A two-year extension of data-gathering at l-Ahrax in Mellieha for assessing the suitability of an offshore wind farm has now been announced (TMID, 19 November).

In this context, it is worth repeating that Malta missed a golden opportunity six years ago when a company offered to build a wind farm on Marfa Ridge. The offer was based on an extrapolated mean wind speed of around 7.5 M/s which they considered a safe bet. The clean electric energy produced by this wind farm was to be added at a convenient mid-way point of the grid between Malta and Gozo and supplied at the going rate of the time. If this project had not been stupidly rejected by the government, it would by now have reached its fifth or sixth year of electricity generation; not only that - it would also have provided exactly the wind data we are now seeking; we would have have had a realistic estimate of the potential of wind energy in Malta and been in a position to decide on the advisability of going offshore.

We would also have had an answer to the vexed question whether a land based wind farm was aesthetically acceptable to the Maltese. This answer could anyway have been foreseen from the result of surveys almost all of which suggest that acceptance would follow what has come to be called the “20/80 rule”. What usually happens is this: proposed wind farms tend to be opposed by 80% of people before they are installed. Once installed, this ratio generally reverses - with 80% favouring it, about 5% opposing it and 15% not minding either way. As it is, the proposal was summarily turned down by the government purely on the basis of uninformed backward thinking and misguided knee-jerk reactions. There was no study of previous experience elsewhere to enable an informed decision. Political one-upmanship may also have entered the equation.

Had we built this wind farm five years ago, Malta would have benefited in other ways. With an estimated annual output of 55 GWh, this would have generated enough inexpensive clean energy for about 650 homes, or approximately equivalent to 5% of Malta’s electricity needs at the time. Every year Malta would have avoided emission of 2,500 tonnes of carbon dioxide, 30 tonnes of sulphur dioxide and 10 tonnes of nitrous oxide per year into our air. This would have got us nearer to meeting our Kyoto obligations.

Besides kick-starting Malta’s renewable energy use in Malta and opening the way to further installations, this project would have provided a valuable opportunity for our technicians to gain hands-on experience in the servicing and maintenance of wind energy generators, it would have tested the logistics of adding a major sources of intermittent electricity to our grid. Finally, this might have provided Malta with an entry into green service industries in the Mediterranean Area. And, of course, it would have provided new employment opportunities.

The decision six years ago (presumably based on a joint decision of MEPA and Enemalta) to refuse approval of this wind farm was the most phenomenally stupid and ignorant decision of the decade. It was based on antiquated thinking and exaggerated and illusory objections. It putMalta back by at least one or two decades and left us still 100% dependent on oil. We also missed the bus on possible exploitation of our labour force (and possibly our dockyard) skills in an emerging green economic market. Not exactly forward thinking.

G G Debono

Sliema