Kurt Sansone
Roads are Malta's pollution hot spots
Motorists driving down Addolorata Hill in the morning rush-hour traffic cannot miss the greyish, orange cloud hanging over the Marsa-Qormi conurbation in what is a constant reminder of the impact of car pollution.
Air quality has increasingly become a subject of interest for many people, especially since EU membership almost six years ago. But with the debate over power station emissions eclipsing everything else, few realise that cars are perhaps the most significant polluters.
The most recent warning was delivered by the EU Commission, which threatened Malta with infringement proceedings unless it drew up an air quality plan to address, among other things, the pollution in the inner harbour region, which exceeds EU levels.
The head of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority's Environment Directorate, Martin Seychell admits air quality levels in the central region are in breach of EU directives and he blames traffic for the problem.
Readings from Mepa's air quality monitoring stations do not paint an ugly picture, he adds, but there are specific problems that have to be addressed.
"The general state of air quality does not dishearten me," Mr Seychell says from his Mepa office, which sits on top of the bastion just off Floriana's main thoroughfare, St Anne Street, which he describes as a "hot spot". He says it was only the monitoring station in the central region, stationed at Msida, that recorded excessive levels of fine dust known as PM10, according to latest data taken in 2008.
PM10 is so fine it is more akin to smoke and is considered to be a health hazard because it has the potential of lodging in people's lungs. It is unrelated to visible dust or that created by construction work, which is larger in size and settles down more quickly.
According to EU regulations, the directive on air quality would be infringed if the allowed limit is exceeded more than 35 times a year. In Msida the limit was exceeded 50 times.
"Msida is a traffic node and it reflects the general situation in other localities in the inner harbour area," Mr Seychell says.
Levels of fine dust mimic traffic trends, he adds, and the situation is bound to worsen if cars are used more and more.
Mepa carried out a deeper analysis of the fine dust since it can be caused by man-made actions and natural phenomena.
He explains: "Combustion, whether in a power station, a bakery or a car, creates fine dust but naturally ocurring saltspray and fine Sahara dust blown here by the wind are also causes of PM10 particles."
The analysis showed that on a number of occasions when the level of fine dust in Msida was above the EU limit, the same was recorded in far-flung Għarb in Gozo. This led analysts to pin down part of the problem to naturally occuring phenomena, especially when the data was cross-checked with prevailing wind conditions.
"When natural phenomena were excluded from the Msida recordings it transpired that levels were exceeded 31 times a year. Although this is below the limit it is too close for comfort and requires action," Mr Seychell says.
The analysis meant Mepa delayed passing on the relevant air quality information to the EU Commission, something which Brussels criticised.
The data has just been passed on to the Commission, along with an air quality plan, five months after they were due.
Identifying the problem, however, is only one aspect, he adds; providing solutions is the more important part.
He admits it is not an easy challenge because people have to realise the problem is caused by the cars they use.
A number of factors contribute to the problem: Malta has the highest rate of car ownership; it is a congested place; a lot of newly purchased cars are second hand and, therefore, have old technology; the average lifespan of a car is around 10 years or more, and so the roads are home to an ageing fleet; people renege on regular maintenance; and the island's topography and small size lead to a lot of start and stop driving, which means engines are consistently working in high power and polluting more.
However, Mr Seychell believes the biggest problem is cultural since the car has become for many a symbol of sorts, whether of independence, wealth or status.
"People are driving more kilometres per year. It is linked to lifetsyle choices. We are living in one place and working in another. The children go to school in a different locality. The more people shift from one place to another the more the problems are bound to increase."
Hope rests with the public transport reform, which Mr Seychell insists should also take into account population shifts.
There are few reasons why students should go to University by car, he says, pointing out that the large student population and the Mater Dei hospital next door provide an ideal location for a major public transport node.
However, there are also simple measures that can be taken.
"It does not make sense that to obtain a passport the individual has to enter Valletta twice. In this sense local councils should be used more often as interfaces for clients of government services."
If the transport issue is solved, he adds, Malta will have better air quality all around.
It is a big "if", one that is conditioned by choices people would have to make but Mr Seychell lives by the old adage: Hope springs eternal.
17 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
S.Bonello
Mar 6th 2010, 09:59
Qomt fl-ahhar hi , indunajt kemm il-MEPA ma ghamlet xejn qatt, imnalla li kien Louis Grech ghax kieku kullhadd rieqed kien u rieqed jibqa bhal dal -gvern, prosit Louis mhux ta b'xejn li gibt dawk il-voti kollha, ghax imnalla hemm int ghax haddiehor f'xi marc mohhu.
C.Cassar
Mar 5th 2010, 15:57
It is very disappointing that MEPA is only now admitting to the fact that Malta has a problem with air quality especially in the central region of the island. The Maltese people only came to know of the breach of EU law regarding air quality control as a result of the Parliamentary Question put by MEP Louis Grech to the Commission last January.
In his reply, Commissioner Potocnik stated that the limit values set for air quality had continued to be surpassed and that the Maltese authorities had failed to submit a notification under Article 22 of the new Air Quality Directive, which would contain an adopted air quality plan, and that consequently the Commission was considering taking further infringement proceedings against Malta.
According to Mr Seychell: "readings from MEPA's air quality monitoring stations do not paint an ugly picture" and that "the general state of air quality does not dishearten (him)".
After having seen Commissioner Potocnik's reply to Grech's request for an investigation, will the Authorities please take serious stock of the situation and take immediate action accordingly.
George Poitier
Mar 4th 2010, 10:17
@Daniel Vella
I absolutely agree with your comment. Bike's and most cars I've seen in Malta, with the exception of a pitiful few are not the main pollutants. I've seen trucks, buses and vans spew out dark black toxic fumes that would kill many small birds if they caught up in that cloud of fumes. When you mention VRT, I assure you wherever I went, they were always very strict with me. In fact I had an old car which is considered a classic and he would not give me a renewal for .1 grammes? So don't tell me VRT are useless. Unfortunately buses, trucks and Van's are (correct me if wrong) are exempt from VRT test's and have their own (dubious) test's?. Now there is the catch!
I. Camilleri
Mar 3rd 2010, 12:51
@ Mr. Micallef
I think we are on the same note, obviously the ECU would need to be detuned for fuel efficiency instead of power. Black smoke should be solved by proper combustion and using better fuel (lets face it, our octane rating is crap). I can’t see why a 1000cc engine shouldn’t be a “big engine” if turbo charged it should be able to propel a standard 1 ton car with ease.
Also I think that the mechanic labor cost is a little on the expensive side (including parts and labor) that is why most people do not service their car as regularly as they should. Eg. If people knew just how much more MPG they can get by just changing the air filter, im sure most people would change it regularly.
Jesmond Micallef
Mar 3rd 2010, 11:45
I.Camilleri,
Turbocharging is indeed a very effective way to better not just the power/torque produced by an engine but also the combustion of the fuel within the combustion chamber. Consider for example a smokey black exhaust. That is surely an indication of either overfuelling or lack of available oxygen within the combustion chamber. The black smoke is simply wasted fuel, it is unburned fuel, but it also carries away heat from the combustion chamber, further loss of energy. So yes, PROPERLY DONE, a pressurised induction system would introduce more oxygen into the combustion chamber, promoting more mixing and hence better efficient use of fuel.
Engine designers and manufacturers may use either a combination of multiple valve arrangements and turbocharging in order to optimise the air and fuelling requirements. The engine capacity plays a very important part here, too.
The politics of insurance cover is beyond my discussion here, I'm afraid.
I. Camilleri
Mar 3rd 2010, 08:50
@ Mr. Micallef
I agree on the car pooling part and all. On a different note however, you probably know very well that the only way to increase an engine’s efficiency is by doing a turbo. Cam profile set for higher revs and a turbo to help for lower revs (like with diesel engines), however how many insurances are willing to insure a petrol turbo car? Also, how many think of “turbo” as a means of power instead of as a solution to internal combustion inefficiency?
Jesmond Micallef
Mar 3rd 2010, 00:29
continued......
This "calibration" then defines the "Engine Map" which is then preprogrammed on all ECU's found on series production cars. So, yes indeed, latest technology does contribute to less particulate matter in the air. Mr. Martin Seychell is completely right in saying this.
Personally, I have become very critical to personal transportation such as cars. The Maltese Islands have so much potential here. People may indeed need to drive to work everyday and be there on time but I dare and ask, How many un-occupied car seats are there on the roads during rush hour for example ? I tend to think that the travelling public in Malta and Gozo need to do there fair share here, too.
Remember people, an Otto or Diesel engine is only about 29 % efficient at the most, the rest of the fuel energy is wasted. I tend to relate and equate this waste also to "pollution". How did that wasted fuel get to the island in the first place and furthermore, who pays for It ?
Why not consider Drive Share schemes ?? Couple that with a good public transport system, the result can only be beneficial.
With my sincere very best wishes.
Jesmond Micallef
Mar 2nd 2010, 23:57
I have no doubt whatsoever that the effective use of mass transportation systems such as Public Transport benefits the environment. The Reform presently underway will forsure contribute to a better air quality, once people elect to use the more passenger and environmentally friendly buses. Particulate matter can be effectively filtered out by means of exhaust system filters. Modern Diesel engines are today fitted with such filters. Indeed, the exhaust system has been so much developed that the cost basis of the exhaust system alone nearly surpasses that of the injection equipement !!!
Modern engines run by means of ECU or Engine Management systems. Within the ECU, an "engine map" is preprogrammed, meaning that the operating parameters are set and the limits defined. The engine is indeed controlled by means of these preset parameters.
Drive cycles such as Stop and Go traffic patterns, but not just, are usually defined and contained within the European Drive Cycle such as the ECE-15. When under development, the engine undergoes this drive cycle simulation on the test bench. Through a series of bench tests, the "engine map" is developed and once all parameters are satisfactory, the required "calibration" is complete.
continued....
Mark Grech
Mar 2nd 2010, 18:47
VRT's have become a joke!
George Debono
Mar 2nd 2010, 17:57
To Daniel Vella
Sorry - I must hasten to add that I agree with every word you say
- IE : * that it is useless taxing private cars according to emmissions and exempting commercial and heavy construction machinery * that it is commercial and heavy construction machinery vehicles (AND BUSES) that cause most air and noise pollution and *that these vehicles also damage and congest our roads endangering anyone using our road network …. (and I ride a bike !)
I discussed cars only in my response to Alex Tanti because Alex only referred to cars in his particular comment - I certainly don't imply that commercial and heavy construction machinery should be exempted - on the contrary it is essential - they are the real baddies.
What I wrote to Alex is only a small part of the big solution. The overall solution must obviously include all vehicles (not to mention energy generation and energy conservation!) .
Daniel Vella - Touring Club Malta
Mar 2nd 2010, 16:45
@ George Debono
It useless taxing private cars according to emmissions and exempting commercial and heavy construction machinery from such a scheme. Its these vehicles that cause most air and noise pollution apart from damaging and congesting our roads endangering anyone using our road network or anone livining in the close proximity of a main road.
George Debono
Mar 2nd 2010, 15:44
Alex
Thanks for the positive & constructive feedback - all of which I agree with.
Re "……incentives to facititate the purchase of cleaner new vehicles" "…. small bikes and cars....free off all taxes all ………"
Absolutely agree -
The differential in Road and registration taxes should be very strongly biased in favour of low CO2 emitting cars. Cars with CO2 emission less than 110g/km should be subject to an extremely low annual road ("circulation") tax. The progressive rise in tax with increasing CO2 emissions should then rise very steeply and the steep increase in taxation must continue beyond 250g/km. At present it stops at 250g/km. This is too low as it which allows many hugely polluting cars to escape the tax deterrent.
Electric cars should be free of road tax (possibly with only an administrative tax for the number plate)
And yes small bikes (say less than 150cc) and electric scooters/bicycles (and ordinary bicycles) - should be VAT/Road tax free.
And our roads should be made more pedestrian friendly &c &c &c….
G
Albert Bezzina
Mar 2nd 2010, 15:37
Part 2
The air quality plan;
Is based on data which give heavy vehicles, like trucks and the like, a fuel consumption of 50 mpg (5.6 l/100km) and light commercial vehicles such as delivery vans an astonishing 157mpg (1.8 l/100km). Diesel passenger cars do 21 mpg while petrol cars do 66mpg
These errors have been pointed out to MEPA in the past months, yet persist in basing policies on fairy tail data which is absolutely unrealistic.
Intransigence in such matters can only be interpreted as a deliberate conspiracy to project the private passenger cars as "perhaps the most significant polluters". What is more significant is the total exculpation of the real cause of poor air quality LDV's and HDV's together with unbridled high rise developments in the name of sustainability!
If Mr Seychell is interested in reality I am ready to make my case to him in conjunction with any journalist who would like to be present for the presentation.
The moderator of this comment section can forward my e-mail address to Mr Seychell if he enquires.
Daniel Vella - Touring Club Malta
Mar 2nd 2010, 15:36
I think mr Sychell should stick to his full time job of jotting down figures out of his guages and refrain from drawing conclusions such as the ones stated in this article. How can you blame motor cars for the high pollution levels we are getting in Malta. It is most clearly evident that Mr Sychell is not basing his conclusions on any empiric data at all. When our kind bus drivers decided to strike, the emmission levels on that particular day went down by half - this is a fact. The remaining half is composed by construction vehicles, distribution vehicles and light cars. And yet mr Seychell is only pointing his finger at us motorists who have to get to work on time and safely on a daily basis forgetting that buses are the greatest source of our air pollution. On the other hand it is very difficult to get a MEPA official to blame the construction industry for causing any pollution - for reasons only the directly interested parties can know. Mr Sychell should have concluded that by digging quarries on every constuction site causes a great deal of emmissions and not driving cars.
Albert Bezzina
Mar 2nd 2010, 15:19
Part 1
This article mentions the word car or cars eleven times. There is no single reference to other polluting vehicles either by the journalist or by the quotes from Mr Seychell.
According to MEPA and NSO sourced data, this is what the air quality plan is based on.
It is based on emissions calculated from using car fleets which are not all in use (registered but not licensed) quoting 263851 (registered) vehicles when there are only 211823 licensed vehicles to which one can add another 6313 vehicles consisting taxis, hire cars ect.
It is based on erroneous fleet numbers of commercial vehicles such as 4586 LDV's instead of the real figure of 30606 and 40842 HDV's instead of 16792.
It is based on disappearing particulate emissions from HDV's (Heavy Duty Vehicles) as submitted to the Emissions Inventory. Using MEPA's own data HDV's would have produced 900 tons of particulates in 2006 but Malta reported just 55 tons from HDV's.
It is based on typographic mistakes where in 2006, diesel passenger cars are shown to have consumed 113,345 tons of diesel - more than the 92,000 tons of diesel imported in 2006 by Enemalta,
Alex Tanti
Mar 2nd 2010, 10:23
Glad that some people
the like of Simon Busuttil and George G. Debono
are trying to highlight this issue to our leaders...
Though political leaders (both sides)
ought to step down from theatrical politics
and do what is right and sensible....
sure that the current trend of ever increasing imported USED trucks/cars
is not helping this situation at all...
What about incentives to facititate
the purchase of cleaner new vehicles
towards all who want to substitute cars/vans say older than 10years....
plus free off all taxes all small bikes and cars....
to compensate goverment ought to consider a fuel eco tax...
the more fuel one consumes the more the taxes one pays....
aim - Eco Smart Malta....
D. Cortis
Mar 2nd 2010, 10:03
An idea which could help is to switch off vehicles on traffic lights. In peak hours in Msida when lights are controlled by traffic policemen, we spend minutes waiting on traffic lights, switching off vehicles will help in less fuel consumption and pollution too.
Maybe TM could take note, and fix signs in congested traffic lights area.