Wednesday, 8th July 2009
'Alternative energy: Cleaner but more expensive than oil'
Infrastructure Minister Austin Gatt said yesterday that any source of alternative energy would be cleaner but more expensive than fossil fuel, especially if the price of crude oil continued to hover around the current mark of US$70 per barrel. But Malta must have clean energy, even if at a higher financial cost.
Answering a series of supplementary parliamentary questions by opposition MPs, he said that if the opposition continued to insist on wind farms at sea, the only place possible for one would be at Is-Sikka l-Bajda, and the project would still be very expensive. The only real possibility for affordable wind farms was on land.
Even so, land-based wind farms would have a minimal effect on the country's financial outlay for energy, while sea wind farms would have no effect and would have to be subsidised if the energy they produced was to be on a par with the cost of fossil fuel energy. There was no technology available yet that would leave a favourable financial impact.
To put the record straight, Minister Gatt said solar panels on the roof of a private household would have a bigger financial return for that household, and the government had long been subsidising this avenue. Even so, that household would not reap back its investment before nine years.
Experience abroad had shown that only large areas of solar panels could yet make commercial sense. Tunisia was working on a solar energy farm over a large area of its desert region, with the aim of selling energy to Italy. But there were no such large areas in Malta.
Dr Gatt said that another source of alternative energy was still largely undiscussed. The tapping of foreign energy through an interconnector with Sicily would give Malta a choice whether to get wind, solar or gas energy for its needs. While Malta generated 580 MW, Sicily had 1,500 MW from wind farms alone.
Dr Gatt said this was possibly the best alternative to share in alternative energy sources without the problems of cost and location of home-grown sources.
RSS
Comments
Thank you for the useful information.
When I commented on the cost of the turbine described, I also took into consideration EU funding participation which I believe would exceed the 30% you mentioned by a stretch.
I do however agree that private turbine/solar panel output to the grid being bought at 5c a KwH will have to be adjusted. Having said that, the terms of purchasing power from a government backed wind farm will by essence be drastically different from buying small quantities from small private generators.
It is good that discussions about different sources of renewable energy take place with ever widening interest and the time has come that some firm decision is arrived at. Technology seems to progress at a steady pace but we can no longer wait for a better system to arrive while we continue to lose ground.
It is therefore imperative that a total consensus be reached and that we stop splitting hairs and point fingers or claim that whatever the government comes up with (with proper research), someone else could do it better. We have followed that routine for far too long now.
If this project goes through we should seriously consider laying a cable to Libya's shores at whatever cost and start negotiations with our African neighbours to conclude a long term contract for supply. Nuclear power is the cheapest and cleanest form of electricity generation with zero emissions. This would definitely help us meet our EU obligations without the need for costly and visually intrusive solar and wind power installations.
The experts in our government and local authorities should immediately sit down and give this some serious thought. They should find out that it will prove to be a win-win solution both in terms of investment costs and environmental impact.
I would really appreciate if you could share your views in the hope that the people who make the decisions will take note and start doing some research.
With all due respect, why invest in an 'interconnector' which basically boils down to rent, when investment in the right alternative energy areas would eventually pay for itself. Paying rent for something one will never own is dead money.
With your own admission, you also clearly do not have the 'want' for alternative energy. You have underlined that wind/solar power is a non-vialble solution due to 'critical mass' and that the only solution is to hook up with Sicily?
Great energy strategy Mr Magro
It is cheaper to buy it in the USA than in Malta. In the USA the government has a scheme of 30% refund from Feb 2009 - Dec 2016 (http://www.helixwind.com/en/faq.php#faq-69) ... not a scheme which was open only for the first few who applied...
Secondly in Malta we do not have a PROPER & FAIR system of net metering - The government charges you 18c for 1KwH but refunds you around 5c per Kwh that your turbine will put int the grid!!
Once the government addresses this, more people will be inclined to install alternative energy sources.
The alternative for an interconnector with Sicily has been under study for more than a decade. What is the Government waiting for to do it? Instead of spending money on a new flying mass of stone, why dont we invest the money in this essential interconnector; and discuss with the EU that their policies must be sustainable and the EU cannot issue stupid benchmarks for all its members. We do not have the critical mass for wind and/or solar eneregy. What about the fuel for aeroplanes, cars, trucks, buses etc? We do not have any plans for the use of electrical cars. There are no incentives to install charging stations. We are in the dark.
I am glad that you mentioned the vertical wind turbines. However, a comment you made later in your contributions drew my attention.
"Also their size is quite small and their price very feasible (in the USA, in Malta their cost is still very high)".
Do I understand that the cost of the turbine differs if purchased for USA use as from that if Malta purchases the same turbine? Do you mean that USA energy users are made to pay for the real cost, while in Malta, the energy user refuses to pay it?
The turbine whether vertical or horizontal is capable of generating a certain output at a certain cost per unit whether situated in Malta or the USA, therefore the cost to the consumer, other than a small difference due to varying transmission costs should be almost identical.
A good portion of the consumers will not come to terms with the fact that they should pay the market cost of energy. If only they would understand that whether they pay the real price (no subsidies) or a subsidized price they are never ahead because subsidies come from the taxpayers' own pockets anyway.
The solar power plant was part-funded by the EU
http://www.power-technology.com/projects/Seville-Solar-Tower/
Isn't the use of alternative energy such as windfarms expensive for all countries, I don't think Malta is special, or the price is only expensive to Malta. Before Malta joined the EU (and by the way...I am glad we did) there were promises that accession to the EU brought with it a better standard of living, funds to improve Malta and the maltese environment.
So let's not ride on an excuse that it is expensive, or because we will ruin the view should windfarms be installed at sikka l-bajda... so what??? what is most important, living a healthy and possibly a longer life or enjoy the views for a shorter period of time? Yes, windfarms may be an eyesore to us maltese until we get used to them; foreigners who visit our countries are used to windfarms and after all this may not be an issue.
Those are called Helix - http://www.helixwind.com/en/
They are available in Malta but @ 11,000 euros each they are still expensive for the ordinary man in the street to buy.
It would have been better for the government to subsidise these kind of purchases.
If a considerable number of households were to install a small turbine measuring less than 2 meters squared on their roof we could potentially generate a lot of energy through alternative sources.
first priority is to get ourselves connected to the european grid.
THEN,,, and only then,,, should we start going slowly and carefully investing into alternative energy sources.
am i against alternative energy sources?!? of course not. but we do not afford the huge investment.
i would also LOVE to turn my house green but there is NO WAY i can afford solar panelling at the current prices. the first step is to lower consumption, use energy efficient appliances.
it is a step by step process and it has to be SUSTAINABLE!!
bold steps yes,,,,, unnaffordable investments no. especially when the people ( esp the middle class) is already being asked for higher sacrifices.
Now that these projects in alternative energies is not going to be made, shouldn't the price of electricity go down?!!!