Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1472871
WITH the threats of climate change, from the threats to food security, more frequent extreme weather events, its effects on health and wellbeing crystal clear by now, it is pertinent to point out the 'do as little as pos- sible' stance of the Maltese gov- ernment. Miriam Dalli's description of government's vision as ambi- tious is simply not true. One might of course argue that tiny Malta has little to no effect on a global phenomenon, however the fact remains that as the EU moves faster to a zero-carbon future, with all the obstacles and spokes in the wheels by the parties and government's wed- ded to the status quo, Malta will be in no position to con- tinue with its business-as-usu- al, don't rock the boat stance. Non-action now will mean much more difficult decisions tomorrow. The issues which need clear targets and brave political de- cisions are precisely those is- sues, which government after government failed to tackle: transport and mobility, energy efficiency standards and mean- ingful renewable energy targets for the services, industrial and construction sectors, and plan- ning policies and economic policies which brings about a real social and ecological tran- sition. Governments in Malta do not lead, but serve the inter- ests of those who profit from a business-as-usual scenario. Malta's 2030 National Ener- gy and Climate Plan is no plan at all. It does not commit the country to any real and mean- ingful change, and is replete with vague non-commitments. Phrases which give away gov- ernment's non-commitment include: 'such and such a policy might be considered', govern- ment is 'assessing policy op- tions' and 'the way forward is being explored'. The risible 2030 targets speak for themselves. The targets are weak, unambitious and will be reached without any real poli- cy innovation and change. One target is 'to increase by 11.5% the share of renewable energy in gross final energy consump- tion in 2030'. Another is 'to in- crease by 14% the share of RES in the transport sector', and 'to reduce GHG emissions by 19% compared to 2005'. This means that combustion of fos- sil fuels as a source of energy will continue to affect us eco- nomically, because all fuels are imported, pollution in heavily congested areas will continue, the destruction of more land for roads will continue, while government will brag that it has reached its targets. Sure, its weak, unambitious and 'do nothing' targets. Just by way of example, the plan says that the proportion of heat pumps installed will increase without any policy measures to encourage or re- quire their use instead of other wasteful heating and cooling equipment. In so many words government is depending on a 'do nothing, don't bother any- one' approach. The plan goes on to tell us how wave and offshore wind is limited by intensity of com- mercial activity, and shame- fully mentions marine pro- tected areas as an obstacle to sea-based renewables. There is no plan to reassess commer- cial activity at sea and reassign some areas to activities related to renewable energy. Schemes and policies for photovoltaics on commercial buildings are being 'considered', according to the plan. In the case of the construc- tion industry it is crystal clear that government will not lift a finger to push towards car- bon-neutral buildings, to re- quire compulsory installations of solar water heating and pho- tovoltaic systems, not even on large projects, let alone retro- fitting of older buildings. Micro-wind turbines in in- dustrial areas? Compulsory in- stallation of RES, with the right incentives and disincentives on commercial and industrial roof space? Of course not! That's too 'Green' and progressive, for this 'market-friendly' gov- ernment. Neither is there an indication of a serious commit- ment for energy efficiency, and zero-carbon targets for the ser- vices and industrial sector. No sticks, but no carrots ei- ther. Financial incentives for industry and the services sector should be tied to clear, measur- able commitments to zero-car- bon. Don't laugh, but other meas- ures touted as contributing towards Malta's climate target are road projects. Not the reas- signing of road space to favour public transport, a Bus Rapid Transit system, bicycles and pedelecs. Not a programme of lining unbearably hot streets with trees, removing some parking spaces in the process and extensive pedestrianisa- tion, but widening roads for vehicles to purportedly move faster. This is the joke the Mal- tese government has present- ed as a climate friendly poli- cy. Incompetence and risible. How do they manage to hold a straight face while explain these hillbilly Trumpian poli- cies to their peers? In the meantime in its most recent country report, the Eu- ropean Commission found that Malta's roads give preference to private transport, which has resulted in significant road congestion problems, noise, air pollutants and increased green- house emissions. It says that "the lack of soft mobility infra- structure (such as pavements and cycling lanes) discourages the use of alternative modes of transport and exacerbates con- gestion in Malta." Fine. But the European Union – dominated unfortunately by neo-liberal EPP and Renew commission- ers, governments and MEPs – should stop spending money which perpetuates this issue, through spending on more roads and only finance renew- able, sustainable mobility, and the social and ecological tran- sition. It is in our interest – health wise, in economic terms, so- cially and ecologically to make meaningful, real strides to- wards a zero-carbon economy. Procrastination and lack of ambition and leadership means that once again Malta will be the laggard of the EU. 6 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 10 JULY 2022 OPINION Malta's energy and climate 'non-plan' Ralph Cassar is secretary-general ADPD – The Green Party ralph.cassar@adpd.mt Ralph Cassar