Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Murphy for his presentation. The court is doing interesting work that is relevant to our own.

To play devil’s advocate for a minute, it seems that the court is running a slide rule over return on investment to decide whether spend in the climate area is washing its face compared to spend elsewhere. Is it not the case that, in many of the matters Mr. Murphy discussed, for example, the role of biofuels and hydrogen, we are in an era of considerable uncertainty as to which punt one should take? While we can have a long-term strategy for biofuels or hydrogen, and there are such strategies in place, there is a great deal of uncertainty about how such alternatives will fit in and when hydrogen will become an appropriate intervention to be scaled up. To an extent, this is about trying to keep a presence in these areas so that, if they do develop, we have enough of a foothold in them. Compare that uncertainty to our long record of doing cost-benefit analyses. For example, we can see that if we invest in a hospital, we can have so many patients treated and there is not much doubt. Is the court expecting a little too much of those who are trying to plan interventions in these more uncertain areas?

Regarding EV, I was impressed. We have lacked a strategic roadmap.

We have a new local authority and regional process that the ESB is rolling out, but there is not a clear understanding in my mind as to what the appropriate sweet spot will be, as the battery capacity of cars grows and we can do more home charging, for the level of public charging we need. Eventually, I presume, public charging will become redundant as battery range develops. The strategy, to my mind, seems a little fraught with uncertainty. Is the court expecting a little too much of these uncertain areas?