Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is correct to focus on these elements. This is complicated because we have our national targets and our national legislative system, but we are also doing something similar in a European system where we have effort-sharing. Not only that, we also have the 20 pieces, I think it is now, of the European Fit for 55 legislation that will drive so much of this and place so many requirements on us.

Included in the renewable energy directive, as I recall, is that within 18 months of it being transposed, we will have to do the acceleration maps to show how we will meet it. The EU fundamentally sees it being a digital, green and renewable future and it wants every country to try to accelerate that. The regional authorities will have a key role in that, as the Deputy said, and they have a role working with the local authorities to work out those regional plans around how the local development plans have to be adjusted to give us the clear guidelines. That work is ongoing and to be concluded for first or second quarter next year. I am going on memory here now. Next year there is a timeline for us to start delivering it. There is a similar timeframe, I understand, for the issue of hyper-connection, which I very much support. This goes back to what I said earlier about where we can put it to different uses. It is not just wind and solar together. One can also look at other uses close to the development. That is a matter for the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, to deliver. It has it broken down into three parts of the work-stream and is working with EirGrid and with the system operators. It has submitted proposals to CRU and expects it to make a decision very shortly on us being able to deliver that.

I will go back to make one last point on what is happening in Europe. I spoke to Deputy Whitmore about environment being the key constraint and there is a real challenge in how we integrate the scaled development of renewables and other technologies to meet our climate targets, the existing European Union habitats and water frameworks, and other environmental legislation. It is a real challenge and the EU has recognised that. This is why the whole new legislative package is coming through so that we do not trip ourselves up, as it were. With offshore wind we must be sensitive to seabird populations to take one example. We must also consider the quality of the marine floor and the ecology there. It cites a whole range of different environmental challenges. I am hearing from European Union colleagues who are already further advanced on this. It may not be that there is a complete yes or no or black and white situation where one cannot do anything there. We may be able to use and develop technology. If, for instance, there is an area where seabird activities are critical at certain times of the day or the year with migratory patterns, we would switch off the turbines. The technology could be adjusted for nature. This gives greater flexibility to deploy the technology. It is not the case that we need to have such blanket restrictions. Similarly, I give the example that one of the most challenging aspects could be forestry. It is interesting. I met Commissioner Sinkeviius in the summer and discussed the development of our new forestry programme. There is recognition of the real challenges and conflicting interests between - let us say - the curlew and other marshland or wetland bird species, or between other farmland bird life, which is very much a threatened species. How we develop our forestry model is going to have to get this balance right. It is going to have to be an adaptive system that allows us restore nature but also meet our climate targets. Sometimes they will compete and getting the balance right on that is probably the most complicated and challenging thing we have to do.