Energy-efficient choices

The energy efficiency appliances scheme has been extended to July 6 (24 May) - reportedly because of pressure from retailers. Retailers? I would have thought that the more vociferous demands would come from consumer groups and from Enemalta, which is coughing up millions of euros in oil purchases to keep the struggling power stations - and our appliances - running. The Finance Minister extended the scheme until the Trade Fair "because it was serving as an incentive for people to purchase appliances". Excuse me Mr Minister, but is it the objective of the scheme to increase consumer spending or to curb electricity consumption? How does having a second or third "energy-efficient" air-conditioner or refrigerator reduce consumption? Clearly something is amiss.

Despite huge increases in fuel prices (and the corresponding surcharge - though the latter does not faithfully reflect fuel costs because of political expediency), electricity demand in Malta is still increasing at around three per cent every year. Developments like the Mater Dei Hospital, Pender Place, Tigné Point and of course Smart City are bound to boost this figure substantially. Tearing down energy-efficient townhouses to build blocks of apartments that do not have basic energy-conservation features further aggravates the situation.

Furthermore, our hopes for "oil-free" renewable energy have been pegged with the pie-in-the-sky deep-sea offshore wind project that will not see the light of day for a good number of years yet. So clearly, with prices of crude oil reaching an all-time record high of $130 a barrel, we are heading for a tough time indeed.

The domestic sector in Malta consumes 36 per cent of total electricity produced, the sector with the highest consumption. It is probably the sector where the greatest energy gains can be made. The government has three tools at its disposal to control demand (and reduce waste) - education, regulation and pricing (including incentives).

The energy efficiency appliances scheme provides (or rather provided) a price incentive in favour of energy efficiency appliances; but it also has a very strong educational component in that it raises awareness about energy use. It seems that the government is confident that, after only 19 months of the scheme being in place, the population is now adequately tuned in with the benefits of energy-efficient appliances and that non-energy efficient appliances are a thing of the past. I think that this is a very dangerous assumption. Will people resort to buying non-energy efficient appliances once the scheme is terminated in July? What studies have been conducted to this effect? Can we really afford to take this risk simply because the scheme was over-subscribed by a measly €80,000? Are our finances in such a bad shape?

Proof that the scheme has not yet managed to change lifestyles can be found in the government's own admission that people were still choosing cheaper non-efficient air-conditioners - despite the scheme. Ironically, the air conditioner is the appliance with the highest electricity consumption in a household. Clearly, in this case, the grant was not adequate and should be revised upwards to bridge the price differential between an efficient air-conditioner and a non-efficient one.

At the same time I cannot fathom how the Malta Resources Authority gives a grant for '"energy-efficient" tumble dryers. There is no such thing as an energy efficient tumble dryer.

This appliance is a huge energy guzzler. The only energy efficient way of drying clothes is the old fashioned way of hanging them out and letting the sun and wind do the job. A scheme that encourages the purchase (and use) of tumble dryers is completely misguided.

The MRA spokesman also said that "some of those who purchased a new appliance continued to use their old appliance or else simply did not dispose of it". What this means is that in such cases the scheme was instrumental in increasing consumption instead of reducing it! One could have addressed this loophole by, for example, only giving grants to applicants that produce evidence of (proper) disposal of the old appliance and to first-time house owners.

I sincerely hope that there is a serious re-think of the decision to terminate the scheme, as the country can ill-afford to equip new inefficient houses with inefficient appliances. However, next time round, let's try to do it better.