Vehicle roadworthiness testing

I refer to the editorial "Cars and the air we breathe".

The exhaust emitted by motor vehicles and the repercussions such emissions are having on our health has been topping the debate list for a good number of years.

Since 2002, the testing of exhaust emissions, as part of the Vehicle Roadworthiness Test (VRT) became obligatory for all categories of motor vehicles. In the first year of introduction alone, 1,577 vehicles failed their VRT test on exhaust emissions exceeding the limit values established under the European Union legislation and between January and October this year, a further 1,142 have vehicles failed on this count.

It is also clearly evident that the introduction of the system of VRT testing has resulted in an increase in the scrapping rate of old vehicles, with less than 33 per cent of vehicles being more than 10 years old today compared to 46 per cent back in 1989. The removal of old, heavy polluting vehicles is obviously a contributing factor towards the improvement of ambient air quality.

The VRT test has gone some way towards addressing the problems of air pollution through exhaust emission. However, it is fair to comment that the frequency of testing (every two years for passenger cars and every year for heavier commercial vehicles) may not be sufficient to ensure full compliance with emission limits of certain vehicles in the interim period between tests. This year, the ADT has consequently introduced new regulations for the roadside roadworthiness testing of vehicles and, to this end, has procured portable roadside emission testing equipment. Following the necessary training of ADT personnel early next year, roadside emission checking shall be carried out randomly on vehicles on our roads. In the meantime, the ADT is currently receiving reports on vehicles that are being used on the roads that are visibly emitting excessive levels of smoke from their exhausts. (ADT Freephone 800 72393).

On a second issue raised in the editorial relating to the provision of new car parks as the solution to our growing problems of congestion and parking, this "predict and provide" approach to transport infrastructure is somewhat myopic. New car parks have been provided in a number of areas, including Floriana, Sliema, Paceville to meet growing car travel demand and, yet, parking problems in these areas have persisted - if anything they have got worse. It is a widely accepted theory that, when one increases the supply of parking spaces in central areas, traffic problems often get worse not better. The perception of freely available parking will put additional traffic onto the narrow roads leading to our capitals, entertainment centres and shopping areas and the roads to inevitably become more congested.

It is for this reason that the authority believes that a more sustainable approach is needed to solve our mobility problems. Upgrading Malta's public transport system should, as was the case with other countries, turn this service into a viable alternative to non-essential car use. Unfortunately, the remarks in your editorial echo the general sentiment of many car owners that buses are there to be used by other people.

We must come to terms with the fact that we cannot keep widening our roads or building tunnels to keep pace with traffic growth (which over the last 10 years has been increasing at an alarming rate of four per cent per annum!). We must endeavour to make public transport and other more sustainable forms of travel, such as walking and cycling, a real alternative to car travel.