The European Commission report on Malta’s failure to reach renewable energy targets highlights the problem of setting policies in a small country. To be fair, Brussels has taken that into account and, whereas other member states have to derive 20 per cent of their energy from renewables by 2020, Malta has a10 per cent target.

The problem has always been what strategy to adopt. Other countries have a wide variety of options, ranging from fusion to hydroelectricity, from wave power to biomass, often possible at more than one location and also with more than one available for any region.

A small country like Malta with limited natural resources suffers because it would likely have only one power station, no rivers and scant land available for wind farms and solar farms, even if wind and sun may not be lacking.

Clearly, this country has been having problems keeping up and, in fact, has received a number of warnings. This is not to say no progress was made.

Malta was only getting 3.8 per cent of its energy from renewables as recently as 2013, up from 0.1 per cent in 2004. That has now gone up to 4.7 per cent, still far short of the EU average of 16 per cent.

The problem is that, to solve the matter, Malta could not tinker witha little bit of this and a little bit ofthat. It had to take broad and committed action.

Rather than go for a mix of sources, the previous government, in 2006, first dismissed wind farms and then decided they were the way forward and planned to build three, one of them offshore. However, this government scrapped those plans and decided instead to go for solar energy. That decision may have been based on pragmatic science, just as the previous government’s no doubt was, but even though we will never know which form of energy would have been the most efficient, one thing is clear: time was wasted.

This government’s plan is based on finding huge swathes of land – 2.7 square kilometres – to produce five per cent of our energy needs, thereby putting us in sight of the target. (It is estimated that 90 square kilometres would provide all our energy.)

But just as we wasted valuable time coming up with wind farm locations that ranged from the sublime to the ridiculous, we now risk doing the same with solar farms, which require a clear Mepa policy on what land can be used, predominantly roofs and abandoned quarries, as well as the Ċirkewwa marshalling area. The consultation closed almost a year ago. What has been happening? We must also consider buying clean energy we cannot generate. Would the interconnector with Sicily be an approvedway to do this?

There is clearly a moral imperative to help the environment for our own sake and for that of our children. The EU’s 2020 renewables target resulted in about 388 metric tonnes of avoided CO2 emissions in 2013 and a reduction in demand for fossil fuels to the tune of 116 metric ton equivalent in the EU. It works.

The real shame is that there is pent-up demand in the private sector for both wind farms and solar farms and experiences like that at Medserv show that they are not only environmentally- but also commercially-viable.

It is about time for this country to decide what direction it would like to take and get going. Enought time has gone with the wind.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.