John Pace
The heavy fuel oil scare
Malta’s power stations have been running on heavy fuel oil for over 70 years but most people got to know of its existence only recently, when it was described by the opponents of the Delimara power station extension as a scary fuel which, if used at the new plant, will cause grievous damage to health and the environment.
Opposition journalists combed the internet to find references on its hazardous nature, one going so far as quoting the Material Safety Data Sheet, a document that contains information for the safe handling, use, storage and disposal of potentially hazardous chemicals. The journalist highlighted the fact that the MSDS described the fuel as toxic. But he omitted to say that it is also unsafe to drink diesel or inhale natural gas!
Only a minority of power stations in Europe use fuel oil (the exception is Italy). The predominant fuel is coal, though the use of natural gas has increased in recent years. The reason for this is that these are the cheapest fuels.
Malta has experimented with the use of coal for some years but its location at Marsa and the storage method used were clearly unsuitable and the amount of dust generated forced the boilers to be converted to the use of HFO within a short time.
Malta had also an opportunity to change over to natural gas but the project happened at a time of political instability and was left to lapse.
Unfortunately, turning back the clock has proved to be very difficult.
But what is actually HFO?
Known by various other names (residual oil, Bunker C, or No. 6 diesel), it is derived from crude oil, which is processed at the refineries to separate the various “fractions”. After extracting petrol, diesel, jet fuel and the other components used in transport or industry, the residue is HFO. This is, by its nature, the cheapest refinery product and special methods need to be employed to burn it and to control its emissions.
Since power stations are large and use huge amounts of fuel, it is economical for them to install sophisticated combustion and exhaust gas cleaning equipment rather than use expensive refined fuels that burn more readily.
HFO is a black treacly liquid that doesn’t burn easily. In fact, it has to be heated to a high temperature before it is injected into the burners on power station boilers or diesel engines.
Transportation through pipes is also difficult and, unless the pipelines are heated, there is the danger of the oil solidifying and blocking the pipework.
For these reasons, HFO is not used in small industrial boilers and ships. It is only in power stations and in very large ships or industries that HFO is used.
HFO comes in various grades. These depend on the crude oil used as a source and of the refinery processes that remove the other fractions. Up to the 1970s, the refineries used straight fractional distillation to extract the lighter fractions but, since then, various other processes have been employed to maximise the amount of transport fuels by converting more of the crude using thermal and catalytic processes. This has led to a deterioration in the quality of the residual oil.
This does not mean, however, that all refinery residues are acceptable for use in power stations. In fact, power stations only purchase fuel oils that meet certain minimum specifications. These include physical quantities such as viscosity, specific gravity and calorific value, and also maximum quantities of impurities such as sulphur, lead, nickel, vanadium, etc. Exceeding these limits would result in pollution or damage to the combustion plant.
Sulphur is the major constituent of these impurities and fuel oil is marketed in various grades depending on the amount of sulphur in it.
Burning fuel containing sulphur will cause the emission of sulphur dioxide in the air, causing respiratory troubles and acid rain. This has been recognised by the European Union and other countries and, as far back as 1987, there have been restrictions on the use of high sulphur fuels together with the mandatory use of sulphur removal plant in power stations, cement kilns, waste incinerators, ships, and other users of large amounts of fuel.
Prior to Malta’s entry in the EU, the power stations used fuels with 3.5 per cent sulphur content. This high amount caused distress and protests in the Marsa area, with episodes of schools in the vicinity closing down because of the unbearable smell. The protests stopped when Malta joined the EU and converted to one per cent sulphur oil in accordance with European legislation. With the further tightening of EU limits, the maximum limit of sulphur in imported fuel oil was lowered to 0.5 per cent.
European environmental limits are progressively revised and the limits for new plant are more rigid than that for existing plant. For this reason, the new plant at Delimara, besides using low sulphur fuel, has to be equipped with gas cleaning equipment that removes sulphur dioxide from the power station exhaust gases. Other equipment removes NOx (nitrogen oxides) and dust particles.
So the new plant will be decidedly cleaner than the rest of the Delimara power station and out of all comparison with the Marsa plant as we know it.
So why all this fuss?
Using diesel oil will remove the need for sulphur dioxide cleaning plant and dust filters and, in fact, it is known that, in the event of malfunctions in the gas removal plant, the new plant will temporarily change over to the use of diesel fuel. Diesel is a refined fuel and is comparatively expensive, so using it instead of HFO would probably increase our electricity bills by some 30 per cent.
Using diesel would only bring marginal improvement at a high price. I have my doubts whether natural gas will ever be economical as the huge investment is only worthwhile if used in large quantities.
The cable connection to Italy also needs to operate at a high load factor to be economical, so it’s either a cable connection or a gas pipeline, not both, especially with Enemalta’s bad financial situation. Thus, I think it will be HFO for a long time.
In the past, the government persisted in the use of high sulphur fuel in order to keep its promise of low electricity rates (a wrong policy, in my opinion). We now have a taste of what high electricity rates are. The public cannot afford the luxury of using fancy fuels when, thanks to EU emission regulations, sufficient safeguards now exist to ensure the safety of using HFO.
An engineer, the author is a former manager generation with Enemalta.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
24 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Alex Ellul
Dec 19th 2011, 16:39
"Colin R. McInnes, DSc, FRAes, FInstP, FRSE, FREng (etc) is not likely to know anything about the negative health effects of emissions from combustion of fossil fuels."
Bet he would, he knows more than you do, and his science is published in your much beloved print media, peer-reviewed and all. Problem is that delusions of grandeur, that characteristic that you have taken on board lately, won't let you accept that other persons may know a thing or two, better than you do and usually end up destroying that person.
I do not remeber the name of the person who said it: If yu have not changed one single opinion these last 10 years, check your pulse, you may be dead.
G G Debono
Dec 19th 2011, 12:50
Sorry Alex ! you are wasting your (and my) time !
Colin R. McInnes, DSc, FRAes, FInstP, FRSE, FREng (etc) is not likely to know anything about the negative health effects of emissions from combustion of fossil fuels.
I do - and the point I make about HFO is in this context . I don't claim to know anything about astro-physics --- or whatever the area of expertise of your professor.
Ciao !
Alex Ellul
Dec 18th 2011, 22:17
Professor Colin R. McInnes
Colin R. McInnes, DSc, FRAes, FInstP, FRSE, FREng is Director of Research, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, UK.
His current research interests center on the orbital mechanics and mission applications of solar sail spacecraft. This work includes the development of families of highly non-Keplerian orbits for solar sails which can enable novel applications.
His other research interests center on autonomous spacecraft control, principally through the application of artificial potential field methods. This work has been developed for automated rendezvous and docking and for the distributed control of multiple spacecraft for formation-flying missions.
Colin is on the Editorial Board of Modern Astrodynamics and is Associate Editor of Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics which is published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) — the world’s largest technical society devoted to the global aerospace community.
Colin was elected a Fellow of The Royal Aeronautical Society in 1998, a Fellow of The Royal Society of Edinburgh in 2001, a Fellow of The Institute of Physics in 2003, and a Fellow of The Royal Academy of Engineering in 2003. He received the Pardoe Space Award from the Royal Aeronautical Society in 2000, the Ackroyd Stuart Propulsion Prize from the Royal Aeronautical Society in 2004, the Makdougall Brisbane Prize from the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 2006, and the Leonov Medal from the Association of Space Explorers in 2007.
He authored Solar Sailing: Technology, Dynamics, and Mission Applications, Instability of Fixed, Low-Thrust Drag Compensation, Azimuthal Repositioning of Payloads in Heliocentric Orbit Using Solar Sails, and Solar Sailing: Mission Applications and Engineering Challenges, and coauthored Control of Lagrange Point Orbits using Solar Sail Propulsion, On-Orbit Assembly Using Superquadric Potential Fields, Reconfiguring Smart Structures Using Phase Space Connections, Artificial Three-Body Equilibria for Hybrid Low-Thrust Propulsion, Robot Motion Planning using Hyperboloid Potential Functions, and A Continuum Model of Gas Flows with Localized Density Variations.
Colin earned his BSc (Hons) in Physics and Astronomy and his PhD in Astrodynamics from the University of Glasgow in 1988 and 1991 respectively.
Read Deflecting asteroids could lead to more versatile spaceprobes, Moving the Earth: a planetary survival guide, University of Strathclyde wins major grant for space research, Tiny satellite set to transform the way gas and electricity meters are recorded, and The sky is not the limit for leading space scientists.
'nuff said
G G Debono
Dec 18th 2011, 16:36
Sorry Alex – this is getting boring
As to you naïve comment that I “hypocritically” denounced nonsense culled from the internet supermarket. – I shan’t lose any sleep over that because none of my sources of information would stoop as low as publishing all and sundry on the internet. They are published in well-respected scientific journals (on paper ! ) and reviewed and approved by a scientific board before publication – a little sample of these are :
Lancet, British Medical Journal, New . England . Journal of Medicine , Journal of the American medical association, American Journal of Respiraratory Critical Care , Environmental research, . Environmental health perspectives, Epidemiology, American Journal of Epidemeology. Journal of Epidemiology …………………………………………… and the list goes on.
Now if you managed to get something published in the New England Journal of Medicine i'd probably pay more attention to you.....
Please get real ! n and stop allowing yourself to be deluded by internet junk. .
Quite frankly I don’t care a fig what your Professor Colin McInnes " FREng, FRSE " (I think you threw him at me before !!! ) he is just touting his goods on the internet – any ass can do that ! If he had something important to say which was backed up by sound scientific evidence - - - then he would have published it in a reputable journal.
Sorry - I have no time to read your ramblings ---- if you happened to say anything worthwhile then it is lost on me because you have already dented your credibility time and again.
SCHLUSS !
Alex Ellul
Dec 18th 2011, 14:53
George Debono,when Einstein escaped from Nazi Germani, 100 Nazi 'scientists' wrote a letter denouncing Einstein and his science. When a US journalist asked him, (Einstein), for his opinion, the answer the journalist got was; If I were wrong, one scientist would have been enough.
Likewise, you have posted what seems like a hundred internet linls ( after hypoctitically denouncing what you refer to "...... I guess it's it's just the same nonsense culled from the internet supermarket.
So, if I get info from the 'net it is nonsense, but your internet links are not. So let me give you just one link from
Professor Colin McInnes FREng, FRSE
has a report on the Royal Academy of Energy website, Ingenia, and found here: http://www.ingenia.org.uk/ingenia/articles.aspx?Index=740#top
Nay, just in case you are terrified of opening the link, same as you were terrifid to read my previous comment to the end, here's what he wrote, don't be afraid, it is written by a high-end person in the science of electrical power production engineering.
>>>Policy measures to combat climate change that favour ‘green’ energy technologies go against the engineering principles that decoupled the costs of energy and human labour. Professor Colin McInnes FREng FRSE believes that reversing transitions to higher energy density and moving towards spatially diffuse and intermittent energy sources is a recipe for a future of energy austerity.
When James Watt’s separate steam condenser began to displace Thomas Newcomen’s early atmospheric engine, it did not require government targets or financial incentives to encourage the take-up of the technology. Watt’s idea succeeded simply because it took less than half as much coal to deliver the same quantity of mechanical work. Watt’s innovation was part of a long-term trend in energy production; it was part of a continuous move towards using fuels of greater energy density and so lower carbon intensity.
The beginning of the transition from wood to coal in the Elizabethan era allowed us to escape from the photosynthetic limit of diffuse biomass. This was followed much later by oil, methane (natural gas) and now uranium. Each new fuel has a higher energy density and lower carbon intensity than the last, with methane releasing about half as much carbon dioxide as coal per unit of energy produced and nuclear being essentially carbon-free.
That evolution has, so far, relied primarily on carbon-rich fuels. If we now want to displace carbon from energy production – to meet policy goals on climate change – we had better come up with something better and cheaper than coal, and ultimately oil. The answer is not, though, to abandon the pursuit of higher energy density.
As it stands, today’s policies ignore the lessons of engineering history. We now seem determined to replace historical transitions toward fuels of greater energy density with diffuse energy production. This step will require vast quantities of materials, land and subsidies, misallocating economic resources that we could use more productively elsewhere. We should, therefore, treat with caution talk of a ‘green energy revolution’.
Many forms of green energy are spatially diffuse and intermittent, making them inefficient and inherently expensive. Therein lies the need for feed-in tariffs and other support mechanisms. Green energy is set to grow, not because it is more productive, like Watt’s separate steam condenser, but because government mandates it and provides generous incentives. An energy transition that leads to more expensive, less efficient energy production is more a regression than a revolution.
In choosing to make energy more expensive, we should remember that, with James Watt’s development of efficient steam power, hydrocarbon-fuelled machines replaced carbohydrate-fuelled human labour. In the late industrial revolution, this decoupled the costs of energy and labour for the first time in human history. Energy became cheap while human labour became more expensive and so our prosperity soared.
Our entire modern economy is built on this remarkable decoupling. In contrast, our headlong rush into expensive green energy risks sacrificing jobs elsewhere in the economy: it also threatens large tracts of the British landscape and hits the pockets of those who can ill afford higher energy bills.
As engineers, we should insist that energy policy sets out to deliver lower costs, security of supply, and now a transition to lower-carbon energy. This will require greater use of methane and uranium and less use of coal and, ultimately, oil. A number of new technologies could help us to achieve these transitions.
For example, while modern power stations have come a long way since Watt’s steam engine, we still generate much of the world’s electricity by heating water and then extracting useful work. A recent exciting innovation has been the demonstration of energy conversion using supercritical carbon dioxide as a working fluid, akin to a jet engine running on hot liquid. Not unlike Watt’s separate steam condenser, this offers a step change in the efficiency of turning heat into useful work in future thermal plants.
Other recent developments include China’s new national programme to develop next generation molten-salt thorium nuclear reactors. This high temperature, low pressure fuel cycle fissions all of its fertile thorium fuel and leaves only short-lived waste products with a half life of around 30 years. Again, this innovation could be on a par with Watt’s separate steam condenser. It appears that even now some producers of rare-Earth metals are storing rather than discarding thorium, as a waste product, in anticipation of its use as a future nuclear fuel.
Support for the energy sector, and in particular energy innovation, is of course essential. But we need to distinguish between supporting innovation and subsidising commercial-scale energy production. Significant subsidies for production consume economic resources that could help deliver future energy innovation.
As the UK drives forward with an ambitious programme to deploy various forms of green energy, it is becoming clear that a combination of energy-dense, lower-carbon methane, partly from expanding reserves of shale gas in the UK and elsewhere, together with uranium, and later thorium, can be the key fuels of the future. This combination can provide the foundations of an energy policy to deliver future abundant, clean energy from compact power plants.
The era of cheap energy is over only if we choose so. If we use technical innovation to accelerate, rather than supplant, moves towards greater energy density, we can deliver energy that is both cheaper and more abundant. And, as a useful side effect, we will help de-carbonise our economy in the process. <<<<
So you see George, one link would have been enough and this link is not c**p, a word that is not becoming of a man of your standing, and I am using it not because I want to but just to quote you.
Now, would you consider including an engineer in the list of the TTPPI board composition? It will give your quango a lot of weight.
G G Debono
Dec 17th 2011, 23:32
TO ……………Alex Ellul (Today, 16:09)
Quick easy answer alex - I'll let loads of references (pasted below) speak for me - it's a waste of time arguing with your rants... ...but I love it when I am criticized by people who talk S**T >>> easy targets ! .
Take your inane remark: " …. CO2 gas is not poisonous, toxic or in any way harmful to humans, fauna or flora “ …………………..
Golly ! Now this IS rocket science ! - - - by the same token neither are bananas “harmful to humans” - that is unless you eat too many _ I am told that 10 Kg of bananas can be lethal. So dear Alex any harmless thing is bad in too great quantities – ditto CO2 in our atmosphere - geddit ?
Now Alex – read the references about the health question with which I back up part IV of my "beloved book" and then come back again in a few months time after having read them if you want to argue with the findings . OK ? . I didn't read the rest of your disparaging c**p - yawn...... I guess it's it's just the same nonsense culled from the internet supermarket.
Dockery,D.W., Pope,C.A.III, Xu,X., Spengler,J.D., Ware,J.H., Fay,M.E., Ferris,B.G.Jr and Speizer,F.E. An association between
air pollution and mortality in six US cities. N. Engl. J. Med., 1993; 329, 1753–1759,
.
Pope CA, Thun MJ, Namboodiri MM, Dockery DW, Evans JS, Speizer FE, Heath CW, Jr. Particulate air pollution as a
predictor of mortality in a prospective study of U.S. adults. Am J Respir Crit Care Med: 1995;151:669– 674.
Ezzati , M. et al. Selected major risk factors and global and regional burden of disease. Lancet, 360: 1347–1360 2002
WHO, World health report 2002. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2002.
Schwartz, J. What are people dying of on high air pollution days? Environmental research, 64: 26–35 1994. 3838
Dockery, D. W. et al. Epidemiologic evidence of cardiovascular effects of particulate air pollution. Environmental health
perspectives, 109: 483–486 2001.
Goldberg et al. Identification of persons with cardiorespiratory conditions who are at risk of dying from the acute effects
of ambient air particles. Environmental health perspectives, 109: 487–494 2001.
Health Aspects of Air Pollution with Particulate Matter, Ozone and Nitrogen Dioxide. Report on a WHO Working Group
Bonn, Germany. 13–15 January 2003,
Bates, D.B., Air pollution: time for more clean air legislation? BMJ. Editorial. 1996;312:649-650 (16 March)
Zmirou D, Schwartz J, Saez M, Zanobetti A, Wojtyniak B, Touloumi G, Spix C, Ponce de Leon A, Le Moullec Y, Bacharova
L, Schouten J, Ponka A, Katsouyanni K. Time-series analysis of air pollution and cause-specific mortality. Epidemiology
1998; 9: 495-503.
Schwartz J. Air pollution and hospital admissions for heart disease in eight US counties. . Epidemiol ogy 1999; 10: 17-
22.
K Katsouyanni, G Touloumi, C Spix, J Schwartz, F Balducci, S Medina, G Rossi, B Wojtyniak, J Sunyer, L Bacharova, J P
Schouten, A Ponka, and H R Anderson. Short term effects of ambient sulphur dioxide and particulate matter on mortality
in 12 European cities: results from time series data from the APHEA project, BMJ, 7 Jun 1997; 314: 1658.
World Health Organization. Health risks of particulate matter from long-range transboundary air pollution. Copenhagen:
WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2006
Brunekreef B. 1997 Air pollution and life expectancy: is there a relation? Occup Environ Med.Nov; 5411: 781-4.
Denison, L., Rolfe, K., and Graham, B. (2000). Health effects of five common air contaminants and recommended
protective ranges. Ministry for the Environment Air Quality Technical Report No. 12, October 2000.
L Dillner, Traffic contributes to rise in asthma, says report. BMJ 1994;308:556
Clancy I, Goodman P, Sinclair H, Dockery DW. Effect of air pollution control on death rates in Dublin, Ireland: an
intervention study. Lancet 2002;360:1210-4. Hedley AJ,
Wong CM, Thach TQ, Ma S, Lam TH, Anderson HR. Cardiorespiratory and all-cause mortality after restrictions on sulphur
content of fuel in Hong Kong: an intervention study. Lancet 2002;360:1646-52.
Rothman, Kenneth J.; Cann, Cristina I: The Smoking Gun? Brit Med J. [Editorial] Volume 115, September 2000, p 485.
Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants. Long-term exposure to air pollution: effect on mortality. Department
of Health, London, 2007.
Fredrik Nyberg, Per Gustavsson, Lars Ja¨rup, Tom Bellander, Niklas Berglind, Robert Jakobsson, and Go¨ran Pershagen1,
Urban Air Pollution and Lung Cancer in Stockholm: Epidemiology September 2000, Vol. 11 No. 5
92
TOWARDS A LOW CARBON SOCIETY – THE NATION’S HEALTH, ENERGY SECURITY AND FOSSIL FUELS
Rothman KJ, Greenland S. Modern Epidemiology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers,
Archer VE. Air pollution and fatal lung disease in three Utah counties. Arch Environ Health 1990; 45:325–334.
Pope C A et al. Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution. Journal
of the American medical association, 287: 1132–1141, 2002.
Abbey, D.E., Nishino, N., McDonnell, W.F., Burchette, R.J., Knutsen, S.F., Beeson, L., and Yang, J.X. 1999 Long-term inhalable
particles and other air pollutants related to mortality in nonsmokers. Am.J.Resp.Crit Care Med. 159: 373 – 382.
Beeson WL, Abbey DE, Knutsen SF. Long-term concentrations of ambient air pollutants and incident lung cancer in
California adults: Results from the AHSMOG study. Review. Environ Health Perspect 1998;106:813–822. 30.
Abbey DE, Nishino N, McDonnell WF, Burchette RJ, Knutsen SF, Beeson WL, Yang JX. Long-term inhalable particles and
other air pollutants related to mortality in nonsmokers. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999;159:373–382.
Abbey DE, Mills PK, Petersen FF, Beeson WL. Long-term ambient concentrations of total suspended particulates and
oxidants as related to incidence of chronic disease in California Seventh-Day Adventists. Environ Health Perspect 1999;
94:43-50
Health Effects Institute. Diesel exhaust: a critical analysis of emissions, exposure and health effects. A special report of
the institute’s diesel working group. Cambridge, MA: HEI , 1995 Feychting M, Svensson D, Ahlbom A. Exposure to motor
vehicle exhaust and childhood cancer. Scand J Work Environ Health 1998; 24: 8-11.
Nyberg F. et al. Urban air pollution and lung cancer in Stockholm. Epidemiology 2000, 11: 487–495.
Nyberg F, Gustavsson P, Jarup L, Bellander T, Berglind N, Jakobsson R, Pershagen G. Urban air pollution and lung cancer
in Stockholm. Epidemiology 2000; 11: 587-595.
Rothman, Kenneth J.; Cann, Cristina I: The Smoking Gun? [Editorial Brit Med J] Volume 115, September 2000, p 485
Katsoyanni K. & Pershagen G. Ambient air pollution exposure and cancer. Cancer causes & control, 8: 284–291 1997.
Cohen, A.J. Outdoor air pollution and lung cancer. Environmental health perspectives, 108: 743–750 2000 Abbey DE,
Lebowitz MD, Mills PK, Petersen FF, Beeson WL, Burchette RJ. Long-term ambient concentrations of particulates and
oxidants and development of chronic disease in a cohort of nonsmoking California residents. Inhal Toxicol 1995;7:19
–34. Cohen AJ, Pope CA. Lung cancer and air pollution. Environ Health Perspect 1995;103suppl 8:219 –224.
Ippen, M. et al.; Cancer in residents of heavy traffic areas; Versicherungsmedizin 1989 Mar 1;412:39-42.
Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust. National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of
Research and Development, US EPA. Washington D.C. May 2002. page 9-11. EPA/600/8-90/057F
Nielsen, T. et al.; City air pollution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and other mutagens: occurrence, sources and
health effects.; Sci Total Environ 1996 Oct 28;189 – 190:41-9.
Bonner MR, Han D, Nie J, Rogerson P, Vena JE, Muti P, Trevisan M, Edge SB, Freudenheim JL 2005. Breast cancer risk
and exposure in early life to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons using total suspended particulates as a proxy measure.
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 14:53-60.
Han D, Rogerson PA, Nie J, Bonner MR, Vena JE, Vito D, Muti P, Trevisan M, Edge SB, Freudenheim JL 2004. Geographic
clustering of residence in early life and subsequent risk of breast cancer United States. Cancer Causes and Control
15:921-929.
Markey CM, Luque EH, Munoz de Toro MM, Sonnenschein C, Soto AM 2001. In utero exposure to bisphenol A alters the
development and tissue organization of the mouse mammary gland. Biology of Reproduction 65:1215-1223.
Han D, Rogerson PA, Nie J, Bonner MR, Vena JE, Vito, D, Muti P, Trevisan M, Edge SB, Freudenheim JL 2004. Geographic
clustering of residence in early life and subsequent risk of breast cancer United States. Cancer Causes and Control
15:921-929.
Palli D, Masala G, Mariani-Costantini R, Zanna I, Saieva C, Sera F, Decarli A, Ottini L 2004. A gene environment interaction
between occupation and BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations in male breast cancer? European Journal of Cancer 40:2474-2479.
Lin CA, Pereira LAA, de Souza Conceicao GM, Kishi HS, Milani RJ, Braga ALF, Saldiva PHN: Association between air
pollution and ischemic cardiovascular emergency room visits. Environmental Research 2003, 92:57-63.
Pope CA III, Burnett RT, Thun MJ, Calle EE, Krewski D, Ito K, and Thurston, GD. 2002. Lung Cancer, Cardiopulmonary
Mortality and Long-Term Exposure to Fine Particulate Air Pollution. Journal of the American Medical Association JAMA.
March 6, 2002, Vol. 287, No. 9, pp. 1132- 1141
C. Arden Pope III, PhD; Richard T. Burnett, PhD; Michael J. Thun, MD; Eugenia E. Calle, PhD; Daniel Krewski, PhD; Kazuhiko
Ito, PhD; George D. Thurston Lung Cancer, Cardiopulmonary Mortality, and Long-term Exposure to Fine Particulate Air
Pollution . JAMA. 2002;287:1132-1141 .
Dockery,D.W., Pope,C.A.III, Xu,X., Spengler,J.D., Ware,J.H., Fay,M.E., Ferris,B.G.Jr and Speizer,F.E. 1993 An association
between air pollthouution and mortality in six US cities. N. Engl. J. Med., 329, 1753–1759
Kunzli N, Medina S, Kaiser R, et al. Assessment of deaths attributable to air pollution: should we use risk estimates based
on time series or on cohort studies? Am J Epidemiol 2001;153:1050–5
Lipfert FW. 1993. Community Air Pollution Mortality: Analysis of 1980 Data from US Metropolitan Areas: I. Particulate
Air Pollution. BNL 48446-R.
US Department of Energy, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton NY Moolgavkar SH. 1994.
Moolgavkar SH, Luebeck EG. Air pollution and mortality [letter]. N Eng J Med 1996. 33017:1237–1238. A critical review
of the evidence on particulate air pollution and mortality. Epidemiology 7:420–428.
Health Effects Institute. 2000 Re-analysis of the Harvard Six Cities Study and the American Cancer Society Study of Air
Pollution and Mortality.Cambridge, MA: Health Effects Institute.
Krewski D, Burnett RT, Goldberg MS, et al. Reanalysis of the Harvard Six Cities Study and the American Cancer Society
Study of Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality. Cambridge:, 2000:246.
Reanalysis of the Harvard Six Cities Study and the American Cancer Society Study of Particulate Air Pollution and
Mortality A Special Report of the Institute’s Particle Epidemiology Reanalysis Project. Health effects institute, USA July
2000. Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants. Long-term exposure to air pollution: effect on mortality.
Department of Health, London, 2007.
5 Finkelstein MM, Jerrett M, Sears MR. Traffic air pollution and mortality rate advancement periods. Am J Epidemiol
2004;160:173-7.
Filleul L, Rondeau V, Vandentorren S, Le Moual N, Cantagrel A, Annesi-Maesano I, et al. Twenty five year mortality and
air pollution: results from the French PAARC survey. Occ Environ Med 2005;62:453-60.
Jerrett, M., Burnett, R.T., Ma, R., Pope, C.A., Krewski, D., Newbold, K.B., Thurston, G., Shi, Y., Finkelstein, N., Calle, E.E. and
Thun, M. 2005 Spatial analysis of air pollution and mortality in Los Angeles. Epidemiology 16, 726-736.
Jerrett et al 2005 Jerrett, M., Burnett, R., Ma, R., Thurston, G., Newbold, B., Finkelstein. N.,Shi, Y., Krewski, D., Pope, A. and
Thun, M. 2004 Air pollution and mortality in Los Angeles. Abstract presented at the 2004 Health Effects Institute Annual
Conference.
Goldberg MS, Bailar JC 3rd, Burnett RT, Brook JR, Tamblyn R, Bonvalot Y, Ernst P, Flegel KM, Singh RK, Valois MF. Identifying
subgroups of the general population that may be susceptible to short-term increases in particulate air pollution: a timeseries
study in Montreal. Res Rep Health Eff Inst. 2000 Oct;97:7-113
Kunzli N. Assessment of deaths attributable to air pollution: should we use risk estimates based on time series or cohort
studies? American Journal of Epidemiology, 2001, 10:1050–1055
Nafstad, P., Haheim, L.L., Wisloff, T., Gram, F., Oftedal, B., Holme, I.,Hjermann, I. and Leren, P. 2004 Urban air pollution and
mortality in a cohort of Norwegian men. Environ. Health.Perspect. 112, 610-615.
94
TOWARDS A LOW CARBON SOCIETY – THE NATION’S HEALTH, ENERGY SECURITY AND FOSSIL FUELS
Kunzli N, Kaiser R, Medina S, Studnicka M, Chanel O, Filliger P, et al. Public health impact of outdoor and traffic-related
air pollution: a European assessment. Lancet 2000; 356: 795-801.
Katsouyanni K, Zmirou D, Spix C, et al. Short-term effects of air pollution on health: a European approach using
epidemiological time-series data. The APHEA project: background, objectives, design. Eur Respir J 1995; 8: 1030-1038.
Katsouyanni K, Touloumi G, Samoli E, et al. Confounding and effect modification in the short-term effects of ambient
particles on total mortality: results from 29 European cities within the APHEA2 project. Epidemiology 2001; 12: 521-
531.
Atkinson RW, Anderson HR, Sunyer J, et al. Acute effects of particulate air pollution on respiratory admissions: results
from APHEA 2 project. Air Pollution and Health: a European Approach. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001; 164: 1860-1866
Le Tertre, A., Medina, S., Samoli, E., Forsberg, B., Michelozzi, P., Boumghar, A., Vonk, J. M., Bellini, A., Atkinson, R., Ayres,
J. G., Sunyer, J., Schwartz, J., & Katsouyanni, K. 2002, “Short-term effects of particulate air pollution on cardiovascular
diseases in eight European cities”, Journal of epidemiology and community health, vol. 56, no. 10, pp. 773-779.
Katsouyanni K, Touloumi G, Spix C, et al. Short-term effects of ambient sulphur dioxide and particulate matter on
mortality in 12 European cities: results from time series data from the APHEA project. BMJ 1997; 314: 1658-1663.
Biggeri A, Bellini P, Terracini B. Meta-analysis of the Italian studies on short-term effects of air pollution—MISA 1996-
2002. Epidemiol Prev. 2004 Jul-Oct;284-5 Suppl:4-100.
Goldberg M S et al. Associations between daily cause-specific mortality and concentrations of ground-level ozone in
Montreal, Quebec. American journal of epidemiology, 154: 817–826 2001.
GOUVEIA, N. ET AL. Time series analysis of air pollution and mortality: effects by cause, age and socioeconomic status.
Journal of epidemiology and community health, 54: 750– 755 2000.
Anderson H.R. et al. WHO project: systematic review of health aspects of AQ Europe. An overview of the St. George’s
project. A systematic review of the epidemiological literature on the short-term health effects of outdoor air pollution,
St. George’s Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 2002.
Meta-analysis of time-series studies and panel studies of particulate matter PM and ozone O3. Copenhagen, WHO
Regional Office for Europe, 2004 http://www.euro.who.int/document/
Wichmann HE, Spix C, Tuch T, Wolke G, Peters A, Heinrich J, Kreyling WG, Heyder J. Daily mortality and fine and ultrafine
particles in Erfurt, Germany part I: role of particle number and particle mass. Res Rep Health Eff Inst. 2000 Nov;98:5-86;
discussion 87-94
Anderson HR, Ponce de Leon A, Bland JM, Bower JS, Strachan DP. Air pollution and daily mortality in London: 1987-92.
BMJ 1996;312:665-9
Clancy L et al. 2002. Effect of air-pollution control on death rates in Dublin, Ireland: an intervention study. Lancet, 360:
1210–1214 2002.
Wong CM et al. Comparison between two districts of the effects of an air pollution intervention on bronchial
responsiveness in primary school children in Hong Kong. Journal of epidemiology and community health, 52: 571–578
1998.
Peters J et al. Effects of an ambient air pollution intervention and environmental tobacco smoke on children’s respiratory
health in Hong Kong. International journal of epidemiology, 25: 821–828 1996. .
Kelly I, Clancy L. Mortality in a general hospital and urban air pollution. Ir J Med Sci 1984; 77: 322-324.. Clancy I, Goodman
P, Sinclair H, Dockery DW. Effect of air pollution control on death rates in Dublin, Ireland: an intervention study. Lancet
2002;360:1210-4.
Hedley AJ, Wong CM, Thach TQ, Ma S, Lam TH, Anderson HR. Cardiorespiratory and all-cause mortality after restrictions
on sulphur content of fuel in Hong Kong: an intervention study. Lancet 2002;360:1646- 1652.
Pope CA III, Schwartz J, Ransom MR. Daily mortality and PM10 pollution in Utah Valley. Arch Environ Health 1992; 47:
211-217.
Long-Term Exposure to Air Pollution: Effect on Mortality. The Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants COMEAP
announces the publication of its report ‘Long-term Exposure to Air Pollution: Effect on Mortality’.
FRIEDMAN, M. S. ET AL. Impact of changes in transportation and commuting behaviors during the 1996 summer olympic
games in Atlanta on air quality and childhood asthma. Journal of the American medical association, 285: 897–905
2001.
Fischer PH, Hoek G, van Reeuwijk H, et al. Traffic-related differences in outdoor and indoor concentrations of particles
and volatile organic compounds in Amsterdam. Atmos Environ 2000;34:3713–22
Lena TS, Ochieng V, Carter M, et al. Elemental carbon and PM2.5 levels in an urban community heavily impacted by
truck traffic. Environ Health Perspect 2002;110:1009–15.
Hoek G, Brunekreef B, Goldbohm S, Fischer P, van den Brandt PA. Association between mortality and indicators of trafficrelated
air pollution in the Netherlands: a cohort study. Lancet 2002;360:1203-9.
Roemer WH, van Wijnen JH. Daily mortality and air pollution along busy streets in Amsterdam, 1987–
1998. Epidemiology 2001; 12: 649-653.
Levy JI, Houseman EA, Spengler JD, et al. Fine particulate matter and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon concentration
patterns in Roxbury, Massachusetts: a community-based GIS analysis. Environ Health Perspect 2001;109:341–7.
Kunzli N. Assessment of deaths attributable to air pollution: should we use risk estimates based on time series or cohort
studies? American Journal of Epidemiology, 2001, 10:1050–1055
Epidemiologic investigation to identify chronic effects of ambient air pollutants in Southern California Prepared for the
California Air Resources Board and the California Environmental Protection Agency Contract No. 94-331
Edwards J, Walters S, Griffiths RK: Hospital admissions for asthma in preschool children: Relationship to major roads in
Birmingham, United Kingdom. Archives of Environmental Health 1994, 49:223-227.
Lin S, Munsie JP, Hwang S, Fitzgerald E, Cayo MR: Childhood asthma hospitalization and residential exposure to state
route traffic. Environmental Research Section A 2002, 88:73-81| HITCHINS, J. ET AL. Concentrations of sub-micrometer
particles from vehicle emissions near a major road. Atmospheric environment, 34: 51–59 2000.
Morawska L et al. Differences in airborne particle and gaseous concentrations in urban air between weekdays and
weekends. Atmospheric Environment, 36: 4375–4383 2002.
Zhu Y et al. Concentration and size distribution of ultrafine particles near a major highway. Journal of the air & waste
management association, 52: 1032–1042 2002.
Ciccone G, Forastiere F, Agabiti N, Biggeri A, Bisanti L, Chellini E, Corbo G, Dell’Orco V, Dalmasso P, Volante TF, Galassi C,
Piffer S, Renzoni E, Rusconi F, Sestini P, Viegi G, SIDRIA collaborative group: Road traffic and adverse respiratory effects in
children. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 1998, 55:771-778.
Epidemiologic investigation to identify chronic effects of ambient air pollutants in Southern California prepared for the
California Air Resources Board and the California Environmental Protection Agency Contract No. 94-331.
Gauderman WJ et al. Association between air pollution and lung function growth in southern California children.
American Journal of Respiratory & Critical Care Medicine, 2000, 162:1383–1390
Gauderman WJ et al. Association between air pollution and lung function growth in southern California children: results
from a second cohort. American Journal of Respiratory & Critical Care Medicine, 2002, 166:76–84..
Frischer T et al. Lung function growth and ambient ozone: A three-year population study in school children. American
journal of respiratory and critical care medicine, 160: 390–396 1999.
Horak F Jr et al. Particulate matter and lung function growth in children: a 3-yr follow-up study in Austrian schoolchildren.
European respiratory journal, 19: 838–845 2002.
Jallaludin BB et al. Acute effects of low levels of ambient ozone on peak expiratory flow rate in a cohort of Australian
children. International journal of epidemiology, 29: 549–557 2000
Brunekreef B, Janssen NAH, de Hartog J, Harssema H, Knape M, van Vilet P: Air pollution from truck traffic and lung
function in children living near motorways.
McConnell R et al. Asthma in exercising children exposed to ozone: a cohort study. Lancet, 359: 386–391 2002.
Gauderman WJ et al . Association between air pollution and lung function growth in southern California children.
Results from a second cohort. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine, 166: 76–84 2002 ABBEY, D.E.
ET AL. Long-term inhalable particles and other air pollutants related to mortality in nonsmokers. American journal of
respiratory and critical care medicine, 159: 3730150382 1999
McConnell WF et al . Long-term ambient ozone concentration and the incidence of asthma in nonsmoking adults: the
ashmog study. Environmental Research, 80: 110–121
Abbey DE et al. Long-term particulate and other air pollutants and lung function in nonsmokers. American journal
of respiratory and critical care medicine, 158: 289–298 1998. MORTIMER, K.M. ET AL. The effect of ozone on inner-city
children with asthma identification of susceptible subgroups. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine,
162: 1838–1845 2000..
Abbey DE et al. Long-term inhalable particles and other air pollutants related to mortality in nonsmokers. American
journal of respiratory and critical care medicine, 159: 3730150382 ,1999.
Peters JM et al. A study of 12 Southern California communities with differing levels and types of air pollution. II Effects on
pulmonary function. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine, 159: 768–775 1999.
Bush M. L.et al. Longitudinal Distribution of O3 absorption in the lung: gender differences and intersubject variability.
Journal of applied physiology, 81: 1651–1657 1996.
Seal E Jr et al . The pulmonary response of white and black adults to six concentrations of ozone. American reviews of
respiratory disease, 147: 804–810 1993.
Avol EL et al. Respiratory effects of relocating to areas of differing air pollution levels. American Journal of Respiratory &
Critical Care Medicine, 2001, 164:2067–2072.
Sunyer J, Anto JM, Tobias A, Burney P: Generational increase of self-reported first attack of asthma in fifteen industrialized
countries European Respiratory Journal 1999, 14:885-891
Variations in the prevalence of respiratory symptoms, self-reported asthma attacks, and use of asthma medication in
the European Community Respiratory Health Survey ECRHS. European Respiratory Journal 1996, 9:687-695.
Beasley R, Crane J, Lai CKW, Pearce N: Prevalence and etiology of asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
2000, 105:S466-S472
Russo MJ, McConnochie KM., McBride JT, Szilagyi PG, Brooks AM, Roghmann KJ: Increase in admission threshold explains
stable asthma hospitalisation rates. Pediatrics 1999, 104:454-462.
Ciccone G, Forastiere F, Agabiti N, Biggeri A, Bisanti L, Chellini E, Corbo G, Dell’Orco V, Dalmasso P, Volante TF, Galassi C,
Piffer S, Renzoni E, Rusconi F, Sestini P, Viegi G, SIDRIA collaborative group: Road traffic and adverse respiratory effects in
children. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 1998, 55:771-778.
Edwards J, Walters S, Griffiths RK: Hospital admissions for asthma in preschool children: Relationship to major roads in
Birmingham, United Kingdom. Archives of Environmental Health 1994, 49:223-227.
Lin S, Munsie JP, Hwang S, Fitzgerald E, Cayo MR: Childhood asthma hospitalization and residential exposure to state
route traffic. Environmental Research Section A 2002, 88:73-81.
Venn A, YemaneberhanH, Lewis S, Parry E, Britton J. Proximity of the home to roads and the risl of wheeze in an Ethiopian
population. Occup Env Med 2005; 626: 376 -380
Lwebuga-Mukasa JS, Oyana T, Thenappan A, Ayirookuzhi SJ. Association between traffic volume and health care use for
asthma among residents at a U.S.-Canadian border crossing point. J Asthma. 2004;413:289-304.
97
TOWARDS A LOW CARBON SOCIETY – THE NATION’S HEALTH, ENERGY SECURITY AND FOSSIL FUELS
Wilkinson P, Elliott P, Grundy C, Shaddick G, Thakrar B, Walls P, Falconer S.Case-control study of hospital admission with
asthma in children aged 5-14 years: relation with road traffic in north west London.Thorax. 1999 Dec;5412:1070-4.
Migliaretti G, Cadum E, Migliore E, Cavallo F. Traffic air pollution and hospital admission for asthma: a case-control
approach in a Turin Italy population. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2005 Mar;782:164-9. Epub 2005 Feb 22.
Oosterlee A, Drijver M, Lebret E, Brunerkreef S, Chronic respiratory effects in children and adults living along streets with
high traffic density. Occup Env Med 1996; 53 4 : 241 – 247
White AJ, Gompertz S, Stockley RA: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 6: The aetiology of exacerbations of chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax 2003, 58:73-80. .
EPIDEMIOLOGIC INVESTIGATION TO IDENTIFY CHRONIC EFFECTS OF AMBIENT AIR POLLUTANTS IN SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA Prepared for the California Air Resources Board and the California Environmental Protection Agency
Contract No. 94-331.
Friedman MS et al.. Impact of changes in transportation and commuting behaviors during the 1996 summer olympic
games in Atlanta on air quality and childhood asthma. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285: 897–905
2001.
Atkinson RW, Anderson HR, Strachan DP, Bland JM, Bremner S, Ponce-de-Leon A: Air pollution, pollens and daily
admissions for asthma in London 1987-1992.European Respiratory Journal 1999, 13:257-265.
Dab W, Medina S, Quenel P, Le Moullec Y, Le Tetre A, Thelot B, Monteil C, Lameloise P, Pirard P, Momas I, Ferry R, Festy
B: Short term respiratory health effects of ambient air pollution: results of the APHEA project in Paris.Journal of
Epidemiology and Community Health 1996, 50Suppl 1:S42-S46. PubMed Abstract |
McDonnell WF et al. Long-term ambient ozone concentration and the incidence of asthma in nonsmoking adults: the
Ashmog study. Environmental Research, 80: 110–121. 1999.
Goldberg MS et al. Associations between daily cause-specific mortality and concentrations of ground-level ozone in
Montreal, Quebec. American journal of Epidemiology, 154: 817–826 2001.
Gouveia N et al. Time series analysis of air pollution and mortality: effects by cause, age and socioeconomic status.
Journal of epidemiology and community health, 54: 750– 755 2000.
Anderson HR et al. WHO project: systematic review of health aspects of AQ Europe. An overview of the St. George’s
project. A systematic review of the epidemiological literature on the short-term health effects of outdoor air pollution,
St. George’s Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 2002..
Balzan M, Bonnici J.J., Respiratory Health Ssurvey 2001. Report commissioned by the Fgura Local Council and the Zejtun
Local Council
Wichmann HE et al. Daily mortality and fine and ultrafine particles in Erfurt, Germany part I: role of particle number and
particle mass. 2000. Research Report Health Effects Institute 98: 5–94. ,
Pekkanen J et al. . Effects of ultrafine and fine particles in urban air on peak expiratory flow among children with
asthmatic symptoms. Environmental research, 74: 24–33 1997.
Peters A et al. Respiratory effects are associated with the number of ultrafine particles. American journal of respiratory
and critical care medicine, 155: 1376–1383 1997
Penttinen P et al. Number concentration and size of particles in urban air: effects on spirometric lung function in adult
asthmatic subjects. Environmental health perspectives, 109: 319–323 2001.
Penttinen P et al. Ultrafine particles in urban air and respiratory health among adult asthmatics. European respiratory
journal, 17: 428–435 2001.
Infant mortality
Woodruff TJ, Parker JD, Schoendorf KC. Fine particulate matter PM2.5 air pollution and selected causes of postneonatal
infant mortality in California. 1: Environ Health Perspect. 2006 May;1145:786-90..
Woodruff TJ, Grillo J, Schoendorf KC. The relationship between selected causes of postneonatal infant mortality and
particulate air pollution in the United States. Environ Health Perspect. 1997 Jun;1056:608-12.
Kaiser R, Romieu I, Medina S, Schwartz J, Krzyzanowski M, Kunzli N. Air pollution attributable postneonatal infant
mortality in U.S. metropolitan areas: a risk assessment study. Environ Health. 2004 May 5;31:4.
Woodruff TJ, Grillo J, Schoendorf KC. The relationship between selected causes of postneonatal infant mortality and
particulate air pollution in the United States U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460, USA
Ostro BD, Rothschild S, Air pollution and acute respiratory morbidity: an observational study of multiple pollutants.
Environ Res 1989; 50:238-47.
Peters EA et al. Increased particulate air pollution and the triggering of myocardial infarction. Circulation, 103: 2810–
2815 (2001).
Delfino R et al. Association of asthma symptoms with peak particulate air pollution and effect modification by antiinflammatory
medication use. Environmental health perspectives, 110: 607–617 (2002).
Mortimer K M et alL. The effect of ozone on inner-city children with asthma identification of susceptible subgroups. ?
American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine, 162: 1838–1845 (2000),
EPIDEMIOLOGIC INVESTIGATION TO IDENTIFY CHRONIC EFFECTS OF AMBIENT AIR POLLUTANTS IN SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA Prepared for the California Air Resources Board and the California Environmental Protection Agency
Contract No. 94-331.
Pope CA, Dockery DW. Acute health effects of PM10 pollution on symptomatic and asymptomatic children. The American
review of respiratory disease, 145: 1123–1128 (1992).
Boezen HM et al. Effects of ambient air pollution on upper and lower respiratory symptoms and peak expiratory flow in
children. Lancet, 353: 874–878 (1999).
Alex Ellul
Dec 17th 2011, 16:09
It is an established fact that all scientific discoveries and inventions, eventually being commercialised, always end up on the engineer's desk. It is the engineer who finally has adapt the science into a functional technology for the service of his fellow men. It is he who has to install it, run it and maintain it. So it is quite surprising to see the usual environmental upstarts, who believe that they are the bees knees of planet earth,its saviour, demonising an engineer for expressing his professional knowledge and sometimes his personal opinion based on this knowledge, as if the devil himself hath spoken. George Debono, as is usual for him to do when he finds himself cornered, refers Ing. Pace to his GD's I mean) most beloved “Towards a Low Carbon Society - the Nation's Health, Energy Security and Fossil Fuels”, as if this was the be all and end all solution for saving the planet, or the island. It is pertinent to note that, while the issue of energy, as I have indicated in the above introduction, always end up on the engineers' desks, none of the 14 members of the "The Today Public Policy Institute" is an engineer, or at least a scientist knowledgeable in the science of energy, though all of them are known to be leading Maltese professionals in their area of expertise, but not engineering. The 'The Today Public Policy Institute' (TTPPI) therefore has a grave lacuna in its board composition which it must address for its own credibility. Ing. Pace's dissertation is trying to fill that gap, that the TTPPI has.
It is also unbefitting for Ing. Cremona to try to ridicule his own profession by trying to indicte that Enemalta, run by engineers, defaults on its environmental committments. Shame on Ing. Cremona, because it is not engineers who default but politicians and finacial controllers who prefer to invest in their onw votes, in the case of politicians, and to balance the books at the expense of others in the case of FC's. Enemalta engineers always do their best to produce and deliver electrical power keeping emissions at or below what the state (read EU) dictates. The defaulters are not the engineers.
Fuel: All hydrocarbon fuels emit CO2 gas, water vapour, other gases and particulates. CO2 gas is not poisonous, toxic or in any way harmful to humans, fauna or flora. On the contrary, CO2 is beneficial to plants, increases plant growth by double percentage points while the current level of global atmospheric CO2 has caused the increase of the global biospheric mass by a massive amount. This science can all be found in peer-reviwed reports.
The problem is not the major components of the exhausted compounds (water and CO2), but the other gases and particulates. But, and here's the rub, EVEN DIESEL produces these gases and particulates and when I am drivving behind a diesel powered vehicle, especially a heavy one, I have to switch off all of my car's ventilation so as not to die of immediate asphixiation or of lung cancer in the longer term. (I don't smoke for the same reasons).
So, what is the difference between using HFO and diesel fuel. It's the financial bottomline, nothing else. Diesel fuel produces the same compounds in its exhaust as HFO, the difference being only in the quantity.
Other countries: In the US, Australia and EU, most of the electrical power is generated by coal, the 'most polluting' among all HC fuels. However, instead of changing over to other cleaner fuels, it was found that scrubbing the exhaust and removing all pollutants while only water vapour and CO2 are let through the chimney stacks, is more economically advantageous. However, Malta being a small island, coal cannot be considered. But we have to consider the priceof energy. This has gone through the roof these last years and there are people in Malta who CANNOT AFFORD TO PURCHASE ENERGY.
If one where to consider who are the people fighting against the use of the cheaper HFO option, one finds that these are mostly well-off people. I wonder what a single mother on a single wage would say if she was told that the HFO option would reduce her electricity bill by €10 euros a week or a month, or that for the same money she can heat her home a little bit, so her baby would not catch a cold and die of bronchitis. In fact, on a global level one finds that rich people are the most adamant on the use of renewable (read:very costly) energy. The poor don't actually care that little bit.
Albert Bezzina
Dec 17th 2011, 13:26
I can imagine that Prof. Mallia's informative letter would have been submitted for publication following the Malta Environment and Planning Authority board hearing on December 5. I could have imagined that Ing. Pace's article could have appeared in response to Prof. Mallia's letter once published. That Ing. Pace's article appeared concurrently with Prof. Mallia's letter - and on the facing page no less - may suggest that the article was done on request after Prof. Mallia's letter was sent ot the editor. Only circumstantial of course.
Alex Ellul
Dec 17th 2011, 14:23
or the other way round. Only circumstantial of course.
Albert Bezzina
Dec 18th 2011, 00:30
@ Alex Ellul
True, but the other way round is unlikely.
And, re above:
"CO2 is beneficial to plants, increases plant growth by double percentage points while the current level of global atmospheric CO2 has caused the increase of the global biospheric mass by a massive amount."
Biospheric mass meaning CO2 consuming organisms such as plants and algae. As far as I know the overall bulk of plants is diminishing from deforestation, draught, failed harvests and desertification.
The rising CO2 is increasing sea acidification with consequances to carbonate shelled organisms such as molluscs, corals and echinoderms. I would be interested in liks to the peer-reviwed reports.
G G Debono
Dec 16th 2011, 19:09
Sorry = please delete my last comment - some of the comments didn't appear when I refreshed the last time...
Apologies...
Edward Mallia
Dec 16th 2011, 18:54
I did send in an earlier comment which pointed out a number of inaccuracies and worse in John Pace's piece. 1. HFO will leave around 3t on slude every day which Enemalta said will be burnt as fuel in the existing boilers. It needs handling; the 'toxic' tag is a due warning; it does not merit any coarse rejoinder from Mr. Pace. 2. HFO is used in many ships; so much so that the EU is currently considering imposing restrictions on its use starting with the Baltic Sea. Numerous ships going through the Sicily channel leave SO2 "wakes" that are detected on Gozo. 3. Enemalta never announced any use of HFO with less than 0.7% sulphur. The temporary IPPC permit allows 1% sulphur HFO. 4. Using diesel will not remove the need for dust filters; in fact Enemalta engineers have said that they would still use desulphurisation with diesel as the dust filters require a coating of sodium sulphate to work at their best-- i.e. trap both PM2.5 and PM10 particles. Does Mr. Pace have an engineering opinion on this? Or is the Enemalta contention similar to telling somebody to improve his Euro2 diesel by sticking a potatoe in the exhaust? 5. That threat of a 30% increase in current tariffs was plagiarised from some recent PN paper. Not even Minister Fenech subcribes to figure any more. In any case it is plain wrong; the rates should come down. 6. Pity that Mr. Pace was not consulted when Cubed Consultants drew up their Cost Benefit Analysis. The preferred generation scheme shown there has a number of implications -- some with the status of impossibilities, others with implications of the sort he has mentioned: that with the Sicily cable working hard, the demand for gas from the Extension and existing Delimara would not warrant the expenseof a pipeline. Surely the easiest, quickest and cheapest way to get gas is to insist that the Sicily cable is energised by a gas-fired power station.
G G Debono
Dec 16th 2011, 18:35
To Mr John Pace(Today, 17:48)
RE “ The residue from gas cleaning is hazardous, not toxic. It is mainly sodium sulphate and sodium carbonate with some minor constituents which render it hazardous.”
This sound like putting it mildly – but what I refer to is toxic fine particulates which are possibly not filtered out.
I said - “a large number of toxins and carcinogens are generated during the combustion process and released in combination with the emitted particulates which are HIGHLY TOXIC ! --- and that it is these that are responsible for the negative effects on health ! These are produced in greater quantities and have to be disposed of if HFO is used. The point is this : there is no certainty that ultra-fine particulates will be effectively filtered. And it is these particulates which are responsible for the serious and usually fatal health effects such as cancer, cardiac deaths and lung disease.”
As to the proof for the toxicity of particulates (." ....check the facts before committing himself in print..." ) ., I suggest you read Part IV of “Towards a Low Carbon Society - the Nation's Health, Energy Security and Fossil Fuels” which can be downloaded at n http://www.tppi.org.mt/cms/index.php/reports .
Edward Mallia
Dec 16th 2011, 18:04
I suggest that John Pace speaks only for himself in telling the "public" what luxuries it can or cannot afford.
One thing it cannot afford is a government, an Enemalta and retired engineers who can only sustain their case with fake reports and empty ministerial spoutings. No government spokeman said we could not afford that monstrosity at City gate or to give our Ministers a rise of €500 a week. Is that a productivity bonus, perhaps?
Charles DeMicoli
Dec 16th 2011, 17:27
#6 oil was used predominantly in burners in most commercial buildings in New York City, and perhaps other cities. #6 has mostly been phased out, #4 oil took its place and it is also on the way out. So, what's the idea of using 1900's technology in 2011 and beyond? More than meets the eye, perhaps. Nevertheless, this is a politically motivated article very thinly veiled as an engineer's report.
Edward Mallia
Dec 16th 2011, 17:15
Pity John Pace slipped on a large patch of HFO. I am not an opponent of the Delimara Power station extension, I am not an Opposition journalist. In fact I am not a journalist at all. To get to some facts: DPSE will produce up to 3t of HFO sludge a day which the piston engines cannot digest. This we are correctly told has "fuel" value and will be burnt in existing Delimara boilers. It will need careful handling; so its description as "toxic" is a required warning, even if there is no assumption that anyone is going to drink it. That remark was a bit callous on the part of Mr. Pace.
Unfortunately, the Enemalta IPPC application failed to mention any heavy metal content of HFO. The attached Cost Benefit Analysis lumped it under the heading of 'dust' so as to play down shadow emission prices and suggest that there is only a quantitative difference betwen HFO and gasoil 'dust'.
Dr. Austin Gatt does not usually put his light under a bushel; in numerous trumpetings he never mentioned any HFO with less than 0.7% sulphur. And the MEPA IPPC temporary permit allows 1% sulphur HFO.
Using diesel WILL NOT remove the need of dust filters. In fact Enemalta has insisted that it needs flue gas desulphurisation even for diesel, as the bag filters need a coating of sodium sulphate to work properly. And working properly in Enemalta-speak is stopping both PM10 and PM2.5 particulates. Perhaps Engineer Pace can give us an opinion on this -- can the filters do this or will the back pressure created snuff out the engines?
That 30% increase in electricty bills is a fantasy. Those making it need to look up the meaning of "increase" in a good dictionary and then work out the basis of current tariffs, before they can talk of an increase. Eng. Pace does not seem to object to silly statements from PN journalists.
On the question of the Sicily cable and/or gas, I pointed that out to Gordon Cordina, the writer of the cost benefit analysis. His (or Enemalta's) preferred generation plan has a large contribution from the cable, less from the extension and very little from existing Delimara. I suggested that the cost of a gas pipeline would not be justified by the rather limited demand. Change the "scenario" said Dr. Cordina; but then the load factor on the cable may drop too much.
There may another trouble with this generation plan.
Tucked away somewhere is the statement that the cable will start off with a single 100MW line, to be doubled later. But the preferred generation plan has the cable supplying such an amount of electricity in year 2014 that it would need to work flat out for 16000hours in that year if its capacity was only 100MW. As there are only 8760 hours in a year, that is an impossible demand.
Narcy Calamatta
Dec 16th 2011, 17:00
I happen to have visited in Branderburg, Germany, a surface coal mine. Such natural fuel sources offer the facility to literally shovel up tons of coal dust every second. They have a 24 hour container train that transports the coal straight from the mine to the power station down the road. That would indeed be the cheapest fuel they can use in Branderburg. In Malta we have other power sources which are natural and easily harvested, namely; wind and sunlight. Why must our engineers keep discussing the use of fossil fuels which were introduced to us by colonialists who are still sitting on such resources. Never mind what other nations use for power station fuels let us concentrate on what will always be there for us even it the initial investment can only produce favourable results in the long term. I am not an engineer but I have lived here for a long time.
Alex Ellul
Dec 17th 2011, 16:07
Narcy, lets make an agreement between you and I, as follows: I do not try my hand at acting and you desist from talking technology. I am sure that if I were to try my hand at acting I will be the fool. I am not writing the next logical sentence.
However I will write the following:
When you find a town or city, let alone a country not necessary as popukous as our island, somewhere in the world, running totally and continuously on wind and/or solar please let me know.
Marco Cremona
Dec 16th 2011, 14:56
Excellent article!.... and this statement is bang on "The cable connection to Italy also needs to operate at a high load factor to be economical, so it’s either a cable connection or a gas pipeline, not both, especially with Enemalta’s bad financial situation"
Unfortunately it seems that this country is trying to invest in all solutions (Delimara extension, interconnector, gas pipeline, wind farms, PVs etc.) without taking into consideration the huge costs involved (when investing in all) and the simple BASIC FACT that these may be competing to meet a small (and ideally decreasing) electricity demand. That is, the cost per unit production (in Euro/kWh) - which is critical - will be prohibitively high!.
With the consequence that at some stage, we will be encouraged to consume more electricity so that we can justify these investments. X'genn!!
However Ing. Pace is wrong (or naive) to believe that "thanks to EU emission regulations, sufficient safeguards now exist to ensure the safety of using HFO". Experience has shown that neither Enemalta or MEPA can be entrusted with implementing and enforcing the same safeguards". It's a question of credibility, and I'm sorry to say both Enemalta and MEPA are in deficit in this area.
G G Debono
Dec 16th 2011, 14:26
Correction !
The sentence "And it is these filters which are responsible for the serious and usually fatal health effects such as cancer, cardiac deaths and lung disease"
This should, of course, read ...." And it is these PARTICULATES which are responsible for the serious and usually fatal health effects such as cancer, cardiac deaths and lung disease"
G G Debono
Dec 16th 2011, 10:54
Sorry but this reads suspiciously like a politically-motivated article
RE “…………Opposition journalists …….. going so far as quoting the Material Safety Data Sheet...........highlighted the fact that the MSDS described the fuel as toxic.”.
Golly ! Of course it is unsafe to drink diesel or inhale natural gas! Any village idiot knows this. Such a comparison between toxicity of (drinking !!!) diesel oil and the hazardous waste resulting from HFO combustion is nothing short of a shameful bare-faced attempt at deception ! Sorry, but the public is no longer stupid !
BUT what every engineer should know is that a large number of toxins and carcinogens are generated during the combustion process and released in combination with the emitted particulates which are HIGHLY TOXIC ! --- and that it is these that are responsible for the negative effects on health ! These are produced in greater quantities and have to be disposed of if HFO is used. The point is this : there is no certainty that ultra-fine particulates will be effectively filtered. And it is these filters which are responsible for the serious and usually fatal health effects such as cancer, cardiac deaths and lung disease.
RE “……..Only a minority of power stations in Europe use fuel oil (the exception is Italy). The predominant fuel is coal, though the use of natural gas has increased in recent years. The reason for this is that these are the cheapest fuels……….”
Bla Bla Bla --- This statement is misleading – 1 ) because that coal is satill used is no excuse for a Malta to take a backward step when installing a new power plant. Coal is being phased out and more benign fuels are being sought.
RE “……Malta had also an opportunity to change over to natural gas but the project happened at a time of political instability and was left to lapse…….”
This is irrelevant ! Political turmoil? Come on !! We have had democratic stability for over 25 years !!! The recent sudden decision to move the goalposts by downward adjusting the conditions for environmental acceptability at the last moment and the way the whole matter was ruished through before an incredulous public has NOTHING to do with political turmoil.
RE “…….Unfortunately, turning back the clock has proved to be very difficult…..”
Nonsense ! . Another false excuse based on a meaningless statement.
RE “…………….Diesel is a refined fuel and is comparatively expensive, so using it instead of HFO would probably increase our electricity bills by some 30 per cent…….” .
This has been repeatedly shown to be an exaggeration….
RE “………Using diesel would only bring marginal improvement at a high price……”
Marginal is a very elastic and unscientific word – - - - ill- health from ambient pollution is not “marginal” – neither is the expense of treating this ill-health - also the costs of disposal of hundreds, if not thousands of tonnes of toxic material by road and ship is an added expense.
RE “……….I have my doubts whether natural gas will ever be economical as the huge investment is only worthwhile if used in large quantities…….”
Your doubts??? This is a speculation – it is NOT a scientific statement . Such vagueness and unclarity doesn’t do much for the credibility of this misleading article.
John Pace
Dec 16th 2011, 17:48
Natural gas was economical in 2003, when due to a change in the ministry a very favourable proposal was left to lapse. When the government finally decided it was too late and it had to go for the cable option, which I consider less favourable.
The residue from gas cleaning is hazardous, not toxic. It is mainly sodium sulphate and sodium carbonate with some minor constituents which render it hazardous.
I hope I made myself clear on what parts of the article are my personal opinion, and I do not expect everyone to agree with me.
Mr Debono should check the facts before committing himself in print.
Mr. R. Saliba
Dec 16th 2011, 18:15
As per usual, when someone writes something in favour of the government, we'll get people writing comments about articles being 'politically motivated', or worse, attacking the author.
Could not expect better when people swallow everything the political stations decides is 'news'
Ian Vella
Dec 16th 2011, 09:38
Ing. Pace - you have explained in detail what HFO is, it's pros and cons. As an ex-enemalta generation Manager perhaps you can suggest something better than what is presently being suggested? (whilst avoiding partisan politics)