But even if we still had one, it would have taken years on end and at massive financial losses for both.

But it will need another tanker alongside every few weeks for one week to refill it.

The system has not yet been scrutinised for compliance with the EU’s Seveso Directive, which is a requirement for major industrial projects involving chemicals, petro-chemicals, and other high-risk projects.

Among the many Seveso Directive’s requirements are acceptance of the project by the residents, of which we have two towns full, and low risk to nationally critical infrastructure, of which there are two – the power stations and the industrial harbour through which all imports and exports flow through.

If you ask me, Muscat is crazy or highly irresponsible or both.

The EU’s Seveso Directive is found here:

http://ec.europa.eu/environmen…

Why has no one picked up this most important issue? It’s so fundamental. If something goes wrong (read Murphy’s Law), the consequences wI’ll be grave indeed.

Considering the purpose for which the tanker is to be used, to keep it would be madness and I would be professionally shocked if insurance and safety standards accepted this option, if it is one.

If they dump the asbestos, how are they going to do that and where are they going to dispose of it? Will they leave it in Malta or ship it to some unfortunate worse regime than ours?

How did they EVER contract that vessel and just discover the asbestos? That must mean that the certificates supplied were either incomplete or fictitious, too. Or that the verifications were sloppy and unprofessional. This is not a very reassuring start to what is set to be burdened with very dangerous cargo.