The idea of greening vertical walls is a positive way forward, especially in an environment where open green areas are falling victims to the insatiable construction industry.
However, the recent implementation of vertical walls, called green walls, is perhaps not the best way to achieve their intended aims.
The way vertical walls are being greened is more of a commercial measure than anything else. It involves a lot of time management and financial costs with few aesthetical or ecological aims.
This is all the more evident when one takes into consideration the local environment and the ever-rising temperatures being recorded. There is no long-term vision.
There are two ways in which attempts at greening vertical walls have been undertaken. One is the planting of Virginia creeper along the bypass at the Santa Venera tunnels leading to the University of Malta.
The idea is commendable but the choice of species leaves much to be desired. Virginia creeper hibernates and, during the winter months, the walls are covered with bare, leafless stalks that do not make any aesthetical contribution at all. Those who are not au courant with the species would think that the summer green climber has died and what is left are the bare unpleasant dead stalks stuck to the walls. Indeed, a very unpleasant sight.
Furthermore, the Virginia creeper is an American plant and it contributes very little, if anything, to local biodiversity. Vertical wall lovers might argue that the aim of vertical walls is only aesthetical and they dismiss any ecological benefits.
A local creeper which can easily take the place of the Virginia creeper is the indigenous ivy (liedna). Being indigenous, it can withstand local climatic conditions. It is evergreen and it can thus cover the wall in its pleasant green leaves all the year round. It also contributes to local biodiversity because it is a good habitat for a number of fauna.
A little neglect and they are rendered eyesores- Alfred Baldacchino
During flowering time, it is also a good foraging ground for bees collecting nectar and pollen, thus contributing to the production of local honey. Its fruit also serves as good food for resident and migratory birds.
It is easily propagated. Any individual, or voluntary organisation, can produce hundreds of such plants if need be.
The other attempt, which is very costly and usually ends up as an eyesore, is the vertical green wall made up of pots. These have to be constantly supplied with water and nutrients. A little neglect and they are rendered eyesores, far from the aesthetical aims they were intended to achieve. Such a waste of resources recently hit the news headlines.
Again, had the local ivy been used it would have contributed far more than these green vertical walls do. Above all, it would have been much cheaper as well as being a greater contributor to local biodiversity.
The covering of walls with ivy would be a good venture commercially while also having a positive impact on the local biodiversity. Its aesthetic value in countering the glare of the ever-increasing number of tall white buildings can also help reduce stress, especially when people are caught in traffic jams.
It can achieve all these objectives if planned in a professional way, cutting down on costs and making an ecological contribution. And management costs are low too.
It is indeed a pity that the official entities, especially those entrusted with ecological conservation, do not embark on such ventures. It is also surprising that such efforts are not encouraged or undertaken.
By all means let us have green walls. They must not, however, be dictated by commercial interests but they should make an ecological contribution.
Alfred Baldacchino is a former assistant director of MEPA.