Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 9 June 2021

Select Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment

Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Bill 2021: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I do not believe net zero for the electricity sector by 2030 is achievable. If the policy is built on that, we would be sending the Minister on a task I doubt he could deliver. Also, there is something of a misconception here. Our commitment under the Paris Agreement is as a member of the European Union. The European Union introduced an emissions trading system whose purpose is to try to locate certain larger activities in the most climate efficient locations. Data centres may be more climate efficient if managed in Ireland rather than in other countries. If the EU needs data centres, the best approach for the EU to take is to run them in the most climate efficient way. That is what the emissions trading system seeks to do. In addition, they do pay carbon tax. This is not some free ride for the business sector trampling on other people. They pay. Indeed, the carbon price within the emissions trading system is substantially higher than the carbon price we pay elsewhere.

Neither do I accept the suggestion that envisaging electric vehicles on our roads is, in some way, the Government having a misaligned policy. The reality is that people need certain transport services. Not all of them can be switched to public transport. It is far better for the substantial number of journeys that cannot be substituted by public transport or by active travel that they be done with electric vehicles. Of course, if some of that power is generated from non-renewable sources, that will have emissions, but they will be dramatically lower than if we are fuelling vehicles with petrol or diesel. As we succeed in switching to renewable sources of power, we will be able to deliver transport services to everyone in a way that avoids an impact on the climate.

Many of the assumptions behind this amendment do not stand up to close scrutiny. There is no choice between companies and not touching our lifestyle. If we want to engage in travel and in all sorts of things, we must find ways of avoiding damaging emissions from them. That is what all this endeavour is about. In the long term, if we can get the electricity sector to be wholly renewable or supplemented by interconnection that is also from either nuclear or non-emitting sources, we can still deliver those transport services without impact on the environment. Many of the assumptions that have been put forward by Deputy Whitmore are not beyond challenge. We all have to change our lifestyles, not just big companies. I have heard others articulate this, that 70% of emissions come from big corporates and everything would be resolved if we did not do that. That is like saying an oil company that puts fuel into every car we drive is responsible for all those emissions. That is not the reality. They only exist because they are delivering a service that people want to have. People want to be able to move around.

There are many assumptions in the amendment that do not stand up to scrutiny. I do not believe net zero by 2030 is an achievable target to ask the Minister to report on. The objective at present is minus 43%, and we will be required to make big changes to reach 70% renewables on the system. I do not believe we should table amendments that are beyond the capacity of the Minister to deliver.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.