Brian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for coming in and giving their time. Their observations on the Bill are welcome. The Bill is an attempt to create a legislative structure and framework to allow microgeneration in the country. I am aware that the ESB has operated a pilot project and some of us may have questions on it. Will Mr. Peter O'Shea speak about the strengths, weaknesses and successes of that project? I outlined in the Bill that there are a number of ways that microgeneration can take place. It is accepted that solar energy will be a major part of that but having large rural areas in our country, small-scale wind generation may also be a considerable part of this. There may be other forms connected with agriculture. We do not believe that small scale hydroelectric generation has reached its potential. We tend to have a lot of water except for a few months in the middle of last year where we did not have much water but did not need much electricity. When we need a lot of electricity, we tend to have a lot of water, in winter and the wet seasons. We think that area needs to be examined further.

We set out the need for a minimum price tariff. We have left much flexibility and the Bill provides that the Minister shall draft Regulations that may be revised, which will contain the minimum contractual price, the minimum length of the contractual term for the tariff and the Minister may amend the applicable micro-generation equipment and generation capacity.

The 5% provision has been raised. Under the Bill, electricity suppliers must supply 5% of their electricity from microgeneration by 2025. The witnesses were right to raise that because we want to hear if they have difficulties with it. I am not that rigid about it, nor is the party that I represent. The Bill has passed Second Stage and we believe we have flexibility about what to do with it. There was a question about whether it was 5% of suppliers or 5% of electricity. To clarify, 5% of the electricity supplied should be from microgeneration by 2025. The idea of putting in a target is that if targets are not set, things tend not to happen. People say that they will reach it some other time. The climate change obligations are a good example of that, where we said we would leave it for another year or two. This is an attempt to move things on.

In the EirGrid contribution, Dr. Ryan outlined that we need more renewables. He raised the question about the 5% target that would make up a large proportion of our renewable electricity supply on a sunny day and that that would be a challenge. He also mentioned that with the improvement of battery technology, it may act as a counterbalance. Will he provide examples of where that has been solved?

Mr. O'Shea from ESB also mentioned the 5% target. The pilot that ESB is running is exciting. I believe 700 users are signed up to it, which is impressive. It is a bit more expensive. He might flesh out how much more expensive it is. What big problems does he come up against with the pilot? What is the potential success of it? Although it is slightly off the subject, EirGrid and ESB might refer to microgeneration for self-consumption.

I thank Mr. Dudley Stewart of the Micro Electricity Generation Association of Ireland for his presentation. He said that the main problems are with connections to the grid and markets. We hear that from people who are trying to do this. What do we need to get around that? Does Mr. Stewart have examples of how that is done internationally?

Dr. Sunderland spoke about fluctuation in supply. I understand that there was one very windy period two years ago where nearly 70% of our electricity came from renewables. The experts will tell us that the grid is okay with 65% from renewables. With the small share that microgeneration would have, why would that cause a problem at this stage? Mr. O'Shea has told me in more informal meetings that by international standards, we have a very good grid. I offer my compliments to EirGrid and others for modernising it. I understand that our grid would not be thrown off balance by a modest amount of microgeneration. The other thing that we are curious about is Germany and other northern European states where there is not a lot of sun and there may be similar weather patterns. They seem to be able to have microgeneration on a wide scale. What is the big difference? Why can we not do it here?