Delimara’s power station extension has been delayed by up to six months due to major damage to one of its turbines, Finance Minister Tonio Fenech admitted yesterday.

It’s worrying not just for the Government or Enemalta, but the nation as a whole

The extension was still being tested by Danish manufacturer BWSC and was set to be handed over to Enemalta by November 7.

Enemalta has paid BWSC €157 million towards the plant so far and delays mean it will have to power up four turbines at Marsa’s ageing power station, which are well past their European-mandated sell-by date.

Mr Fenech said the Government would be seeking €1.6 million in damages from BWSC for every week the plant was delayed beyond November 7.

That figure relates exclusively to delays in delivering the plant. Enemalta CEO Louis Giordimaina yesterday said the corporation would apply “every penalty possible” contractually allowed against the plant manufacturer.

BWSC has reportedly accepted responsibility for the damage and said that it will foot the bill for turbine repairs. But the delay is set to have other repercussions on State coffers.

They include the added fuel expenses required to run Marsa’s inefficient plant as well as the daily €1,284 fine Enemalta is paying the Malta Environment and Plan-ning Authority to continue running Marsa power station.

Mr Fenech said the Government would be seeking to recoup both from BWSC.

The steam turbine was damaged during extensive testing last week when parts of steam strainer were found jammed in the turbine’s stop valve. The debris damaged the rotor blades, which may need to be replaced.

Mr Fenech yesterday said the Government would only accept the extension once all the damage was fixed and the plant had passed a full set of reliability tests.

Government to seek damages

“We’re in a delicate state of litigation with BWSC and the Government is ready to present a strong case in court if things get to that stage,” the minister said.

Any such litigation would take place in London’s Court of Arbitration under Maltese jurisdiction.

Engineer Arthur Ciantar told The Sunday Times he was “extremely worried” by the situation.

“This is no joke. Every testing phase has teething problems, but this goes beyond that.

“It’s worrying not just for the Government and Enemalta, but the nation as a whole.”

A Labour Party spokesman laid the blame squarely at the Government’s feet, saying its hastiness had resulted in a power station that broke down before it had even started operating.

The Government had changed environmental legislation and switched Cabinet policy to favour heavy fuel oil instead of gas to be able to hand the power station tender to BWSC, the spokesman said, noting that Malta’s Auditor General had also criticised the process.

According to Enemalta sour-ces, there is genuine concern that it may take a full 12 months before the plant is fully functional.

Mr Ciantar also felt that it could be a year before the power station was back online.

“When such major faults occur during the testing period, it’s standard industry practice to run extended tests which tend to mean year-long delays. It’s a way of ensuring problems don’t reoccur.”

An Enemalta spokeswoman played down such fears, saying testing and re-commissioning of the turbine was likely to be “relatively straightforward” and that the Government’s six-month estimate was a “worst case scenario”.

She admitted that the corporation did not yet have an accurate timeframe for repairs.

Malta has already received two out of a possible three warnings from the European Commission for continuing to use the Marsa power station’s polluting turbines beyond their allowed lifespan.

Failure to comply with emissions legislation could see Malta taken to the European Court of Justice, although the Government will be hoping damage to the Delimara extension can be fixed before matters reach that stage.

€1.6 million

– the weekly damages Government will be requesting from BWSC

Asked about potential ECJ repercussions, an Enemalta spokeswoman turned up the heat on BWSC.

“Evidently, it is in the contractor’s interest to ensure the return of the turbine in the shortest time frame possible due to the penalties mentioned above,” she said.