Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1237083
8 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 19 APRIL 2020 INTERVIEW You have just announced a waste-to-energy plant to ca- ter for 40% of non-recyclable waste. Is the extension of the landfill a recognition that re- ality caught up with us sooner than previously expected? And is 2023 a realistic time-frame? There is no landfill extension. The announced plan does not include new landfilling outside the current footprint. All the new land uptake is devoted to state-of-the-art facilities that will allow the country to change course from predominant reli- ance on landfilling to a circular economy context. It's not about 'reality catching up' either, but more about im- plementing a vision: we don't want to waste the opportunity to create precious resources, and we aim to do our best to avoid a scenario in which we would need to expropriate land for landfill- ing in the future. What we an- nounced is a holistic plan that will valorise main waste streams to their full potential, enable us to reach our environmental and recycling targets, and improve the overall environment in the area, rehabilitate former landfills to give back to the public, and improve our quality of life on the islands. The new plants will be able to treat dry recyclables; such as pa- per, plastics, and metal, organic wastes which will be convert- ed into energy and agricultural compost, and a waste-to-energy plant that will turn the remain- ing non-usable waste into ener- gy. No, 2023 is not a realistic time- frame. Government always said that it would take six years from the commissioning of the pro- ject. Therefore, our time-frame is closer to 2026. We are deter- mined to deliver a high-quality project within the shortest pos- sible time to ensure that Malta starts benefitting from this in- vestment and that landfilling is limited as much as possible. Why is such a large amount of land required for the inciner- ator and other plants that will be centralised at Maghtab? And how much land will go for land- fill expansion? Once again, the plan does not include new land for landfill ex- pansion. The land will be devoted to the facilities, access roads, and adjoining landscaping. Although the plant on its own could take a smaller land uptake, such a plant requires ancillary facilities that are vital to ensure a very high standard operation and that the environment is safeguarded in the best possible manner. For instance, the waste-to-energy plant includes ancillary facilities related to pollution abatement, cooling, and other supporting functions. The total required uptake of land is 82,000sq.m – a drastic reduction from the previously proposed amount of 279,000sq.m. Malta fares miserably on land- fill and waste recovery targets. By 2020, Malta should have halved the amount of garbage it was landfilling in 1995. Is this a legacy of procrastination in a sector where everyone was afraid of taking hard decisions? I acknowledge that the situa- tion is becoming critical. But the plan that was announced attests to this administration's determi- nation to move away from land- filling to a circular economy ap- proach. Hand-in-hand with this capital investment, there will be a number of initiatives led by WasteServ and the Ministry, including an educational cam- paign which will seek to venture into a new era of environmental ambition. Don't you think it is also time to recognize that some waste practices have to be penalised while others incentivised, be- cause of the risk that incinera- tion might lessen the urgency for more drastic action? An infrastructural setup alone, without a concrete commitment by all the involved stakeholders, will not be sufficient. We are sure that our ambition will be matched and that the required improvements will be attained across the board. While direct action is currently being consid- ered, one should also be sensi- tive to the fact that penalties can have social repercussions. One of Labour's first steps in 2013 was to de-merge MEPA and set up a separate ERA. Now you are minister responsible for both environment and plan- ning. Was the demerger a mis- take? Prime Minister Robert Abela made the right decision, and at the right time, to put the respon- sibilities of planning and envi- ronment back under the same Ministerial portfolio. Similarly, the demerger was the right move at the time, as well. But what happened was that the pace with which the planning sector was developing in our country was not on par with that of envi- ronmental regulation – and was therefore unsustainable. The time has come to balance this out. Strangely, hunting was kept out of your portfolio and hand- ed to the Gozo Minister, who is a hunter himself. Is this not a glaring conflict of interest? And did you disagree with open- New environment minister AARON FARRUGIA has inherited a portfolio beset by the vested interests of powerful lobbies. Will his enthusiasm be enough to make up for decades of procrastination in the face of difficult decisions? Moving towards a 'circular Raphael Vassallo rvassallo@mediatoday.com.mt It was a courageous decision to place both the PA and ERA under the same ministry, and it will be the policies that will create a balance between the two. In fact, new policies within both are being finalised as we speak