New Eden Master Plan for Integrated
Water Resources Management in the Marshland
Area Marshland. Iraqi Ministry of Water
Resources, Iraq.
MOWR, 2006b. General Directorate for Survey Digital
Photogrametric Workstation. Ministry of Water
Resources.
UNEP, 2005. Water Quality of Marshlands, South of
Iraq. United Nation Environment Program. UNEP
Publication.
USAID, 2006. Iraq Marshland Restoration Program.
United State Agency for International
Development (USAID), Washington, D.C., United
States.
Ye, S. and R.L.K. Tiong, 2000. NPV-at-risk method in
infrastructure project investment evaluation. J.
Constr. Eng. M., 126(3): 227-233.