A five drop policy

We need a five drop policy: a sustainable water policy which would treat with care our five sources of water.

Drop No. 1 is a drop of rainwater. We need to handle rainwater with care. If we harvest it appropriately we will be able to make use of it when it is required. If we harvest it we will also reduce its flow in streets and diminish substantially the overloading of our sewers whenever it rains.

Drop No. 2 is a drop of storm water. Storm water flowing through our streets can be substantially reduced if rainwater harvesting is done appropriately. The remaining storm water would then be less of a danger to life and limb. It would be less of a civil protection issue and much more an exercise of collecting rainwater from streets to be utilised for non-potable purposes.

Drop No. 3 is a drop of ground water. Ground water has been mishandled for years on end. It is time that we realise that this resource which has been collected and stored by nature is finite. Through the years it has been over-extracted such that the quality of what’s left is compromised. It has also been contaminated by human activity, primarily agriculture, such that it would take a minimum of 40 years to reverse the process.

Drop No. 4 is a drop of treated sewage effluent. Treated sewage effluent is being discarded as a waste when it should be valued as a very precious resource. Treating sewage before discharging it into the sea honours Malta’s obligations under the Urban Wastewater Directive of the European Union. However throwing it away into the sea is an unsustainable practice which should be discontinued. We should appreciate its value and put it to good use. At the moment we are discharging treated sewage effluent into the sea at three points along our coast and then taking it up again at other points to produce potable water through our reverse osmosis plants!

Drop No. 5 is a drop of sea water.  Sea water is much cleaner nowadays due to sewage being treated before discharging into the sea. This has improved substantially our bathing waters. But sea water is also the source of over 55% of our potable water which we process through our reverse osmosis plants.

These five drops of water make up our water resources.

Water is of strategic importance to ensure a healthy eco-system, for our quality of life as well as for our economy.  Government can and should do much more to protect this precious resource. But we should also consider how we could improve our input by using this resource properly.

A sustainable water policy is a five drop policy through which each and every one of us values each and every source of water.

This post was originally published in di-ve.com on Friday 9th November 2012

Il-Kappillan jagħtiha għall-business

 

F’Għajn Qasab limiti tan-Nadur Għawdex l-inkwiet għadu għaddej. L-Kappillan tan-Nadur qed jagħmel biċċa business bl-oqbra. Business li wiret mill-Kappillan ta’ qablu. Qaluli li hu speċi ta’ timeshare bl-oqbra.

Ix-xogħol ta’ kostruzzjoni għaddej u l-ħsara lill-biedja fl-inħawi m’hiex żgħira. Is-sistema ta’ irrigazzjoni li ilha taħdem minn żmien il-kavallieri ġiet imħarbta biex il-Kappillan jagħmel il-business bl-oqbra. Sa minn żmien il-kavallieri missierijietna kienu għaqlin biżżejjed biex fasslu sistema li iżżomm l-ilma u titilqgħu ftit ftit. Hekk li meta tagħmel ix-xita l-ilma jinħażen u matul is-sena sa Awwissu u anke Settembru titlaq dan l-ilma ftit ftit. Dan l-ilma għal dawn l-aħħar tlett mitt sena intuża biex f’Għajn Qasab hemm qasam kbir mimli siġar taċ-ċitru. Issa l-ilma naqas. Jiġi f’daqqa malli tagħmel ix-xita u wara ftit li xejn.

L-effetti fuq il-bdiewa ġja bdew. Raba’ mingħajr ilma matul is-sena bil-fors tnaqqas il-frott li trodd.

 

Il-Kappillan inkwetat. Mhux għall-bdiewa u l-għixien tagħhom li hu mhedded. Hu inkwetat li l-appell fil-MEPA kontra l-bini taċ-ċimiterju għadu għaddej u ma jafx meta ser ilesti. Min tah il-flus għall-oqbra qed igorr.

 

Jiena infurmat li din il-ġimgħa dawk viċin il-kappillan bdew jiġbru l-firem. Lin-nies qalulhom li dwar il-permessi għad hemm il-problemi. Imma li l-business tal-Kappillan qed jagħmel il-ħsara lill-bdiewa ħadd ma qalilhom xejn dwaru.

Dwar dan messu jitkellem Dun Mario!

World Environment Day: “Government’s environment policy is beyond repair” : AD

World Environment Day: ”Government’s environment policy is beyond repair” AD  

On occasion of  world environment day, Alternattiva Demokratika – The Green Party said that one should reflect on what has been carried out, what has been omitted and on what was just done for the sake of it in terms of environmental policy. Whilst the Environment was projected to be one of the foundations for political action of GonziPN it is now clear to everyone that it is cracked and beyond repair.  

Carmel Cacopardo, AD spokesperson for Sustainable Development and Local Government, said that “environment responsibilities for GonziPN is like a political football with responsibilities moving on from one Minister to another. Environmental responsibilities are fragmented in various Ministries increasing the difficulty for implementation of policy.   

Focusing on the water situation one still observes the large quantities of water in our streets which are channelled towards the sea almost every time it rains. This happens notwithstanding laws which have been on the statute book for over 130 years which require water harvesting measures in every building. MEPA still issues compliance certificates relative to buildings which are not provided with a rainwater well however it shifts the blame onto MRA.

This week the Prime Minister inaugurated the sewage purification plant at Ta’ Barkat limits of  Xgħajra. It was a good step but it was only done in order to fulfil EU obligations and not out of an environmental conviction. Substantial financial resources were applied with the resulting purified waters being dumped directly into the sea as to date the government is still considering this water as having no economic value.”

Water has been mismanaged throughout the years and unfortunately the current government does not indicate any change of that direction.

Michael Briguglio, AD Chairperson, said that “AD therefore wishes to focus on this matter of concern on the 2011 World Environment Day. In line with the vision of sustainable development and ecological modernisation, we believe that the importance of water should be seen through the combination of environmental, social and economic dimensions.”

Jum Dinji ta’ l-ambjent: “Il-politika ambjentali tal-Gvern hi mfarrka” AD  

Fl-okkazzjoni tal-jum dinji ghall-ambjent, Alternattiva Demokratika qalet li dan il-jum għandu jservi ghal riflessjoni fuq dak li sar,  dak li kellu jsir u ma sarx, jew inkella sar biex wieħed jgħid li taparsi sar. Meta wieħed iżomm f’moħħu li l-ambjent suppost li hu wiehħed mit-tliet pilastri ta’ GonziPN u jagħti ħarsa ftit lura biex jara kif dan il-pilastu ħadem, isib li mhux talli kien hemm falliment sħiħ f’dan il-qasam, imma l-pilalstru ta’ GonziPN ixxaqqaq u qed jitfarrak ftit ftit.

Carmel Cacopardo, Kelliemi ta’ l-AD għall-Iżvilupp Sostenibbli u Gvern Lokali, qal li “l-ambjent għall-GonziPN sar qisu ballun politiku: ir-responsabbilta’ għalih tgħaddi minn Ministru għal għand ieħor. Illum ir-responsabiltajiet ambjentali huma  mifruxa bejn ħafna Ministeri b’mod li tiżdied id-diffikulta biex din titwettaq.

Nieħdu is-sitwazzjoni tal-ilma. Volumi kbar ta’ ilma għadhom isibu ruħhom fit-triqat u jintremew fil-baħar wara kull ħalba xita. Dan minkejja liġijiet tal-pajjiż li ilhom magħna il-fuq minn 130 sena li jgħidu li kull binja irid ikollha bir biex fih jinħażen l-ilma tax-xita. Minkejja dan il-MEPA xorta għada toħroġ compliance certificate lil dawk li meta jibnu ma jkollhomx dan il-bir! Il-MEPA twaħħal fl-MRA.

Din il-gimgħa rajna l-ftuħ uffiċjali mill-Prim Ministru tal-impjant tat-tisfija tad-drenaġġ f’Ta’ Barkat limiti tax-Xgħajra.  Ħaġa tajba, għalkemm din saret biss minħabba l-obbligi tal-UE u mhux minħabba xi konvinzjoni. Ammont sostanzjali ta’ riżorsi finanzjarji ġew użati biex filwaqt li d-drenaġġ jissaffa l-ilma msoffi jintefa’ l-baħar, għax skond il-Gvern dan l-ilma m’għandux valur ekonomiku.

Tul is-snin l-ilma gie użat hażin u ma jidhirx li dan il-Gvern fi ħsiebu jibdel id-direzzjoni.

Michael Briguglio, Chairperson ta’ AD, qal li “għalhekk, Alternattiva Demokratika tħoss li għandha tiffoka fuq l-importanza ta’ l-ilma fl-okkazjoni ta’ Jum L-Ambjent 2011. Permezz tal-viżjoni favur żvilupp sostenibbli u modernizazzjoni ekologika, AD temmen li l-importanza ta’ l-ilma għandha titqies permezz tad-dimensjonijiet ambjentali, soċjali u ekonomiċi”.

The government must lead by example

The consultation re­port issued by the Climate Change Committee for Adaptation serves as a good basis for discussion on issues which have not been given sufficient attention over the years.

One of the issues tackled is that concerning the absence of rainwater cisterns in dwellings. Recommendation 35 deals with the matter.

It consists of three proposals. First, it emphasises the need to implement the existing legal provisions and then goes on to suggest the year 2007 as a cut-off point. It does this by referring to the uptake by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority of provisions relative to rainwater storage. Finally, it proceeds with recommending a one-off flood fine on those properties which, not having a rainwater cistern, contribute to flooding during heavy rainfall.

The recommendation ignores the fact that the duty to collect rainwater in cisterns was not introduced in 2007 but way back in 1880 through legislation. So the point of departure in this discussion is that all residential properties constructed after 1880 should be provided with a rainwater cistern.

The 1880 legislation was an important milestone. The provision of damp proofing, measures emphasising the importance of ventilation, the provision of an adequately sized rainwater cistern and many other matters were introduced. They are incorporated in article 97 of the Code of Police Laws. The relevant legislative provision on rainwater cisterns is regulated by the director of public health and states that “every house shall also have a cistern of a capacity of at least three cubic metres for every five square metres of the surface of the floor of each room of such house”.

One could justifiably argue that the rainwater cistern dimensions resulting from the above quoted legal provision are on the high side and that after 130 years they need revisiting. When this legal provision was introduced, the most common type of dwelling was one of two floors.

Applying the law’s dimensions to blocks of flats would result in very large water cisterns, of such dimensions that would never be fully utilised. The existing dimensions can be revisited by referring to the footprint of a building rather than to its total floor space. This would result in dimensions that are reasonable and achievable given today’s predominant building typology. It would also iron out discrepancies between the dimensions for rainwater cisterns in the Code of Police Laws and those indicated elsewhere. The establishment of the year 2007 as a cut-off point would exempt dwellings constructed before that date from shouldering their contribution to flooding.

This would discriminate and would mean that a substantial number of dwellings are left free to continue contributing to the flooding problem.

Recommendation 35 suggests the introduction of a one-off flood fine to be paid by the owners of those properties which do not have a rainwater cistern. A one-off fine will not solve anything unless it is substantial. The fine should be payable annually until such time that a rainwater cistern of an appropriate size is introduced.

How should one proceed? As a first point no one should be exempt. To reduce flooding, rainwater should be collected in every dwelling.

Secondly, it has to be recognised that, in some cases, a solution may be beyond the financial means of current owners of buildings without rainwater cisterns. In such cases some form of financial assistance should be considered as the politics of climate change should not be socially regressive.

A third consideration would be that in a number of cases the construction of a rainwater cistern may not be technically possible. In such cases the solution may well be the pooling of resources to construct communal rainwater reservoirs or to fund the maintenance of existing ones. Such funds could be administered by local councils with the owners of defaulting properties being obliged to contribute an amount equivalent to what it would cost to construct a rainwater cistern in their property.

The tangible results of such an initiative would be manifold. Having an alternative source of water some would be in a position to reduce their water bills. With less rainwater flowing in our streets flooding can be substantially reduced and our streets will be generally safer both during as well as immediately after a storm. We will also end up with less sewage overflowing into our streets if rainwater is collected instead of ending up in the public sewer. Finally, our sewage purification plants will have a reduced load during storms thereby reducing their running costs.

Alternattiva Demokratika has been emphasising the above for a number of years.

A good point to start implementation would be for the government to set the example by embarking on an exercise of providing rainwater cisterns in all government-constructed housing estates. Most of them have none.

If the government leads by example the rest will slowly follow.

Published in The Times of Malta : Saturday 13th November 2010

Il-Gvern stenbaħ ….. dwar l-ilma

Qiegħed naqra t-Times tal-lum. Jidher li l-Gvern stenbaħ dwar l-ilma.

Fid-dokument pre-budget għall-2011 hemm dikjarazzjoni li ser tibda tiġi applikata l-liġi dwar postijiet li m’għandhomx bir skond il-liġi.

Din il-liġi li qed jirreferu għaliha ma saritx issa. Ilha hemm mill-1880.

Bosta residenzi li nbnew mis-snin 60 lil hawn m’għandhomx bir. Oħrajn li nbnew qabel għandhom il-bir mirdum.

Fost dawn hemm ħafna postjiet li bena l-Gvern. Mhux biss dawk li nbnew fis-snin 70 u 80 u 90 biss. Imma anke’ dawk li nbnew aktar reċenti ukoll.

Il-ġimgħa l-oħra stess kont f’post li nbena fl-2003-04 mill-Awtorita tad-Djar. Jikkonsisti f’‘numru ta’ maisonettes li tqassmu f’Pembroke wara sejħa pubblika li saret. Ikoll bla bir.

Issa naraw jekk il-Gvern huwiex ser jibda jirranġa l-problemi li ħoloq huwa stess meta m’għamilx bjar fil-postijiet li bena  jew kien responsabbli  għalihom huwa.

L-iżviluppaturi f’diversi każi gew jaqgħu u jqumu mill-bjar. Imma l-Gvern ma mexiex wisq aħjar!

Għal iktar spjegazzjoni tista’ tara s-segwenti fuq dan il-blog :

23 ta’ Mejju 2010           Water: A Long-Term View

17 ta’ Jannar 2009        The cost of incompetence

17 ta’ Novembru 2008         L-ilma tax-xita

8 t’Ottubru 2008          Sa fl-aħħar : strateġija dwar l-ilma.

No Compromise with Nature

 

published on December 19, 2009

by Carmel Cacopardo

________________________________________________________ 

At the time of writing negotiators at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference are still wrangling. The bone of contention is that the developed world has already used up the planet’s capacity to absorb emissions through past industrial activity whilst the developing countries as well as the emerging economies are demanding their fair share. This, they maintain, could be achieved through adequate funding as well as monitoring of binding emission targets. It is estimated that business as usual will lead to a global temperature increase of around six degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures. Researchers maintain that in order to minimise required adaptation measures it is imperative to restrict a temperature increase to not more than two degrees. Island states consider that any increase above 1.5 degrees would be catastrophic. The Maldives, Tuvalu and Fiji have been vociferous in their campaigning for drastic emission cuts by all states in the short term. They risk being submerged. In Africa, countries are already shouldering drought and the resulting famine due to a collapse of agriculture. Faced with these problems many seek to move elsewhere away from nature’s wrath. Malta’s problem of illegal immigration is a direct result of these impacts of climate change on the African Continent. Mitigation through the reduction of carbon emissions is not a switch which can be put on or off at ease. It is, in part, the result of a carefully planned shift away from a carbon economy. There is a substantial financial cost related to such a transition. Alternatively as demonstrated in the Stern Report, the financial, ecological and human costs will be substantially higher. Malta is committed to mitigation measures decided within an EU framework. These currently entail a reduction of carbon emissions by 20 per cent on the basis of 1990 emission levels and the sourcing of 10 per cent of energy needs from sustainable alternatives by 2020. Government has been moving very slowly and it is still not clear whether targets will be achieved. The mitigation measures implemented by the global community will determine the intensity of the climate changes that Malta will have to face together with the rest of the international community. Malta’s vulnerability is substantial and comparable to that faced by the Pacific and Caribbean islands. If mitigation measures implemented are not substantial the temperature rise will be closer to six degrees. This will mean more drastic impacts as a result of higher sea level rises, reduced rainfall, as well as more intense storms. Malta’s adaptation measures will be dependent on the extent to which the international community implements the mitigation measures agreed to. So far the assumption has been that the international community would come to its senses and agree to measures which restrict a temperature rise to not more than two degrees Celsius. This requires a 40 per cent global carbon emission cut by 2020. Yet commitments made to date are insufficient. The resulting sea level rise could be substantial: around two metres by the end of this century. This will affect coastal facilities, low lying residential areas as well as the water table. It may also affect the extent of Malta’s rights over the surrounding sea in view of the fact that these rights are determined on the basis of a distance from the coastline. A receding coastline may affect territorial waters, fishing rights as well as the economic zone (including oil exploration rights). A rising sea level will affect most of Malta’s tourism facilities as well as the commercial infrastructure in our ports. These will as a result, either be closer to or else below sea level. Malta’s beaches such as Għadira, Għajn Tuffieħa and Pretty Bay will be below sea level whilst some low-lying residential areas may have to be abandoned. The water table will be affected by a rise in sea level through an increase in its salinity. Coupled with the mismanagement of water resources in past years, climate change will lead to a situation where ground water in Malta will not be usable if not subject to substantial, costly and energy intensive treatment. This will hasten the collapse of agriculture which is dependent on the direct use of water extracted from the water table. It will also increase exponentially the cost of water used for consumption and industrial purposes. Consideration of the impacts of climate change should thus lead us to consider whether the Maltese islands will still be capable of supporting a population of 400,000. Misuse of nature’s resources in the past coupled with the foreseeable impacts of climate change lead to the inevitable conclusion that in the not too distant future it will be difficult to support human life on these islands. Resistance to change over the years signifies that environmental problems faced by Malta have increased. Nature does not compromise. Deferring action will condemn millions (including Maltese) to immeasurable suffering.

The Cost of Incompetence

by Carmel Cacopardo

published Saturday, January 17, 2009

___________________________________________________________

Walking or driving through some of our roads during or immediately after heavy rainfall is no easy task. If you are lucky you will “just” encounter large quantities of ankle-deep rainwater. It may, however, be worse if the rainwater is mixed with sewage.

This is happening so often that it is hardly news any more!

Three issues should be underlined. The first is rainwater literally going down the drain!

Secondly, it is an issue of civil protection: life and property are endangered.

Thirdly, it’s a case of an overloaded public sewer and, consequently, an unnecessary increase in the costs of sewage purification.

Local building regulations applicable since 1880 established the capacity of rainwater cisterns that are to be provided as an integral part of a dwelling. Unfortunately, a number of residential properties constructed over the last 45 years have not been provided with cisterns for rainwater storage.

The major culprits are a substantial portion of the developers of blocks of flats and maisonettes. In particular, in cases where basement or semi-basement garages are constructed, the duty to provide for rainwater storage is very rarely complied with. In those instances where a rainwater cistern has not been provided, rainwater is being disposed of either directly onto the street or else straight into the public sewer.

When disposed of onto the streets, rainwater is a contributor to flooding whereas when discharged down the drain it overloads the public sewer which, subsequently, overflows onto our streets.

As a result, this adds a health hazard to an already alarming situation.

Mepa has since 1992 been responsible for determining and ensuring the observance of the conditions of development permits, which, in most cases, specify the required capacity of a rainwater cistern. Mepa shares this responsibility with the public health authorities.

The Water Services Corporation (WSC) has, during the last years, taken over the responsibility for the management of the public sewers from the former Drainage Department. This responsibility includes authorising owners of dwellings to connect their house drains with the public sewer.

Is the WSC verifying that it is only the house drains that are connected and, in particular, that rainwater pipes are not connected to the public sewer too? The answer is provided by our streets on a rainy day. No one is bothering to check.

This leads to the conclusion that, while the culprit for the present state of affairs is the building industry as, more often than not, it does not provide for rainwater storage in new development, it is not the only one to blame. The authorities and government departments have a substantial share of the blame for not shouldering their responsibilities.

A number of areas are out of bounds whenever heavy or continuous rainfall hits the Maltese islands. This is a source of danger and, in fact, the Civil Protection Department is heavily involved in assisting residents or motorists who are trapped as a result of flooding. The Birkirkara local council had some years ago installed a storm warning system to alert residents and passers by that “danger was on the way”!

Public authorities, unfortunately, have developed the habit of dealing with the effects but continuously ignore the cause of flooding!

Austin Gatt, as the minister responsible for the WSC, recently announced that the government will introduce a drainage tariff as of next year. He stressed that, in terms of the EU Water Framework Directive, the government has to recover costs related to the treatment of urban wastewater. Leaving aside for the time being the discharge of the treated wastewater into the sea (I have dealt with this elsewhere) it is clear that the cost of treating urban wastewater includes an expense which can easily be avoided if the public sewer is not overloaded with rainwater during the rainy season. All of us will thus be forced to pay the cost for the gross incompetence of the government through its authorities.

We have also been informed that part of the €855 million made available by the EU will be used to fund a project for the construction of underground tunnels through which it is planned to collect rainwater from our streets and roads. It is planned not only to store the rainwater underground but, possibly, also to make use of it in order recharge the depleted water table!

No one has yet explained how it is intended to deal with the contamination of rainwater by sewage prior to it being collected in the projected tunnels. But even if this is remedied, the EU funds will be effectively subsidising a number of developers who, once more, will shift their responsibilities and expenses onto the taxpayer. EU monies are taxpayers’ funds too!

This is the accumulated cost of incompetence!

Greening the Surcharge

 

Published on Saturday 12 July 2008

by Carmel Cacopardo

________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

The surcharge is back in the news after reaching its highest level yet : 95 per cent. Over the past months two alternatives were proposed, with the government now proposing a third in the form of redesigned tariffs.

The MLP, during the March 2008 electoral campaign, proposed that the surcharge ought to be halved. This meant that all of us would have to foot the bill for everybody’s consumption through increased subsidies. The second proposal was brought forward by AD, the Green party: that surcharge rates should be adjusted to benefit low users at the expense of the high consumers.

The change of MLP leadership brought about a change of views on the subject. New MLP leader Joseph Muscat, in a meeting with an AD delegation led by Arnold Cassola, stated that the AD surcharge proposal was a very reasonable basis for discussion. To his credit, Dr Muscat is inching Labour towards an adoption of AD’s surcharge policy.

The two remaining proposals are complementary. The government’s proposal to redesign tariffs can be integrated with the AD proposal producing a green pricing strategy. The rates to be established next October can be constructed in such a manner as to encourage low consumption and penalise high use of water and energy.

Water consumption can be substantially reduced through encouraging the use of rainwater not just in homes but also in offices and commercial establishments where possible. The provision of a rainwater cistern is a compulsory feature of the Maltese building code. It has in fact been codified since 1880. No building should be without a water cistern of a suitable size to retain rainwater incident on its roof. Yet, when the rainy season commences, flooded streets and overflowing sewers are a familiar sight. This being clear enough proof that, in lieu of collecting rainwater in a water cistern, a number of property owners just pour their rainwater onto the streets or, worse still, channel it directly into the public sewers. This does not only signify the loss of a natural resource but it is also the cause of considerable expense and dangers through the flooding of streets.

An overloaded sewer increases the load on sewage purification plants and, consequently, the energy required to purify the sewage before its intended use.

While emphasising the need for enforcement to ensure that water cisterns of an appropriate size are constructed in new buildings, I believe that the carrot is more effective than the stick.

Encouraging the use of rainwater and reflecting such encouragement in the water pricing policy would signify having low water rates for low consumption. This is already partially existent in the current pricing structure as the first cubic metres of water consumed per person in every household is subsidised. However, when the surcharge was introduced it did not consider this a feature worth emphasising and in fact the surcharge was applied indiscriminately irrespective of consumption.

The expense to the exchequer through applying lower rates for those who shift or have shifted their water consumption from mains water to rainwater will be more than recouped through lower costs in producing water, less waste water to treat at sewage purification plants and less flooding of streets after a heavy rainstorm.

In respect of energy bills, current basic rates differentiate between low and high users, yet the surcharge mechanism ignored this too. Rates charged vary for the first 6,400 units per annum at which point the maximum rate is applied.

In addition, those installing photovoltaic panels receive a financial grant to encourage installation. They are connected to the national grid as a result selling any excess electricity generated. Excess electricity so generated is deducted from electricity bills on the basis of one unit generated compensating for every unit consumed. This is positive although it is still far off from current practice elsewhere. In other countries, notably in Germany, electricity generated through photovoltaic panels or wind turbines is paid for at a much higher rate. This not only encourages the generation of renewable energy but it is also an environmental statement to the effect that the conventional method of generation of electricity has hidden costs which are not yet reflected in the price structure. Part of these hidden costs are medical costs related to respiratory diseases to which power station emissions are a major contributor.

In the alternative set-up of revised tariffs, the pricing structure must support those who strive to minimise their environmental impacts. The new water and electricity pricing policy must not be just another accounting exercise. It must also be a reflection of the government’s environmental policy, one of the instruments through which it can manifest that it is serious when it proclaims to one and all that sustainable development is on the top of its agenda.

Distributing energy saving bulbs, whenever this will happen, is not sufficient.

The author, an architect and civil engineer, is the spokesman on sustainable development and local government of Alternattiva Demokratika – the Green party in Malta.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

you may also read through the following posts which deal with the same subject :

http://carmelcacopardo.wordpress.com/2008/03/26/dik-il-bozza/

http://carmelcacopardo.wordpress.com/2008/05/26/surcharge/

http://carmelcacopardo.wordpress.com/2008/06/22/l-mlp-u-l-proposti-tal-ad-dwar-is-%e2%80%9csurcharge%e2%80%9d/

http://carmelcacopardo.wordpress.com/2008/06/26/revizjoni-tas-surcharge/

http://carmelcacopardo.wordpress.com/2008/07/02/inharsu-l-ambjent-ghax-hekk-tajjeb-u-ghax-jaqblilna/

Inħarsu l-Ambjent : għax hekk tajjeb u għax jaqblilna !

 

 

 

Il-messaġġ kontinwu li qed twassal AD f’dawn il-jiem huwa li l-ħarsien tal-ambjent hu stument biex intejbu l-kwalita’ tal-ħajja tagħna lkoll.

 

Li nifhmu illi huwa meħtieġ illi ma naħlux elettriku u ilma huwa biss wieħed mill-issues. Nisħqu fuq illum iktar mill-bieraħ għax is-suġġett huwa attwali minħabba fiż-żieda fil-prezzijiet kif ukoll minħabba fiż-żieda fis-surcharge.

 

L-AD qed tinsisti li min ma jaħlix ikun ippremjat u min jaħli għandu jħallas sakemm jirrealizza li jaqbillu hu ukoll li juża r-risorsi bil-galbu.

 

Kif nistgħu ma naħlux ?

 

L-ewwel nistennew li jagħti eżempju l-Gvern. Għidna f’waħda mill-istqarrijiet tal-AD illi ma jistax ikun li l-impjanti tat-tisfija tad-drenaġġ wara li jkunu ppurifikaw l-ilma jarmu kollox il-baħar. Dan x’sens fih ? Veru li l-ilma ma jkunx għadu tajjeb. Imma veru ukoll li bi ftit investiment ieħor (ħdejn il-miljuni ġja investiti) jkun tajjeb ta’ l-inqas bħala ilma għat-tisqija. Il-Gvern fi ftit kliem qed jagħti eżempju ħażin.

 

It-tieni nistennew li min jimxi sewwa u juża r-risorsi bil-galbu jkun ippremjat mis-sistema.  Għalhekk qed nipproponu li min ikollu konsum baxx kemm tal-elettriku kif ukoll tal-ilma ikollu rati tas-surcharge (inkella t-tariffi meta dawn jinbidlu f’Ottubru li ġej) li jvarjaw skond l-użu. Min juża ftit ikollu rati baxxi ta’ surcharge u min juża ħafna jkollu rati għoljin. Mhux biss għar-residenzi iżda ukoll għall-użu kummerċjali.

 

Biex dan isir hemm bżonn li jkunu stabiliti benchmarks raġjonevoli permezz ta’ audits dwar l-użu tal-ilma u l-elettriku.

 

Hemm bżonn li min jiġġenera l-elettriku huwa permezz tal-pannelli fotovoltajci jew mtieħen żgħar tar-riħ jitħallas b’rata iktar għolja mill-Enemalta. Hekk jiġri f’pajjiżi oħra biex jinkuraġixxu lil min jagħti sehmu.

 

Hemm bżonn li min juża l-ilma tax-xita ikun eżentat mis-surcharge. Tafu għaliex ? Għax lill-pajjiż jiffrankalu :

1.      il-ħtieġa tal-produzzjoni ta’ l-ilma, inkluż l-elettriku li jintuża fl-impjanti tar-Reverse Osmosis,

2.      inaqqas l-ilma tax-xita mit-triq jew mid-drenaġġ, għax dan ikun qiegħed jinġabar fil-bir,

3.      jiffranka kwantita’ ta’ ilma li għalxejn jispiċċa fl-impjant tat-tisfija tad-drenaġġ, u allura l-elettriku meħtieġ biex dan jissaffa.

 

Jekk iktar nies jaħżnu l-ilma tax-xita fil-bir u jużawħ flok l-ilma li tipprovdi l-Korporazzjoni għas-Serviżżi tal-Ilma l-effett ikun enormi : għall-pajjiż u għall-but tiegħek. Il-pajjiż jiffranka l-miljuni u inti tiffranka l-mijiet.

 

 

Inħarsu l-ambjent ifisser kwalita’ tal-ħajja aħjar. Bil-flus iffrankati minn użu bil-għaqal tar-riżorsi jistgħu jsiru affarijiet oħra li bħalissa m’għandniex mezzi biżżejjed għalihom.