I fail to understand the logic behind Enemalta's marketing campaign regarding the new power station extension. What is Enemalta really trying to achieve by comparing the modern technology selected with that at the outdated Marsa power station? Is this considered money well spent?

Isn't it obvious that a modern power station commissioned in 2011 is bound to be far more efficient than one using outdated technology? It is here pertinent to recall that some of the turbines at Marsa are refurbished units dating back to the early 1950s.

Isn't it just as obvious that greenhouse gas emissions, emissions of acidic gases and fly ash from modern power plants are bound to be far less than those from almost 60-year-old turbines? And isn't it equally obvious that any plant commissioned in an EU member state has to be compliant with EU directives and is therefore surely nothing to highlight or boast about?

If Enemalta wishes to convince its clients about the quality of the selected technology, it should clearly be comparing this technology with other modern, competing technologies presently available on the market.

Imagine an analogous situation of a motor car salesman trying to persuade a client to buy a new car in his showroom by comparing its technology with that of a 1950s vehicle rather than with the modern cars offered by competing manufacturers!