Mr. Nigel Hillis:

While it is envisaged that primarily it is for Spain to take electricity from France, there is a great deal of wind power in the north of Spain and whenever the wind blows, it is to go in the other direction. I do not know whether members have ever flown down to Faro in Portugal, but if one looks out, as one is coming in over the north of Spain on a good clear day, the number of wind farms on top of mountains is unbelievable. The interconnector would be to export this to France. The project has been delivered and I have read some of the technical detail on it. The direction of the power flow can be switched in milliseconds and the technical controls are in place to integrate it seamlessly into an alternating current, AC, system. It has been lauded throughout Europe as a model and the first of its kind, that is, integrated into an AC system. Were EirGrid to place underground the North-South interconnector, it would have a model to follow. It would be the second in Europe. I note EirGrid always likes to be the first in Europe. It states it is first in Europe to integrate wind and the first in Europe to do this. This would be another first in Europe for the company.

Deputy Colreavy mentioned the landscape guidelines. While I could be wrong on this, it is my understanding that at present the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government is conducting an electromagnetic field, EMF, review that in due course will feed into pylon siting guidelines.

At the committee's last meeting on this issue, Senator Thomas Byrne mentioned that a pylon should not be located within 50 m of a person's home or 400 m of a whooper swan's habitat. The guidelines might state that a pylon should be 60, 70, 80 or even 100 m from a home or whooper swan habitat but we are stuck with the 50 m figure which EirGrid appears to have pulled out of the sky.

The project of common interest, PCI, process was mentioned by Deputy Conlan. This is an administrative process that is being undertaken by An Bord Pleanála. EirGrid does not have a lot of say in it. It more or less has to do what it is told and follow what has been laid down. We are disappointed with An Bord Pleanála because, as provided for under the PCI process, we were not consulted in any way. The PCI process is very strong on public participation and engagement. It specifically mentions the Aarhus Convention. An Bord Pleanála accepted in retrospect a concept of public participation which was undertaken before the project was declared a project of common interest. In other words, consultation took place prior to the commencement of that process. There was no consultation after the project had been declared a project of common interest. We do not believe that is right. An Bord Pleanála's view on this may have to be tested in some other forum.

The issue of health concerns was mentioned. The health concerns remain real. People are afraid they will get cancer or that their children will get leukaemia if the microtesla level exceeds 0.4%. If pylons are located closer to houses that level will be exceeded. That concern still remains. I hope I have covered all of the issues raised.