The real pollution culprits
The head of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority's Environment Directorate, Martin Seychell, is reported to have said in his letter Roads Are Malta's Pollution Hotspots (March 2), that air quality monitoring data "do not paint an ugly picture" and that "the general state of air quality (did) not dishearten (him)".
In traditional government defensive mode, Mr Seychell tries to downplay excess particulate pollution by invoking that old chestnut of "saltspray particles" and "fine Sahara dust" to explain away our raised PM10 particles. He even resorts to a grotesque extrapolation to implicate "naturally occurring phenomena" to explain some episodes of excess particulate pollution levels and bring down these down to "31 times a year".
Mr Seychell's assertion that "Msida is a traffic node which reflects the general situation in other localities in the inner harbour area," is also suspect, since it is not supported by air monitoring data from what must be other more serious "hot spots" elsewhere such as the harbour area itself, St Julians, Ħamrun and other sites. These are built-up, heavily congested places where pollution lingers owing to the street "canyon effect". These areas are almost certainly significantly more polluted than suggested by the monitoring station at Msida, which is in the middle of a large open space.
Finally, Mr Seychell seems to place the blame squarely on private transport ("lifestyle choices of (people) driving more kilometres per year in their car"). In so doing he conveniently ignores Malta's two monstrous, polluting sacred cows, namely, the dust-generating and diesel-hungry construction industry and our notorious buses, thus omitting the truly polluting vehicles which create intense street level pollution when they circulate in densely built up areas.
Maybe Mr Seychell could be forgiven for putting the blame on cars; he may have been misled by Malta's latest emissions inventory which is seriously flawed and biased against cars. This report grossly under-estimates the contribution to particulates by our diesel-powered buses and construction, transport and heavy goods vehicles. The pollution from these vehicles is so immense that it is visible to all. To make matters worse, much of this pollution also occurs in densely built-up areas, immediately exposing pedestrians and residents directly to a health hazard from inhaling the smoke. This visible pollution, though illegal, has now gone on unheeded for years.
Given the lengths to which our government goes to downplay its inaction over its appalling inactivity on the pollution front (not to mention clean energy generation) it may be in place here to pre-empt some excuses. It might be argued that our polluting buses will soon be taken off our roads. This is no excuse for allowing the scandalous situation to continue even one day longer and prolonging the harm from this pollution. In any event, it is very possible that, like many other grandiose projects, the reform will take much longer to introduce - so that exposure to the pollution will continue. Furthermore, such an argument does not include the other major source of pollution from the construction industry, heavy goods and delivery vehicles, many of which continue to emit smoke with impunity in our streets.
The argument that buses are relatively few in number in comparison to private cars is also invalid because their potential for pollution at street level is much greater. Besides (illegally) emitting smoke particles and polluting much more than cars, buses travel many more kilomtetres because they are used almost continuously and their pollution is all the more serious because much of it occurs in built-up streets and gets blown directly at pedestrians and inhaled into lungs. The importance of dealing with such pollution is supported by clear scientific evidence that people exposed to traffic pollution from living on, or close to, congested roads have a higher rate of illness and early death.
Private transport might be part of the problem, but it is simply not on to place the blame entirely on the car and omit the more gross and abundant illegal pollution, not only from our heavily polluting buses but also from our construction industry and heavy goods vehicles. To see mothers pushing infants in prams on our pavements within feet of buses which spew out smoke is a damning indictment of the indifference of our authorities to the health of citizens and the very young.
It also needs emphasising, yet again, that our Health Department should be doing something about this health hazard. It would be very welcome if our new health Minister, Joseph Cassar, might make it his crusade to combat Malta's pollution.
3 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
George Debono
Mar 8th 2010, 21:47
Peter Montanaro
Re "……………..A simple solution is to insall traffic lights at sebra crossing…"
No it is not a solution
……………Pedestrian comes to the crossing and stops,press the botton and wait for the green man . ……
Ok so far BUT if the green man takes too long (as is usual) ………….. pedestrian will take a chance and cross when man is still RED. Then cars wait for nothing while his light is red.
And..
I have witnessed 100s of cases where driver is talking on mobile or simply ignores red light and tries to chance it.
Such pelican (traffic light) Pedestrian crossings are not safer - possibly more dangerous (I speak from experience I us a pelican light dozens of times a day when I cross a main road at the bottom of the hill where I live.
RE "…………….. I was several times almost run down there………" …………….exactly !
A traffic zebra crossing with a road hump is a good idea. Decent drivers will be a better idea. If the Pedestrian crossing is well signposted and well lighted it is safer.
Continues.........
Edward Mallia
Mar 8th 2010, 12:03
George Debono is quite right to point out that construction vehicles and buses must contribute significantly to the particle levels on local roads, even if cars, because of the large numbers, may emit a greater share. The recent Italian situation is private car produced. But there may be other questions to ask. Do the MEPA stations measure PM10 (10microns or less in size) or just fine particles? Is construction dust, salt spray and Sahara dust as fine as PM10? Do the MEPA detectors allow the analysers to sort out the types of particle, remembering that possibly these same persons have been making such a mess of the 'black dust' problem? Would the Msida-Gharb coincidences also have Msida-Attard coincidences, as MEPA has a detection box in a small public garden in Attard, well away from major roads?
On a different tack: are our violations of EU norms restricted to PM10 or do they include other things like benzene, carbon monoxide and ozone? One may also ask why we stopped taking even a token part in European car-free day some years ago.
Georges A. Magri
Mar 8th 2010, 11:07
How right you are, and what a good expose that was!what I have to add is the selfish people, particularly here in Rabat, who take out their old cars from their garage in the morning,let the engine purr away for a few minutes and calmly lock up, with no hurry whatsoever.The fumes emitted are deadly, believe me. Sometimes we choke and cough as a result.Many cars are cranky and well over their VRT acceptability, and some even lack silencers.Others stop for a few minutes at the baker's or grocer's, leave the engine on and hold the traffic nonchalantly, with the poisonous fumes fouling the atmosphere.
I wonder, do the VRT people know about these cars ? How can they allow this?I hardly ever see a warden around here.Wardens would have a field day in Rabat from 7 to 9 a.m., issuing tickets with a revenue to feed the state 's hungry coffers!The overtime would be paid handsomely from the money coming in.
Wardens please note, Health Authorities take note. And Dr. Cassar, please make it your mission to eradicate these harmful habits and occurences in Rabat.There is an alarming incidence of cancer here in particular. No wonder ! !