Dr. Diarmuid Torney:

I cannot hope to match my colleagues' forensic analysis of the climate action plan. My response to the Deputy's final question builds on what Dr. Devaney said about the overemphasis in the transport chapter on technological improvement. As our report shows, we need to recognise that transport systems vary and there are different challenges in different parts of the country. There is a place for EV roll-out but one of the main constraints in that regard is the charging infrastructure. The costs are decreasing significantly.

The action plan makes reference to the fact that Bloomberg New Energy Finance, which has crunched the numbers on this, projects that by 2022 electric vehicles for private transport will be cheaper on a total cost of ownership basis than internal combustion engines. That means that just three years from now, the combined purchase cost and running cost of electric vehicles over their lifetimes will be cheaper. They will become the obvious choice but not if the charging infrastructure is not in place. That is one thing we really need to focus on and prioritise.

To pick up on Dr. Devaney's emphasis on the avoid, shift, improve approach, we need to prioritise public transport to an extent that is not reflected strongly enough in the climate action plan. I refer to more funding for public transport, cycling and walking infrastructure. When we were waiting to come in this morning we remarked on the importance of things as simple as traffic light sequences. Cyclists and pedestrians seem to be an afterthought in the way that we design our public spaces and allocate space to different modes of transport. I would place a priority on that. As Dr. Devaney said, this does not come through strongly in the climate action plan published on Monday.