MaltaToday previous editions

MW 28 February 2018

Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/947253

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 5 of 23

maltatoday WEDNESDAY 28 FEBRUARY 2018 News 6 ANALYSIS IMPROVEMENTS in emissions technology make incineration a far less scary prospect than it was two decades ago. But in- cinerators need a large, fixed supply of waste to operate. Will the Government's decision to open an incinerator in 2023 derail efforts which encourage people to separate and recycle more waste? The increase in population and economic activity in the past years, coupled with the exhaustion of limited space for landfilling waste have given an aura of inevitability to the Gov- ernment's decision to opt for incineration. But incineration has lurked in the shadows of half-baked waste policies as successive Maltese administrations strug- gled to catch up with the EU's waste recovery targets. Malta's missed targets By 2020, Malta should have halved the amount of garbage it was landfilling in 1995. But this will certainly not be the case. With a target to recycle 50% of its municipal waste within two years, Malta had only managed to recycle only 5.68% of this waste in 2014. And the percentage of recycled waste declined from 8.1% in 2012 to 6.8% in 2013 and to 5.7% in 2014 and 6.7% in 2015. The island is now ranked sixth among the EU countries that generate the most waste per inhabitant. Nearly 90% of all rubbish is sent to landfills, with just eight per cent being recycled. It was only in October last year that Environment Min- ister Jose Herrera announced that recycling will be made compulsory under new waste separation laws currently being drafted. The Circular Economy Act will require people to separate recyclable, organic and waste streams. Would Malta have been spared the waste inciner- ator had it taken this decision a decade ago? Achieving high rates of re- cycling is not impossible. The Flanders region of Belgium re- cycles around 75 percent of its municipal waste, while Austria recycles 70 percent, and Ger- many 66 percent. The long road to incineration Through the past decades there was always the nagging feeling that incineration had always lurked in the corner of waste management plans, with governments waiting for the politically opportune moment to introduce it. The first draft of the waste management plan presented in 2000 suggested that incinera- tion should have been in place by 2010. Yet while any decision on in- cineration was postponed, an energetic push for waste sepa- ration by former parliamentary secretary Stanley Zammit in the 1990s was not followed up in subsequent years. While EU membership did away with the uncontrolled disposal of waste at Maghtab, this was replaced by an engi- neered landfilled located in the vicinity of the former dump. Incineration now described as "waste to energy" plant was recommended by a committee appointed by former resources minister George Pullicino be- fore 2008. In the first draft of the waste management plan issued in 2009, an incineration plant was proposed in Marsaxlokk close to the power station. But sub- sequently, amidst opposition from the Labour led local coun- cil, the Government postponed the decision and indicated that a site had still to be chosen. Although incineration was on the agenda of the previous gov- ernment for years, studies had not been finalised by the 2013 general election, to the extent that a tender on technical as- sistance on the development of a waste-to-energy facility was shelved on the eve of the elec- tion. In order to buy time the new- ly-elected Labour government under former Environment Minister Leo Brincat opted for a feasibility study on exporting waste to be incinerated. The idea of exporting waste to third countries was based on exploiting the spare capac- ity many incineration plants in Europe have, and their exces- sive demand for waste imports from various other European countries – something which was reported to be leading to reduced fees being charged. At that time Nationalist MP Charlò Bonnici rubbished these plans claiming that the Government was just playing for time by postponing the in- evitable decision to go for in- cineration. Five years down the line Mal- ta is back on the road to incin- eration. In June 2016 environ- ment minister Jose Herrera hinted that the new plant will be located on a disused oilrig. But judging by the latest decla- rations, this idea has now been abandoned. The new plant located at Ghallis will be completed by 2023, curiously after the expiry of this legislature. The incinerator will gener- ate electrical energy from the fumes emitted and will cater for around 40% of Malta's waste. Incinerators and EU targets The EU does make a dis- tinction between incinerators which simply burn waste and those which convert this re- source into energy. The EU considers incinera- tion as a recovery operation; incineration without energy re- covery is considered a disposal operation. But energy from incineration does not contribute to achiev- ing recycling targets which stipulate that by 2020 EU mem- ber states should be recycling 50% of waste materials such as at least paper, metal, plastic and glass from households. This means that incineration cannot be used as a short cut to evade EU directives encourag- ing recycling but it does help member states to meet the cri- teria and targets stipulated by the landfill directive. The EU considers landfilling as the least preferable waste Incineration: Too late to avoid? Malta may have wasted too much time in the past to do away with the need for an incinerator. JAMES DEBONO asks if the need to 'feed' the monster will derail any attempt to reduce waste Through the past decades there was always the nagging feeling that incineration had always lurked in the corner of waste management plans, with governments waiting for the politically opportune moment to introduce it

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of MaltaToday previous editions - MW 28 February 2018