Aligning the economy and the environment

More than four months ago we discussed the possible impacts of the EU emissions trading scheme on shipping emissions. This was effective as of the first day of the current year. Specifically, this was considered to impact substantially the operations of the Freeport Terminal at Birżebbuġa. Earlier this week government announced that it had commissioned a study intended in part to address these impacts as part of a much broader exercise that seeks to quantify the challenges Malta has to face as an island state on the periphery of the European Union.

The EU emissions trading scheme seeks to align the shipping industry with the Paris Climate targets, that is, ensuring that the global mean temperature does not rise to more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial age temperature. This is done by making use of environmental taxation in order to encourage innovation and consequently through new technology to reduce emissions thereby contributing to a reduction of the projected global increase in temperature.

When the EU emissions trading scheme was updated to be applied to shipping, the Labour government’s representatives on the various EU structures did not in any way indicate that Malta was not in agreement. This signifies that there was either approval or else the Maltese representatives were fast asleep when the matter was approved.

There was ample time for government to plan, yet it remained silent and only now, after the event, it is commissioning reports and studies to address the resulting challenges!

The basic challenge that we must face very urgently is the alignment of our economy with our environmental responsibilities. This is not only evident in shipping but it is also very clear in the tourism industry. It is not an issue that can be solved through state aid. It rather requires a clear green vision which unfortunately the Maltese state, as currently led, does not have.

This week we have been told by the industry that tourism numbers will be approaching 3,200,000 this year. This is not good news. It clearly signifies that tourism growth is completely out of control. The concerns generated are various, primarily overcrowding but also that of an infrastructure bursting at the seams, bringing to the fore mistaken priorities which ignored the long-term view, so essential to adequate planning.

Two years ago, we had an early warning of what lies in store. The publication of the Deloitte report on the tourism capacity of the Maltese islands had spelt out the problem quite clearly. The projected supply of touristic beds is such that it would require close to 5 million tourists annually to achieve an 80 per cent occupancy.

Overtourism is impacting the quality of life of residents all over the islands. The taking over of our pavements by the catering industry is just one of the most obvious symptoms. Residents in most localities are fed up as a result of tourism continuously and arrogantly invading their space. Sewers are overflowing at an increased frequency. Obviously, this will impact bathing water as sewage overflows are taking place close to public beaches frequented for bathing.

Tables and chairs spill over onto pavements and squeeze pedestrians onto the streets. The secure space reserved for pedestrians has been taken over abusively by the tourism industry. As a result, pedestrians end up competing with traffic for space, risking their lives in the process.  Music which goes on into the silent hours at excessive levels is also contributing to an ever-growing problem. The resulting noise pollution is annoying everyone.

The term “sustainable tourism” is a contradiction in terms as, tourism, is not, and can never be, sustainable. We can address its various impacts, and possibly reduce some of them.  However, this will not make tourism sustainable. No amount of greenwashing can transform tourism into a sustainable enterprise.

Overtourism has brought people out, protesting in the streets, not just in Malta but also elsewhere, as has happened recently in the Canary Islands. In the Balearic Islands, with statistics approaching the twenty million mark per annum, the Regional Government is considering taking measures to control tourism growth before it is too late. The City of Venice has introduced a tourist tax to reduce excessive tourist numbers but so far this has been ineffective.

Tourism does not exist in a vacuum. It has considerable social and environmental impacts which are reflected in the quality of life of the impacted residential community, the deterioration of our surroundings and the depletion of the resources which Mother Earth provides. Maltese academics researching into the impacts of tourism are of the opinion that Malta has exceeded its carrying capacity in terms of tourist arrivals.

It is only a question of time before the anti-tourism sentiment currently gaining ground in other European touristic destinations reaches our shores. It is a pity that instead of improving the quality of our product, the industry has been mismanaged and is currently in a self-destructive mode.

Unfortunately, the tourism industry does not care about anything except what goes into its bank account. We need to change direction the soonest before it is too late. It is a must that we align our economy with our environmental responsibilities.

Tourism is a prime candidate for this re-alignment.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 26 May 2024

The EU Emissions Trading Scheme and the Malta Freeport

The EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) has been in place for the past 20 years, since 2003. It deals with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through the use of market-based instruments. Initially maritime emissions were excluded from its operation.

The debate at an EU level as to when greenhouse gas emissions from the maritime industry would no longer be excluded from this regulatory process has been ongoing for quite some time. Extending the applicability of the EU ETS to maritime transport was a crucial next step, no longer avoidable after the 2015 Paris Climate Summit.

At Paris there was unanimous agreement between the participating states that urgent action needed to be taken in order to contain the increase in global temperature to possibly no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial global temperature. Achieving that aim would be of considerable help in reducing climate change impacts, including the potential rise in sea level, a serious threat to islands and coastal areas.

As an island state with a substantially developed coast, Malta has an interest in arresting the projected sea level rise, the soonest possible. At least an interest in reducing it to the minimum possible. Depending on its extent, a sea level rise will be extremely damaging to Malta’s infrastructure.

Everybody is aware that as of the 1 January 2024 cargo and passenger ships having a gross tonnage of 5000 tonnes or over will be subject to the EU ETS scheme as a result of which they will pay for their carbon emissions. Initially such payments will cover 40 per cent of their emissions. This will rise to 70 per cent in 2025 and then to 100 per cent from 2026 onwards. This is an application of the polluter pays principle. A basic principle in international environmental law enshrined in the EU treaties and incorporated as well in the Maltese statute book.

The scheme will be operating within the European Union and consequently there will be shipping lines which will try to better organise themselves in order to avoid payment for their carbon emissions. This fact was highlighted some weeks ago by Alex Montebello, the CEO of the Freeport Terminal, who argued, in an article published in the local press, that the North African ports, to which the EU ETS does not apply, as they are not part of an EU member state, will be placed at a competitive advantage. Consequently, most probably, the Malta Freeport Terminal will lose substantially its transhipment role. The Malta Freeport’s loss, he argued, will be the gain of other ports along the southern Mediterranean shores, such as Damietta, Tangier Med or East Port Said.

Now this is an interesting argument which most probably was considered by the negotiators on behalf of the Maltese Government when they handled the matter in Brussels.

In fact, a substantial number of islands within the EU territory are exempted from the provisions of ETS if they satisfy the applicable criteria. Having a population which is less than 200,000 and no road or rail links with the European mainland are the criteria to be met. As a result, the port of Imġarr in Gozo is the only exempted Maltese port which is included in the relative EU implementation decision published in the Official Journal of the EU on the 19 December 2023.

No explanation has been forthcoming from Government, and I would not dare speculate as to the reason why the Maltese negotiators failed to ensure that the transhipment role of the Freeport Terminal at Marsaxlokk Bay was defended appropriately.  The locality of Birżebbuġa, possibly, stands to gain, inadvertently, as a result of this failure.

Obviously, Malta cannot possibly be exempted as this would defeat the whole purpose of the EU ETS which is that of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Possibly, for a change, as a country we have started taking our responsibilities seriously. Maybe we can now start the long process of aligning our economy with our environmental responsibilities.

Well, it is never too late.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 7 January 2024

L-inkompetenza, ħsara biss tagħmel

L-impjant f’Ħal-Far għall-ipproċessar tal-fdalijiet tat-tonn kellu l-potenzjal li jagħti kontribut sostanzjali għall-iżvilupp tal-ekonomija ċirkulari f’Malta. Bħal ħafna affarijiet oħra l-inkompetenza qerditu.

Fuq il-karta kien proġett tal-ogħla kwalità. Fil-prattika, s’issa, qed jiżviluppa f’diżastru ieħor.  Biċċiet ta’ informazzjoni li qed tasal għandi qed tindika li probabbilment ser jirriżulta li x-xeħħa fil-fondi allokati biex ikun ikkummissjonat l-apparat istallat fl-impjant, hi l-kawża ewlenija tad-diżastru li qed jiżviluppa.

Bħala riżultat ta’ dan kollu irnexxielhom jittrasformaw pass pożittiv f’esperjenza negattiva għal kulħadd. L-impatt ta’ dan kollu ser jibqa’ magħna għal żmien mhux żgħir għax riżultat ta’ dak li ġara qed tissaħħaħ l-isfiduċja fl-awtoritajiet li għal darb’oħra ġie ippruvat li mhumiex kapaċi li jwasslu proġett tajjeb biex jagħti r-riżultat mixtieq.

Għal darb’oħra l-inkonvenjent hu fuq Birżebbuġa, kif ilu jiġri s-snin riżultat ta’ attività industrijali oħra fiż-żona. L-assalt fuq Birżebbuġa tul is-snin ħalla impatt fuq il-kwalità tal-ħajja tar-residenti.  Fuq quddiem nett f’dan ir-rigward hemm it-Terminal tal-Port Ħieles, li hu ta’ inkonvenjent 24 siegħa kull jum. Huwa biss dan l-aħħar li dan l-inkonvenjent beda jiġi indirizzat.

Qiesu dan mhux biżżejjed, fiż-żona industrijali ta’ Ħal-Far, f’data mhux il-bogħod ser ikollna ukoll trakka tal-karozzi li ser tkun iffinanzjata mill-fondi li nġabru mill-bejgħ tal-passaporti! Iktar impatt fuq ir-residenti ta’ Birżebbuġa!

L-aktar attakk riċenti fuq il-kwalità tal-ħajja f’Birżebbuġa qed isir mill-attività ta’ Aquaculture Resources Ltd f’dawn l-aħħar ġimgħat. Dan riżultat tal-irwejjaħ ta’ ħut u drenaġġ ifur fiż-żoni residenzjali.  It-tmexxija tal-kumpanija Aquaculture Resources Ltd kontinwament irrifjutat li terfa’ r-responsabbiltà għall-irwejjaħ tal-ħut u d-drenaġġ ifur għax, qalet, li qed tieħu l-passi kollha meħtieġa fl-impjant tagħha f’Ħal-Far.  

Il-binja li fiha illum hemm l-impjant għall-iproċessar ta’ prodotti tat-tonn kien approvat permezz ta’ applikazzjoni li ma tieħux ħin u dan riżultat ta’ emendi għar-regolamenti tal-ippjanar magħrufa bħala proċeduri tad-DNO (Development Notification Order). Fil-prattika dan elimina l-konsultazzjoni pubblika fil-kaz ta’ xogħolijiet ta’ kostruzzjoni f’żoni industrijali. Riżultat ta’ hekk ħadd ma kien jaf li nhar is-16 ta’ Marzu 2021, l-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar ħarġet il-permess ta’ żvilupp bir-referenza DN01359/20 għall-binja tal-impjant fuq il-Plot 36B fiż-żona Industrijali ta’ Ħal-Far. Il-permess ħareġ f’isem Dr Charlon Gouder, CEO ta’ Aquaculture Resources Limited.

Il-konsultazzjoni pubblika bdiet biss f’Ġunju 2022, ftit wara l-elezzjoni ġenerali. Dan seħħ permezz ta’ dokumentazzjoni dwar il-proċess li jwassal għal permess ambjentali magħruf bħala applikazzjioni IPPC. L-ittri IPPC jfissru Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control u l-proċess hu regolat b’direttiva tal-Unjoni Ewropeja li ġġib dan l-isem u li ilha parti mill-liġi Maltija sa minn meta Malta issieħbet fl-Unjoni fl-2004.

Id-Direttiva IPPC hi intenzjonata biex ikun assigurat li l-impatti ambjentali ta’ numru ta’ proċessi industrijali jkunu indirizzati b’mod integrat. L-impjant tal-prodotti tat-tonn hu soġġett għal din id-Direttiva.

Riżultat ta’ hekk hu meħtieġ il-presentazzjoni ta’ dokumentazzjoni dettaljata teknika li permezz tagħha jkun ċar dwar kif ser issir il-ħidma industrijali, dwar l-impatti ambjentali riżultanti kif ukoll dwar kif inhu ippjanat li dawn ikunu indirizzati.

Din id-dokumentazzjoni ġiet ippreżentata u wara li kienet eżaminata mill-ERA ħareġ il-permess għall-impjant biex jipproċessa l-fdalijiet tat-tonn.

Il-problemi bdew kif beda jopera l-impjant hekk kif beda l-proċess biex l-apparat istallat ikun ikkummissjonat. Jiena infurmat li d-ditta li mingħandha inxtara l-apparat ma ntalbitx biex tieħu ħsieb ukoll li dan ikun ikkummissjonat. Mid-dehra dawk li ġew inkarigati ma tantx kellhom esperjenza f’dan ix-xogħol, kif jidher, wara kollox mir-riżultati miksuba.  

Forsi l-ERA tiftaħ investigazzjoni biex ikun stabilit mhux biss x’ġara imma ukoll min kien responsabbli. Għax hu essenzjali li jkun assigurat li kull min kien involut, inkluż l-ERA, jitgħallem minn din l-esperjenza. Din hi froġa li nħolqot mis-settur privat minkejja li kien qed jaħdem taħt is-superviżjoni tal-ERA! Anke proġett tajjeb irnexxielhom b’inkompetenza kbira jeqirduh!

Ippubblikat fuq Illum: 18 ta’ Diċembru 2022

The art of messing up

The processing plant for Tuna By-Products at Ħal-Far had the potential to be a significant project contributing to the development of the circular economy in Malta. Like many other things it has been messed up.

On paper it was a first-class project. In practice, so far, it is developing into another disaster. Titbits of information which have come my way indicate that eventually it will most probably result that cost-cutting relative to commissioning of the equipment installed in the processing plant is the primary cause of the developing mess.

The end result of this mess-up is that of transforming a potential positive into an absolute negative. The effects of this will be felt for quite some time as it has reinforced the existing mistrust of the authorities who have proven once more that they are incapable of guiding a beneficial project to fruition!

Birżebbuġa is once more shouldering all the resulting inconvenience as it has been doing for many years relative to other industrial operations in the area.  The assault on Birżebbuġa over the years has negatively impacted the quality of life of its residents. The Freeport Terminal tops the list with its round-the-clock inconvenience. It is only relatively recently that this inconvenience has started being addressed.

To add insult to injury the Ħal-Far Industrial Estate will shortly also host a racetrack, the funds for which have already been allocated through the monies collected from the sale of golden passports!  

The latest affront on Birżebbuġa has been the operations of Aquaculture Resources Ltd which commenced earlier this year, and specifically the result of fishy effluent ending up in residential areas in Birżebbuġa.  The management of Aquaculture Resources Ltd has refused to take responsibility for the unbearable fish odours and sewage leaks that have affected the area, stating that the  company has taken measures to contain smells within the tuna by-product processing  plant. 

The building envelope of the tuna byproduct processing plant was approved through a fast-track procedure made possible some years back through amendments to the Development Notification Order. This, in practice, eliminated public consultation for construction works in industrial estates.  As a result, no-one was aware that on 16 March 2021 the Planning Authority issued a development permit bearing reference DN 01359/20 for the Construction of a Tuna Rending Factory on Plot 36B of Ħal-Far Industrial Estate. The permit was issued to Dr Charlon Gouder, the CEO of Aquaculture Resources Limited.

The public consultation only commenced in June 2022, after the general elections, through the publication of the documentation for the environmental permitting process known as the IPPC application. IPPC referring to the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control as regulated by the EU Directive bearing that name and forming part of Maltese law since EU accession in 2004.

The IPPC Directive seeks to ensure that there is one integrated process addressing the environmental impacts resulting from a number of industrial processes. The tuna byproduct processing plant is subject to this regulatory process.

The IPPC regulatory process requires the presentation of detailed technical documentation relative to the proposed industrial process, the resulting environmental impacts and the manner in which it is proposed to address these same impacts.

This documentation was compiled and after being examined by ERA an operating permit for the Tuna byproduct processing plant was issued.

The problems started with the commencement of operations which were initiated in order to carry out the commissioning of the supplied equipment. I am informed that the suppliers of the equipment were not entrusted to carry out the commissioning. Apparently, those entrusted with the commissioning did not have sufficient experience: the results achieved so far are indicative enough of this fact.

Someday maybe ERA will commission an investigation into what went wrong and who was responsible for the resulting mess.  This is essential in order to ensure that lessons are learnt by all those involved. This is a mess created by the private sector subject to supervision by ERA! They have managed to mess up a good project.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 18 December 2022

Il-kosta tagħna lkoll: inħarsuha

Għaddej sforz kontinwu biex il-kosta tkun ikkommerċjalizzata. Sforz li ilu għaddej is-snin.

Il-jott marina proposta f’Marsaskala hi biss eżempju wieħed minn bosta li mhux limitati għan-nofsinnhar politiku, iżda li huma mifruxa mal-pajjiż.  Fost l-eżempji hemm it-Terminal tal-Port Ħieles, Manoel Island, il-Bajja tal-Balluta, ix-Xatt u l-jott marina tal-Birgu, il-jott marina fil-Kalkara u x-Xatt tal-Belt.  

Hemm ukoll għaddej il-kummerċjalizzazzjoni tal-ispazji pubbliċi mal-kosta, bil-bankini b’kollox.

L-art pubblika kontinwament qed tkun trasformata f’minjiera ta’ profitti privati, ħafna drabi għall-magħżulin. Il-kwalità tal-ħajja tar-residenti rari jagħtu każ tagħha, jekk mhux fl-aħħar minuta. Meta possibli jevitawha kompletament ukoll.

Għaddew madwar erba’ snin minn meta l-Parlament approva il-leġislazzjoni biex tissaħħah il-protezzjoni tal-kosta permezz tal-liġi dwar id-dimanju pubbliku. Kellna kemm-il Ministru li tkellem b’mod pompuż dwar dan. L-għaqdiet ambjentali ippreżentaw lista ta’ iktar minn għoxrin sit, mifruxa mal-kost,a li kollha kemm huma jikkwalifikaw għall-protezzjoni. Ninsab infurmat li l-għaqdiet ambjentali għamlu riċerka estensiva dwar min hu sid din l-art. Iżda sfortunatament l-Awtorità tal-Artijiet u l-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar qed iżommu dan il-proċess milli jitwettaq, anke għal dawk il-każijiet fejn l-art hi kollha kemm hi propjetà pubblika.  

Għalfejn jiġu approvati dawn il-liġijiet jekk ma hemm l-ebda intenzjoni li dawn ikunu implimentati?

Nafu li wieħed mill-impatti ewlenin tat-tibdil fil-klima fuq il-gżejjer, inkluż dawk Maltin, hu bit-tibdil fl-livell tal-baħar. Numru ta’ gżejjer fl-Oċejan Paċifiku li mhumiex wisq il-fuq minn livell il-baħar diġa bdew jisparixxu taħt baħar li l-livell tiegħu qed jogħla. Robert Abela, Prim Ministru, huwa u jindirizza l-laqgħa Internazzjonali fi Glasgow dwar it-tibdil fil-klima (COP26), iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa, emfasizza dan il-punt.

L-għoli fil-livell tal-baħar ikollu impatt sostanzjali fuq il-gżejjer Maltin, skond kemm dan ikun kbir. Jeffettwa l-infrastruttura kostali kollha: l-infrastruttura marittima, dik tat-turiżmu, tal-ilma kif ukoll l-infrastruttura tal-enerġija li huma kollha b’xi mod marbuta mal-kosta. Kemm-il darba jogħla l-livell tal-baħar dawn kollha jitħarbtu.  Anke iż-żoni residenzjali viċin tal-kosta jsofru impatti mhux żgħar.  

Ħadd ma jaf eżatt dwar kemm, kif u meta dan ser iseħħ. L-ewwelnett għax il-proċess li bih dan iseħħ għad mhux mifhum biżżejjed. Imma ukoll għax għalkemm ma nistgħux nevitawh nistgħu nnaqqsu l-impatt tiegħu billi nindirzzaw u nnaqqsu l-emissjonijiet tal-karbonju.

Repetutatament fil-laqgħat tal-UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change) li jsiru regolarment tul is-snin, kien hemm emfasi fuq il-ħtieġa li ż-żieda fit-temperatura globali minn kif kienet fl-era pre-industrijali ma tiżdiedx b’iktar minn 1.5 gradi Celsius. Dan sar fuq insistenza tal-istati gżejjer u tal-pajjiżi sottożviluppati, għax għal snin twal il-limitu raġjonevoli kien meqjus li kien ta’ 2 gradi Celsius. Pass ieħor il-quddiem. Imma mhux biżżejjed.

F’Pariġu fl-2015 kien hemm qbil dwar dan kollu. Imma sfortunatament dan ma kienx ikkonvertit f’azzjoni. Huwa dak li issa qed nistennew li jseħħ fi Glasgow.

Huwa essenzjali li nindirizzaw it-tibdil fil-klima bis-serjetà. Anke l-ħarsien tal-kosta jiddependi minn hekk.

ippubblikat fuq Illum :il-Ħadd 7 ta’ Novembru 2021

Claiming back (and protecting) our coast

A continuous effort to commercialise the coast is under way. It has been going on for quite some time.

The proposed Marsaskala yacht marina is just one example. It is possibly the latest of many examples, not just in the political south, but throughout the Maltese islands. The Freeport Terminal, Manoel Island, Balluta Bay, the Birgu Waterfront and yacht marina, the Kalkara yacht marina, Valletta Waterfront are some of the most glaring examples which come to mind.

There is also the ongoing commercialisation of the public spaces adjacent to the coast, including pavements and open spaces.

Public land is continuously being transformed into private profits, many times for the chosen few. In practically all cases,the quality of life of residents is not factored in, until the eleventh hour. Whenever possible, it is avoided completely.

It has been around four years since parliament approved legislation in order to reinforce the protection of the coastline through the public domain legislation. Much was said pompously by many a Minister. Environmental NGOs have submitted a list of over twenty sites along the coast which qualify for protection. I am informed that eNGOs have even carried out extensive research on ownership issues related to these sites. It is indeed unfortunate that the Lands Authority and the Planning Authority have ground the whole process to an unacceptable halt. This applies even in those instances where it is proven beyond any doubt whatsoever that the land in question is public property.

Why approve such laws when there is no intention to implement them?

We are aware that one of the main areas through which climate change will impact islands, including the Maltese islands, is through sea level rise.  A number of low-lying islands in the Pacific Ocean are already in the process of disappearing below a rising sea level.  Robert Abela, Prime Minister, addressing the Glasgow Climate Change COP26 earlier this week emphasised this point.

A rise in sea level will have a substantial impact on the Maltese islands, depending on its extent. It will impact the coastal infrastructure: the maritime, tourism, as well as the water and electricity infrastructure are all linked to our coast. A sea level rise will play havoc with all this. It will even impact the residential areas which have been developed close to the coast.

No one is certain as to when, how and the extent of this happening. Primarily this is due to the fact the natural processes in play are not fully understood yet. It is also however possible that mitigation measures planned and in hand to reduce carbon emissions could be quite effective if taken up.

During UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change) meetings it is continuously emphasised that the increase in global mean temperature should not exceed 1.5 degree Celsius over the pre-industrial temperature. This is the result of extensive lobbying by island states and under-developed countries over the years. They have been successful in adjusting the objective from the previous 2 degree Celsius.  This is definitely a step in the right direction, but it is not enough. 

In Paris in 2015 this was already agreed upon. Yet it was all words, none of which was converted into action. At Glasgow we need some decisions which are implemented the soonest.

Taking definite action on climate change is required to protect our coast.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 7 November 2021

The Metro consultation: taking us for a ride

In 2008 Professor Mir Ali from the School of Architecture, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, published a paper entitled “Urban Design Strategy Report on Tall Buildings in Malta.”

Professor Ali comments on the lack of mass transport facilities in Malta and links the functionality of tall buildings with the availability of mass transport facilities. He emphasises that: “Once there is a BRT or MRT system, integration of tall buildings with transportation can result in high efficiency, consolidation of services and a better urban life.” BRT signifies Bus Rapid Transit System. MRT signifies Mass Rapid Transport.

The need for a mass transport network has been felt for a long time. Greens in Malta have been emphasising that it is one of various solutions to address transport issues in the Maltese islands.

Government’s announcement last weekend on a three-route metro is just a first step. Greens definitely agree with the objective though not with the specifics proposed. As ARUP emphasised, government’s massive expenditure on long-term road building will not solve anything. Most of it is money down the drain.

Government’s announcement has only presented a sketch of a solution. The proposal needs to be much more detailed than that. While the identification of the routes as well as the location of the stations is definitely important information, we need more analytical information to digest.

ARUP identified potential routes and stations on the basis of studies. It is said that studies were also carried out on various options, as a result of which ARUP discarded the Bus Rapid Transit, the surface tram, the elevated light metro and combinations. We need to be able to digest these studies to understand why ARUP have discarded alternative solutions. All studies carried out by ARUP should be available for examination in the Metro public consultation. If this is not possible what is the purpose of a public consultation?

The proposal for a Metro should not be an excuse for developing open spaces as has already been pointed out with reference to the proposed B’Kara and Pembroke Metro stations. We already have too few open spaces.

Proposals have to be analysed within the wider context of transport policy in Malta.  Specifically private car use must be substantially reduced for any mass transport proposal to be economically feasible! This must be clear even at this stage. It is inevitable, but government is conveniently being silent on the matter! Has ARUP advised on the matter in its feasibility studies? We have a right to know.

It is the intention to utilise the stations to attract metro users from the surrounding areas. Some, living nearby, will come on foot. Others living or working slightly further away may come by private car, by bus or by bike.  Most potential metro stations do not have parking areas around them. This signifies that it is essential that more emphasis is laid on the interaction between the proposed Metro and local and regional transport.

The metro’s functioning has to be seen within the existing urban context. This is very relevant to the debate but unfortunately the detailed advice which government has received in this respect has not been divulged. Just one tit-bit of information has inadvertently emerged. When asked as to why the Metro will not make it to Gozo, it was stated that there is not sufficient population on the sister island. This begs the question: how come then that a tunnel is planned below the sea to link the two islands?

The announcement further informed us that most of the Metro will be underground with only a small stretch being above ground for topographical reasons.  Depending on the size of the tunnels between the metro stations this could generate a substantial amount of inert waste. An estimated excavation volume of 4.9 million cubic metres, presumably measured in situ, is indicated. Once excavated this would amount to around 8.6 million cubic metres after taking account of the increase in volume after excavation. This is a substantial amount of inert waste which, as already hinted, can only be utilised in land reclamation projects. For comparative purposes 8.6 million cubic metres of inert waste is close to the amount that was used in the whole Freeport project at Kalafrana for land reclamation purposes!

I am not aware of any land reclamation currently required in the national interest. We cannot be forced into land reclamation as the only solution to dispose of the inert waste generated by the Metro project.

Excavation of an underground Metro does not only generate excessive inert waste. It also endangers our historical heritage: in particular when excavating below, around or close to national monuments in Valletta, Mosta, Balluta and elsewhere. Excavation is also proposed next to ecologically sensitive sites.

This is definitely not on.

Proposed solutions above ground have to be examined in detail too and discussed as part of the public consultation. A hybrid metro-tram system mostly above ground, and/or a Bus Rapid Transit system, are other possibilities which should make it on the table of any serious public consultation. They do not generate inert waste, can be implemented in a shorter time frame from that proposed by ARUP and cost a fraction of the proposed outlay. In addition, substantially less environmental impacts are involved. Any selected solutions should respect our historical and ecological heritage.

Through constructive criticism we can explore alternative solutions which are being deliberately shut out with a stage-managed consultation. We need more than PR stunts: logos and flashy video clips are not the information we need for a mature public consultation. Government must put all its cards on the table. The ARUP studies must be subject to public scrutiny. Otherwise, the public consultation is taking us for a ride.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 10 October 2021

Birżebbuġa: minn ġot-taġen għal ġon-nar

Id-deċiżjoni tal-Gvern li jagħżel sit għal trakka għat-tlielaq tal-karozzi f’Ħal-Far, viċin ta’ Birżebbuġa juri nuqqas kbir ta’ sensittività fil-konfront tal-komunità ta’ Birżebbuġa. Ir-residenti ta’ Birżebbuġa ilhom is-snin jaqilgħu ġo fihom bl-istorbju madwarhom. Imma ħadd mill-awtoritajiet m’hu qed jagħti każ. Kollha għala biebhom.

Il-parti l-kbira tal-ajruplani jinżlu fl-Ajruport Internazzjonali tal-Gudja minn fuq parti miż-żona residenzjali ta’ Birżebbuġa. Dan iseħħ kuljum. Ir-residenti tant draw b’dan, li uħud ftit li xejn għadhom jagħtu kaz bl-ajruplani storbjużi jittajjru fil-baxx : avolja xorta qed issir ħsara lill-saħħithom kif tispjega repetutament l-Organizzazzjoni Dinjija tas-Saħħa (WHO). Ma’ dan żid l-impatti tat-Terminal tal-Port Ħieles, kuljum, xi drabi lejl u nhar. Xi drabi diffiċli biex tissaporti. Meta wara ġurnata xogħol tfittex il-mistrieħ u ma issibux, tkun ilħaqt il-limitu tal-paċenzja.  

Dan it-tniġġiż xi kultant jitnaqqas ftit bħala riżultat ta’ titjib fl-iżviluppi teknoloġiċi. Imma huwa ċar li sostanzjalment, Birżebbuġa, ser tibqa’ tgħum fl-istorbju.

Iż-żona residenzjali Tal-Papa f’Birżebbuġa hi l-iktar waħda effettwata mill-istorbju ġġenerat mill-ajruplani u mit-Terminal tal-Port Ħieles. Hi ukoll iż-zona l-iktar viċin tat-trakka għat-tlielaq tal-karozzi.   Apparti ż-żona Tal-Papa li qegħda ġol-limiti tal-iżvilupp hemm ukoll il-komunità residenzjali ċkejkna ta’ Bengħajsa kif ukoll numru żgħir ta’ residenzi rurali: fihom ukoll jgħixu in-nies!  

Iz-zona residenzjali Tal-Papa qegħda 1,500 metru biss il-bogħod mit-trakka proposta. Hemm numru ta’ residenzi rurali, barra miz-zona tal-iżvilupp li huma ferm iktar viċin tat-trakka minn hekk.  

L-art li fuqha hemm il-proposta għal trakka tat-tlielaq tal-karozzi illum hi parti miż-żona industrijali ta’  Ħal-Far. Issa jidher li anke l-Malta Industrial Parks ser tibda tilgħab il-logħob elettorali. Mhix xi ħaġa normali li l-Malta Industrial Parks tirrilaxxja art li tifforma parti minn żona industrijali. Għall-ebda raġuni! L-unika żvilupp li jista’ jsir fuq art ta’ din ix-xorta hu żvilupp industrijali. Il-bqija mhux aċċettabbli għax imur kontra dak li jipprovdi l-pjan lokali.  Is-saltna tad-dritt tapplika għall-ippjanar tal-użu tal-art ukoll: għar-regoli u r-regolamenti tal-ippjanar. Il-Pjani Lokali m’għandhomx jibqgħu jġebbdu fihom. Giebuhom agħar miċ-chewing gum.

L-iżvilupp tat-trakka għat-tlielaq tal-karozzi fuq l-art li ġiet indikata ser iwassal għal tniġġiż sostanzjali mill-ħsejjes ġġenerati li ser ikollhom impatt fuq iż-żona residenzjali f’Birżebbuġa li hi viċin ħafna. Miżuri ta’ mitigazzjoni jistgħu jnaqqsu xi ftit dawn l-impatti, imma dawn l-impatti sostanzjalment ser jibqgħu hemm, idejqu lir-residenti.

Is-sit hu diġa użat għat-tlielaq fi tmiem il-ġimgħa. L-istorbju ġġenerat f’dawn il-ġranet jasal anke sa Ħal-Safi u Ħal-Kirkop, aħseb u ara sa Birżebbuġa. Residenti infurmawni li xi drabi l-attività konnessa mat-tlielaq tal-karozzi ġieli damet sas-sagħtejn ta’ fil-għodu. Lir-residenti, id-dilettanti tat-tlielaq tal-karozzi dejjem ġew għala biebhom minnhom!  Hu ftit diffiċli li wieħed jifhem kif jistgħu jibdlu l-imġiebha tagħhom issa.

It-tniġġiż ikkawżat mill-ħsejjes ser ikollu ukoll impatt fuq iż-żona ta’ importanza ekoloġika li qegħda fil-viċin ħafna. Issa ser ikun possibli li naraw kif dawk li jmexxu l-ERA, l-awtorità li tħares l-ambjent, jitgħawġu ġanċ biex jippruvaw jiġġustifikaw dak li mhux ġustifikabbli.

Safejn naf jien, f’Malta ma hawn l-ebda sit li jista’ jakkomoda b’mod raġjonevoli t-trakka proposta għat-tlielaq tal-karozzi mingħajr ma tikkawża impatti negattivi fuq in-nies jew fuq l-ambjent jew it-tnejn. Malta żgħira fid-daqs u iktar ma nirrealizzaw dan malajr iktar ċans li tieqaf issir il-ħsara permezz ta’ proġetti li ma hawnx spazju għalihom. In parti dan hu l-prezz li jeħtieg li nħallsu għal nuqqas ta’ ippjanar tul is-snin.

Kemm il-PN kif ukoll il-PL jappoġġaw dan il-ġenn. It-tnejn li huma jitgħawġu ġanċ biex jappoġġaw dawn il-proposti. Sal-lum ma iddejqux li jissagrifikaw il-kwalità tal-ħajja tar-residenti ta’ Birżebbuġa biex jissodisfaw il-lobby tat-tiġrijiet tal-karozzi.  Il-komunità residenzjali ta’ Birżebbuġa ilha taqla’ ġo fiha.  Li l-Gvern ikompli jżid ma dan hu inuman. Birżebbuġa ser tispiċċa minn ġot-taġen għal ġon-nar.

Huwa biss b’membri parlamentari ħodor minn ADPD fil-Parlament li jmiss li nistgħu nibdew nindirizzaw dawn l-abbużi. Il-PLPN ma jinteresshomx mill-kwalità tal-ħajja tan-nies imma biss mill-poter!

ippubblikat fuq Illum: Il-Ħadd 3 t’Ottubru 2021

Birżebbuġa: adding insult to injury

Government’s decision to select a site for a car-racing track at Ħal-Far, on the outskirts of Birżebbuġa, betrays a gross lack of sensitivity towards the welfare of the Birżebbuġa community. Birżebbuġa residents have been at the receiving end of noise pollution for ages. Apparently, no one in authority cares. They are not the least bothered.

Most aircraft approach landing at Gudja International Airport over part of the Birżebbuġa residential area. This happens throughout most of any normal day. Birżebbuġa residents are so used to it that at times they barely notice the noise from aeroplanes at low altitude blasting above: nothwithstanding, this is damaging to their health as attested to repeatedly by the World Health Organisation (WHO). Added to this, Birżebbuġa residents have to bear the impacts of the Freeport Terminal, likewise a round the clock operation! At times the noise pollution from the Freeport Terminal in areas of Birżebbuġa is unbearable. After a day’s work you seek some resting time and you are obstructed from doing so by the excessive noise around you.

These noise sources may be slightly mitigated through the application of technological improvements. It is however clear for Biżebbuġa residents that these impacts are substantially here to stay.

The Tal-Papa residential area in Birżebbuġa is already the zone most impacted by aircraft and Freeport Terminal noise pollution. It is also the zone closest to the planned car-racing track.  Beyond the residential development within the limits of development there is also the Bengħajsa hamlet as well as a number of rural units, some of which are still used for residential purposes.

The Tal-Papa residential area is as close as 1,500 metres to the proposed racing track. A number of rural residences, outside the development zone are even closer than this to the projected racetrack. 

The land on which the racing track proposal may be developed forms part of the Ħal-Far Industrial Estate. It seems that now, even Malta Industrial Parks is playing electoral games.  It is not normal for Malta Industrial Parks to release land forming part of an industrial estate for any purpose whatsoever! The only permissible development on such land is related to industrial development. Anything beyond that is unacceptable as it goes against the parameters determined by the Local Plan. The rule of law is applicable to planning rules and regulations too. Local Plans should not be further transformed into chewing gum, having unlimited elasticity!

The development of the car-racing track on the indicated land will generate substantial noise pollution which will impact a residential area in Birżebbuġa which is not so far away. Mitigation measures may reduce slightly the impacts but it will keep annoying the residents just the same!

The site is already in use on weekends: the resulting acoustic pollution is being picked up as far away as Kirkop and Safi, let alone in Birżebbuga itself. At times, residents inform me that this goes on well into the night, even as late as 2am. Car-racing enthusiasts never had the minimum of respect towards the residential community! It is difficult to imagine how they could change their behaviour at this point in time.

The acoustic pollution generated will also have an impact on an area of ecological importance close by. We will now be able to see how far the ERA bigwigs twist their spine to enable them to justify the unjustifiable.

As far as I am aware no site in Malta can reasonably accommodate this racing track without being the cause of extreme nuisance to residents, damaging to the environment or both. Malta is small in size. The sooner this basic fact sinks in, the better. It should be realised that there is no room for projects such as this car-racing track!  In part this is the price we have to pay for a lack of planning over the years.

Both the PN and the PL are supporting this madness. Both of them are willing to accommodate the racing track lobby. They have so far considered the Birżebbuġa residential community as unavoidable collateral damage in their drive to satisfy the racing track lobby. The Birżebbuġa residential community has already been at the receiving end of all sorts of acoustic pollution. Adding to this is grossly inhumane. It adds insult to accumulated injury.

Only Green MPs in the next parliament can apply the brakes to this madness. PLPN is not interested in the welfare of residents: they are only interested in raw power.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 3 October 2021

It-tnaqqis tal-iskart iġġenerat, jipproteġi l-art agrikola

Ir-residenti ta’ Birżebbuġa jilmentaw dwar it-tniġġiż mill-ħsejjes iġġenerati mill-Port Ħieles. Ir-residenti tal-Furjana jilmentaw dwar l-impatti tal-cruise liners fuq il-kwalità tal-ħajja tagħhom, kemm minħabba t-tniġġiż tal-arja kif ukoll minħabba t-tniġġiż akustiku. Ir-residenti tal-Gudja, Ħal-Luqa, Ħal-Kirkop u tal-irħula tal-madwar huma effettwati mill-operat tal-uniku ajruport li għandna. L-impjant ta’ Sant Antnin għat-Trattament tal-iskart qatt ma tqies ġar eżemplari mir-residenti ta’ Wied il-Għajn.

Ħadd ma jixtieq miżbla wara biebu. Miżbla jew faċilità għall-immaniġjar tal-iskart wara l-bieb, tfisser iktar minn impatti negattivi jekk teħodlok ukoll l-għodda ewliena tal-għixien tiegħek inkella teqridlek darek. Dan hu l-każ tal–bdiewa u r-residenti tal-Magħtab.

Il-miżbla tal-Magħtab ilha topera mill-1977, meta l-miżbla f’Wied Fulija (Iż-Żurrieq) kienet qed toqrob li timtela.

Il-bdiewa tal-Magħtab ilhom jaqilgħu fuq rashom żmien. Wieħed mill-bdiewa li ltqajt miegħu l-ġimgħa l-oħra spjegali li lill-familja tiegħu, fl-1975 kienu ħadulhom 75 tomna raba’ li kienet tinħadem, ftit iktar minn 84,000 metru kwadru, biex jiffurmaw parti mill-miżbla li nħolqot dakinnhar. Illum ser jeħdulhom 25 tomna oħra biex ikabbru madwar 28,000 metru kwadru.

Kif nistgħu nevitaw li l-kumpless tal-iskart fil-Magħtab ikompli jikber billi jibla’ 254,144 metru kwadru ta’ art, primarjament raba’ li tinħadem, kif qed tipproponi l-Wasteserv?

X’ġustizzja hi li sezzjoni waħda tal-popolazzjoni tkun mistennija li ġġorr waħedha l-piż tal-impatti li lkoll kemm aħna nikkontribwixxu għalihom? Ma jkunx iktar ġust li l-piż jinqasam? Fejn ser niġbdu linja?

Jekk nillimita ruħi għall-materja presentment taħt il-lenti, dik tal-immaniġjar tal-iskart, neħtieġu ppjanar sew u dan fil-kuntest tal-għodda ta’ politika kurrenti li tikkonċerna l-iskart. Imma jeħtieġilna li nimxu mal-miri ta’ ħidma stabiliti, għax inkella ma naslu qatt.
It-tnaqqis tal-ħolqien tal-iskart, li dan jintagħżel (is-separazzjoni) u li jkun riċiklat huma tlett għodod bażiċi fil-ħidma li ssir biex l-iskart ikun immaniġjat. Jekk dan isir sewwa l-ammont ta’ skart li jispiċċa fil-miżbla għandu jonqos b’mod sostanzjali. B’riżultat ta’ hekk jkun hemm inqas ħtieġa ta’ art biex tkun kkonvertita f’miżbla. Dan hu l-iskop tal-leġislazzjoni ambjentali tal-Unjoni Ewropeja li suppost li ilna nsegwu sa minn meta fl-2004 isseħibna fl-Unjoni Ewropea.

Il-politika dwar it-tnaqqis tal-ħolqien tal-iskart tfisser tnaqqis ippjanat tal-iskart iġġenerat. Inizjattivi dwar amminsitrazzjoni elettronika huma passi posittivi f’din id-direzzjoni. L-amministrazzoni elettronika hi waħda bla karti, avolja xi kultant din twassal sempliċiment biex tnaqqas l-użu tal-karta minn uffiċċju u żżidu f’ieħor. Anke it-tnaqqis fl-iskart li joriġina mill-ippakkeġġjar ukoll jikkontribwixxi b’mod sostanzjali għall-iskart iġġenerat. Fi djarna hu possibli ukoll li nnaqqsu l-iskart li nipproduċu. F’dan il-kuntest kampanji ta’ informazzjoni u edukazzjoni għandhom rwol importanti.

Imma hemm kontradizzjoni fil-politika tal-Gvern f’dan ir-rigward. Id-deċiżjoni li jkollna inċineratur tirrikjedi ammont kontinwu ta’ skart biex jitma lill-inċineratur. Filwaqt li suppost li qed ninkoraġixxu t-tnaqqis tal-ġenerazzjoni tal-iskart, l-inċineratur jirrikjedi l-oppost: il-ġenerazzjoni kontinwa ta’ ammont sostanzjali ta’ skart. Mingħajru l-inċineratur ikollu jagħmel id-dieta.

Is-separazzjoni tal-iskart tinvolvi l-għażla ta’ tipi differenti ta’ skart. Dan jiffaċilita li l-iskart li jkun intagħżel ikun użat u mhux mormi. Is-separazzjoni tal-iskart organiku, per eżempju, jiffaċilita it-trattament ta’ dan l-iskart biex minnu jkun prodott kemm l-elettriku kif ukoll il-kompost. L-iskart organiku jammonta għal madwar 50% tal-iskart iġġenerat fid-djar. Imma fl-industrija tal-catering l-iskart organiku jammonta għal porzjon ferm ikbar mill-iskart iġġenerat f’dik l-industrija.

Skond il-Wastserv, 27,000 tunellata ta’ skart organiku inġabru mid-djar matul l-2019. Dan jista’ jiżdied għal 70,000 tunellata fis-sena jekk f’kull dar nagħmlu sforz ikbar biex l-iskart organiku jkun separat. Il-Wasteserv ma tipprovdix informazzjoni dwar l-iskart miġbur mill-istabilimenti tal-ikel. Bħala riżultat ta’ dan in-nuqqas ta’ informazzjoni l-Wasteserve qed tindika li ma tafx x’qed jiġri f’dan il-qasam. Lanqas ma hu ċar jekk l-iskart organiku mhux ipproċessat li dan l-aħħar deher imħallat ma skart ieħor f’ritratti u filmati dwar l-operat tal-miżbla tal-Magħtab hux inkluż fl-informazzjoni ippubblikata mill-Wasteserv.

Li niġbru l-iskart organiku b’mod separt u li nipproċessawh ma jfissirx biss li jkun hemm inqas skart li jmur fil-miżbla: ifisser tnaqqis mhux żgħir fil-gassijiet serra (greenhouse gases) attribwibbli lil Malta u allura tnaqqis tal-impatt Malti fuq it-tibdil fil-klima.

Ir-riċiklaġġ tal-iskart f’Malta għadu lura meta mqabbel ma dak mistenni minna. L-unika qasam li qabad huwa dak li jirrigwarda l-iskart tal-ippakkeġġjar. Iż-żieda meħtieġa fir-riċiklar ukoll tnaqqas l-iskart li jinġabar fil-miżbla u għaldaqstant meta naslu biex inżidu r-rata tar-riċiklar il-Wasteserv ikollha inqas ħtieġa li tuża’ art agrikola biex testendi l-miżbla tal-Magħtab.

L-għajnuna li nistgħu nagħtu lill-bdiewa tal-Magħtab biex ikunu jistgħu jibqgħu jaħdmu ir-raba’ tista’ timmaterjalizza biss jekk inkunu kapaċi innaqqsu bil-kbir l-iskart li nibgħatu fil-miżbla. Għandna niftakru li l-istrateġija kurrenti għall-immaniġjar tal-iskart fil-gżejjer Maltin għandha l-mira ta’ skart zero sas-sena 2050. Għadna lura biex naslu!

Ippubblikat fuq Illum : il-Ħadd 1 ta’ Marzu 2020