If offshore wind farm fails, we are stuck - Pullicino

Alex Ellul

Nov 3rd 2009, 22:51

@George Debono et al: While I have referred to many scientific reports and scientific facts showing that planetary warmings and coolings are natural, AGW proponents can only attack the person making ad hominem attacks calling me denier,fairy tale etc etc, but I cannot see one single scientific exposition from your end that shows that AGW theory is true. AGW theory is based on one single forcing only: That CO2 gas increases global warming. THIS HAS BEEN PROVEN FALSE BY THE WORLD'S LEADING CLIMATOLOGIST, Professor Richard Lindzen of the world leading scientific college the MIT, having studied and analysed data for the last 15 years. There are a hundred other forcings that effect climate and temperatures many of which I have mentioned in my various comments.
I am quoting science and the most renowned climatologist of the whole planet. He is not living a fairy tale, he is not a denier, he is not in the oilmen's paypacket, the truth is that he is saying what science is telling him.

Should we then play it safe like Blaise Pascal and spend 80 trillion dollars to fight a Quixotic battle against an inexistent enemy and reduce the global temperature by 0.0C?

Dylan Chircop

Nov 3rd 2009, 19:34

BDW I'm 17 and my rate for windfarms from 1 to 10 is -1

Dylan Chircop

Nov 3rd 2009, 19:32

These are the best solutions for our country: Installing photovoltaic panels on every building in Malta and Gozo excluding historical buildings of course (the Government has to invest heavily since these are quite expensive and most of our poulation can't afford it) or buy energy from other countries.
Why don't other countries build large solar powerstations, they don't have financial and space problems and we could buy energy from them!

Dylan Chircop

Nov 3rd 2009, 19:16

Stephen sammut that is nonsense!!! Aren't you aware that in Malta we have earthquakes and do you now what happened in Chernobyl!???????If an earthquake hits our country and damages YOUR SUGGESTION iot would be a disaster! Hello RADIATION!

George Debono

Nov 3rd 2009, 13:56

Maybe our situation is best summed up with Ronald Reagan's dictum:

"JUST STAND THERE---DON'T DO SOMETHING!!!"

and the worst thing we can do is is precisely that - DO NOTHING through paying attention to all the Ludditesout there who are afraid of change -and simply continue tio hesitate and end up doing exactly nothing,

let's get on with it ! . We already missed a golden opportunity in 2004 at Marfa Ridge.

George Debono

Nov 3rd 2009, 13:50

To Climate change deniers(as Al Ellul)---------------------------------this must be said: even if a minority of scientists (possibly in the pay of the oil industry!) say that climate change is nonsense, the possibility of Climate Change is so important that it should serve at the very least as a wake-up call that we are plundering the planet's resources at too fast a rate. AND that, sooner- or-later, these resources will finish, so we should start now to explore alternatives.

To those saying "We don't have enough land space to energise the nation" "we cannot meet all Malta's needs with RE" and so on------------- this is not the point! The expression goes "Slowly, slowly catchy monkey" -(1) we must start and gradually build up from 5% to 10% and so on. (2)the secret lies in DIVERSITY - at present we are much limited to Solar and Wind (plus a cable connection to the EU Grid) which we should exploit as far as possible. With time other possibilities will present themselves (and this blog has yielded many excellent positive suggestions) we will (hopefully) take them up. Gradually we will depend less on fossil fuels and produce more and more clean energy…..

continues----------

Alex Cassola

Nov 3rd 2009, 13:04

@ T Grima

Sorry to let you down but in Malta the tide is minimal and cannot be exploited for the generation of electricity. The maximum change in sea level is around 0.4 metres at spring tide and this is not enough to have high velocity currents.

Locations were tidal devices could be/are installed undergo a sea level change of more than 4 metres (even up to 8m) - for example the Mull of Galloway(Scotland) and Solway Firth (N. Ireland) and ideally have spring tide currents that exceed 2 metres/second. Unfortunately Malta cannot adopt this technology.

joe borg

Nov 3rd 2009, 09:06

Sorry everyone but I still cannot understand one thing..

Mater Dei has taken about 17 years to be finished..

During these 17 years.. how come no one ever thought of installing solar panels on the roofs?? That would have been a clear example that the government has the environment really at heart..

As usual.. is there anyone responsible for such bad planning??

David Pace

Nov 3rd 2009, 08:29

I'm constantly amazed that we (our Gov) keep going down the wind turbine route as THE solution to our problems. More so when it is obvious on solar maps that Malta is a HOT spot due to it's near year-round sunshine. I've talked to Solar E companies who reliably state that 50Mw can be generated in an area of 0.5 of a sq mile here using tracking. The feed-in tariff is the real blocker to adoption as there is no incentive to invest as the ROI is too long. If the Gov considered a Private-Public arrangement, which incidentally has been put on the table, then the investment would not come out of the Government purse at all, and costs borne by the investors. It is not hard to find such a small area, even in Gozo, with minimal impact on the environment and landscape value of the islands. Maintenance levels are SIGNIFICANTLY lower than for Wind turbines and panels can be upgraded very easily. To my mind it is a no-brainer. All we need is a feed-in tariff of 30c or so, 3 locations to generate 150Mw and better subsidies.

Franco Buttigieg

Nov 3rd 2009, 08:12

I agree with Nicholas Critien’s post but would take it one step further, Enemalta should set up their Solar panel manufacturing plant then supply panels to households free of cost. These will generate supply to the grid on a 50/50 basis, the household retains 50% for the use of the roof and Enemalta takes 50% to cover its costs. Once Enemalta has been repaid its outlay costs the household takes full ownership of the equipment and what it generates. The household will then supplies Enemalta any extra production at a reduced rate. This system will change the way Enemalta provide their service and produce a profit as the will create an income from the supply of clean electricity and maintenance of solar panels it also address the Government’s Social responsibility and obligations.

I am sure that with the costs allocated towards wind farms a longer term plan like that above will not only help replace our supply to a 100% clean system but will also change the strategy Enemalta uses and generate more employment and a supply of natural resources (solar).

Alex Ellul

Nov 3rd 2009, 07:34

George Debono: We do have land s[ace for some WT's, but not nearly enough to energise the nation. You know it. It would only just be enough to get in line with the hoax of 20/20. Enemalta engineers must be very amused.

Alex Ellul

Nov 3rd 2009, 07:32

John Cauchi and Paul Smith: I may be living in a fairytale, but is the world's leading climateologist too? Give yourself a chance and read what he is saying: don't do what the pope did to Galileo. Just look through that telescope and see what you get. : Prof Richard Lindzen of MIT has absolutely, convincingly, and irrefutably proven the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming to be completely false:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/co2_report_july_09.pdf
and so say many other scientists: Piers Corbyn, the British astrophysicist and the most successful weatherman on the planet calls AGW theory 'FRAUD WITH LIPSTICK'. OPEN YOUR EYES.

T Grima

Nov 3rd 2009, 01:15

Why have we not even considered tidal power?
http://www.tidalenergyltd.com/

Jesmond Micallef

Nov 2nd 2009, 23:59

@Maria Zammit

Engineers find solutions no matter what, they are very well trained to do so. Everything is possible when the political will is there and available. There are infinite permutations to what can be done with photovoltaic cells, the panels can be made to move along the suns path during the day, for example. It all needs one to think and make the best of what is available. The mast here will provide valuble statistical data. This data can then be analysed and made best use of but to start arguing about where how what !!! I find this totally ridiculous. ( this very last sentence is not directed to you).

Finally, The laws of Energy Conservation tell us that Energy cannot be Created nor destroyed. Perpetual motion is only possible on paper, nowhere else in the universe !!!

raymond cutajar

Nov 2nd 2009, 23:57

sorry sir another failure or no failure would tip the BALANCE you think ??
And do you want us to beleive you that you care one IOTA? Hallina Sur u toghoqodux tiftahru meta taghamlu u kif jghid il MALTI jekk taghamlu dak xogholkhom fuq kollox u jekk joghogobkhom tinsewhx dan id dritt lejn Malta ! grazzi

C.Scerri

Nov 2nd 2009, 22:11

@Paul Caruana - you really do not have an idea of the ground area that you require the on in Seville - a 53MW plant has two 1km diameter area = appr 6sq KM - approximately 1 tenth of the Enemalta generation capacity. The cost is budgeted at €211 million with a 20 year expected lifetime. Comino is only around 1.5 square km. And the cost per unit is not cheaper then oil produced.

@ Stephen Vassallo - SDolar energy is not free, clean maybe, but nor free. It costs around 27 Euro cents per Unit - around 45% higher then what you pay for electricity today!#

I can imagine how many of you would happily pay more for each unit used just so that we can priduce less carbon dioxid

Maria Zammit

Nov 2nd 2009, 21:03

Why isn't such a debate tackled by engineers?

I would like to ask, since I am no expert, if it is possible to mount photovoltaic panels along a house facade incorporating it the design so as not to have these things on roofs. Obviously we have to built facades facing the right direction to catch the sun. Would enough energy be produced to make each household self sufficient? Would the expense incurred be viable in the long run?

Nigel Lawrence

Nov 2nd 2009, 20:59

Ok try this one.

Take a part of your power station output- plus a bit of solar power, to de-compose water. Now take the resulting gases to run the engines that turn the generators.

Carbon emissions- zero
Cost of water-zero
Dependency on oil-zero

Or is that too difficult?

Nicholas Critien

Nov 2nd 2009, 20:20

I've been researching wind turbines for a long time. the bad news, the propeller type is proved to be inefficient, the GOOD NEWS there is a very efficient wind turbine which is built in the shape of a helix and is proven to generate more electricity! Both theBritish & the Americans have been using the helix design for a couple of years now, & there is one large installation that feeds 4000+ homes!
Saying all this, why don't we have a system like other EUROPEAN countries, ie Germany, where people use solar panels on their houses and sell the electricity they generate to the grid for 1.8 times the tariff! NOW THIS IS A REAL INCENTIVE TO GENERATE CLEAN ENERGY. Even if we were to be paid like for like (as the system is here now), i'm sure that if the government subsidized half the cost for solar panels, a lot of people would install them. This way a lot of area could be used to generate electricity (how many people really use their roofs?) Why don't the government speak to a manufacturer about supplying Malta in bulk ? This way they would give us a real deal !

stephen brincat

Nov 2nd 2009, 19:35

a few days ago we were told that by installing solar panels on government buildings malta will beat the eu deadline by a couple of years and now we read that the off shore wind farms are necessary to "save us".If the visual and other impacts were unacceptable 3 years ago what has changed since then.The project may generate electricity but it certainly generates no confidence that these guys know what the hell they're doing.

Jesmond Micallef

Nov 2nd 2009, 19:07

I don't need to watch films, here logic suffices.

Consider simple energy balance. I explain, take for example steel, how is it produced ? Iron Ore is melted, meaning one energy input simply to produce the raw material. Then come the shaping processes, more energy inputs and so on until we have at the end of all this say, a nice CAR !!! What happens to cars with age, they start rusting, no, why ? Because matter as presented in nature allways seeks to go back to a lower state of energy : Meaning the oxide of iron as it once was before getting into the production chain of the CAR we humbly drive on our sunday drives !!!!

If some of these complainers about wind, solar energy and so on know how much energy is simply lost during our daily lives....................People would simply shut up for good !!!

Furthermore, do you know Maltese complainers about wind energy and all, how expensive the production of the simple DRINKING WATER in Malta is...................????

See for yourselves, check out how Reverse Osmosis works, and ask does Malta have mountains, lakes, large land mass where ALL the rainwater can be collected ???????

Alexander Morana

Nov 2nd 2009, 19:04

. As I already have said that the costs of energy in Malta is not of price but of distribution. Presently the Government buys this energy at a fixed price while it sells to the consumer at any set price, to sustain a bankrupt, mismanaged and debt ridden EneMalta!
If Malta hooks to the Euro grid there will be no other options for the Malta Government to pay its given price and taxes on utility bills! Watch out soon you will have to pay VAT on your Water and Electricity bill!

Paul Smith

Nov 2nd 2009, 18:26

I have to agree with one of the other bloggers with regard to Alex Ellul. he lives in a fairy land.
Bottom line is, the world is now on it's Oil, Gas and coal decent and uranium peaked in 1981.
The less virgin resources the more energy required to obtain them. If the whole world went Nuclear we would be out of Uranium and other fissile material within a decade. If we all turned to coal to power everything and even our electric cars we would be out of cheap abundant coal within a few decades and by the middle of the century earth would almost be inhabitable for humans. Alex, Just look at UK north sea if you want to see Peak oil in action and then take a glance at Mexican oil production - mexico will soon be a net oil importer, what will USA do then for the 2 million barrels a day it gets from them? Now we get an idea what Iraq was all about.

The coming conference is not just a GW conf - but about powering the future. Man has always gone to war over energy and water.

George Debono

Nov 2nd 2009, 17:48

@ Anthony Formosa(If by 2020 most EU countries must generate 20% from clean renewable sources, then the oil price must drop drastically)-------------------

I wouldn't bet on that - not with huge emerging economies all competing for oil - which is a finite resource. The price could rise astronomically as it starts to get scarce…

@John Cauchi - SPOT ON !!!!

George Debono

Nov 2nd 2009, 17:42

RE SOLAR WATER HEATING
e camilleri is right in saying that simply employing people to produce cheap solar heaters and sell them cheaply - this is very sound because the energy saved in heating water is far and away the most efficient efficient way to conserve energy. And this brings up what nobody thinks about ! CONSERVATION !!! For instance, if AC's were to be banned (I can hear people SCREAMING and PROTESTING!!!) we would probably cut down energy requirement by 25% - If we made our houses energy efficient we could save another 20% (some put it as high as 40%) &c &c

We are not even scratching the surface of our energy problem until we do something about energy saving. But then I'm the 73 year old guy who still uses a bike instead of a car (just back from Valletta by bike and so I didn't add a milligram of pollution to our air to get there AND I enjoyed the ride - gives you that apres-ski feeling)

George Debono

Nov 2nd 2009, 17:41

I AGREE with Charles Downing(Malta should be making much more of solar power), C Bonello(Solar power is without limits) and my colleague Stephen Vassallo(if wind farms fail the sun will not)--------------------------we have a great potential for Solar Power and this surely must be part of our energy mix. The only snag is that you only get power in daytime…that's why we need variety in RE so as to make up for intermittency.

@Martin Spiteri--solar panels on private houses and blocks of flats roofs?----------------yes, yes, yes - we have (or maybe one should say "had" because we now only build apartment blocks!) a lot of potential there - not to mention roofs of Govt buildings, hospitals, schools……….

Paul Caruana(what about a solar thermal power plant located on barren comino?)-------wonderful idea but i expect that comino is probably a Sacred Cow (tourism!) There are other sites I suppose ....

George Debono

Nov 2nd 2009, 17:12

@james whelan @ wind generally fails at times of peak requirements-----------------eh? WHEN is peak requirement? That the wind is random is a problem - one usually calculates on getting energy 25% of the time and not constantly. Solar power is also intermittent (no power at night and on cloudy days….) the secret is DIVERSITY - a combination of wind/Solar/EU grid connection and other possible future RE technology. Therefore what Paul Barrett said "we need to make our own power by a variety of methods" is spot on.

@edward bartolo@territory is limited and our resources are even more limited-------------------------No, we have extensive relatively uninhabited areas where we could fit land based wind farms and remember when better technology (eg less expensive offshore) becomes available the turbines are simply removed!

What we have to take into account is 1) we already have intolerable pollution, 2) Oil will sooner or later become so expensive (with South America, China and India competing for it) that wind energy will be a doddle financially. And 3) Oil will soon run out sooner or later so we'd better start now making our position more secure by going for EVERY Renewable modality and no remining 100% oil-dependent. .

George Debono

Nov 2nd 2009, 16:57

Continues

@Alex Ellul @ we (do not) have the necessary land for megawatt wind turbines and neither do we have the right winds ----------------------------------------Sorry Al, we do - Most of Malta lives on only about 30% of our surface and there are quite extensive relatively uninhabited areas where we could fit land based wind farms. Eg Marfa Ridge where the originally proposed Wind Farm was to be sited (extrapolated wind speed estimate was about 7.2 M/S which is OK)

@edward bartolo@Wind is extremely unreliable, -not a single watt of power------------------I know the Med is not the north sea (or windy Denmark) but if our wind testing shows a mean annual wind speed greater than 7metres/second then we are in business.

@GodwinYoung@possible effects of wind turbines a few miles away from Malta's only airport?-------------------- This has been checked - no prob.

Continues

J Martinelli

Nov 2nd 2009, 16:49

Every energy generating system known so far has its disadvantages. Many disagree with wind power generation and blame the government for going in that direction. Denmark's example built many wind farms while being unable to close one single fossil fuel power station. Dozens if not hundreds of other jurisdictions are going for it, so much so, that wind generator manufacturers are having a tough time keeping up with orders. Are all these other governments dumb, or have money to burn?

Some mention PVCs as the ideal means of converting sunlight into energy. What they fail to calculate is: the cost: the area required to provide sufficient energy for the household: the number of multifamily apartments with one small single roof: the ability to expose the PVCs to sunlight: the fact that charging can only be done during the day: the high cost of the storing devices from which energy is extracted during the night: the total daily consumption in wattage required to run heavy appliances (washing machines, dryers, refrigerator) plus lighting: the down time for equipment failure: the time and expense involved for repairs and the inconvenience during downtime, etc.

The problems are real, solutions are hard to get.

George Debono

Nov 2nd 2009, 16:47

It is a pity to see so much antagonism to wind power. I agree with DVella that Malta is the only country in the world that is stupid enough to rule out land-based wind farms at all costs. This stupidity cost us dearly - a proposed wind farm at Marfa Ridge was turned down about 5 years ago. If we had gone ahead we might have had all the answers by now and we would have gained Know-how in handling wind energy before going to sea. .

@Marco Cremona@It is possible for Malta to invest in a wind farm in Scotland - Marco! Sorry, I disagree - Malta MUST get out of its 100% dependency on oil. It is absurd to continue polluting our country to save money while Scotland benefits by producing clean energy and aids local employment just to save us carbon tariffs. We must embark on RE asap. This will also provide local employment and we could also go commercial by eventually servicicng the Med area for RE applications &c &c We cammit remain stuck in the middle ages. .

Continues

Anthony Formosa

Nov 2nd 2009, 16:32

If by 2020 most EU countries must generate 20% from clean renewable sources, then the oil price must drop drastically, therefore it is not necessary that Malta with its size adopt by EUs laws. Mellieha, Hal-Far and Bahrija will be ruined, and we have to pay for the maintenance of the power stations, and windfarms as well.

John Cauchi

Nov 2nd 2009, 16:07

@ Alex Ellul

Mr Ellul, you clearly choose to live in an unreal world where climate change is not anthropogenic, and where oil is the best thing that ever happened to humanity.

Maybe when Msida is an underwater relic, you will come to your senses... oh, I forgot! You probably are old enough to miss that time when (I hope not) it will come! Well, I will be here still, unless some tragedy comes my way.

Watch the film "Age of Stupid" - the science in it is not fancy, contrary to what you will undoubtedly say in reply. Global Warming is a fact, and we should all play our part. If we need to suffer economically, then so be it.

These wind farms are the best thing the Maltese government will do in a LONG time. And to those who complain about the visual impact- they are far more beautiful and graceful than any polluting chimney visible from half of Malta! That's for sure! Pollution-free too!

Stephen Vassallo

Nov 2nd 2009, 15:38

If wind farms fail, the sun will not. We have an abundance of flat roofs where solar panels will not spoil the countryside. What is the extra cost of adding solar panels or photovoltaic cells to the cost of a new house? Minimal. And thereafter the energy is free for years and years. We complain that we have no natural resources, and yet we continue to waste (by not using it) the greatest resource of all, the sun.

D. Scerri

Nov 2nd 2009, 13:21

I'm astounded by the lack of knowledge being displayed here.

We chose to join the EU, we must play by the rules.

1. Malta is part of a bigger community: The European community. We have the ability to buy clean nuclear power from our neighbours.
2. Buying power from our neighbours would provide us with lower and more stable prices.
3. Carbon based power generation *does* contribute to global warming.
4. Considering the EU will pick up the majority cost of our getting connected to the European grid, why do we not take all our power requirements from there?

The simple fact is that the Nationlist government does not want to do anything about the problem because (select any from the below):

a. There's less money to be made when buying from abroad (bribes).
b. They don't know and don't want to know (ignorance).
c. They're scared of the votes they might lose (denial).
d. They couldn't care less. (I'm all right, Jack).

What ever the reasons are, you can be certain you'll get neither a straight or honest answer from this lot.

Alex Ellul

Nov 2nd 2009, 12:29

Denmark, the most wind-farmed nation per-capita, has not managed to switch off one single oil/coal-fired power station. In fact it had t increase the carbon-based power generation during this wind-farming years. If there is any politician who thinks that Malta will benefit from wind farming he should employ a few technocrats for a month or two to get his technology bearings right. The only way to make do without carbon-based energy is to go back to the middle ages, donkey travel, candle light, cooking on firewood and making medicine out of tea leaves.

But the main reason why we should not invest in these expensive politicians' toys is that climate change is only natural. There is no man made global warming. The only problem we have is the cost of electricity which we have to generate in a very inefficient way, paying TRIPLE what the USA-consumer pays. The only way we have to go is to get the most economical way to energise this island, the rest follows, be it solar, safe nuclear, clean carbon etc. Economics is the name of the game, not toying around with expensive ideas that will cost the western world an estimated $80 trillion

Gerard Cassar

Nov 2nd 2009, 12:03

It seems Perit Pullicino is not acquainted with modern research about wind energy.
It is no longer wind farms that are being experienced they passed their time. Mr Pullicino or rather his advisers must look into Google and search for wind energy high up in the sky, and they will be aware of new technologies that will not spoil the view. High up in the sky there is no danger of lack of wind.
There exists also such things as sea waves energy.

Godwin Saliba

Nov 2nd 2009, 12:03

I love the idea of having huge structures turning in the wind and producing electricity, but in my humble opinion they are just good PR exercises to show the people that we are doing something with regards to clean energy. Wind turbines are huge, inefficient and costly equipment. We should try to find a better solution for our island.
The Maltese Government should invest in local inventiveness. For example, this year Scotland started a competition which involves local companies in trying to come up, and implement the best energy producing solution. The price is a hefty 20 million pounds sterling, which is quite a lot but the investment from the companies is going to be much more than this, when one considers what teh companies will spend on research. Why does not the Maltese governement do the same? It would encourage local companies to invest in research and new technology and at the same time it would increase Malta's clean energy output. The way forward is through new technology and innovation. Malta should come up with a solution tailor made for itself and not try to do what other countries are doing.

DVella

Nov 2nd 2009, 12:00

Duh ! ! ! We are stuck only because we seem to be the only country in the world that is stupid enough to rule out land-based wind farms at all costs . . . on the basis of some peurile environmental and aesthetic excuse ! ! !

John Spiteri Gingell

Nov 2nd 2009, 11:50

@Mr. Whelan - you are spot on.

but wind farms are 'sexy' you see, they are the ultimate phallic totem to the green religion. costs and common sense do not factor in the equation.

Pullicino does not need a wind mast - he only needs to look at the experience of other countries which incidentally have more favourable wind patterns and still proved to be an expensive failure requiring investments in 'hot standby' conventional generation.

Most people simply do not comprehend the requirement of frequency synchronization for a grid to function or for the matter issues such as energy storage etc. The whole debate has become a belief system and nothing more.

h.j.zammit

Nov 2nd 2009, 11:33

what about the new floating turbines? they're still experimental , but can be anchored in deeper waters, without the need for a reef. maybe they're costlier but they pose less restrictions on possible locations, and hopefully more favourable wind patterns. see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8085551.stm

Paul Caruana

Nov 2nd 2009, 11:29

Need a plan B? What about a solar thermal power plant located on barren comino?

Stephen Sammut

Nov 2nd 2009, 11:21

What a load of nonsense. "Green energy"......

Malta needs a couple of the Russian-built nuclear reactor-wagons -- maximum efficiency, cheap maintenance costs (18-month refueling cycle; ~Eur 8 million) and 100% clean air (save for the 300K vehicles around and 60-odd butts in the parliament)..

Martin Spiteri

Nov 2nd 2009, 10:57

What about the government pays for purchasing and installing solar panels on private houses and blocks of flats roofs? I would like to make one myself on my house but at the moment I don't have the budget. If the gov pays for it I'll gladly make one. From these solar panels then power can be distributed back to the grid.

At least we would be using space of already built up areas and not continuing eating from the little natural spaces we have left.

james whelan

Nov 2nd 2009, 10:48

This is an expensive nonsense. As wind generally fails at times of peak requirements you have to keep your conventional capacity on 'hot standby' at all times. This is very inefficient. On a small island system such as Malta it is a complete waste of money. It would be no doubt cheaper to pay whatever fines the EU imposes. An alternative solution is to 'buy' 20% capacity from 'renewable sources' elsewhere and contractually deliver it through the planned link to the Italian system. Its only a 'paper' transaction, but solves the requirements.

edward bartolo

Nov 2nd 2009, 10:30

The EU must realise that Malta is not Italy, France or Germany. Our territory is limited and our resources are even more limited.