Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I confirm I am on the Leinster House premises. I thank the Commissioner and her staff for their very interesting presentation and for the discussion. I will follow up a little on the question of lock-in that was raised. It is a real concern, and one the committee has discussed, that there is talk, for example, of contracts going to 2049 in respect of some of the new potential infrastructure around LNG. There is a fear, in effect, that the idea of having new contracts going until 2049, and simply saying that in 2050 we will suddenly talk about net zero but not have a genuinely strong emission path up to it, is the real danger. In fact, Europe, and the EU in particular, does not have 28 years, given our disproportionate responsibility for driving climate change. We should be leading and ahead of the curve in decarbonisation as our fair share will be exhausted before that. I am quite concerned.

Ms Simson mentioned the investment in new gas infrastructure if it is hydrogen ready, but it seems there is a lot of lobbying for investment in gas infrastructure and the conversion of gas infrastructure rather than, for example, investment in new infrastructure. This is the case even when it comes to things such as hydrogen and green hydrogen or the idea of more investment in things such as ammonia or ammonia storage. On LNG, given we have methane targets and methane is increasingly being recognised as an accelerant, and we know LNG and fracked gas in particular can drive that, there are dangers a major push on the LNG market will lead to an acceleration in methane emissions. There are concerns about that.

I also know that - and this relates to the substitutions and the dangers of tying ourselves long term to fossil fuel infrastructure and new fossil fuel - Qatar, for example, about which Human Rights Watch has raised very significant concerns, is one of the major producers of LNG and one of the major exporters to the EU. While people are moving away from Russian coal, there are concerns coal is now being purchased from the Cerrejón mine in Columbia. There is a danger that while we are exercising sanctions on Russia we are actually contributing to human rights breaches in other parts of the world, and by continuing to invest heavily in gas and coal, even if we are not buying directly from Russia, we are contributing to the asset price and to that market.

We are at a crunch point in that regard in terms of what we scale up.

I have two specific questions, one being on the renovation wave and the prioritisation of public buildings. I am not referring simply to the market in renovation. Do we need security and energy-demand reduction to really accelerate? Will the EU support these through public, not just private, investment in this area?

My last question is on the Energy Charter Treaty. We talked about the dangers of lock-in. Can countries seeking to make an energy transition, including developing and EU countries, afford to sign up to the treaty at a time when energy is so politically central? Should the EU consider pulling out? If the EU pulled out, would it give greater flexibility to developing-country governments in charting a more renewable energy path?