Professor Barry McMullin:

I thank the Senator; it is much appreciated. Much depends on how quickly we think this decarbonisation transition has to happen. If we think it is 30, 40 or 50 years then we have many more options on the table. We are awaiting the CCAC's advice on budgets but the carbon emissions budget numbers we have looked at suggest we do not have anything like 30, 40 or 50 years. We have 15 to 20 years if we are going to do our fair part on a global basis. If we do not do our fair part on a global basis our opportunity to influence the big emitting parties will be greatly reduced. If that is the time we have then in our context, where we have large indigenous resources of variable renewables, green hydrogen looms large. I should emphasise that green hydrogen is what I am speaking about when I say "hydrogen". There is a lot of activity in Europe on hydrogen generally and some activity on green hydrogen. In Europe and the world, Ireland has an almost unique need to push green hydrogen development as fast as it can go. If we do this, we will have the opportunity to lead in the technology development and even export the expertise we gain in doing so. Rapidly developing this hydrogen strategy in the light of carbon budgets as part of the climate action plan will be important over the next year.

The CRU operates on a statutory mandate. It is doing what it has a statutory mandate to do. The statutory mandate is to manage the monopoly providers of electricity and gas infrastructure to satisfy demand at least cost. It is not its fault that this is its remit. My point of view is that as a society we need to discuss our priorities. We throw around phrases such as "climate emergency" and "climate crisis". I am not sure we have internalised them. We spent 30 years basically saying climate action is important and as long as the economy is going well, we will work on climate. I am afraid we have run out of road on this. We now have to flip it and say we have to achieve our climate targets. We will keep a strong as possible an economy within this limit but the first question every year should not be whether the economy is growing but whether our emissions are falling at the level required. As long as the answer is "Yes" then all other economic choices are open. This can only happen if there is wider societal buy-in to the idea. In my view, this deep into the climate crisis we do not have a good way forward unless we can reorient our priorities. We must remember that gross economic activity is a poor indicator of societal well-being. Prioritising other things rather than just having more and more economic activity for economic activity's sake should not automatically be threatening. I will stop there.