Resources and Rural Affairs Minister George Pullicino announced that enough clean energy would be produced from waste yesterday equal to that consumed by 30,000 families. Apart from biological waste from homes the government also intended to extract clean energy from animal manure. While humans produced between 240,000 and 250,000 tonnes of waste, animals produced more.
The minister also announced that the area between the Sant'Antnin plant and Razzett tal-Ħbiberija in Marsascala was to be converted into a family park which would be larger than 20 football grounds.
Speaking at the end of the open discussion on waste management strategy, Mr Pullicino said the government had managed to create a number of new facilities in the sector, including the closure of the incinerator chimneys at St Luke's Hospital and in Gozo, a new environmentally-friendly incinerator in Marsa, engineered landfills, planting of trees in Magħtab, and an investment of €9 million in a new system that treated toxic gases. This system, which cost €1.5 million, was treating around 100 million cubic metres of gas deriving from Magħtab.
Another €30 million of EU funds had been used to rehabilitate Magħtab and modernise the Sant'Antnin plant. Minister Pullicino argued that the targets by this plant had not been reached because it had taken six years to get the permit to open the plant.
He thanked WasteServ for its important work in this sector. The government was trying to increase the private stakeholders in this sector and reduce the amount of work carried out by the company.
In the past two years, 14 million kilograms of separated waste had been collected in grey bags. The amount of separated waste collected in civic amenity sites amounted to 50,000 tonnes.
The public was being educated not only through Eko Skola but also through trained people who were visiting homes to explain how waste should be separated. To date there had been more than 50,000 such visits.
Mr Pullicino said the opposition had strongly obstructed the facilities the government had in mind. The opposition should bring itself to admit it had been mistaken, and decide to participate in a policy for the country's benefit.
On the refund of the eco-contribution it was the constituted bodies themselves that were to blame for the lack of refund. They had fallen apart and agreement had been reached only after a long series of talks.
Mr Brincat should know that WasteServ was a public enterprise whose audited accounts were submitted to the MFSA. The government had no objection to a discussion on them in the House.
To the Auditor General's comments on the direct order system, Mr Pullicino said the only thing that made sense was to get the company installing the incinerator to upgrade it. Following explanations, the AG had raised no more objections.
On the setting of the gate fee, Mr Brincat should understand that it had already been difficult to involve the private sector because it was not commercially viable.
Every tonne treated cost WasteServ €30, but the government had settled on €20. Local councils knew they could save money by sending in less mixed waste, so much so that some of them had started to collect separated waste even more than once a week.
Mr Pullicino said the government had given an example of revision by wide consultation. The draft document had been issued in January 2009, but instead of one month the government had allowed two months for public consultation. It was only after this that it had started on the strategic environmental assessment. Then it had been decided that the final part of the assessment would be left until after the parliamentary debate. Now the government was waiting to see what Labour would come up with.
The government was also waiting for the IPPC permit for the hazardous waste treatment plant. Discussion had been wide-ranging with lots of constituted bodies, members of the public, the MCESD, the Association of Local Councils and others, but Labour had never participated.
Mr Pullicino said the strategy spoke of a number of plants, just two of which would cost €55 million. Apart from biological waste from homes the government also intended to extract clean energy from animal dung. While humans produced 240 to 250,000 tonnes of waste, animals produced more.
There was nothing wrong with trying to get more clean energy from waste than from other sources. It was ready to try all possible angles. The amount of clean energy to be generated from waste would equal that of 30,000 families.
Besides the digesters in Għallis and Gozo, others were also needed in Siġġiewi to treat animal waste from the region and at the waste transfer station in Gozo, which would cost another €8 million.
Contrary to what Mr Brincat kept saying, the incinerator mentioned in the strategy would be for inorganic waste, which would be only 20 per cent of the total waste generated. In its quest to keep mind and eyes open for potential new technologies for clean energy, even as Mr Pullicino spoke, a seminar on waste management was under way with the German government, and there would soon be another with the Swedish government.
Concluding, he said the government would continue to be committed to give the country the best possible means of waste management in spite of obstacles from the opposition, even though it kept saying that it was in favour of discussion.