Is-silġ qed idub

Is-silġ qed idub kullimkien. Iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa fl-Iżlanda saret kommemorazzjoni tal-glaċier Okjökull li dab wara madwar 700 sena li ilu jeżisti.

Kien hemm ċerimonja ta’ tifkira u twaħħlet plakka bi twissija għall-futur li tgħid: “Okjökull hu l-ewwel glaċier fl-Iżlanda li spiċċa. Matul il-mitejn sena li ġejjin il-glaċieri ewlenin li għandna ser imisshom l-istess xorti. Dan il-monument jirrikonoxxi li nafu x’qiegħed jiġri kif ukoll x’jeħtieġ li jsir. Intom biss tafu jekk għamilniehx.”

Din id-dedika tispiċċa bid-data taċ-ċerimonja u l-konċentrazzjoni attwali tad-dijossidju tal-carbonju fl-arja, 415 parti minn kull miljun.

Mappa ġeoloġika tal-1901 tal-Iżlanda tindika li dan il-glaċier kien ikopri area ta’ 38 kilometru kwadru. Issa spiċċa: dab u sparixxa fl-oċeani.

It-tibdil fil-klima qiegħed magħna. Illum diffiċli biex dan jitwaqqaf. It-tibdil fil-klima m’għadux xi eżerċizzju tejoretiku li jbassar il-futur: hu r-realtà li qed tiżviluppa quddiemna u li rridu niffaċċjaw.

Il-kommemorazzjoni simbolika “tal-mewt” tal-glaċier Iżlandiz hi twiddiba għal kulħadd: it-tibdil fil-klima teffettwa lil kulħadd, min mod u min ieħor. Iż-żieda fit-temperatura globali qed iddewweb il-glaċieri u l-icebergs. Dan iwassal biex jogħla l-livell tal-baħar u dan b’theddida serja għal kull attività fuq l-art li hi qrib tal-livell tal-baħar. L-effetti mhux ser ikunu biss mal-kosta, imma iktar ‘il-ġewwa ukoll.

Kontinwament naqraw kif ibliet kbar li qegħdin mhux wisq ‘il-fuq mil-livell tal-baħar qed jaħsbu u jitħassbu dwar kif jistgħu jilqgħu għal din it-theddida: ibliet bħal New York, Miami, Tampa, Boston, New Orleans, Amsterdam, Mumbai, Stokkolma, Buenos Aires, Dakar, Shanghai, Hong Kong, Cancun u bosta oħrajn jistgħu jisparixxu. Miljuni ta’ bnedmin jispiċċaw bla saqaf fuq rashom.

U f’Malta?

L-għoli tal-livell tal-baħar jeqred il-faċilitajiet mal-kosta, bit-turiżmu jaqla’ l-ikbar daqqa. Numru ta’ zoni residenzjali mal-kosta ukoll jistgħu jkunu effettwati: bħal Marsalforn, ix-Xlendi, San Pawl il-Baħar, l-Għadira, tas-Sliema, l-Gżira, Ta’ Xbiex, l-Msida, Birżebbuġa, Marsaskala u Marsaxlokk, flimkien ma partijiet minn lokalitajiet oħra lkoll jintlaqtu skont kemm jogħla l-livell tal-baħar.

Jiena infurmat li l-power station ta’ Malta f’Delimara qegħda madwar 4 metri ‘l-fuq mil-livell tal-baħar.

Żieda żgħira fil-livell tal-baħar tista’ tillimita l-ħsara għall-infrastruttura turistika u l-faċilitajiet kostali. Imma jekk iż-żieda fil-livell tal-baħar tkun waħda sostanzjali iz-zoni residenzjali mal-kosta, u bosta iktar, jista’ jkunu effettwati.

It-tbassir dwar kemm ser jogħla l-livell tal-baħar jiddependi fuq iż-żidiet reali fit-temperaturi. Fis-Summit dwar il-klima f’Pariġi kien hemm it-tama li ż-żieda massima fit-temperatura ma taqbizx il-1.5 gradi Celsius fuq it-temperatura pre-industrijali. Sfortunatament, illum, dan jidher li hu ħolm għax mexjin lejn żidied ferm ikbar fit-temperaturi.

It-tbassir minimu hu dwar żieda fl-għoli tal-baħar ta’ madwar 500 millimetru imma hemm il-possibiltà li dan jista’ jilħaq żieda fl-għoli ta’ anke 7 metri! Dan hu tbassir li qed ikun revedut kontinwament mill-komunità xjentifika u jiddependi miż-żidiet reali fit-temperaturi u projezzjonijiet reveduti.

Malta għandha interess (dirett) ovvju biex it-tibdil fil-klima jkun indirizzat, imma fl-istess ħin issegwi politika li twassal il-messaġġ ċar li tiġi taqa’ u tqum, ma jimpurtahiex. Eżempju ta’ dan huma l-proġetti infrastrutturali konnessi mat-toroq li ser iservu biss biex iżidu n-numru tal-karozzi fit-toroq. Iktar karozzi, iktar emissjonijiet: kontribut dirett ikbar għat-tibdil fil-klima.

Fejn diġa beda jinħass l-għoli fil-livell tal-baħar diġa sparixxew numru ta’ gżejjer (mhux abitati) fil-Paċifiku. Hemm gżejjer oħra mill-Fiji sal-gżejjer Marshall, mill-Maldives sal-Bahamas, Tuvalu, l-Kiribati u bosta oħrajn li qegħdin taħt theddida imminenti.

Anke Malta u Għawdex qegħdin fil-queue għax in-natura ma taħfira lil ħadd, ma timxix b’mod diskriminatorju. Ser tolqot lil kulħadd mingħajr eċċezzjoni.

Ippubblikat fuq Illum: il-Ħadd 25 t’Awwissu 2019

Advertisements

Requiem for a glacier

Earlier this week, mourners gathered in Iceland to commemorate the loss of Okjökull, the glacier, which has “died” at the age of about 700.

Mourners fixed a plaque as a warning to the future stating: “Ok is the first Icelandic glacier to lose its status as a glacier. In the next 200 years, all our main glaciers are expected to follow the same path. This monument is to acknowledge that we know what is happening and what needs to be done. Only you know if we did it.”

The dedication, ends with the date of the ceremony and the current global concentration of carbon dioxide in the air – 415 parts per million.

A 1901 geological map of Iceland indicated that at that time this glacier had covered an area of 38 square kilometres. Now it is no more: it has melted and disappeared into the ocean.
Climate change is definitely happening: it is now almost unstoppable. It is no longer a theoretical prediction of the future – it is today’s reality which we must face head on.

The symbolic commemoration of the “death” of an Icelandic glacier is a warning: climate change hits all of us in one way or another. The global increase in temperature is melting glaciers and icebergs which will, in turn, increase the sea level and threaten low-lying land. This will have an impact not just along the coast but also further inland.

We constantly read how various low-lying countries are considering how they could face this threat. Cities such as New York, Miami, Tampa, Boston, New Orleans, Amsterdam, Mumbai, Stockholm, Buenos Aires, Dakar, Shanghai, Hong Kong and Cancun, (to name just a few) could vanish and millions of persons would be displaced.

What about Malta? A rising sea level could wipe out coastal facilities – tourism being the hardest hit. A number of coastal residential areas would also be considerably impacted: Marsalforn, Xlendi, St Paul’s Bay, Għadira, Sliema, Gżira, Ta’ Xbiex, Msida, Birżebbuġa, Marsaskala and Marsaxlokk, together with parts of other localities – would be hit with an intensity depending on the extent of the sea level rise.

I am informed that Malta’s power station at Delimara is at approximately four metres above sea level.

A small sea level rise could possibly limit damage to tourism infrastructure and coastal facilities but if the rise is substantial, it could hit the low-lying residential areas and possibly much more.

Projections for sea-level rise vary as they are dependent on the actual increase in global temperatures. The Paris Climate Summit had pinned its hopes on a maximum temperature increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial age. Unfortunately, this is now wishful thinking, as we are moving towards much higher temperature increases.

The minimum projection is for a rise in sea level of around 500 millimetres –  which could rise even to as much as seven metres! These projections are being constantly revised by the scientific community, depending on actual rise in temperature and revised projections.

Malta has an obvious direct interest in taming climate change and yet it follows policies which send out the clear message that it does not care. The current spending spree on the development of the road infrastructure is a case in point because it will only serve to increase the number of vehicles on our roads. More vehicles, more emissions: signifying an increased direct contribution to climate change.

The rise in sea level has already wiped out a number of uninhabited low-lying islands in the Pacific. Other island states – from Fiji to the Marshall Islands, the Maldives to the Bahamas, Tuvalu, Kiribati and many more – are under an imminent threat.

Even Malta and Gozo will have to join the queue as nature will not discriminate: it will hit all of us without exception.

published in the Malta Independent on Sunday: 25 August 2019

Kemmuna: mhux dwar l-umbrelel

comino

 

Matul il-ġimgħat li għaddew diversi paġni tal-gazzetti imtlew b’aħbarijiet minn Kemmuna: il-battalja bejn dawk li jikru l-umbrelel.

Issa l-għaqdiet ambjentali ħarġu bi proposta dwar il-kontrolli rejali li hemm bżonn isiru fuq Kemmuna: kemm għandhom jirfsu l-art persuni? X’inhu dak in-numru li  jkun aħjar li ma jinqabiżx?

In-numru jrid ikun stabilit bi ħsieb. Imma jeħtieġ li jkun stabilit.

L-idea tal-għaqdiet ambjentali (Nature Trust, Din l-Art Ħelwa u Friends of the Earth) m’hiex oriġinali għax diġa tqegħdet fil-prattika f’diversi postijiet oħra mhux biss fil-postijiet li ġew indikati fil-gazzetti (Blue Lagoon fl-Iżlanda u fir-reġjun pittoresk Taljan Cinque Terre).

Il-Bhutan (pajjiż fil-Lvant imbiegħed) jikkontrolla n-numru ta’ turisti li jidħlu fil-pajjiż għax hu kinxju li numru esagerati ta’ turisti jistgħu jagħmlu ħsara mhux żgħira. Hemm ukoll il-ġzira turistika Latino Amerikana ta’ Fernando de Noronha (parti mit-territorju Brażiljan) li kienet tillimita n-numru massimu ta’ turisti li jistgħu joqgħodu fuq il-gżira għal 420, u kull wieħed minn dawn kellu jħallas taxxa ambjentali li tiżdied iktar ma jdum!

F’Malta ukoll xi żmien ilu kienu ġew introdotti kontrolli fuq in-numru ta’ turisti li f’ħin wieħed jistgħu jidħlu fl-Ipoġew ta’ Ħal-Saflieni kif ukoll in-numru massimu li setgħu jidħlu matul il-ġurnata. Dan kien sar għax kien ġie stabilit li biex dan is-sit arkejolġiku jkun protett aħjar kellhom ikun hemm kontrolli tal-mikro-klima. Dan fil-fatt sar billi kien ġie identifikat in-numru massimu ta’ 80 persuna li setgħu jidħlu f’ġurnata fl-Ipoġew.

L-istess jista’ jsir dwar il-gżira ta’ Kemmuna. Tista’ tiġi protetta billi jkunu limitati n-numri ta’ persuni li jistgħu jinżlu l-art. Dan ikun pass tajjeb li jagħmel il-ġid, lill-Kemmuna, naturalment mhux lil dawk li jikru l-umbrellel!

Santiago and maritime affairs

Aerial View_Grand Harbour

Ernest Hemingway’s Santiago in “The Old Man and the Sea” was unlucky. It took him 85 days to catch his big fish. But when he did, being on his own out at sea without any help, he had to tow it back to port, only to discover then that the sharks had reduced his catch to a mere skeleton.  It is the same with maritime policy. We need to coordinate with our Mediterranean neighbours to have meaningful and lasting results. On our own we can achieve very little.

A national integrated maritime strategy is an essential policy tool. Yet, as was pointed out by Parliamentary Secretary Edward Zammit Lewis, it is still unavailable. On May 19, European Maritime Day,  it was emphasised by Zammit Lewis that such a strategy would identify Malta’s maritime policy priorities required to support the Blue Economy.

The economic opportunities presented by the sea which surrounds Malta are substantial. We do however have to make use of such opportunities carefully, knowing that various impacts may result. Through the sea surrounding us we are subject to impacts as a result of the actions of others. Similarly Malta’s maritime activities necessarily will impact other countries, for better or for worse.

The excellent quality of seawater around the Maltese islands resulting from Malta’s recent adherence to the Urban Wastewater Directive of the EU is one positive contribution to a better Mediterranean Sea even though the sewage treatment system is badly designed as it ignores the resource value of the discharged treated water.

Through Arvid Pardo in the 1960s Malta made a lasting contribution to global maritime thought by emphasising that the seabed forms part of the common heritage of mankind.

The sea and its resources have always had a central importance in Malta’s development. Tourism, fisheries and water management easily come to mind. Maritime trade and services as well as the sustainable utilisation of resources on the seabed are also essential for this island state.

Whilst a national maritime strategy will inevitably seek the further utilisation of the coastline and its contiguous areas it is hoped that environmental responsibilities will be adequately addressed in the proposals considered.

A national integrated maritime policy, though essential, cannot however be effective if it  does not take into consideration the activities of our neighbours: both their maritime  as well as their coastal activities.

This is an issue which is given considerable importance within the European Union which seeks to assist member states in coordinating their maritime policies for the specific reason that the impacts of such policies are by their very nature transboundary.  In fact one of the EU Commissioners, Maria Damanaki,  is tasked with Maritime Affairs and Fisheries.  Her work is underpinned by the Marine Strategy Framework Directive which seeks to protect the sea in order that it could be utilised sustainably thereby contributing to attaining the objectives of EU2020, the ten year growth strategy of the European Union.

Within its maritime competencies the EU has also developed effective instruments of transboundary cooperation foremost amongst which are the Baltic Strategy and the Danube Strategy.  These macro-strategies of the European Union, as their name implies, focus on the Baltic Sea and the river Danube respectively. They bring together the European regions bordering the Baltic Sea and the Danube to cooperate in various policy areas such that the resulting coordination addresses challenges which no single country can address on its own.

Such strategies also serve as an instrument of cooperation with non-EU countries. Through the Baltic Strategy it is cooperation with Russia, Iceland and Norway whilst through the Danube Strategy eight EU member states cooperate with six European non-EU member states.  The EU has also more recently launched an Atlantic Ocean Strategy.

A national maritime strategy will  seek to identify those areas which can absorb strategic investments in order to develop the blue economy.  An important point worth emphasising is that a sustainable development of the blue economy will ensure that no negative impacts are borne by our communities residing along and adjacent to the coastal areas. Unfortunately not enough attention has been paid to this aspect in the past. Such negative impacts can be avoided not only through careful planning but also through proper consultation with both civil society as well as directly with residents.

Impacts which have to be avoided include air and sea pollution. In addition potential noise and light pollution need careful attention in particular if the operating times of the newly identified activities span into the silent hours.

Malta’s Maritime strategy needs a double focus: a national and a regional one.  Both are essential elements neither of which can be ignored. It is in Malta’s interest to take part in initiatives addressing transboundary impacts and simultaneously to integrate these initiatives within a national maritime policy strategy. Otherwise we will face Santiago’s fate. The result of our good work will be taken up by the sharks!

Originally published in The Times of Malta, Saturday June 8, 2013