Alcúdia plans desalination expansion: Who pays, who really needs the water?

More seawater, fewer worries? The central question in Alcúdia

At the harbor of Alcúdia, between the early sounds of fishermen and the distant calls of seagulls, a new debate is emerging: Is expanding the desalination plant enough to sustainably solve water shortages during hot summers — and at what cost? The government has announced plans to enlarge the desalination facility in the bay. Around €250,000 from the tourist tax are intended to kick off planning and initial studies. For many locals this sounds like a welcome start; for others it opens up a bundle of unresolved questions.

Who benefits — and who pays?

The beneficiaries are clearly named: Alcúdia itself, Sa Pobla, Can Picafort, Manacor and the agriculture in Es Pla. At the market in Sa Pobla you can see farmers with dusty hands worrying because wells barely produce water in July. A farmer in Es Pla recently said quietly: "A reliable source in the summer is worth its weight in gold for us." But the source of funding is not undisputed. It is not wrong that tourists also contribute to infrastructure through the tax — after all, consumption and pressure on the network rise in the high season. Ironically: the person drinking their cappuccino on the Passeig may be paying for the water their hotel shower uses.

The less visible risks

Desalination sounds like a technical solution to a practical problem. What is rarely discussed in cafés, however, are the ecological and economic side effects. Desalination consumes a lot of electricity; the question of how much of that comes from renewable energy is central. Also often underestimated is the salt concentration (brine) discharged back into the sea and the possible impacts on local marine life in the Bay of Alcúdia — see studies on the environmental impacts of desalination (including brine discharge). Long-term operating costs, maintenance and spare parts must also be transparent — a one-off planning grant does not automatically resolve these issues.

What is missing from the public debate

We should ask more critically: Are there alternatives or complements to simply increasing capacity? Energy saving programs for hotels, targeted irrigation schedules for agriculture, promotion of drip irrigation in Es Pla or local greywater reuse are measures that should run in parallel. Hardly discussed either is the possibility of smaller, decentralized plants located closer to consumption hotspots that could relieve peak loads. Another gap is clear success indicators and an open timeline with milestones — not just vague dates like "early 2026".

Concretely: Opportunities and concrete steps

The €250,000 makes sense as seed money if it is used with strict earmarking. Concrete proposals that planners should consider include:

- Environmental impact assessment: Early studies on brine disposal and protection of the bay.
- Renewable energy integration: Tenders with a clear share of solar power plus storage; a pilot project on a nearby solar area.
- Water-saving programs: Grants for hotels and agricultural enterprises (drip irrigation, smart meters).
- Transparent reporting: Public interim reports on costs, timeline and environmental impacts.
- Regional water management: Coordination between municipalities so that drinking water, agriculture and tourism are distributed fairly by season.

Timeline, outlook and a touch of everyday life

Work is planned to begin in stages — at the earliest in early 2026, with first noticeable effects by the end of 2026. That sounds tight, but in practice careful planning and environmental review often decide success. Until then, fishing will continue in the bay, cafés on the Plaça will fill up and the summer sun will already start beating down on Alcúdia's roofs in May.

The expansion of the desalination plant is not a cure-all, but a pragmatic step. What will be decisive is how transparently the spending from the tourist tax is documented and whether renewable energy and water-saving measures go hand in hand with the expansion. Without this combination the measure remains a technical band-aid — useful, but not sustainable on its own.

What remains: clear commitments to environmental standards, an open cost plan and a genuine dialogue with farmers, hoteliers and residents. Then the debate at the morning harbor could soon turn into real relief — and not just another project discussed on the Passeig.