Politika dwar il-klima fl-Unjoni Ewropea

 

Il-politika dwar il-klima hi materja ewlenija li qegħda taħt il-lenti fil-laqgħat li Ursula von der Leyen, innominata bħala President tal-Kummissjoni tal-Unjoni Ewropea, qed ikollha mal-gruppi politiċi diversi fil-Parlament Ewropew.

Kemm il-Grupp tas-Soċjalisti u Demokratiċi kif ukoll dak Liberali fil-Parlament Ewropew ippubblikaw lista ta’ talbiet li għamlu lil von der Leyen dwar dak li jriduha tikkommetti ruħha dwaru imma li s’issa evitat. Fuq quddiem nett f’dan kollu hemm impenn ikbar dwar li politika meħtieġa biex ikun indirizzati l-impatti tat-tibdil fil-klima.

Min-naħa l-oħra, l-Grupp tal-Ħodor fil-Parlament Ewropew ħareġ stqarrija li permezz tagħha ta’ l-ġenb lill-kandidatura ta’ von der Leyen u dan għax, fi kliem Ska Keller, ko-president tal-grupp: “ma smajna l-ebda proposta konkreta, la dwar is-saltna tad-dritt u l-anqas dwar il-klima. Ġejna eletti b’mandat ta’ bidla u m’aħniex naraw kif din il-bidla tista’ sseħħ b’din il-kandidata.”

Azzjoni dwar il-bidla fil-klima hi prijorità u din il-prijorità għandha tkun riflessa fl-ambizzjonijiet li l-kandidat għall-Presidenza tal-Kummissjoni tal-Unjoni Ewropea trid tmexxi ‘l-quddiem. Sfortunatament hu magħruf li Ursula von der Leyen qatt ma tat prijorità lill-azzjoni dwar il-bidla fil-klima tul iż-żmien kollu li ilha attiva fil-politika nazzjonali tal-Ġermanja!

Tul l-għaxar snin li ġejjin, l-emissjonijiet tal-gassijiet serra fuq livell globali jeħtieġ li jonqsu b’iktar min-nofs. Anke iktar mit-tnaqqis ta’ 55% kif talab il-Parlament Ewropew kif ukoll mill-40% tnaqqis li s’issa aċċettaw il-pajjiżi membri. Dan fl-istess ħin li l-emissjonijiet netti għandhom jilħqu żero sa mhux iktar tard mill- 2050. Il-miri tal-ftehim ta’ Pariġi illum jiuffurmaw parti integrali mill-liġijiet tal-Unjoni Ewropea imma għad hemm ħafna ħidma x’issir biex dawn il-miri jitwettqu fir-realtà.

Soluzzjonijiet jeżistu biex ikunu ikunu indirizzati u trasformati l-enerġija, t-trasport, l-agrikultura u l-proċessi industrijali. Imma jeħtieġ li nkunu kapaċi li naħdmu flimkien biex l-impenn li jitwettaq il-Ftehim ta’ Pariġi mhux biss ikun onorat, imma li nkunu kapaċi nħajru oħrajn jagħmlu bħalna.

Minkejja l-wegħdiet li saru mill-pajjiżi differenti dwar emissjonijiet bħala parti mill-ftehim ta’ Pariġi xorta waħda jidher li ż-żieda fit-temperatura, sa tmiem is-seklu kurrenti, ser tkun ta’ madwar tlett gradi Celsius (3°C) fuq it-temperatura pre-industrijali. Dan meta nafu li iktar min-nofs din iż-żieda jkollha effetti katastrofiċi.

Diġà bdejna nduqu l-konsegwenzi bis-sħana tilħaq livelli ġodda, estremi ta’ għargħar u nuqqas ta’ xita u nirien li qed jagħmlu ħsara mhux żgħira f’kull rokna tad-dinja. L-affarijiet sejrin għall-agħar. Imma għad baqa’ ċans, kemm-il darba niċċaqalqu bla iktar dewmien.

Il-Gvernijiet m’humiex jieħdu l-inizjattiva. Mhux qed jindirizzaw dak li qed jirriżulta mir-riċerka xjentifika. Sfortunatament, uħud mill-Gvernijiet (u l-partiti politiċi li jiffurmawhom) jaraw kull azzjoni meħtieġa biex tkun indirizzata l-bidla fil-klima bħala ta’ xkiel għall-industrija u għall-ekonomija.

Sa minn meta saru tibdiliet fit-trattati Ewropej fl-1987, l-Unjoni Ewropea bdiet tieħu deċiżjonijiet dwar l-oqsma ambjentali b’maġġoranza kkwalifikata. Dan wassal biex ġiet sviluppata leġislazzjoni ambjentali li tiffaċilita politika Ewropea li tirrispondi għal dak kollu meħtieġ mit-tibdil fil-klima. Tul dan iż-żmien kollu, l-Parlament Ewropew kien dejjem fuq quddiem jinsisti dwar miri ċari u ambizzjużi fil-ġlieda kontra l-bidla fil-klima. Hu meħtieġ li anke l-Kummissjoni Ewropea timxi fuq dawn il-passi.

Hu għalhekk li hu meħtieġ li l-President approvat għall-Kummissjoni Ewropea tikkunsidra l-azzjoni dwar il-bidla fil-klima bħala prijorità u li tkun lesta biex il-Kummissjoni immexxija minnha taġixxi b’dan il-mod.

Ippubblikat fuq Illum : il-Ħadd 14 ta’ Lulju 2019

Advertisements

Climate Change politics at the EU

The politics of climate change is a main topic of discussion at the meetings which Ursula von der Leyen, European Commission President-designate, is currently participating in with the various political groups in the EU Parliament.

The Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats Group, as well as the Liberal Group, have issued written demands to von der Leyen detailing the various policy commitments which they expect but not yet see. The politics of climate change is at the forefront of the requests made.

The Greens, on the other hand, have issued a statement rejecting von der Leyen’s candidacy, as in the words of Ska Keller, co-president of the group: “We did not hear any concrete proposal, be it on the rule of law or on climate. We have been elected on a mandate for change and we don’t see how change will be possible with this candidate.”

Action on climate change is a priority and this priority must be reflected in the ambitions which the European Commission President-designate puts forward. Unfortunately, it is known that Ursula von der Leyen has never prioritised climate action during her long career in German National politics!

Over the next 10 years, global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions need to be more than halved (beyond the 55% reduction as requested by the European Parliament and surely beyond the 40% committed to by the EU Member States), while net GHG emissions must reach zero by 2050 at the latest. Attaining the commitments of the Paris Agreement is now enshrined in EU climate and energy laws but the European Union must do much more to make it a reality.

Solutions exist for transforming energy, transport, agriculture and industrial production systems. We must act together to fulfil our commitments to the Paris Agreement and beyond, and encourage others to do so too.

Notwithstanding the national pledges made as part of the Paris Agreement, we are on course for warming of about 3°C above pre-industrial temperatures by 2100. It is known that any increase exceeding 1.5°C will be catastrophic.

We are already at the receiving end, with global temperatures warming-up at unprecedented rates, floods, droughts and fires which are impacting our communities all over the world. It is getting worse. Yet it is not too late, provided we act without further delay.

Governments are not showing leadership in tackling climate change. They are not addressing the gap between the expectations of the citizens and the analysis of the scientists on one hand, and their decisions on the other.

Unfortunately, some governments, and the political parties which form them, see climate change policies only as an obstacle for industry and the economy.

Since the Treaty change of 1987, the European Union has decided legislation in the field of the environment on the basis of a qualified majority voting. This has allowed for the development of a comprehensive set of new environmental legislation and facilitated a concerted EU policy response towards climate change.

The EU Parliament has, most of the time, been the most progressive EU institution, demanding more ambitious targets and measures in the fight against climate change. It is about time that the EU Commission follows suit.

We need a European Commission President who considers climate change action as a priority and acts accordingly.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 14 July 2019

Towards a zero waste target

 

The linear model of our economy follows a take-make-use-waste path as a result of which we extract resources from the earth which we use and subsequently throw away. In contrast to this cradle-to-grave trajectory, the circular economy seeks cyclical sustainability.

In a circular economy, the management of waste is paramount.  It seeks to retain the resources used in our products in the economic loop as it is considered that they can be re-used to form other products. William McDonough and Michael Braungart describe this as a cradle-to-cradle process in their seminal book Cradle to Cradle. Remaking the way we make things. This is in contrast to the throw-away society which follows a cradle-to-grave path.

This is not only makes environmental sense, it also makes economic sense. Malta’s Waste Management Plan for the period 2014-2020 tentatively points in this direction by establishing a zero waste target that is to be achieved by 2050. Thirty-three years may seem to be too far away but, in reality, it may be just enough to change our mindset. A lot of hard work is involved but, at the end of the day, it will also be rewarding.

It involves the application of what is known as the waste hierarchy to different waste streams. Waste minimisation or prevention is always the preferred option. Ideally we should aim to prevent the generation of waste and in a number of cases this can easily be done. For example, we can prevent the generation of a substantial portion of organic waste by giving more thought to the food intake in our homes. We can also reduce the amount of food packaging by opting for more fresh food which is generally local.

Obviously, most of us have very little time to think about the consequences of our large number of small decisions which end up generating a lot of waste. Convenience generally wins the day, as we often opt for packaged and processed food. As a result, we not only generate avoidable waste but also end up eating less healthy food.

A pilot project related to organic waste is currently under way in 8 localities in Malta and Gozo. It has been going on for some time and although information as to the manner in which the localities involved have reacted is not publicly available, it is known through the grapevine that this has been varied but is improving.

Collecting the organic waste part of domestic waste, if carried out successfully, may well reduce the amount going to landfill by around 50 percent. There is also an added benefit: when the organic part of our waste is processed in a waste recycling plant, the resulting gases are used to produce electricity instead of adding to greenhouse gas emissions. This is surely a win-win situation.

Reducing 50 percent of our waste through the responsible management of just one part of it is very good policy. However, this requires much more investment in environmental education in our localities. Wasteserve, being ultimately responsible for waste management in the Maltese Islands, has taken a lot of initiatives in this respect, but much more needs to be done.  It is never enough.

Waste is a collection of discarded resources and realising the value that we throw away is, in reality, what the circular economy is all about – hence the target of a zero waste society.

published in The Independent on Sunday : 29 January 2017

L-Iżvilupp Sostenibbli

Environment

Illum il-ġurnata, diversi jitkellmu dwar “sostenibilitá” u dwar “l-iżvilupp sostenibbli”. Sfortunatament, bosta drabi ma jkunux jafu x’inhuma jgħidu. Bħala riżultat jispiċċaw iwasslu messaġġi żbaljati.

Mela, ejja nibdew minn hawn. Meta nitkellmu dwar sostenibilitá inkunu qed nirriferu lejn dak li nagħmlu. Dan ikun sostenibbli kemm-il darba, d-deċiżjonijiet tagħna ma jippreġudikawx lil ġenerazzjonijiet futuri milli huma ukoll ikunu jistgħu jieħdu d-deċiżjonijiet tagħhom. Min-naħa l-oħra, l-iżvilupp sostenibbli hi t-triq li permezz tagħha nistgħu noqorbu u eventwalment naslu viċin li nkunu sostenibbli.

Fi ftit kliem is-sostenibilitá tħares fit-tul.

Dan kollu ma jikkonċernax biss l-ambjent. Imma jiġbor flimkien kemm il-politika ambjentali, kif ukoll dik ekonomika, il-politika soċjali kif ukoll il-politika kulturali. Ifisser li f’dak kollu li nagħmlu irridu nħarsu fit-tul u rridu nassiguraw li l-ħarsien ambjentali, l-iżvilupp ekonomiku u soċjali jimxu id f’id u b’rispett għall-kisbiet kulturali.

Dan iwassal għal numru ta’ konklużjonijiet loġiċi li jiffurmaw il-bażi tal-politika għall-iżvilupp sostenibbli. Kienet Gro Harlem Brundtland, soċjal demokratika Norveġiża li serviet kemm bħala Prim Ministru kif ukoll bħala Ministru għall-Ambjent ta’ pajjiżha li fasslet it-triq meta fl-1987 mexxiet il-ħidma tal-Kummissjoni Dinjija għall-Ambjent u l-Iżvilupp tal-Ġnus Magħquda u ippreżentat ir-rapport intitolat Our Common Future.

B’mod prattiku, l-iżvilupp sostenibbli għandu jwassal għal deċiżjonijiet konkreti li permezz tagħhom, l-iżvilupp li jseħħ ikun wieħed li jirrispetta lin-nies, lin-natura u l-kultura. Fi ftit kliem, il-profitti li tiġġenera l-ekonomija ikunu ibbażati fuq kriterji etiċi. Kien għal din ir-raġuni li sa mis-snin disgħin, meta l-iżvilupp sostenibbli issemma l-ewwel darba fil-liġijiet Maltin, dan kien responsabbiltá diretta tal-Prim Ministru. Ta’ l-inqas fuq il-karta.

Għax il-politika dwar l-iżvilupp sostenibbli tmiss l-oqsma kollha tal-ħajja pubblika u allura teħtieġ politiku ta’ esperjenza. Sfortunatament l-ebda wieħed mill-Prim Ministri li kellna s’issa ma mexxa hu f’dan il-qasam għax dejjem iddelegah lill-Ministru (jew lis-Segretarju Parlamentari) responsabbli għall-Ambjent. Dan hu żball għax il-Ministru responsabbli mill-Ambjent rari ħafna jkun f’posizzjoni li jagħti direzzjoni lill-Ministri l-oħra, li ngħiduha kif inhi, ftit li xejn ikollhom interess fl-iżvilupp sostenibbli.

B’eżempju forsi ninftehmu aħjar dwar kemm f’Malta, l-politika dwar l-iżvilupp sostenibbli hi biss logħob bil-kliem.

Inħarsu ftit lejn l-infrastruttura tat-toroq tagħna, inkluż it-trasport pubbliku. B’mod mill-iktar ċar din mhiex sostenibbli u ilha hekk għal ħafna żmien.

Marbuta mal-infrastruttura tat-toroq hemm il-mobilitá u l-kwalitá tal-arja. Dan flimkien mal-konġestjoni tat-traffiku, l-impatti fuq is-saħħa prinċipalment minħabba l- kwalitá fqira tal-arja kif ukoll l-impatti fuq l-ekonomija tal-ħin moħli fi traffiku ma jispiċċa qatt.

F’Mejju 2014 l-Istitut għat-Tibdil fil-Klima u l-Iżvilupp Sostenibbli tal-Universitá ta’ Malta kien ikkummissjonat mill-uffiċċju rappresentattiv tal-Unjoni Ewropeja f’Malta biex iħejji studju dwar l-impatti tat-traffiku f’Malta. Minn dan l-istudju, intitolat The External Costs of Passenger and Commercial Vehicles Use in Malta , jirriżulta li l-impatt tal-konġestjoni tat-traffiku hu stmat li hu ekwivalenti għal 1.7% tal-Prodott Gross Nazzjonali. Din l-istima tieħu konsiderazzjoni kemm tal-petrol/diesel kif ukoll tal-ħin li jinħela bħala riżultat tal-konġestjoni tat-traffiku. Hu stmat li f’Malta kull sewwieq, kull sena, jaħli medja ta’ 52 siegħa  wieqaf fit-traffiku.

L-istudju iżid jgħid li din l-istima tiżdied u tilħaq l-4% tal-Prodott Gross Nazzjonali jekk jittieħed ukoll konsiderazzjoni tal-inċidenti tat-traffiku, l-impatt tat-tniġġiz tal-arja, l-effett tat-tniġġiż mill-ħoss kif ukoll il-gassijiet serra. Għall-paragun, tajjeb li nirrealizzaw li t-tkabbir ekonomiku għas-sena 2017 huwa stmat li ser ikun ta’ 3.5% tal-Prodott Gross Nazzjonali.

Dan hu biss eżempju wieħed. Bħalu hemm bosta oħra.

Il-loġika tal-iżvilupp sostenibbli kellha inevitabilment twassal għal servizz effiċjenti ta’ transport pubbliku snin ilu bil-konsegwenza ta’ tnaqqis sostanzjali ta’ karozzi mit-toroq tagħna. Huwa dak li għandna nippretendu f’pajjiż żgħir bħal tagħna fejn kważi kullimkien qiegħed biss tefa’ ta’ ġebla ‘l-bogħod. Imma, kollox bil-maqlub!

Darba l-Kabinett kien approva Strateġija Nazzjonali għall-Iżvilupp Sostenibbli  ………….. imma sadanittant il-politika tat-trasport f’Malta għadha tinkoraġixxi iktar karozzi fit-toroq tagħna.

 ippubblikat fl-Illum : il-Ħadd 8 ta’ Jannar 2017

The logic of sustainable development

four_pillar-sustainable development

 

Political discourse is nowadays peppered with the terms “sustainability” and “sustainable development” but often, unfortunately,  their use is out of context and thereby transmits the wrong message.

So, let us first be clear as to what the terms really mean. Being in a state of sustainability means that our actions, attitudes and behaviour are such that future generations are not precluded from taking their own decisions. On the other hand, sustainable development is the path to be followed to achieve sustainability.

This is not just a matter of environmental concern. It is an intertwining of environmental, economic, social and cultural policy. It means that our actions must take the long view and be compatible with the forces of nature, the economy, human development and a respect for culture.

All this leads to a number of logical conclusions which form the basis of the politics of sustainable development. This was first outlined by Gro Harlem Brundtland, a former Norwegian social democrat prime minister and minister for the environment in her seminal  1987 report Our Common Future,drawn up for the UN World Commission on Environment and Development. In her report, Brundtland, made ample use of the conclusions of an earlier debate in the World Council of Churches in 1974.

In practical terms, the politics of sustainable development should lead  to a number of concrete decisions, as a result of which modern-day living is simultaneously respectful of society, nature, the economy and the accumulated cultural heritage in its widest sense. Sustainable development is, in fact, a balanced approach to development. It is for this reason that, since the 1990s, when sustainable development first made it to Malta’s statute book, it was retained (on paper) as a direct political responsibility of the Prime Minister.

Sustainable development permeates all areas of policy and hence requires a senior politician in Cabinet to be in charge. Unfortunately, not even one of our prime ministers assumed direct political responsibility for the matter as, formally or informally, all of them delegated the matter to the Minister (or Parliamentary Secretary) responsible for the environment.

The Minister responsible for the environment cannot make much headway as he is dependent upon – and can in no way can he be expected to direct – his cabinet colleagues, most of whom are not really interested in sustainable development, anyway. A simple example will illustrate how all the talk on sustainable development by governments in Malta has been an exercise in managing hot air.

Consider the management of Malta’s road infrastructure, including public transport. This is clearly unsustainable and has been so for a long time. The public transport reform carried out under the direction of former Minister Austin Gatt was a public disservice as it made a bad situation even worse.

The management of Malta’s road infrastructure brings to the fore a number of issues, including mobility and air quality. Linked to these are traffic congestion, health impacts primarily due to poor air quality and the impact of the clogging of our roads on our economy through a substantial amount of time spent fuming at our steering wheels.

In May 2014, the Institute for Climate Change and Sustainable Development of the University of Malta was commissioned by the European Union representation in Malta to carry out a study on the external costs of traffic and congestion in Malta. Among other things, this study, entitled The External Costs of Passenger and Commercial Vehicles Use in Malta, estimated that 1.7 per cent of Malta’s GDP is wiped out annually as a result of traffic congestion. This conclusion took into consideration both fuel wasted and time lost: approximately 52 hours per annum per commuter.

The study further emphasises that this estimate would rise to four per cent of the GDP if it also took into consideration traffic accidents, the impacts of air and noise pollution as well as the impact of greenhouse gases emitted.  (For comparison purposes, it is pertinent to remember that the real Malta GDP growth for 2017 is projected at 3.5 per cent.)

This is just one example. There are many more.

The logic of sustainable development would have inevitably led to an efficient public transport system ages ago and a substantially reduced number of cars on our roads. It is what one would expect in a small country where practically everywhere is within a stone’s throw of everywhere else.  Yet we get the complete opposite.

Once upon a time, the Cabinet had approved a National Strategy for Sustainable Development – yet Malta’s transport policy is still one which encourages more cars on the road.

 published in the Malta Independent on Sunday : 8 January 2017

Nisseparaw l-iskart organiku

apple

 

L-iskart li narmu hu fil-parti l-kbira tiegħu utli. Għalhekk aħna dejjem imħeġġa biex nirriċiklaw dak li s-soltu narmu. Dak li nirriċiklaw jibqa’ jdur fl-ekonomija u ma jinħeliex. Għalhekk nirriċiklaw u nerġgħu nużaw il-karta, l-ħġieġ, il-metalli u l-plastic. Kollha għad għandhom użu, anke meta għalina ma jkunx għadhom utli.

Nhar il-Ġimgħa 30 t’Ottubru, l-WasteServe, flimkien mal-ħames kunsilli lokali tal-Mdina, Ħal-Għaxaq, Ta’ Xbiex, Bormla u Birkirkara ser jagħtu bidu għall-ġbir separat tal-iskart organiku. Dan ser ikun proġett pilota fuq numru ta’ ġimgħat li permezz tiegħu l-iskart organiku ser jinġabar f’dawn il-lokalitajiet darbtejn fil-ġimgħa (it-Tnejn w il-Ġimgħa). Wara, l-ġbir tal-iskart organiku jibda jsir fil-lokalitajiet kollha.

Il-parti organika tal-iskart li narmu jammonta għal ftit iktar min-nofs tal-iskart li llum inqegħdu fil-borża s-sewda. Din tidher li hi l-iktar stima korretta u tirriżulta minn stħarriġ li għamel l-Uffiċċju Nazzjonali tal-Istatistika fl-2012. Studju addizzjonali li sar f’Settembru li għadda mill-WasteServe fil-lokalitajiet li ser jipparteċipaw fil-proġett pilota jindika li l-ammont ta’ skart organiku li niġġeneraw fil-lokalitajiet tagħna jvarja anke skond il-lokalità. Dan jista’ jkun rifless ta’ stil ta’ ħajja u/jew livell ta’ għixien (ftit) differenti fil-lokalitajiet tagħna, liema differenza tinkixef anke minn eżami tal-iskart li niġġeneraw.

Sar eżerċizzju ta’ informazzjoni bieb bieb li bih r-residenti fil-ħames lokalitajiet diġa ġew infurmati x’għandhom jagħmlu. Ingħatawlhom boroż bojod u kontenituri bojod tal-plastic li minnhom tgħaddi l-arja biex iqegħdu l-boroz fihom u l-iskart ma jrejjaħx.

L-iskart organiku huwa prinċipalment fdal tal-ikel kif ukoll skart tal-ġonna. Jista’ jinkludi ukoll karti u kartun.

Meta l-iskart organiku jinġabar minn wara l-bieb tagħna, dan jittieħed fl-impjant ta’ Sant Antnin f’Wied il-Għajn fejn issir verifika li fil-borza hemm biss dak li suppost. Wara, l-iskart organiku jitqiegħed f’apparat imsejjaħ waste digester  fejn jiddikomponi u jipproduċi il-gass metanu (methane) li l-ewwel jinġabar u eventwalment jinħaraq biex jipproduċi l-elettriku.

Mill-proċess kollu tirriżulta ukoll kwantità ta’ sħana li ser tintuża biex jissaħħan l-ilma tas-swimming pool terrapewtiku li għanda l-Fondazzjoni Inspire li qiegħed  ftit il-bogħod. Li jibqa’, jintuża bħala kompost.

Dan il-proġett pilota biex jinġabar separatament l-iskart organiku għandu l-potenzjal li jnaqqas b’mod sostanzjali l-iskart li jispiċċa fil-miżbliet tagħna. L-iskart fil-borza s-sewda jista’ jonqos saħansitra bin-nofs. Il-gass li minnu jiġi prodott l-elettriku jonqos mill-emissjonijiet serra tal-pajjiż u b’hekk ukoll b’dan il-proġett inkunu qed nagħtu s-sehem tagħna biex jonqsu l-impatti li qed jagħtu kontribut għat-tibdil fil-klima.

Għalhekk hu neċessarju li nisseparaw l-iskart. Għax innaqqsu l-impatti ambjentali u fl-istess ħin inkunu qed nagħtu l-kontribut żgħir tagħna biex titjieb il-kwalità tal-ħajja ta’ kulħadd.

ippubblikat fuq iNews it-Tnejn 26 t’Ottubru 2015

Our waste has good value

organic waste

 

Our waste can be put to good use, which is why we are encouraged to separate and recycle what we would otherwise throw away. Our waste contains plenty of useful resources which can be recovered and re-circulated in our economy and we separate paper, glass, metals and plastic, all of which can be reused.

We also recycle electric and electronic equipment such as televisions, radios, refrigerators,  PCs and laptops. Instead of being thrown away, disintegrating into a chemical soup in a landfill, this equipment will be dismantled into its component parts, most of which can be reused. Most  electronic equipment  nowadays makes use of some rare metal and it is in everybody’s interest that such resources are recycled.

Next Friday, 30 October, state waste management operator WasteServe, in conjunction with the five local councils of Mdina, Ħal-Għaxaq, Ta’ Xbiex, Bormla and Birkirkara will commence the separate collection of organic waste in Malta. This pilot project will run for a number of weeks during which separated organic waste will be collected twice weekly (on Mondays and Fridays) after which it will be extended to the rest of our localities.

The organic fraction of our waste may be as high as 52 per cent of the waste discarded by each household in the black garbage bags. This, apparently, is the most accurate estimate to date resulting from a National Statistics Office study carried out in 2012 entitled Household Waste Composition Survey. A more recent waste characterisation exercise, carried out by WasteServe itself in the localities participating in the pilot project, indicates that the size of the organic waste percentage varies in the different localities. This may be the result of different lifestyles, as a result of which we tend to have different patterns of behaviour that are even evident in our waste.

WasteServe has already organised a door-to-door information exercise explaining their role to residents of the five localities, who have also been supplied with white bags in which they are to collect organic waste, as well as suitably aerated bins in which to place these bags.

Organic waste, sometimes referred to as “green waste”, is organic material such as food and garden waste. It can also include animal and plant-based material and degradable carbon such as paper and cardboard.

The organic waste collected from our doorsteps will be delivered to the Sant Antnin Waste Treatment Plant at Marsascala where it is verified that the white bags contain only organic waste. It is then placed in a waste digester where, as a result of its decomposing in the absence of oxygen, it will produce the gas methane, which is collected and used to produce electricity.

In addition, the heat produced will be used to heat the therapeutic swimming pool at the neighbouring Inspire Foundation, a considerable help to the foundation’s clients. The remainder is then used as compost.

The organic waste pilot project thus has the potential to substantially reduce the  waste that currently ends up at the Magħtab landfill. In addition, when the methane resulting from its decomposition is used to produce electricity, we will also be reducing the emission of a greenhouse gas which is 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide. This will be an additional step in reducing Malta’s contribution to climate change.

These are the practical reasons why it is imperative that we recycle. We reduce our negative environmental impact and, as a result, create the conditions for a better quality of life for everyone.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday 25 October 2015

The chihuahua that roared

During the Cancún Climate Summit Bolivian President Evo Morales emphasised that “nature has rights”. He insisted on a 1°C rise above the pre-industrial-age temperature as the maximum permissible.

Stripped of his trademark anti-US remarks the Morales input at Cancún would not have led to any radically different conclusions at the summit. Who can dispute his declaration in favour of families already deprived of water because of drought, or islanders facing the loss of their homes and possessions as a result of rising sea levels? His plea was one to buttress arguments in favour of mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Realistically, however, there was never a chance of this being accepted.

Participants at Cancún opted instead for declarations which though very important as a political statement served to postpone decisions to the Durban Climate Summit towards the end of this year. It is this postponement which led to the Morales outburst equating lack of definite action with “ecocide which is equivalent to genocide because this would be an affront to mankind as a whole”.

Cancún went one step further from the declarations of the past. Agreement in principle was reached on the need for inspections in order to account for commitments made. As to who will eventually carry out the monitoring, reporting and verification this is still to be determined. Maybe this will be concluded at Durban later this year on the basis of the agreement in principle sealed at Cancún.

Climate change diplomacy is moving although at a very slow pace.

In the words of BBC Cancún correspondent Richard Black one can compare the 2009 Copenhagen summit to a Great Dane which whimpered while the Cancún 2010 summit can be compared to a chihuahua which roared. Much was expected from Copenhagen but little tangible results were achieved. On the other hand while there were no great expectations from the Cancún summit, foundations for a comprehensive settlement in the future were laid. Whether this will be achieved at Durban or possibly later is still to be seen.

At Cancún pledges by countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions were formalised. Developing countries for the first time agreed to look into possible cuts in their own emissions. They made no formal pledges yet they moved one step forward towards a more reasonable application of the “common but differentiated responsibility” principle in climate change diplomacy.

Countries represented at Cancún gave formal backing to the UN’s deforestation scheme REDD (Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation). As a result of REDD rich countries will pay poor countries not to chop down forests on their territory. This will compensate them for their lost income and further encourage the production and use of sustainable timber. The developed countries will thus be paying for protecting biodiversity as well as for the service which forests are rendering as carbon sinks. Details of the REDD scheme have still to be worked out. Maybe by the Durban Climate Summit these will be settled.

The Cancún agreement has acknowledged for the first time in a UN document that global warming must not exceed pre-industrial temperatures by more than 2°C. While being a big step forward, this is clearly not enough. In fact exceeding pre-industrial temperatures by more than 1.5°C endangers the very existence of a number of islands as well as low-lying coastal areas.

Small island states and coastal areas are already feeling the impacts of climate change: millions reside and earn their livelihood in such areas. If temperature rises are not contained within the said 1.5°C increase these millions risk becoming climate change refugees.

The first climate change refugees have already left their homeland. Those displaced by sea level changes have already left the Carteret Islands and Kiribati in the Pacific Ocean.

Drought has been playing havoc with the lives of various African nations resulting in escalating tribal conflicts which have displaced millions of human beings. In Malta we have direct experience of this through the boat refugees departing from Libyan shores, a number of whom end up in Malta.

Depending on the actual rise above pre-industrial temperatures, current projections indicate that in the long term more than one billion human beings could face losing their homes and possessions in islands and coastal areas as a result of sea level rise. Millions more will be displaced as a result of the impacts of changing weather patterns. Availability of water will change as a result of a varying frequency and intensity of rainfall. As a result this will impact agriculture, sanitation and the quality of life in the areas affected.

Mr Morales is right. Nature has rights. It will strike back in defence of these rights if current greenhouse gas emissions are not reduced substantially. Maybe the roaring chihuahua will alert policy makers around the globe that there is no alternative to substantial reductions across the board.

 

Published in The Times of Malta : January 1, 2011