Dr. Kevin Hanrahan:

Yes. I thank Deputy Farrell for the questions. The question about relatively low levels of afforestation is a very contested one, both politically and economically. As an economist, the evidence suggests that the relative returns from planting forests are not sufficiently large compared with other agricultural uses of land to drive high levels of afforestation. However, it is also clear from the research that lots of other factors are important in influencing landowners' decisions on whether to afforest their land. Despite the relatively generous subsidies to afforest land, the levels of afforestation are still very low relative to where they have been in the past. The level of subsidy is no lower now than in the past so there is a nut there to be cracked. That nut will need to be cracked if we are to get to the kinds of targets that my colleague, Dr. Styles, will talk about in a moment.

I agree with the Deputy that the volume of peat extraction that would be required to provide a medium for the Irish horticultural industry would be relatively small as compared with the volumes of peat that were extracted and mostly exported historically and in the recent past. Teagasc is in the process of hiring a new research officer on a permanent basis who will be looking at alternative growing mediums for the horticultural sector. I am sure the committee understands that it is not easy to find a medium that is as good as the peat resource which, unfortunately, involves lots of carbon dioxide emissions as part of the harvesting process. Teagasc is actively trying to figure out how the industry can develop without the use of peat but that is a long-term goal. It is probably possible to extract minimal amounts for the domestic horticultural market which could potentially be more than offset by re-wetting bogs and getting some sequestration going in Irish wetlands.

I am sure Dr. Styles wishes to respond too.