Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 3 July 2018

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment

Scrutiny of Petroleum and Other Mineral Development (Amendment) (Climate Emergency Measures) Bill 2018: Discussion

3:00 pm

Photo of James LawlessJames Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I have a couple of comments to follow up on what has already been said. For me, the stand-out figure from Professor Sweeney's presentation is that we come 28th out of 29 countries on climate change, which is a pretty poor position to be in. That is pretty damning and it says a lot. To follow what Deputy Dooley said, there appears to be a view in Government that it is better to engage in damage mitigation and manage fines than take radical steps to be proactive in addressing the substantive issue. This approach is of concern.

The Irish Offshore Operators Association mentioned that Norway has renewables and fossil fuel exploration. I am curious because if we juxtapose this with Sweden, my understanding is that Sweden has made a fairly radical departure and will go fossil fuel free in the very near future. Sweden has access to great fossil fuel reserves in the North Sea but it will choose not to use them. Other members of the committee and I recently visited Denmark, a country with a long-standing tradition in renewables. What is Norway doing differently from Sweden and why did it go down that route? Why does it not follow its neighbours in embracing a more renewable approach?

My next question is to Dr. Slaven, who has written a book that I have not read. I will try to read it, however, so she has made a sale today. Dr. Slaven made a very impressive presentation. Something I have never understood during the many years I have studied this issue, and I was an observer long before I entered the Oireachtas, is how we have had three different reviews since 1992 but royalties from fossil fuels have been zero and State participation in these activities has been zero. There are many other metrics we might have used to get some benefit for the State from all of these activities but we have not done so. This has not been down to one particular Government or party. We have had three successive reviews under three different Governments. I have never been able to fathom this. This is going a little bit against the grain with regard to renewables and supporting the Bill, but I am curious about it. I know we cannot interfere with contracts that are assigned, but before it is too late is there anything that could or should be done in this regard?

I must confess to Professor Sweeney that I am a little biased because he teaches at my local university in Maynooth and my wife, who was one of his geography students some years ago, speaks very highly of him. He spoke about stranded assets, which I thought was very interesting. That is a type of financial penalty. Funds do not make decisions that do not have good fiscal rewards and I understand they are beginning to distance themselves from fossil fuel-type funds. I presume this is because of the risk that they may be stranded if the return is cut off and they will not drive a yield in five, ten or 15 years' time. I ask Professor Sweeney to elaborate on that point because it is an interesting line of argument.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.