Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

There was a discussion about reflection and looking back at areas. In some of the written pieces from the CRU on the ongoing data centre discussions, I noticed there were multiple references to EirGrid but almost no reference to the review the CRU conducted that considered the options of doing nothing and a moratorium on data centres until the demand can be safely and securely facilitated by the network, and then the subsequent connection measures. I say this in the context that we were told, the time we met EirGrid and the CRU, that a 9% increase in electricity demand over five years was not an outlier, but I know from the information we have been given since that it is an outlier, and it seems the average in most EU countries is an overall net growth of zero percent. There has been either flat or declining energy usage in most countries, so effectively zero percent growth in electricity demand is the norm, whereas Ireland has had a 9% increase in electricity demand for the same period. The figures for the same five-year period show a 265% increase in the electricity demand from data centres.

In the current context where we are having literally to consider measures such as keeping the lights off or reducing the use of lights, has the CRU reflected on the decision not to apply the reasonable standard of having a moratorium until the demand can be safety and securely facilitated by the network and instead to go with a couple of connection measures? On the decision the CRU made not to limit the expansion of electricity demand by data centres but to look instead at connection measures, will the delegation comment on two of them in particular? One is the question of backup generators and the extent to which they rely on fossil fuels. We know, for example, that two of the new data centres that have been given planning permission have diesel backup generators. Perhaps the witnesses could comment on the danger of locking in that in terms of backup generation, which is fossil fuel-based generation happening in data centres that are being built and ones that are newly proposed to be built.

The CRU mentioned the ability of data centres to provide flexibility in their demand by reducing consumption. I would like to clarify what is meant by that. Are we saying the data centres must reduce demand at peak times and they can be required to do so? Is it, as mentioned here, something they could be requested to do or is it, and I was quite concerned by the reference to this earlier, the idea of procurement auctions around demand reduction? Is the suggestion we would have to bid for companies to reduce their energy demand? I was very concerned about the suggestion, which seemed to be, and I hope I got this wrong, that a hospital might bid for energy reduction bonuses or payments against other companies. We certainly should not have a situation where for-profit companies can choose not to reduce energy where hospitals are effectively being told they should seek to reduce their energy costs and so forth by bidding for demand reduction. Either Deputy O'Sullivan or Deputy Leddin made the very sensible suggestion that surely we should just pay for battery power in our public and essential services rather than have them going into a demand reduction procurement market. Is that where the CRU sees data centres going?

I want to be clear as to whether that reduction of demand from data centres is a hard power we can exercise. Are our guests suggesting they may choose to participate in a demand reduction procurement market?