Delimara and Marsa power stations "can be developed further"
Nuclear energy is not an option at present as an alternative source of energy to Enemalta Corporation's chairman, despite a recent report by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority that the two existing power plants in the country will not meet...
Nuclear energy is not an option at present as an alternative source of energy to Enemalta Corporation's chairman, despite a recent report by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority that the two existing power plants in the country will not meet energy demands by 2010.
While the environment-conscious Finns have strayed from the European trend and last May approved their first nuclear reactor since the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, Malta will not be considering this option.
When contacted about the subject, Enemalta chairman Robert Ghirlando said he personally did not believe that Malta should consider going nuclear.
The idea is not new. Nuclear power for Malta was considered in the '60s, when it was estimated that the smallest nuclear power station possible would meet all Malta's needs. The idea was ditched.
However, Prof. Ghirlando assumed that it should be technically feasible to build a nuclear plant in Malta, though they had never gone into this.
He also pointed out that such a plant would probably require a safety buffer zone around it, which would make it almost impossible to build on an island where there is no room for such buffer zones.
The debate on nuclear power in Europe is not over, and the Finnish decision has again put it on the agenda.
Last May, Finland's parliament approved construction of a fifth nuclear reactor after experts had repeatedly warned that Finland - a relatively flat country with a vast forestland - would face power shortages if no new power plants were built.
Prof. Ghirlando said that while nuclear energy posed certain environmental problems, it was at the same time a source of energy that did not produce greenhouse gas.
"Therefore, if we want to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, nuclear energy would be one way of doing it," he said.
"In a way, it is a matter of balancing one environmental problem against another. I get the impression that nuclear energy is making a bit of a comeback." he said.
"Besides the carbon dioxide argument, the EU Commission also favours a mix of sources of energy and such a mix would include nuclear power," he added.
Abroad, energy shortages and international accords that oblige countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions have forced governments to reconsider the benefits of nuclear power.
Lacking viable alternatives, some countries such as Sweden have opted to extend the life of their nuclear plants from 40 to 50 years instead of building new ones, thereby also increasing the profitability of nuclear power.
However, the Finnish decision has drawn a storm of criticism from international environmentalists and runs counter to current European trends where many countries, notably Germany and Sweden, want to phase out nuclear power.
Prof. Ghirlando felt that MEPA's report - that Malta's existing power stations would not satisfy the needs of the country by 2010, should the demand for electricity go on rising - would only be possible if no development took place.
He said he could not work out how MEPA had arrived at the figure of a demand of 600 to 700 megawatts, unless it was including the spare capacity that Enemalta would normally require for maintenance and breakdowns.
"Starting from a peak load of 369 MW, which we experienced last winter, then at five per cent per annum increase, this should get us to a demand of 572 MW in the winter of 2010.
"It will be lower if the annual increase goes down to three per cent, as forecast. If we include what we consider is the minimum spare capacity over and above peak load, that is 120 MW, then clearly by 2010 we would need some 700 MW of installed capacity," he said, making a distinction between demand and installed capacity.
"Again, this seems to reflect the paradigm that Marsa and Delimara have reached the end of their development. This is not correct.
"Both Marsa and Delimara are and will continue to be in a state of constant development, which must include the installation of a new plant and the replacement of ageing plant," he said.
Prof. Ghirlando said there seemed to be the perception that once Delimara was built, there would be no need for expansion.
He also wanted to dispel the notion that there was a problem of capacity at the power stations, saying that if you compared capacity with demand, there was enough power.
"The problem we do have is that because of the existing network we cannot get all the power we want out of Delimara, so we do have problems with capacity in that respect," he said.
"No one from Enemalta has ever said that Delimara is complete and there is room for another three combined cycle plants of 110 MW each - another 330MW.
"People have to realise that Delimara is not complete and will never be. We would be making a mistake to say that this is the end, and that for the next 50 years we have nothing to do. Delimara is not yet complete," he said.
Around 1996 there was talk that the Marsa power station would be phased out, but Enemalta had taken the decision to keep the Marsa plant.
"Let's say that we go beyond the 600 MW of Delimara, then where will you build another power station?" he asked.
"Apart from that, we also felt that having two power stations gives us more stability, so we believe we should keep Marsa," Prof. Ghirlando said.
However, Marsa was in dire need of modernisation and Prof. Ghirlando said that there was a lot of equipment which needed to be replaced.
"On the other hand we do our best to keep our machinery in good shape. We attach a lot of importance to maintaining our machines in the best possible condition and it is a continuous process," he said.
"I attach great importance to this, so much so that while there are many areas where I am tight-fisted, verging on being a miser, maintenance and instrumentation are two sectors where I take a liberal view," he added.
Prof. Ghirlando also felt that if MEPA was concerned about the increase in energy demand, then it should insist that buildings were designed with energy efficiency in mind.
"It is usually reckoned that savings of the order of 30 to 50 per cent could be achieved in energy consumption in buildings, if these were to be properly designed," he said.