Malta’s water resource is a deserving candidate for the next cycle of EU funding, if only the decision-makers will admit we have a problem. Photo: Chris Sant Fournier

An important deadline slipped by last month for comments from the public on Malta’s priorities for European Union funding over the coming years.

This is a crucial time for decision-making as we begin our final approach toward meeting a number of environmental deadlines that close at the end of the decade.

The consultation document of the Ministry of European Affairs’ Planning and Priorities Coordination Division (PPCD) for the funding period 2014 to 2020 outlines a number of areas for financing through European structural and investments funds, within the parameters of new EU regulations.

Harmonisation of rules related to different funds will become law from next year, to simplify implementation and increase coherence of funds for rural development and maritime and fisheries.

The EU funding of Malta’s future development, to the tune of over one billion euros, adopts a strategic direction that rests on three priorities: health, competitiveness and an economy that is both environment-friendly and resource-efficient.

Identifying Malta’s current and future needs took the form of meetings by the PPCD with various ministries and sub-committees.

Although flood management and sewage treatment were somewhat improved under the 2007 to 2013 funding canopy, Malta is in dire need of urgent action to improve its aquifer status. Yet the PPCD document hardly gives a nod to the huge problems facing Malta’s water resources.

Member states are obliged to meet the EU directive on climate change and energy targets by 2020. As a small island nation dependent on fossil fuel imports, Malta is vulnerable to risks such as geopolitical conflicts and natural disasters that could disrupt supplies. Also of concern is the extent of carbon dioxide emissions stemming from generation of electricity – over 60 per cent of the national carbon footprint.

Substations can be sensitive to photovoltaic grid feed-ins if not prepared for it. This and similar upgrades could be contenders for funding. An increase in renewable energy will require further investment in the energy management and distribution network to ease integration of these new technologies with the system.

A Malta Enterprise grant scheme to subsidise rooftop solar panels, co-funded by the EU, was cancelled in August “due to technical problems encountered in the process of pre-selection of suppliers”.

The decision to cancel was reached after consultations with the managing authority of the European Regional Development Fund, and the findings of the appeals committee. An independent source has suggested that unsuccessful applicants may have raised objections and bogged down the process.

A deeper insight on the reasons behind the cancellation of the scheme comes from a supplier of photovoltaic panels:

“The key word here is ‘eligible costs’ because only qualified companies were allowed to install the systems, which meant the public money was to be transferred to a limited number of companies. The competition and the supply side was limited, which might have resulted in increased prices. In such cases, there are always questions about the transparency of the entire process and criteria for qualification.”

“The grant scheme supported the installation of the system, meaning that simply installing and connecting a photovoltaic system was enough to receive public money, regardless of what happens to the system afterwards. It might be working very efficiently or not at all. By cancelling that programme the government avoided a number of problems.”

A support scheme for a more attractive renewable energy feed-in tariff (FIT) expired last month. This type of scheme seemed fair since every owner of a solar PV system connected to the grid would receive money for energy delivered to the grid, and the price was fixed for 20 years.

While prices vary slightly depending on the size and the type of the PV system, the tariff support scheme provided a reasonable financial return for owners.

The FIT scheme promoted efficient, quality systems as it paid only for energy actually delivered to the grid. The owners were free to install any system they wanted, installed by any company, so it promoted competition and there were no ‘transparency’ issues.

The supplier concludes:

“For these reasons, feed-in tariffs are considered the best support tool for solar energy. It is possible the government realised this and decided to cancel a less efficient programme to transfer the funds to increase support through the more efficient programme. That would be very beneficial to the economy and to the development of solar energy here. What is surprising is that the feed-in tariff scheme ended on September 30 and there is no information about what the government is planning to do next.”

As a parting shot, the supplier of PV systems adds: “This state of uncertainty is very detrimental for every market, especially if there are important investment decisions to be made. The government should put more emphasis on its information policy and introduce changes gradually, informing about them in advance, to avoid the boom and bust cycle of the solar energy market.”

Prevention and management of risks related to climate change is another EU funding theme set to incorporate mitigation and adaptation measures. Interventions under this priority will aim to focus on low carbon, research, environment and human capital development.

Investments will promote local research in the area of climate change while backing improvements in agriculture and soil management. Other interventions may include infrastructure for climate change adaptation, including marine and coastal observation systems.

Gozo looks set to gain from EU funds for a fast ferry, putting paid to any talk of a tunnel or bridge for the Malta-Gozo channel. Funding for expansion of Mġarr Harbour may face some resistance from environmentalists concerned about any ill-effects on nearby seagrass meadows.

www.hienergypeople.com/22-things-you-have-to-check-before-buying-a-solar-system