Skip to main content

Question time: Controlling Waste (Times of Malta 22/04/2018)

What measures need to be put in place to ensure recycled waste does not continue to drop?


Plenty has been said about the need to review our waste management strategies both on a national level but also at local council level. It is high time action is taken in the right direction following the footsteps of the National Waste Management Strategy 2014-2020. Malta’s wider waste management plan recognises the need to meet a series of targets not least to reduce the generation of waste and increase source separation so as to promote recycling and reduce landfilling. Malta is obliged to recycle 50 per cent of paper, plastics, metal and glass waste from households by 2020; landfill only 35 per cent (based on 2002 levels) of biodegradable municipal waste; recover 70 per cent of construction and demolition waste by 2020 and collect 65 per cent of the average weight of electrical and electronic equipment placed on the national markets by 2021.
If we take municipal waste, mainly waste generated by households, including waste from sources such as shops, offices and other institutions, the real situation is a far cry from obtaining the above targets. Latest Eurostat figures show that in 2016 the Maltese generated 150kgs of waste per capita above the EU average. The pity is that only 20,000 tonnes from a staggering 283,000 tonnes of waste generated were recycled. The landfilling rate in Malta is more than 92 per cent. These figures show that as a country we have failed to take the right actions to reduce waste generation, reuse or recycle it.
In 2014, the Labour government had promised to take bold steps to reduce the dependency on the only engineered landfill at Għallis. Malta’s Waste Management Plan for the Maltese islands published in 2014 says that “an out of sight, out of mind approach can only lead to a more expensive waste management system and one where the cost of inaction is high”. It is exactly what has happened. Labour are now going to construct an incinerator over 5,000 square metres at Magħtab that will handle 114,000 tonnes or 40 per cent of waste generated per annum. The decision follows the commissioning of a study by former environment minister Leo Brincat, who in 2009 had criticised the Nationalist administration that “reliance on incineration is proof of the failure of the waste strategy so far, compounded with the desperate need to come up with renewable energy to make up for time lost in meeting targets”.
This government is proving that it wasn’t able to walk the talk on what it preached nine to 10 years ago. The only solution the government is offering is to spend €150 million to construct a large incinerator to burn all sort of waste. The message out there is that all efforts to reduce, reuse and recycle will go down in vain.
What we really need to ensure a healthy environment for future generations is to continue to reduce waste, reuse and recycle the resource. The most important thing is that everyone acknowledges his or her civic duty to separate waste at source. This with separation at home will immediately increase the amount of recycled waste being collected from each and every locality. We also have to think outside the box and incentivise citizens to increase recycling habits. 
The waste management sector must also be helped to ensure long-term sustainability and provide services with the best available technologies at the lowest of cost. At local council level, for example, we require a strong basis for changes to waste collection. First and foremost we need to change waste collection contracts. In order to ensure economies of scale, contracts should be issued on a rationality basis and for a longer period. How can a waste carrier invest in a refuse collection vehicle if they are awarded a three- to four-year contract only? Secondly, introducing organic waste separation is a good step forward. But how come biodegradable bags for this scheme have been out-of-stock at councils involved in this pilot project for the past five months? How can citizens be encouraged and incentivised to participate if they are not being provided the means to?


The full article can be found here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Who's the real monster?

I usually hate comparisons, but some very different reactions from the 'great unthinking' rabble do merit some analysis. In May this year, the notorious dog Star was found buried alive . A prima facie , this looked liked the most horrific case of animal cruelty, and is still considered so by some. The perpetrator was described by the sensitive and caring animal-lovers as a villain, a heartless monster, deserving of death, stoning, or even to be 'buried alive in the same manner'. But what did Mr. Vella actually do, according to the testimony heard in Court? Star was sick. It was shedding fur, and quite old already, and its owner did not afford the treatment. In trying to save some money from paying for the dog to be put to sleep and killed properly by vets, she gave it to Mr. Vella to have it killed himself. Nothing much to make people angry till now. Mercy-killing of very sick and suffering animals is widely done and usually acceptable. You may

Shema Yisrael, the cries of the Palestinian people

You live a peaceful life in a modest home. You've never bothered anyone and you've never caused trouble. Out of the blues, a group of people claim that they should live in your house. Why? Because they have been persecuted in a war, and they claim that some 5,000 years ago, their God had told them your home was their promised land. Somehow, the whole community agrees with their wishes, and asks you to grant them your spare-bedroom. You oblige. After a few months, they take the whole top-floor. In a few year's time, they take over your kitchen. After a few more years, they own your house and keep you and your family locked in the bathroom. They don't even allow you to get out, while they strip-search you the few times they do. Even if it's a medical emergency. Sometimes not even medical personnel and ambulances are allowed to see to your needs while your children die in your hands. Desperation starts hitting you. Life seems to offer no hopes. In moments

Why I am dropping out of the Anti-ACTA protest

Like many avid internet users, I have followed with interest the debate about ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement). After reading numerous articles, watched sensational videos, and discussed ad nauseam with friends, I have realized that what I have come across is a campaign hi-jacked by lies, myths and misconceptions as to rival Malta's misinformed divorce referendum campaign. I have to say that the videos on Youtube   got me worried. I quickly signed the petition, joined the Anti-ACTA groups, and prepared myself for a full-blown fight against the big-governments who want to intrude on our privacy and freedom of expression. Like our MEP Edward Scicluna invited us to do in the University debate last Wednesday, I did not try to understand the details of ACTA but rather saw who the players behind it were. But as usual, my logical instincts took over, and his call to not try to understand ACTA actually pushed me to read the text. And here's what I now know: ACTA is