Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank both delegations for coming before us. I commend the SEAI for the work it does through the various retrofit programmes. I also commend it for the important information and education programmes with which it is involved. I read recently about a dual initiative in which it was involved with the Department of Education and Skills, whereby information was provided for schools in raising awareness of energy issues. This is a welcome initiative which must be properly promoted. I am aware of a better energy communities project, whereby a day centre for the elderly and another community building in my constituency came together and put forward a viable proposal which proved successful. That is to be welcomed. There is major potential in the scheme to which I refer, particularly if we can expand it and give it the time and attention it deserves. Schemes such as this would create great awareness in towns and villages.

I have three questions for the SEAI. I am aware that it is not directly responsible for the smart metering initiative, but are there plans to drive this initiative forward? Information on energy usage is extremely important to households. The idea behind smart metering is that information is meant to be fed back to householders on where they are using most energy and what they might do to reduce their energy consumption. Are there other technologies available which might be used to inform householders about their energy consumption?

Home heating systems for which grants are provided - geothermal, solar and wood pellet boiler systems - are those which relate to renewable initiatives. These are all very good systems, but ordinary householders cannot access them for two reasons, namely, they cannot afford them and they are difficult to understand. Given that fuel poverty is prevalent, does the SEAI consider advising people to install solid fuel stoves or dual systems that would heat water rather than their having open fireplaces only? I understand the former are 80% efficient, whereas the latter are only 20% efficient. The beauty of such stoves or dual systems is that they are affordable and much cheaper than the more complicated renewable technologies. In addition, they are also very easy to use. They go further in addressing fuel poverty and reducing the amount of material people burn in their households. We should consider the installation of simple systems of this nature. Irish society is predominantly rural in nature and many people would take advantage of an initiative in this regard if one were put in place. Such an initiative would help to reduce carbon emissions and improve energy efficiency in people's homes. Is the SEAI considering initiatives involving cheaper, easier to operate systems such as those to which I refer?

I agree with a great deal of what Deputy Brian Stanley said about the pay-as-you-save system. Energy suppliers and credit unions must be brought on board in this regard. Such a move would be very welcome in order that people might be in a position to access some of these schemes.

My final question to the SEAI relates to the public sector. I understand all public sector agencies and organisations will be obliged to either rent or own high energy saving buildings. Is the SEAI involved with the various agencies and organisations involved in achieving the very challenging target in this regard? After all, what is proposed must be achieved within six years. I stand open to correction, but I understand there is an EU directive which stipulates we must achieve this target.

I welcome the new regime for building regulations. There is a legacy issue in this regard by virtue of the fact that much of the construction work done in recent years was of a poor standard. This was evident the winter before last when many water mains froze because they had not been properly installed. Will the new regime address problems of this nature? Will utility companies be obliged to ensure the relevant infrastructure will be installed to the proper standard in new housing estates, etc.?

The committee previously discussed high radon levels in certain parts of the country. Radon is a dangerous gas and I am wondering whether there might be a proposal to introduce certificates similar to the BER certificates in respect of radon levels. Such certificates would indicate whether the levels of radon in a house were low, whether radon barriers had been installed or whether work had been carried out in order to address high levels of radon. There is a need for certificates of this nature. Will Dr. Motherway indicate whether there are proposals in this regard?