Look at the size of that gas storage tank, and how close it is to shore
Published:
February 18, 2014 at 11:09pm
Please read this article in Times of Malta, and take note of that whacking great gas storage tank moored right next to the shore. This isn’t conjecture. It comes from the environmental impact assessment report.
Another deal struck before the election, with the Labour Party held hostage and the government in turn making Malta pay the price for its business transactions, just as it is doing with the Henley & Partners deal.
45 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20140218/opinion/Is-this-scaremongering-.507284
http://www.pq.gov.mt/pqweb.nsf/06d013e9f9ab0283c12568f50054014f/c1257881003b3b78c1257c8300555074?OpenDocument
Hu mod kif twiegeb PQ?
Telaghlom ghar-rashom u jghidu il PN kienu arroganti.
The price of residences in the area will be less then the price of the letter box at the front gate if that project is allowed to happen.
Maybe the PL have offered them compensation?
And who would pay for that and how, I wonder? The citizenship-for-sale fund is apparently getting larger by the day – as are the sectors being promised a share – but it isn’t infinite.
Hekk, hu go fik Franco.
What are the residents of the South telling Franco about this time bomb now?
They used to tell him many things about the “cancer factory.”
According to a document which had been published by Gasol at the time when Konrad Mizzi announced the Electrogas Consortium as the preferred bidder, the FSU will be supplied by Socar SA, the Azerbaijani company in the consortium. The same applies for the gas.
Former USSR standards of safety and maintenance here. So we have to prepare ourselves. If there is an LNG gas leak, this will be another Chernobyl.
11/02/2014
AFRICA ENERGY INTELLIGENCE N°716
AFRIQUE DE L’OUEST
Gasol voit très grand
La firme britannique tente de proposer ses solutions d’importation de gaz liquéfié à plusieurs pays côtiers de la région avec des résultats mitigés.
Things will really start getting interesting, once property owners within explosion blast or gas leak asphyxiation distance from the gas storage vessel start filing claims against government and Enemalta for damages due to loss of value of their property.
Mintoff had established legal precedent for validity of such claims in the l-Ghariex power station chimney court case.
I’m NOT paying compensation with my taxes.
This is a very valid point.
The legal precedent established in Mintoff’s case may prove providential to those who own property in Birzebbuga and Marsaxlokk.
Alas, the notion of precedent does not really hold water in Maltese law – granted, it helps, but a judge is not bound to decide a case in one manner or another simply because a previous case was decided accordingly.
Therefore, people who file a law suit for the devaluation of their property could easily have their claims rejected or accepted.
Not being flippant here, however, the potential of the largest ‘blow job’ ever to be performed in Malta is certainly something we all anticipate.
Comment beneath the article above:
“Scaremongering stories abound, but NOT ONE can be substantiated by a FACt of an explosion happening on such LNG vessels !” – Eddy Privitera
LNG accidents do happen:
http://www.slc.ca.gov/division_pages/DEPM/DEPM_Programs_and_Reports/BHP_Deep_Water_Port/RevisedDraftEIR/1aCabTransport/Appendices/C3_Public%20Safety.pdf
And closer to home the gases which accumulated on the Umm El Faroud may not have been LNG but the volume pales in comparison.
The chances of an accident may be remote, but no matter how small the chance the results would be catastrophic. The chances of an accident in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station were probably estimated to be just as low.
Well said and done, ciccio. But will Eddy Privitera understand the technicalities? Could be too complex for his brain.
Is the guy utterly mad? It’s one thing to support at all costs a political party, but this is absolutely callous.
If you’re reading this Privitera, you’re an absolute jerk.
Commercial banks who have issued loans for the purchase of property within the fall-out zone could find themselves in a very serious situation of ‘negative equity’ where the value of the property falls down to below the level of the loan. And still the blinkered Laburisti who populate the area have not raised as much as a whimper.
We have to wait until the economic implications hit their pockets. But then it will be too late.
What about chances, if any, of reselling properties in these areas at risk ?
I feel for Marsaxlokk residents but I can’t help wondering where they were before the election.
Tonio Fenech was going blue in the face trying to explain the implications of having a new gas-fired power station but nobody seemed to be listening. Not only did Fenech warn us about the LNG tanker, he also offered us a cheaper and safer solution, a Malta/Sicily gas pipeline. Alas, the Kool-aid was too strong.
Now that people are slowly getting off that most powerful Kool-aid, they are starting to panic.
Unlike the passport issue, which nobody knew about, this issue was discussed often before the election so people cannot claim that they did not know about it. The last-minute scramble to try and stop the project now might just be too late. People had a chance to vote for a different power-generation strategy and they blew it.
Just tell that to Michela Spiteri who spent the next column after one Bondi+ calling Tonio Fenech arrogant and a bully whereas Konrad was the new kid on the block.
We knew 60,000cbm weren’t possible, this industry works on volume alone, the plant they proposed to the idiots in front of their coffees wasn’t commercially possible.
Konrad however had suggested we take up half a ship’s cargo. There they were, taking it in, the laughs.
One nutty professor doing his bit on Times of Malta, how dare Ann Fenech, a lawyer to boot, contradict him, and everyone thought Labour were serious.
Another case of Labour deceiving its electorate before the elections. Massive.
Labour has never denied that the powerstation project was a deal agreed upon before the elections. There is enough circumstantial evidence to prove this.
This means that we have another case where Labour deceived the electorate, in particular those of the South.
The technicalities and infrastructural details of the project must have been known by Labour when they launched the project during the electoral campaign. They must have known that there would be a floating LNG storage unit in the middle of the Marsaxlokk bay, because that would be the cheapest option for gas storage.
And we know that Konrad Mizzi had predicted with precision the cost of the project, and the breakdown of that cost. This was covered on this website in detail.
But instead, when Labour showed pictures of their project in January 2013, they showed small tanks onshore, which were then the source of criticism by Fenech and his team because those tanks looked immediately inconsistent with their context.
Labour hid from its diagrams the floating storage unit and its location, and instead put in small onshore tanks to imply security and stability.
“U iwa, Konrad, pingilhom zewg tankijiet tal-40 (gallun) fuq l-art. Dan mhux gass? Ic-cilindru tal-gass tad-dar tieghi ma fihx iktar minn metru gholi u jservini xahar shih.”
Using Google Earth I have calculated that the viewpoint of this artist’s impression is about 1.5 km away from the site proposed for the floating gas storage unit.
Why did they have to go so far away to make this photo-montage, which is part of the Environmental Impact Assessment? To make the floating storage unit appear as small as possible perhaps?
Yes.
If you saw Toscana in the Grand Harbour last year, you’ll realise that picture is understated.
I listened to Stefano Mallia on Radio 101. He pointed out that the problem of the positioning of the floating gas storage unit is that the company which ‘won’ the LNG power station project had already entered into a contract for a floating storage unit without a re-gasification unit.
Pumping LNG for, say, 10 miles is a big engineering headache, because the gas has to be kept at minus 170 degrees Centigrade. And that’s no mean feat.
Pumping gas through pipes hundreds of kilometres long is a piece of cake by comparison.
Which shows how ramshackle their design is.
You’d need very thick stainless steel plate with special properties to withstand that very low temperature.
I think the biggest danger would be if the floating storage unit starts to take in water and lists to one side or sinks.
Then we will first see Archimede’s Principle when the ship sinks and Boyles Law and Charles Law in practice because 140,000 tonnes of a gas in liquid state at minus 170 centigrade in a thermos flask can’t be kept for long in a sea temperature of say 20 degrees Centigrade.
The nearest I can get to explain the effect of LNG hitting the sea surface is like when someone throws water in a frying pan filled with boiling oil.
The company which got the contract should have opted for an FSRU like the one installed in Livorno.
http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:9.990688/centery:43.64584/zoom:8/mmsi:247323700
http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/9253284/vessel:FSRU_TOSCANA
Are these things bullet proof? What’s to stop a resourceful psycho (like the animal crucifier for example) firing shots at the storage tanks? Or even a disgruntled hunter, angry at not getting to hunt, using the tanks for target practice?
I doubt they wouldn’t be thick enough to withstand a shot or two. Now, continued abuse over time may be another matter entirely.
Remember what a fuss had been raised by the Labour Party because of the chimney in the first power station.
This fully espouses the socialist mantra of ‘for the greater good’
The vessel will be as large as the one in Hammond’s video. That one has four tanks 34,000 cubic meters each whilst Konrad’s quoted as being 140,000 cubic meters.
Although, given the way numbers behave with Labour, that figure could translate into more.
I haven’t yet understood whether they intend to have the regasifier on board as well. At one point it was hinted that they did.
Konrad refuses to specify in detail this ‘ship’, still not clear what, if any, propulsion, stabilising systems and docking or trim characteristics it has.
A vessel that has to remain attached to rigid pipework at all costs should anything go amiss, surely deserves taxpayers’ scrutiny. The minister thinks otherwise.
The problem here, is that the information results staggered and incomplete, the impression is that it isn’t even ready yet.
Mizzi’s reluctance to provide sufficient detail about any main component, I mean, it’s HIS project ffs, cannot be underestimated.
Cacopardo discovered one minor detail yesterday as well, the EIA didn’t even go into the implications of micro, radio and other electronic signals in the vicinity of the ship, these considered the greatest flash hazard, yet the vessel will be moored right next to the freeport, not exactly a place where radios and other electronics aren’t utilised.
What has to be the greatest concern is that the captain of this vessel asked for a breakwater, that means the ship doesn’t have the capability to ride out a storm amplified by backcurrent amplified against the shore, this detail only came out after The Malta Independent went into some detail. (The hypocrisy of the press is astonishing, Times of Malta, I have to say, is disgusting)
And finally, just to spice things up, the ships will be two, not one, refuelling taking all of two days. No other place on Earth allows anything similar, on such a large scale or as close to an inhabited centre and major infrastructure.
This thing isn’t normal.
And if I have really conclude;
WHY IS ASTRID VELLA SILENT ON THE MATTER?
The website below could provide useful, albeit a tad sensational, just look at the endless list of accidents at the bottom of the page under History and Accidents.
People in the States, but also around Europe, kick up a fuss to plants 14 miles out. Truly a case of Labour getting away with murder in this place.
http://timrileylaw.com/LNG.htm
it is a case of sweet justice that this is being put on the doorstep of the red heartland of Malta. Now let them enjoy it. Although let us not be mistaken; if it were technically possible the reds would have anchored that thing right in front of Exiles. The fact that they didn’t is merely due to the lack of a power station there.
[Daphne – I think you are quite wrong to adopt that attitude, not least because if the thing explodes, the whole of Malta will go under. You really need to work that out. This is not a Marsaxlokk problem. It is a problem for Malta, posing the risk of an explosion that can wipe out the economy overnight, by wiping out our infrastructure.]
Your comment misses the point on many levels. Not least of which is the fact that bang on in the red heartland, live many people who saw through the smokes and mirrors during the last election and refused once again to vote Labour. The same cannot be said for the many supposedly ‘Nationalist’ voters from the Exiles area who either stayed at home or elected to go red last time around.
Maybe they should build a block of luxurious apartments in Marsaxlokk for these new citizens.
This gives a more realistic idea of the size.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130702/local/Bastions-dwarfed.476269
My understanding is that this behemoth will be permanently moored there. Then, several times a year, there will be a second, twin vessel alongside it making deliveries. The risks due to marine traffic in the harbour are horrendous, as Ann Fenech, clearly described in a recent article.
Considering that Franco Debono owns a property in Marsaxlokk, I am convinced that this is Joseph Muscat’s only hope of getting rid of him. The rest is collateral damage.
If I go to the Times of Malta website and open a story I am able to read the first paragraph and the rest is blocked with a ‘please subscribe’ message.
So I just read the headlines and go to The Malta Independent if I am interested in pursuing a particular story.
However if I right click on a timesofmalta link posted on your blog and open the story in a new tab – hey presto – I get to read the full story and all links to other stories from that page, without restrictions.
Is there a trick to this, or maybe links posted by subscribers have somehow by passed the timesofmalta main gateway?
This storage tank so close to shore is sheer madness. Somehow, someone, somewhere must stop this from becoming reality.
The risk to life and limb is too high, let alone the economic repercussions which will set Malta back a hundred years. If an accident happens EVERYONE on the island loses.
The power rests with the people – and particularly the 20 or so super-rich Maltese businessmen who, let’s be blunt, pull most of the strings and also have much to lose. They can and must bring their influence to bear and stop this madness.
This is way beyond politics – this is all about the risk that the island faces if this project goes ahead. Politicians come and go. The people will always be there.
The approach being used reminds me of one particular billboard in Australia telling people to slow down on the highways. It which simply states, “Do not die for a deadline”.
A very apt inverse metaphor in this context. Stop it before it’s too late.
IN MAY THE RESIDENTS OF BOTH MARSAXLOKK AND BIRZEBBUGA WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE. IF THEY CARE TO SEND A MESSAGE WE WILL CARE BUT OTHERWISE IF GOOD FOR THEM GOOD FOR ME.