Incineration: No to an ostrich approach - Deidun
PN MEP candidate Alan Deidun denounced the opportunism of PL candidates in the environmental sphere arguing that their environmental proposals for the upcoming elections boiled down to opposing the incinerator, symptomatic of an approach aimed at reacting to and opposing any initiatiev without actually proposing alternatives.
Three PL candidates spoke against incineration, with at least two not having an inkling of what they were talking about, he said.
The anti-incineration camp harped about the need to reduce waste and although this was laudable it was tantamount to wishful thinking, at least in the near future, while the clock was still ticking.
By 2020, Malta needed to achieve the 10 percent benchmark where renewables were involved at the very least and the Ghallis landfill would only last a few more years.
The planned incinerator would extend its lifetime by at least 10 years, eliminating the need to excavate and destroy further agircultural land for an new one.
Despite the PL's claim that it had set up a board/panel on waste management, it has still to pronounce itself on related issues and the present detailed reports.
In addition, the government made public the names of experts it was consulting. PL arguments lacked the phrase Refuse Derived Fuel, that fuel which could be derived from incineration and which was considered clean energy if preceded by waste separation.
The incinerator, Dr Deidun said, would not handle all types of waste, with organic and other types being eliminated beforehand.
He pointed out that PL's track record was dismal in waste management and during the 1996-1998 Labour interlude, no efforts were made to address the Maghtab landfill issue. The PL had then tried to divert European funds to upgrade the Sant’Antnin waste management and recycling plant away from Malta.
The incineration issue, Dr Deidun said, had to be studied in a mature way and not in a sensationalist one. The Spittelau Thermal Waste Treatment Plant in Vienna, which could be considered an incinerator, was less than 100 metres away from the city’s university and was a tourist attraction.
Dr Deidun said he still had not made up his mind about the proposed incinerator and would follow the recommendations made in any EIA that would be eventually commissioned, since the scientific method had to prevail in such sensitive issues.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
4 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Marco Cremona
May 17th 2009, 19:46
Alan,
Being the seasoned environmentalist that you are, I cannot believe that you are so naive as to think that a DECISION on the incinerator has not already been taken by the PN-government.
It is a fait-accompli, and therefore there is no opportunity for a mature unpoliticised discussion. You very well know that the EIA will only serve to rubber-stamp this decision-a decision taken unilaterally by a couple of people within MRRA and with no socio-economic studies to back it up.
You know as well as I do that any waste management hierarchy includes the 3 Rs: Re-use, Reduce, Recycle (note: no incineration).
Put your hand on your heart and let us know whether you are truly convinced that Malta has fully exploited these three funtamental waste proceses and which therefore leaves us with the unfortunate choice of landfilling or incineration?
Do not give us any of the MRRA propoganda please.You are more intelligent than to be the Ministry's mouthpiece.If you want to formulate an opinion on incineration, I invite you for a one-to-one discussion (public or private) on the subject so that you'll hear the other side of the story. It's an invitation,not a challenge.
We have been thr
ALAN DEIDUN
May 16th 2009, 15:40
@Jesmond
I live in Gudja and hence am quite well versed with the south's problems. I have been campaigning for the past 7 years in my column in The Sunday Times to avert unsustainable projects away from the south of the island - the proposed gas tanks at Has Saptan, overdevelopment at Marsascala, the proposed fuel tanks at Ghaxaq, the development within Wied Garnaw in Santa Lucija, just to name a few. Hence, your comment is unfair to say the least.
Re your appeal not to knock on doors, I will abide by your instructions, although I must say that you are nipping any chances of dialogue in the bud - I never said I am in favour of incineration - I only said we need a mature debate, rather than petitions and protests to the European Commission before the process of consultation has even started! We need the PL which is objecting to give us viable alternatives. We need the independent experts to do their job so that we can take the best decision.
I reiterate - the PL is being opportunist in this case - it has sensed the opportunity to win votes!
jesmond zammit
May 15th 2009, 17:14
billi tghid li l pl hu oppotunist ,tkun qed tikkonferma kemm m ghandek x il polz taghna tas south . ahna ,ghalikhom tal pn ,dejjem konna dumping site . ara tigix thabbat il bibien
lgalea
May 15th 2009, 12:41
Have a look at a Masters thesis by Mr Augustus Debono regarding the exportation of dangerous waste used to produce energy and the Basle Convention on the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste at http://www.cnimalta.org/sa.html