Thou shall not covet thy neighbor's water: a look at the journey both Texas and the Middle East must embark upon to solve the kinks in their water regulation.

Desalination is the process of removing dissolved salts from water. (200) This process is able to produce drinking water from seawater and brackish groundwater. (201) Two fundamental processes make desalination possible: thermal and membrane. (202) The thermal process involves heating salt water in order to produce a vapor that can then be distilled to produce fresh water. (203) The membrane process, on the other hand, uses actual membranes to separate the salts from freshwater. (204) This membrane involves using one of two methods: electrodialysis or reverse osmosis. (205) One argument proffers that desalination is one of the very few options available for areas like the Middle East. (206) Over time, "[d]esalination technologies have advanced rapidly in the last decades, bringing down costs and mitigating environmental consequences." (207) In fact, "[p]ublic private partnerships have evolved as a means to harvest the creativity and entrepreneurship of the private sector in partnership with public owners to integrate finance, planning, design, construction, operations and maintenance, and ownership in the delivery of complex projects." (208) In order to effectively combat water shortages in both areas, Texas and the Middle East should both expand their desalination efforts. When discussing the expansion of the desalination effort as a possible solution to the water shortage problem, one must consider costs and the environmental ramifications. (209)

Often, consideration of the cost of a desalination facility focuses on the amount of fresh water the facility produces. (210) Typically, the measure of cost is put in terms of dollars per thousand gallons. (211) The range of costs "[depend] not only on the costs of desalination facilities, but on the cost of conveyance facilities and environmental mitigation." (212) With improvements in technology, newer desalination facilities as well as the more expensive reverse osmosis facilities have been able to lower costs. (213)

Turning now toward the issue of environmental ramifications, the biggest existing concern is the disposal of the briny residue that remains after the desalination process. (214) For facilities in coastal areas that use sea water as the material source for desalination, the disposing of this briny residue back into the sea is a generally accepted method of disposal. (215) The same, however, is not true for inland desalination facilities. (216) In these situations, the inland facilities have the burden of transporting briny residue to the nearest seawater point or injection well. (217) In both instances, "[b]rine disposal issues often add substantial cost to desalination facilities...." (218) When compared to the high demand and need for water, this cost is arguably nominal in comparison.

As the issues surrounding the longevity of water supplies increase, water rights will need to be more clearly defined. According to the World Water Council, the implicit right to water has not been put into practice due to the lack of political will and the confusion over a concrete definition of water rights. (219) An argument has been raised "that even with major improvements in water collection and distribution (that would provide 70 percent efficiency instead of the current average of 45 percent worldwide), there would still be a need for 20 percent more water, a prediction that has been termed the 'world water gap.'" (220) Unfortunately, because a number of the available sources have already been appropriated, there are limitations on how much additional water can be extracted from the environment. (221)

IV. CONCLUSION

The problem is simply stated: Water resources are limited while demand is ever growing. In order to battle this harsh truth, both Texas and the Middle East must shift gears into a new mindset when addressing their water regulation systems. This would include clearly defining rights to water, increasing cooperation among neighbors, and looking to new ways of regulating water, such as setting a reasonable use standard, privatizing the water sector, and focusing on the development of technologies such as desalination. (222) By formulating a clear definition of water rights, countries will be better able to understand the boundaries within which they are to act. Increasing cooperation among neighbors will be the most challenging aspect of reform for both the Texas and Middle Eastern water regulation systems. For both areas, there is a long history that contributes to the current views of rights to water held among neighbors.

Finally, by looking to new ways of increasing the water supply, both Texas and the Middle East will allow for a greater likelihood of sustaining the maximum availability of water. This will, however, require that both areas contribute time, energy, and resources to the continual development of access to fresh water. After looking at the background of both Texas and Middle Eastern water regulation and the conflicts that exist internally in both areas, it is clear that both can benefit from the above mentioned solutions.

Although no one solution alone will suffice, in the aggregate, they will lead to a more constant supply of water. As with any solution or plan, the true benefit is not realized until it is implemented and given time to take effect. The only thing that is definite is the current systems in both Texas and the Middle East is not sufficient to sustain the needed level of water.

(1.) See Noah Arre, Safe Water is Safe Life! How Safe Are Somalis in Water? (2001), http://www.watermagazine.com/secure/ jc/somali.rtf (paper presented at the Eighth Congress of Somali Studies) ("Tensions over water permeate every region of the world, ranging from clashes between urban and agricultural water users to out right (sic) warfare in the Middle East.").

(2.) Harry Grant Potter, III, History and Evolution of the Rule of Capture, in 100 YEARS OF RULE OF CAPTURE: FROM EAST TO GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT, TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD REPORT 361, 1 (William F. Mullican, III & Suzanne Schwartz eds., 2004), available at http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/GroundWater Reports/GWReports/Report%20361/1%20CH%20Potter.pdf.

(3.) 81 S.W. 279, 280 (Tex. 1904).

(4.) Id.

(5.) Id. (quoting Acton v. Bundell, 152 Eng. Rep. 1223 (Ex. Ch. 1843)) ('That doctrine is thus stated: 'That the person who owns the surface may dig therein and apply all that is there found to his own purposes, at his free will and pleasure; and that if, in the exercise of such right, he intercepts or drains off the water collected from the underground springs in his neighbor's well, this inconvenience to his neighbor falls within the description of damnum absque injuria, which cannot become the ground of an action.'").

(6.) Id. at 280-81; Frazier v. Brown, 12 Ohio St. 294, 311 (Ohio 1861), overruled by Cline v. American Aggregates Corp., 474 N.E.2d 324 (Ohio 1984).

(7.) East, 81 S.W. at 280.

(8.) Frazier, 12 Ohio St. at 311.

(9.) See East, 81 S.W. at 280-81.

(10.) 296 S.W. 273, 277 (Tex. 1927) ("Again, where there is but one riparian owner, ... he may grant all of the riparian rights to the use of the waters of such stream, even if by that use it is all consumed by the grantee. This is for the reason that the grantor had dominion and ownership of it. It was his property, and he could dispose of it as he saw fit.").

(11.) Id. at 275-76.

(12.) Id. at 276.

(13.) Id. at 278.

(14.) Eric Opiela, Commentary, The Rule of Capture in Texas: An Outdated Principle Beyond its Time, 6 U. DENV. WATER L. REV. 87, 96 (2002).

(15.) Todd H. Votteler, The Little Fish that Roared: The Endangered Species Act, State Groundwater Law, and Private Property Rights Collide Over the Texas Edwards Aquifer, 28 ENVTL. L. 845, 874-75 (1998) (discussing the fundamental characteristics of property rights serving as part of the bundle of entitlements involving the rights, privileges, and limitations for use of a resource of the owner).

(16.) Id. (noting that an efficient property rights system has the following characteristics: "1) universality--all resources are privately owned, and all entitlements completely specified; 2) exclusivity--all benefits and costs accrued as a result of owning and using the resources should accrue to the owner, and only to the owner, either directly or indirectly by sale to others; 3) transferability--all property rights should be transferable from one owner to another in a voluntary exchange; 4) enforceability--property rights should be secure from involuntary seizure or encroachment by others").

(17.) Opiela, supra note 14, at 97.

(18.) Id.; see also Act of June 2, 1949, ch. 306, [subsection] 1, 3c(D), 1949 Tex. Gen. Laws 559, 562.

(19.) C. Richard Bath, A Commentary on Texas Water Law and Policy, 39 NAT. RESOURCES J. 121, 122 (1999).

(20.) Id.

(21.) Id.

(22.) Id.

(23.) Cynthia DeLaughter, Comment, Priming the Water Industry Pump, 37 HOUS. L. REV. 1465, 1477 (2000).

(24.) See Bath, supra note 19, at 122.

(25.) Id.

(26.) See John R. Pitts & Janet L. Hamilton, Texas Water Law for the New Millennium, 14 NAT. RESOURCES & ENV'T 35, 35 (1999); see also Act of Sept. 1, 1997, ch. 1010, [section] 1.01, 1997 Tex. Gen. Laws 3610, 3610 (codified as amended at TEX. WATER CODE ANN. [section] 16.05).

(27.) See DeLaughter, supra note 23, at 1479 (citation omitted).

(28.) Id. at 1478-79.