A three-pronged climate change strategy

The Leader of the Opposition, Joseph Muscat, was quoted by The Times as demanding an answer of why I allegedly changed my position with regard to my respective positions as chair on the Climate Change Committee and as co-chair of the adjudication committee for the 150MW generation plant.

I have no hesitation in responding to Dr Muscat's demand for the answer is simple. I never changed my position. The position I took with regard to the decision of the 150MW tender and in steering the Climate Change Committee to the decisions it reached in the strategy it presented to the government are consistent.

So consistent, that, in fact, I have serious doubts whether Dr Muscat actually read the climate change strategy. If Dr Muscat did read the strategy than he either is being awkward with the truth, for reasons he should state publicly, or he has failed to understand the climate change strategy.

The climate change strategy proposes three prongs with regard to energy generation.

The first is that the introduction of three new 150MW (the first one relates to the issue raised by Dr Muscat) generation plants is proposed as a strategic national abatement project. Recommendation 20 of the strategy is clear with regard to the commissioning of the first of these plants: that the plant should be "operational as planned in 2011".

Why 2011? It is imperative that the Marsa power station is de-commissioned at the earliest possible moment. Under the Large Combustion Plant Directive, the plant has 20,000 hours of operational life - effective from January 1, 2008. It should be noted that if the plant operates 24x7, then these hours will expire by April 2012 resulting in issues of continuity of supply or payment of infringes.

Moreover, at an efficiency generation factor of 23 per cent, the Marsa power station releases CO2 emissions. The de-commissioning of the Marsa power station will thus significantly reduce the CO2e emitted in Malta. Hence, the sooner that the Marsa power station is fully or partially de-commissioned the faster is the pace of CO2 emissions reduction in Malta. Thus, independent of whether the replacement plant technology is fossil oil or gas generated, the very fact that the Marsa power station is de-commissioned will result in significant gains with regard to the cutting of CO2 emissions.

The question is raised: Why not procure a new generation plant that is gas powered? After all, the climate change strategy recommends that the substitution of fuel oil by natural gas should be considered for the powering of the generation plants. There is no doubt that the application of gas will have a significant positive impact on CO2 emissions.

Yet, and as the climate change strategy clearly recognizes, there is one major limitation in applying a gas fuel generation plant with immediate effect: the setting up of the necessary infrastructure and logistical capacity to handle the importation and supply of gas. In fact, the climate change strategy in recommendation 21 is very clear in that the government should consider "the substitution of fuel oil to natural gas for the powering of the generation plants... as a national strategic abatement initiative... appropriate mobilisation is embarked upon to secure that the necessary infrastructure and logistical capacity as well as the appropriate conversion technologies requiring installation at the plants are in place by 2015".

The third prong, which I am not entering into, relates to the establishment of a sub-sea inter-connector between Malta and Sicily.

Recommendations 21 and 22 of the climate change strategy are consistent with the decisions I took as co-chair of the adjudication board of the 150MW generation plant:

• The 150MW generation plant must be introduced at the latest by 2011. Malta cannot afford to wait until 2015 until such time as when it would have built the appropriate infrastructure (a gas pipeline, which is one of three possible options, the other being shuttle supply of CNG or LNG, is estimated at €200 million) to introduce the first of the three generation plants required to respectively shut down the Marsa power station and strengthen the generation energy infrastructure to safeguard security of supply - where-in infrastructure investment in the new 150MW plant would immediately result in a significant positive impact on CO2 emissions reduction.

The impact of the first of the 150MW generation plant powered by fuel oil on CO2 emissions reduction is shown as "New - 2011" in figure 33 and shown as figure 01, presented in chapter 05 of the strategy.

• The 150MW plant is selected with the best available technology with regard to CO2 abatement measures. BWSC has a CO2 efficiency factor of 0.576 CO2/kWh when compared to that of the losing bidder - Bateman - which stands at an efficiency factor of 0.56 CO2/kWh. While it is correct that the Bateman abatement technology is marginally more efficient than that of BWSC - the selected bidder - international consultants in an independent study had confirmed to the adjudication committee that all of the three bidders had presented state-of-the-art CO2 abatement technologies.

• The 150MW plant selected by the adjudication committee is purchased with the option that allows Enemalta Corporation to convert the plant with the appropriate technology that will enable it to be powered by gas. This is consistent with the aforementioned recommendation 21 of the strategy, which states that the "appropriate conversion technologies (relating to gas) requiring installation" are in place by 2015.

The fact that the adjudication committee selected a plant that that can be converted to be powered by gas - albeit at an additional cost but where the total cost of ownership of investment and operation of the selected plant would still be lower than that of Bateman - once the appropriate infrastructure is in place by 2015 shows how consistent my position on the adjudication committee is with my position on the climate change strategy.

It is pertinent to underline that the climate change strategy modelled a scenario of the impact of energy abatement supply-side infrastructure where power plants are powered by fossil oil. As can be seen from figure 01, under such a scenario Malta would still meet its responsibilities to reduce by 2020 its CO2 emissions to 80 per cent of the 1990 national carbon footprint. In essence, the above clearly shows that Malta will achieve considerable in-roads in drastically reducing its CO2 carbon footprint in the event that it transpires that for every €1 investment in a gas infrastructure and logistical capacity such an investment fails to provide the optimum return in terms of CO2 reduced.

It is to be noted that the climate change strategy also modelled a scenario of the impact of energy abatement supply-side infrastructure where the plants are powered by natural gas. Figure 02 is figure 40 presented in the climate change strategy. As can be seen from this figure, unlike the previous scenario, the level of CO2 emissions under this scenario is reduced to 55 per cent below the CO2 emissions national footprint as at 2020 and, hence, much lower than the 80 per cent of 1990 national carbon footprint level.

What this figure also clearly shows, however, is that the Climate Change Committee in its strategy and supporting modelling always considered that the introduction of natural gas to power Malta's plants will occur in 2016 when the necessary and critical related infrastructure and logistical capacity for the supply of gas is in place. The climate Change strategy, in chapter 5, has at least five other different figures that show various implications of this scenario, which models the powering of the power stations by natural gas and in every one of these figures, "GAS" (shown in large capital letters) is depicted to be in place by 2016.

I have no doubt that my behaviour has been professional and one of integrity. My contribution and leadership to the climate change strategy as well as my participation as co-chair of the adjudication committee has been consistent.

Dr Muscat is a politician, seeking the smoking gun to win some cheap brownie political points. I understand that. I also, however, believe that politicians should be honourable and should strive to seek and state the truth. If Dr Muscat would have attended the Public Accounts Committee held the other day at the House of Representatives he would have, perhaps, been in a better position to assess my position in both committees prior to making his statements in press conferences.

But then, perhaps, it is not the truth that Dr Muscat is after... and like a jesting Pontius Pilate is not ready to stay for an answer.

The author is chairman of the Climate Change Committee