Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/866589
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 27 AUGUST 2017 A principal theoretical premise of energy policy is the energy trilemma, through which the policy maker must balance energy security, energy equity and environmental sustainability. This fine balance is even more relevant to island states such as the Maltese islands. Even though today Malta is connected to the European energy grid through the interconnector, Malta remains devoid of multiple physical links, such as pipelines and auxiliary connections. This situation will improve upon the completion of the proposed gas pipeline linking Malta to Sicily. Geographically, the Maltese islands lack many of the advantages of mainland European states, particularly coastal Mediterranean EU Member States which can take advantage of their offshore sector, besides their considerable land-based opportunities. Regulated by the Gas and Electricity Liberalisation Directives, fostering competition and liberalising national energy grids, the EU has allowed its member states to secure a steady supply of energy, whilst competition has allowed prices to remain relatively stable. This has been inadvertently aided by the EU 2020 and 2050 objectives, which have provided the required political impetus for the paradigm shift to renewable energy. Malta's precarious position as an island state increases the relevance of the energy trilemma, since Malta is constrained more than other EU Member States to achieve this delicate balance. In the previous decades, the environmental dimension of this equation has suffered disproportionately, with green areas being sacrificed and replaced by industrial zones and housing. Greater awareness has mitigated such adverse effects in the recent past, however much remains to be done to ensure that recreation and ecological areas retain their importance. Energy equity is an entirely different subject altogether. The upcoming gas pipeline project will increase Malta's energy security, ensuring a further physical link to the European mainland and ensuring security of supply. Energy security has been undoubtedly strengthened through the interconnector and the proposed gas pipeline, however it would be unwise to rely overty on these two mediums to ensure a steady supply of electricity for the Maltese islands. Furthermore, the EU's 2020 targets, besides other international agreements and treaties, have steered Malta's direction to invest in renewable sources of energy, which must account for 10% of Malta's total generation of electricity by 2020. However, it is evident that further measures have to be taken to increase energy security. One of the possible solutions would be to invest in Malta's offshore resources through the establishment of offshore solar farms and other sources of renewable energy. This would ease the burdens associated with land-based developments, such as lack of space. Presently, the situation in Malta with regard to administrative matters is fragmented, with a plethora of departments regulating different matters. Petroleum procurement and renewable sources of energy are regulated by separate entities, whilst other aspects fall under the responsibility of the Ministry for Sustainable Development, the Environment and Climate Change. The Continental Shelf Department is the competent authority with regard to the exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons. On the other hand, financial schemes and tax credits pertaining to investment in sustainable and renewable energy are regulated by Malta Enterprise and Transport Malta. Planning permits are regulated by the Planning Authority whilst other remits are exercised by the Environment and Resources Authority. This is hardly a conducive environment to invest in the energy sector, given that so many different departments and authorities hinder functionality. Enhanced cohesion and collaboration could be more easily attained through the establishment of a National Energy Agency, bringing together conventional and renewable sources of energy alike in order to draft an energy policy regulating the Maltese islands for the foreseeable future. This should also provide a roadmap with regard to Malta's modus operandi to achieve its international targets set not only by the EU but also through international treaties and agreements such as COP 21. The National Energy Agency would be solely responsible for the implementation of its mandate, namely to develop, regulate and operate an energy framework encompassing conventional and unconventional sources of energy alike. Due to the importance of the subject matter, the status of this agency would have to be enshrined in the Constitution, protecting the agency from unnecessary political bickering and placing it on an equal footing with the Broadcasting Authority and the Employment Commission. The establishment of this agency as a national body in accordance with the Constitution would furthermore elevate the energy debate beyond partisan politics and ensure that the agency is led with the utmost diligence and competence. Dr Edward Mario Camilleri holds a Masters Degree in International Maritime Law (IMLI) and Energy & Natural Resources Law (QMUL). He is a lawyer at SAGA Juris Advocates edwardcamilleri@sagajuris.com 22 Opinion L ast Thursday, I decided to watch the televised debate between the four PN leadership contestants. I can't say my expectations were very high... there is, after all, a limit to how often you can hear the same old recycled clichés and platitudes before falling asleep in your chair. But I wasn't expecting it to be quite so depressing, either. The whole thing reminded me uncannily of a funeral. That ominous black backdrop clearly didn't help much – what were they even thinking? – but it was the facial expressions that really did the trick. With one exception – Chris Said, who clearly has a lot to grin about right now – they were all glum, morose and deathly despondent. Frank Portelli in particular looked and sounded like he might burst into tears at any moment (which is ironic, because he was also the only one to display anything resembling a sense of humour on the night). Portelli was an exception for other reasons, too. With that beige overcoat and blue shirt, he vaguely resembled a newly regenerated 'Doctor Who' stepping out of the TARDIS... perhaps uncertain which century he had actually landed in. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that his ideas are straight out of the Victorian era. Or maybe I'm just watching too much retro TV. But at least, he added a dash of colour and verve to proceedings. Everything else was so... grey. All the candidates were so... similar. With (once again) the exception of Chris Said... none of them exuded even a glimmer of confidence or optimism. And without any exception at all, none uttered even a single word that we don't already know by heart. In fact, by the end of the debate two hours later... I was none the wiser regarding any of those four men's plans or visions for either the Nationalist Party or the country. And it wasn't for lack of opportunity. The journalists present actually did an excellent job of asking all the right questions. Each candidate in turn was asked very specifically what he intended to do, if elected party leader, that was in any way NEW. And not a single one of them gave a clear answer. Even worse, they all said exactly the same thing. They would 'bring the party closer to the people'. They would 'go back to basics'. They would 'reaffirm the party's core principles'. Oh, and of course... they're all in politics 'to serve' (excuse me while I reach for the sick bag under my seat). I mean... come on. Seriously. Is there anyone out there who hasn't heard those identical (and equally vacuous) catchphrases at least a thousand times before? What do any of those things even mean, anyway? 'Closer to the people', for instance. How much 'closer' do they want to get? It's not like the Stamperija is in a different galaxy, you know. It's slap-bang in the middle of a densely populated urban neighbourhood, in a country that is simply crawling with people everywhere you look. All they have to do to 'get close' to those people is actually emerge from their cocoon every once in a while. And besides: the PN already has youth centres, 'sectional committees', 'kazini' and regular coffee morning/bingo sessions in every nook and cranny of the frigging country. Party officials make direct phone- calls to practically every single household throughout every single election campaign. The infrastructure to connect with people is all there, already in place... all you have to do is actually use it. But like I said earlier: at least, Said was the only one smiling. That makes a big difference in the world of politics, you know. It is in fact about the only reason why Said can be described (in a very roundabout way) as the 'winner' of last Thursday's debate. Not for anything he said, or any vision he actually conjured up to mesmerise his audience... but merely because he was the only one of the four to strike up a vaguely human rapport with the viewer. There is, of course, a very good reason why only Chris Said would be capable of doing that right now. The others are far too busy fighting off the usual co- ordinated bevy of allegations/ revelations/accusations, etc... all coming from the same, overtly pro-Said source. It is in fact difficult to imagine a more clearly vitiated contest than the one we are currently witnessing. And the implications are quite serious, for a party that likes to think it 'rescued democracy' back in the 1980s. If Chris Said goes on to win this election, it would not be Raphael Vassallo Edward Mario Camilleri The energy trilemma Energy security has been undoubtedly strengthened through the interconnector and the proposed gas pipeline, however it would be unwise to rely overly on these two mediums for a steady supply of electricity