Enemalta denies financial liability for recent power failures, while admitting they were caused by faults in its own equipment. So who is responsible when Marsa’s boilers malfunction?
Raphael Vassallo
The Enemalta Corporation has disclaimed all liability for any damage caused by a spate of four power cuts in the past month; but at the same time, the State-owned energy provider also admits that three of these failures were caused by malfunctioning equipment at the obsolete Marsa Power Station – for which Enemalta itself is theoretically responsible.
“Enemalta Corporation is liable to pay damages when the loss of electricity supply is the direct fault of Enemalta,” the corporation’s PRO Ian Vella told this newspaper yesterday: adding that “the recent events were not the direct fault of the Corporation, therefore Enemalta is not liable to pay any damages.”
However, Vella freely admits that the cause of the power interruptions involved faulty boilers and turbines at the Enemalta-administered power station at Marsa.
“An electricity supply outage occurred at 0010hrs on 28 July due to a fault on boiler number 8 at the Marsa Power Station,” Vella said. “As a result, load shedding took place to stabilize the supply and there were supply interruptions in the following localities: Baħar iċ-Ċagħaq, Ħal Far, Kirkop, Ibragg, Madliena, Pembroke, Qrendi, Safi, areas of Sliema, St Andrews , St Julian’s, Swieqi, Ta’ Xbiex, Żurrieq and Msida. All supply was restored by 01:20.”
Responsibility for another blackout, occurring three days later, was similarly lain at the Marsa plant’s door.
“With regard to the incident between Thursday 30 and Friday 31 July, an electricity supply outage occurred due to a fault on turbine number 6 at Marsa Power Station.”
The resulting power failure affected several localities until the supply was restored by midnight. Around one third of Malta was also left without running water for most of the following day, as the blackout temporarily paralysed the Pembroke reverse osmosis plant.
As in the case of the eight-hour blackout of Tuesday 16 July, Enemalta continues to insist it is not in a position to rule out a repeat performance.
“No electricity company or country in the world is able to guarantee an uninterrupted supply,” the corporation’s PRO reiterated yesterday.
However, the Corporation’s spokesperson skirted the questions of why consumers are currently being asked to pay higher tariffs for a service the corporation cannot even guarantee.
“The tariff is based on the atual cost of production of electricity, and it is fair and reasonable that consumers of electricity pay the true cost of the product as with other products that they consume,” Enemalta’s PRO told MaltaToday.
Whether it is fair for consumers to be denied the service even after paying the true cost for its production, is a question that however remains unanswered.
But while Enemalta is reluctant to assume responsibility for its defunct Marsa boilers – which date back to the 1950s, when the first steam turbines were commissioned using funds from the Marshall Aid programme – it is always quick to seek legal redress when the fault is caused by third parties.
A fourth power cut to occur last month, this time on 21 July, was attributed to damage caused by construction works.
“A private contractor who was carrying out works in the Ghargur vicinity damaged an 11kv electricity cable,” Enemalta announced in a press statement on that occasion. “The electricity service feeding the Gharghur transmission antenna, and parts of Lija and Naxxar, was interrupted as a result.”
In this instance, Enemalta did not shy away from apportioning commercial liability for the interruption in power supply.
“Enemalta Corporation is reviewing its legal position and is considering initiating legal proceedings against the contractor,” the statement said.
Earlier still, in 2002, Enemalta successfully sued the owners of the Tonga-registered, 85-metre vessel Marwa M for damage to one of its two 33kV submarine power cables, supplying Gozo with all its electricity.
The 9,000-tonne cargo vessel damaged the cable when it anchored near Comino, apparently to shelter from bad weather. The $2.3 million cable, laid in 1981, was caught by the anchor and completely severed, plunging all Gozo into darkness.
Markers in the area forbid vessels from anchoring in the Comino channel, precisely because of electricity cables.
The cost of monopoly Meanwhile, Enemalta’s explanation for the recurring faults in the older of its two power stations has once again raised the question of the notorious unreliability of energy provision in Malta – a sector in which the corporation enjoys a complete monopoly.
GRTU director general Vince Farrugia told MaltaToday that the issue cannot be resolved without considerable investment in energy infrastructure, and that consumers who demand a reliable supply must also be willing to pay higher tariffs for the service.
“It’s not a straightforward issue,” he said. “If you were an insurance agency, how much would you charge to insure against a fault in the Marsa turbines?” he asked rhetorically.
Farrugia also argues that it would be unreasonable to expect all businesses to pay the same rates, when some industry’s dependence on electricity is higher than other’s.
“In an ideal market, the consumer would be able choose between different service providers, and pay for the service accordingly. If having a constant, uninterrupted supply was vital to your business, you would be willing to pay higher tariffs to cover the additional of insurance against power failure.
“On the other hand, some businesses would prefer paying lower tariffs, and not have the same guarantees.”
Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below. Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.
Download front page in pdf file format
All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.
