Dr. David Wilson:

Regarding Abbeyleix versus Shannon, the Abbeyleix project, for want of a better word, seems to be a role model for what can be achieved by working with a community rather than knocking heads against it. There could be much to learn from the experience of the community in Abbeyleix. I cannot offer any solutions on the flooded areas. I can only say that from a greenhouse gas and climate point of view, it is not something we would like to see either. Flooding is not of benefit for greenhouse gas removals because there are no plant communities to pull in CO2, and methane and CO2 are released from the water bodies that are flooded. It is certainly not something we would like to see in terms of climate mitigation. In fact, it would only exacerbate the climate issues.

As regards methane, the Deputy is right about rewetting being site-specific. There are some sites that will never be re-wetted and cannot physically be re-wetted, such as sites that are on slopes. Some of the sites in the midlands may be problematic as, according to projected climate change, the summers are predicted to be drier. There will be less rain and the sites may dry out. For some of the work we have carried out, that would be extremely problematic because the sites that were previously Bord na Móna sites are nutrient rich and are likely to be high CO2 emitters. If rewetting is not maintained during the summer, they will continue to remain CO2 emitters even though they have ostensibly been re-wetted. They are problematic and from that point of view the rewetting issue is site-specific.

Methane is something we just have to live with. It is part and parcel of the rewetting package and as I mentioned earlier, the hope is that after the initial years of rewetting the methane spike will decline, in which case the amount of CO2 taken in by the site will compensate for the loss of methane that occurs immediately after the rewetting.