Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I would appreciate written comments from Dr. Muinzer on the idea of the separated targets because while it may be more difficult to achieve zero in terms of bio-methane the concern is that although it does not last as long it does have a quicker and higher impact. The same argument might be made, if we are looking to special qualities, that bio-methane targets might need to be much higher than other targets in the interim to ensure we do not heat past a tipping point. That is interesting. Perhaps Dr. Muinzer could send a note on it also.

In the Scottish Act there is clearly a requirement in respect of the reporting mechanisms of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCC, around greenhouse gasses to ensure that whatever other internal mechanisms we might be doing, we are hitting the UNFCC targets. Perhaps Dr. Muinzer could also send on a note for this.

On the technical expertise within the CCC on the science of greenhouse gasses and those factors we need, is there scope for a separation? How is that work done versus the wider expertise? The concern in relation to our advisory council, for example, is the scientific expertise that might be needed around genuinely saying something will get us to 1.5°, keep us below 1.5°, or not, versus all the other expertise.

That expertise is now channelled towards the budget. It seems to me that there may be an argument for having a scientific subgroup that would focus on the scientific facts, while the wider group might make an input into sectoral plans in the way which has been described in the UK, with civil society or Ministers being able to engage in that context concerning how things can be done and what works in that regard.

Does Mr. Church have a comment regarding the interaction of trade legislation and climate legislation? How do we ensure this climate legislation is not undermined by other legislation? Are there any good examples internationally that we could look to in ensuring this climate legislation is not chipped away at by other competing imperatives?