Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Wednesday, 8 October 2025
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy
Climate Change Targets 2026-2030: Discussion (Resumed)
2:00 am
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
We have received apologies from Deputy Barry Heneghan and Senator Alice-Mary Higgins. The first item on the agenda today is the engagement with the transport sector on climate change targets 2026 to 2030 - the near term targets. The purpose of today's meeting is to continue a discussion with the goal of identifying the 15 to 20 barriers that would prevent Ireland from reaching its climate change targets for 2026 to 2030. We are holding sector by sector engagement on this topic. As members will know, we continue today with witnesses from the transport sector.
I welcome the following witnesses to our meeting: from the National Transport Authority: Mr. Hugh Creegan, interim CEO, and Mr. Eoin Gillard, assistant director of transport investment; from the Irish Road Haulage Association, Mr. Ger Hyland, president, Mr. John Nolan, honorary secretary, Mr. Paul Jackman, officer on the management committee, and Mr. Eugene Drennan, officer on the management committee; from Fuels for Ireland, Mr. Kevin McPartlan, CEO, and Ms Sarah Bradshaw; and from the Society of the Irish Motor Industry; Mr. Brian Cooke, director general, Mr. Tom Cullen, deputy director general, and Ms Emma Mitchell, operations director and secretary. They are all very welcome here today. I remind all witnesses to make sure their mobile phones are on silent or switched off, please.
Before I invite the witnesses to deliver their opening statements, I want to advise them of the following in relation to parliamentary privilege. Witnesses and members are reminded of the long-standing practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity, by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of that person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative they comply with any such direction.
On the format of the session, I will invite witnesses in turn to make an opening statement for a maximum of five minutes. Once the opening statements have been delivered, I will then call on the members of the committee in the order in which they indicate to me to put their questions. The committee operates a rota system, which provides each member with an initial six minutes to engage with our witnesses. It is important to note that the six minutes is for both questions and answers. Therefore, it is essential for members to put their questions succinctly and witnesses to be succinct in their responses. We may have some non-members of the committee here and they will also be invited to contribute and put their questions at the end of the first round. When all members who have indicated have had their initial engagement, time permitting, a second round will commence where each member will have up to three minutes for both questions and answers.
Please note the duration of this meeting is limited and, therefore, the times must be adhered to. I ask everybody to be focused in their contributions. I will now call each organisation to deliver their opening statements as follows: Mr. Hugh Creegan, for the National Transport Authority, Mr. Ger Hyland for the IRHA, Mr. Kevin McPartlan for Fuels for Ireland and Mr. Brian Cooke for the SIMI. We will start with Mr. Hugh Creegan for the NTA.
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
I thank the Cathaoirleach and committee for the invitation to appear today. I understand the committee wishes to explore barriers that may prevent Ireland from meeting its 2026 to 2030 climate change targets. To assist me in dealing with questions that may arise during the session, I am joined by Mr. Eoin Gillard, assistant director of transport investment.
As the committee will be aware, transport emissions accounted for 19.5% of total national greenhouse gas emissions at the end of 2023. The sectoral emissions reduction target set by the Government is for transport emissions to be reduced by 50% by 2030 compared with a 2018 emissions baseline. By the end of 2023, transport emissions had reduced by 4.2% from the 2018 figure. This leaves a challenging reduction to be achieved over the 2023 to 2030 period.
Within the direct remit of the NTA, other than our regulatory functions, all of our activities are focused on the provision of sustainable transport infrastructure and services. In relation to services, public transport use continues to grow at exceptional levels. Overall, passenger numbers on State-provided bus and rail services in 2024 were 32 million higher compared with 2023, an increase of 10.6%. Unlike many other international jurisdictions, overall public transport passenger numbers in Ireland now significantly exceed the 2019 pre-pandemic levels, with 344 million passengers carried on State-provided services in the previous year, compared with 295 million in 2019.
Public transport infrastructure is being developed, with construction now starting on the first BusConnects Dublin corridor and a construction contract for the second corridor expected to be signed later this month. Three of the DART+ projects have received planning consent as has the MetroLink project in the previous week. These projects are now available to proceed to construction.
The Cork commuter rail programme is under construction. Bus depots are being electrified and urban buses are transitioning to electric vehicles. A major programme of development of active travel projects, being cycling and walking projects, is under way, with approximately 800 projects at various stages of development across the country.
Focusing solely on the NTA’s activities, some of the challenges that we see to achieving the targeted level of emissions reduction by 2030 include the need to reduce the level of car use, the need for increased funding both to build infrastructure and provide services, lengthy delivery times for infrastructure projects, the need for increased levels of electrification across transport, resource availability in a near-full employment environment, and public acceptance and buy-in to change.
This concludes my opening remarks and I welcome any questions that members of the committee may have.
Mr. Ger Hyland:
I thank the Chair, Deputies and Senators for their invitation to address the committee today. I am here as president of the Irish Road Haulage Association, which is the representative body for the licensed road haulage sector, which is also the backbone of Ireland’s supply chains.
As an island economy, more than 90% of our goods are transported by Irish-registered operators. This means that the State has a unique ability and responsibility to shape the emissions profile of our national fleet. As key stakeholders, we fully support the national ambition to reduce transport emissions, but I must emphasise that there are real barriers that, if unaddressed, will prevent Ireland from meeting its 2026 to 2030 climate targets. Almost half of Ireland’s heavy goods vehicles are over ten years old and nearly all are diesel powered. At present there is no commercially viable alternative for long-haul freight. Compressed natural gas, CNG, has not taken off, liquefied natural gas, LNG, is unworkable in Ireland, hydrogen and battery-electric trucks remain at trial stage, and the infrastructure to support them does not exist. For the coming decade, diesel, specifically the modern Euro 6 diesel engine, remains the only practical option. Without State support to accelerate fleet renewal, our progress will stall.
Our sector operates on the tightest of margins. Hauliers cannot pass on the cost of expensive new technologies when customers award contracts almost exclusively on price. While other EU states provide clear fiscal incentives for lower emission vehicles and fuels, Irish hauliers face higher excise and carbon taxes without equivalent supports. For example, hydrotreated vegetable oil, HVO, can cut emissions by up to 90%, yet in Ireland it costs up to 25 cent more per litre than diesel due to tax treatment. That is a clear policy contradiction and one which only the Government can reconcile. Ensuring our sector achieves its climate change targets requires action, not just lip service by Government.
There are practical, immediate low-hanging fruit measures that could cut emissions today but which remain unimplemented. Examples include incentives to replace older trucks with Euro 6 models, rebates and tax support for low-carbon fuels like HVO and biodiesel blends, smarter traffic management such as express HGV toll lanes and sequencing traffic lights to avoid unnecessary idling, and supporting night-time port operations to reduce congestion. These measures would cut fuel use, emissions and costs and improve safety. Again, as a sector, we cannot implement these measures without Government support and co-ordination. The onus, responsibility and capacity to deliver these measures rests with the Government.
The current policy is too often aspirational rather than practical. Ambitious targets assume a rapid uptake of technologies that are not yet available. This creates a credibility gap between national goals and industry realities. The consequence is a missed decade. A phased, evidence-based approach, beginning with upgrading to the cleanest diesel available while building hydrogen and EV infrastructure, is the only viable pathway. Progress needs to be grounded in realities and not vague aspirations.
We urge the State to maintain and adapt the diesel rebate scheme and introduce a specific rebate for the non-fossil component of our fuel mix. This would directly support the climate action plan while shielding hauliers from disproportionate cost burdens. Equally, exempting licensed hauliers from the M50 toll would remove a regulatory cost where no alternative route exists.
The IRHA members are committed to decarbonisation, but unless the barriers of fleet age, lack of viable alternatives, absence of infrastructure and misaligned taxation are addressed, Ireland’s transport emissions will remain stubbornly high. We stand ready to work with Government to deliver realistic, evidence-based measures that reduce emissions today while preparing for the technologies of tomorrow.
Mr. Kevin McPartlan:
I thank the committee for the opportunity to speak on behalf of Fuels for Ireland. We welcome this discussion on the decarbonisation of transport, a challenge that is both urgent and complex, and one that must be addressed with ambition, pragmatism and pace.
Fuels for Ireland is the national representative body for the companies that import, refine, distribute and sell liquid fuels, whether fossil, advanced, synthetic or biofuel, across the State. Our members supply more than half of Ireland’s total energy needs. As such, we have a central role to play in delivering a successful transition to a low carbon future. That responsibility is one we embrace fully. In 2020, we published our industry’s long-term vision in which we stated unequivocally that fossil fuels cannot be the basis of Ireland’s long-term energy plans or the basis of our industry’s long-term business strategy. That remains our guiding principle.
We are unstinting in our support for increased electrification of transport. Many of our members are among the largest investors in public charging infrastructure, and a greater proportion of forecourts in Ireland now offer EV charging than in any other EU member state. However, we must also confront reality. EV adoption continues to lag behind the targets set out in national plans, and internal combustion engine vehicles will remain a significant part of Ireland’s transport system for many years to come. Reducing emissions from those vehicles is therefore essential if we are to meet our climate commitments. That is why technology neutrality, which means deploying every available solution in parallel, must be at the heart of policy.
Low-carbon liquid fuels, including advanced biofuels such as hydrotreated vegetable oil, HVO, are among the most powerful tools we have to cut emissions quickly and cost-effectively. They are proven, scalable, and compatible with existing vehicles and infrastructure. They can deliver up to 90% life cycle greenhouse gas savings compared with fossil diesel and they can be deployed immediately, not years from now but today in sectors where electrification is not yet practical, such as heavy goods transport, off-road machinery, civil engineering and back-up generation. The same supply chains and the same fuels can also decarbonise Ireland’s home heating sector, which remains one of the most fossil fuel-dependent in Europe.
If we are serious about decarbonising transport, we must remove barriers to the deployment of these solutions. One such barrier is the policy and fiscal environment. Government has repeatedly stated that its priority is to reduce energy costs and ease the cost-of-living burden. Yet, in the next 12 weeks alone, if we include from midnight last night, fiscal measures already enacted will add around 5 cent per litre to the price of transport fuels.
Many of the taxes and levies intended to discourage the use of fossil fuels are also applied to certified low-carbon liquid fuels, including the application of mineral oil tax to fuels that are not mineral oils. This makes little policy sense and undermines the goal we all share. That is why Fuels for Ireland is calling for the establishment of an expert group, led by the Minister for Finance, to examine how taxation and related policies affect fuel prices and whether they align with Ireland’s decarbonisation objectives.
The challenge before us is immense, but the solutions are available. By embracing technology neutrality, accelerating electrification and removing the obstacles that prevent the wider use of low-carbon liquid fuels, Ireland can make rapid, meaningful progress in reducing transport emissions without placing unnecessary burdens on households, businesses or the wider economy. I thank members for their attention. I look forward to engaging with the committee on questions.
Mr. Brian Cooke:
I thank the Cathaoirleach for the invitation to address the committee.
If Ireland is to achieve its ambitious environmental goals, the drive to decarbonise the national vehicle fleet by electrification must be a fundamental pillar. In fact, it is projected to deliver the greatest emission reductions across the Government’s climate action plan. It is also the key strategic issue for the motor industry both nationally and globally. The motor industry is already making significant efforts to do its part and is fully committed to the electric vehicle, EV, project going forward. Manufacturers are investing heavily in new electric vehicles. There are now over 120 EV models for sale in Ireland, including a growing number priced under €30,000. Irish motor retailers are also investing heavily in premises, equipment and employee training in preparation for the increase of EVs on roads. The industry can and will deliver EVs in large numbers. The extent of this delivery though is not just in the hands of the Industry. The State also must play an important role in encouraging drivers to switch to electric. The reality is that for the majority of motorists, the single biggest contribution they can make to help Ireland achieve its climate targets is to switch to an EV. The industry and the State must work together to make this possible.
The joint committee is looking at the key barriers in preventing Ireland from meeting its climate targets and has asked us to highlight the challenges and potential solutions to ensure sustainable progress. First, some good news. Following the decline in EV registrations in 2024, we have seen a recovery this year and EV sales have returned and exceeded 2023 levels. We have achieved the 2025 EV passenger car target of 175,000, as outlined in the Government’s climate action plan. There are now over 185,500 EV cars on the road. Of these, nearly 98,000 are fully electric. This is an important achievement.
The challenge from 2026 to 2030 is an even greater one. Motorists who have already gone electric are the innovators and early adopters. We must now target a new cohort of more cautious consumers and businesses who typically adopt new technology only after it has proved successful. This group may also be swayed by misconceptions about range, charging and battery performance. We must combat misinformation whenever and wherever possible. The Climate Action Advisory Council has highlighted that mass market adoption is achieved when the total electric vehicle stock reaches 16% of the national fleet. Currently, we are at 4%, meaning that a fourfold increase is required to reach mass market adoption. Only then will there be a fully functioning EV new and used car market.
One of the biggest barriers to reaching Ireland’s climate targets is the weakness of the new car market. To sell EVs in the volumes required, we need a stronger demand for new cars. However, registrations remain well below pre-2008 levels. The 2030 target - ambitious from the outset - is simply not realistic given the size of the market. The Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, estimates that with no additional measures and based on current new car market volumes, we will have 564,000 electric vehicles on the road by 2030. This number increases to just over 640,000 with additional measures, which, although short of the target, would still be a significant achievement from what effectively was a standing start at the beginning of the decade.
The spectre of significant fines for missing the climate targets hangs over the country, with an estimated range in 2030 between €8 billion and €27 billion. In order to reduce these fines, we must invest now in all climate positive projects, including electric vehicles. We must continue to incentivise. It has worked to date and reductions in support will only undermine the EV project. Incentives are vital to bridge the affordability gap for consumers and businesses to choose an electric vehicle, ensuring that new EVs remain a viable option. The cost of any incentives between now and 2030 will be offset by the reduction in fines. It should be emphasised that fines are dead money going to the benefit of other economies. EV incentives on the other hand will help generate additional domestic taxes, protect local employment as well as delivering significant environmental benefits. We were not aware of the contents of the budget on preparing this statement. What we need to see, as a minimum, is the extension of the current incentives, including the SEAI purchase and home charger grants, VRT relief, benefit-in-kind relief and a 9% VAT rate on electricity.
Looking at other European countries, many offer stronger supports for businesses to adopt EVs, such as VAT relief and enhanced tax deductions. Similar measures in Ireland would help SMEs that cannot access the SEAI grant. France has also introduced a social leasing scheme for lower income households, which could be considered here to broaden access.
The transition to zero-emission vehicles should be accessible to everyone. The reality is that for people driving older vehicles the financial gap that must be breached in moving to a new EV is just too large, and we do not have a fully functioning second-hand EV market. Next year is not only a crucial year for new EV registrations but also for the development of the used EV market. Used car buyers make up the majority of the Irish car market. Over 20,000 EVs sold in 2023 will become three years old next year. Many of these, in particular company cars or cars financed by PCP, will be coming to the used car market next year. Any support for used EVs, which could be based on a household income threshold, could potentially bring a wider constituency to the EV market. In addition to vehicle supports, the charging infrastructure must continue to evolve. The charging infrastructure should operate with simple contactless payments already used in everyday life instead of the plethora of apps we have at the moment.
Overall, we have hit the EV target for 2025. We are on the right road, but we need to accelerate. Ireland has many advantages in relation to the roll-out of EVs. We are small country geographically meaning range anxiety is not as big an issue in Ireland. We have a temperate climate, which is the ideal environment for battery performance and longevity. Our residential property profile lends itself to home charging. While the 2030 targets may be out of reach, SIMI still feels that electric vehicles have been a good news story to date, and with the right Government support can continue to progress. Incentives will be required to drive behavioural change.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
I invite members in the order they have indicated to engage with the witnesses. The order is as follows: Deputy Clendennen followed by Deputies Ahern, Whitmore and O’Connell.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
I thank the witnesses. My first question is for Mr. Cooke. He mentioned EV charging and the roll-out. If we could identify one agency or stakeholder to take responsibility for this and expedite the speed of delivery, who would he see taking on that responsibility?
Mr. Brian Cooke:
We have a zero emissions vehicle office, which is zero emission vehicles Ireland, ZEVI. It has done a really good job to date. It may potentially have been hampered by funding. I see it got increased funding in the budget. Although it is part of the Department of Transport, that office has its own personality. It would be effective in leading the charge. Obviously, it is not going to be the one making the investment. All stakeholders are going to be involved, both public and private stakeholders. ZEVI has its finger on the pulse.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
From our perspective, I want to bring one agency in. It is a bit all over the place at the moment. It is taking too long. I have community groups back in Offaly that are taking 12 to 18 months, and it is still not delivered. We need to identify one stakeholder that we can bring in here in 12, 24 or 36 months to tell us what the roll-out is. Mr. Cooke is telling me-----
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
My next question is on a fully functioning second-hand EV market. Should we be looking at the likes of the UK market or other markets to bring second-hand electric cars in here?
Mr. Brian Cooke:
There are a few reasons. We have already seen the data. Used imports can play an important role in plugging the gap in used vehicles, but what we have is a new market. If we look at what happened to the overall car market between 2016 and 2019, sterling collapsed after the Brexit vote and we had a flood of used imports. We brought in a lot of older cars and higher emitting cars. That substituted for new cars, so it reduced our new car market. It also undermined the values of used cars in Ireland. We cannot see the new EV market undermined which a flood of used imports would do.
It would also undermine the residual value of used Irish EVs. Overall, it would end up upsetting a market that is in its early stages.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
There is a dream, but there is also a reality. There is also an affordability piece for households. We all want to go on this journey but my point is that considering the size of the UK market, as our nearest neighbours and as a right-hand-drive market, should we not be considering some sort of mechanism to encourage more electric vehicles to enter this market from there at a reduced rate?
Mr. Brian Cooke:
My answer remains no. We would be supporting UK retailers over Irish retailers, who are investing in their premises and in training their staff. Between 2016 and 2019, the Irish new-car and used-car markets were undermined. They have not fully recovered. If we incentivise UK imports, we will undermine the new-car market, which will deliver the overwhelming majority of cars to the used-car market over the next few years.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
The message is that if people cannot afford electric vehicles, they should stay in their high-emissions vehicles for now.
Mr. Brian Cooke:
There will potentially be an extra 20,000 used cars coming to the market next year. Those are the cars we need to encourage the sale of and incentivise people to buy. They were sold by Irish retailers. The used cars will be sold by Irish retailers. That will also encourage Irish retailers to take them as trade-ins. Twelve months ago, many retailers, particularly outside Dublin, did not want to take an electric vehicle as a trade-in. That has changed and the tipping point could well be next year. As I said in my opening statement, next year is crucial for the used EV market. Incentivising Irish cars that were sold two or three years ago by Irish retailers is the way to get the market to start churning. It will not only help the used EV market. For over 90% of people who own an EV now, their next car will be an EV. It will create an overall scale. It might take two or three years.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
I am conscious of time and want to ask more questions. I will turn to the representatives of Fuels for Ireland and the Irish Road Haulage Association. I have been an advocate for HVO in other areas, particularly the likes of home heating. I would like to see it in this area, too. It has to be seen as an intermediary and must be supported. If we look at home retrofits and so on, it is an intermediary measure. It needs to be seen as that in this sector too.
I would like to get a better insight into the likes of electric vehicles. I see that a Swedish manufacturer now has a vehicle with a range of 600 km and a charging time of 40 minutes. Should we be looking at this in a two-tier range system or something similar? We are trying to incentivise people, where it is possible to do so and there is not a range anxiety piece, to use the likes of electric HGVs in cities and HVO on a broader island basis.
Mr. Kevin McPartlan:
The Deputy is suggesting a model that we are proposing, which is that of technology neutrality. As we say, there are different technologies that work for different applications. If you are running a delivery service with predictable hours in and around the city centre, frankly, and I say this as the CEO of Fuels for Ireland, it does not make sense that you would use anything other than an EV for that. It might be surprising to some people to hear me say that. If you are doing very long journeys in heavy goods vehicles, at the moment the only real option you have is an internal combustion engine. Therefore, we should be looking at how we can reduce the emissions from that use. Our friends and colleagues in Irish Road Haulage Association used support for HVO as an example. We could get lost in HVO. It is the current best and most available example. We should talk about advanced synthetic and biofuels. We should be looking at how we can use all available technology to reduce emissions across all possible uses. Advanced synthetic and biofuels are a good way of doing that in the context of internal combustion engines. We rely on internal combustion engines today and will continue to do so for a period. The Deputy is right to talk about HVO as a transitional measure. Perhaps we will hit absolute electrification. However, that prospect is not within our immediate sight so we must examine how to reduce emissions now from vehicles that will continue to use internal combustion engines.
Mr. Paul Jackman:
What has been touched on is spot-on. The low-hanging fruit, as Mr. McPartlan referenced, is the back-to-base trucks. A component of that is not only the nature of the work. The fact of going back to base is direct support for the hauliers who have that vehicle type. It is taking pressure off the grid because we will be waiting a long time for the grid to come up. If you analyse the diesel and convert it to electricity, factoring in the additional efficiency, 22% of our current grid capacity has to be used to do the trucks. The back-to-base trucks, coupled with a battery pack and renewable structure at the premises, are low-hanging fruit with the longer truck.
HVO has been referenced several times. That is the only potential solution for decarbonising larger vehicles. There are six taxes on diesel and the only one that is missing for HVO is carbon tax. Any user of carbon tax forgoes the diesel rebate scheme. The Government benefits to the tune of 26.8 cent per every litre of HVO that is used to displace diesel because impending fines are being reduced. The haulier is paying up to €250,000 or €300,000 extra to consume 1 million litres of HVO over diesel when it is factored in. The benefit to the State amounts to a similar figure. It is totally out of kilter and counterintuitive.
Mr. Eugene Drennan:
To borrow the Deputy's phrase, there is a dream and there is the reality. We live in the reality. The percentage of the vehicles we are talking about that could switch to electricity is very small. You need a multifunctional vehicle in Ireland because we all go to the UK or the Continent. Only a very limited number of battery vehicles are allowed on ferries because the risk of a fire is too high. We have no choice but to use this type of vehicle. Mr. McPartlan sang our song when he rightly said we could come in here tomorrow morning and say we can reduce 90% of emissions by using HVO. Why does the reality not dawn? It is fortunate that we are here today. What the budget does is to show that Ireland would prefer to pay 26.8 cents per litre of a carbon penalty to Europe than to support us with a similar amount of money or a little more and decarbonise.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
I thank the guests for coming in and giving us the benefit of their expertise. I will start with something that Mr. Cooke said. In his opening statement, he said, "The single biggest contribution [a motorist] can make to help Ireland to achieve its climate targets is to switch to an EV." That is a fundamentally incorrect statement. Clearly, the single biggest thing that someone can do to reduce their emissions is to change to a more sustainable mode of transport. The failure to grasp that-----
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
I will let Mr. Cooke come in shortly. The failure to grasp that point is at the heart of why we are here and why we have failed so drastically to reduce our transport emissions. We have to see a 50% reduction in the number of car journeys we take. We cannot just say that the status quo can continue and that simply switching to electric vehicles is going to sort us out and on its own reduce all our transport emissions. I have a fundamental problem with that.
I would like to ask all the witnesses from an emissions and broader environmental perspective, and from a traffic congestion perspective, what we are going to do to reduce the number of car journeys. How can we facilitate people and encourage them to switch to another mode of transport? What measures can reduce overall car use and shift demand towards public transport, walking and cycling? I would like to hear from the witnesses on topics such as road space reallocation, parking policy, congestion charging and broader incentives or disincentives to choose more sustainable modes. I put those questions to all the witnesses.
Mr. Brian Cooke:
What I said was that what most motorists can realistically do is to change to an EV. The most they can do is to get rid of their cars but for most people, that is not realistic. I am quoting the Climate Change Advisory Council. For most people, it is not realistic at the moment to ditch their cars completely. In that case, as the Climate Change Advisory Council stated, they can switch to EVs. The UK climate change committee has stated that the single biggest thing consumers can do when trying to decarbonise and buying a new car is to buy an electric one. I did not just-----
Mr. Brian Cooke:
We have to be realistic about this. If you look at the various versions of the climate action plan, the biggest investment is in public transport. That is the real answer to the question but that will not deliver enough between now and 2030. We have to do everything that is in those plans. We have to increase public transport, improve the fuels, improve active travel and introduce electric vehicles. We cannot ignore the fact fleet electrification is a fundamental pillar and the various climate action plans over recent years have identified that, not the motor industry, as the biggest emissions abatement between now and 2026 and 2030. That is not me saying that. It is the Government's own documents saying that. That is the way. If we want to reduce emissions quickly and effectively, the way we can do it is by moving to fleet electrification.
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
I agree that many steps have to be taken. There is no single answer. All the things I mentioned about roadspace reallocation, increased use of public transport and the possibility of low-emission zones have work ongoing on them. Members are all aware of the various measures to increase public transport and traffic management measures in the city of Dublin, if they think of what has changed along the quays in the city centre over the years. Many things have happened but there is much more to be done.
Mr. Kevin McPartlan:
I do not disagree with the Deputy. Modal shift is the holy grail. That is the most effective way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transport but we need to be realistic and say that we cannot have penalties without alternatives. I came in from the suburbs of Dublin. I could have got the Luas, I could have cycled, I could have walked if I had taken the time and I could have driven in. That is fine because I have those options. I think of my mother in north Cork, who does not have all of those options. At 76 - she will kill me for that - she is not going to start cycling around north Cork. We have to be realistic and say that, yes, we need to look for a modal shift as the first alternative, if we are serious about reducing emissions from transport, but we also have to accept that, while we may say that they should not, people will continue to use private transport, as will the essential haulage sector.
We can either leave those emitting as they are or we can do something about it. Electrification is the best option if they are going to continue to use motor vehicles and we think, in concert with that, that we should be looking at advanced synthetic and biofuels. We are trying to look at every possible alternative. We are not suggesting that the use of advanced synthetic and biofuels is not the most effective way of decarbonising transport. We think it is the most effective thing we can do, alongside our commitment to providing electric vehicle charging.
Mr. Paul Jackman:
It is worth putting on the record that we have a member that has several trucks working in Dublin city centre. It has looked at the EV option. The Dublin city permit costs, the State road tax and the tolls are exactly the same for an EV versus a 1988 diesel truck. There is not one incentive from an operator's perspective to improve the air quality in the city for the citizens. That is shocking and should be put on record here. We have raised it. We have written to Dublin City Council several times to try to get the Dublin city permit removed for electric vehicles, but there has been no outcome.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
I thank the witnesses for coming in today. Mr. Creegan said in his statement that delivery times are one of the challenges for delivering on emissions. He has just stated that things have happened but there is still a lot more to be done. I would say there is a lot more to be done and it needs to be done a whole lot more quickly. London, Warsaw, Budapest, Prague, Vienna, Edinburgh, Brussels, Stockholm, Sofia, Rome, Madrid, Copenhagen, Budapest, Amsterdam, Helsinki, Athens, Lisbon and Berlin all have contactless systems for their public transport. Dublin and Paris are the only two capital cities in Europe that are yet to have them. I know a project is under way for which the contract was signed in April 2024. Can Mr. Creegan go through the four phases for the delivery of that? What is in each of those phases and when will we have a fully contactless system in our public transport?
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
We have a contractor in place, as the Deputy says, designing and building the system. These are not simple, off-the-shelf products. They just are not. The extra complexity is keeping the existing Leap card system going in parallel while we put in the new system. That is an end-of-life, really stretched system at the moment. The Deputy is obviously familiar with the four release phases that we are doing. I have not got all the details off the top of my head. We will deploy the final phase for the Dublin area, which covers all of the bus network, the Luas network and the rail network in the Dublin area, at some point in 2028. There will be stages before that when we are doing largely pilots. We are doing a stage where we put in validators that read Leap Cards but they will not be energised to read contactless until we get parts of the back office finished. It is a complex project but we are targeting 2028 to roll it out across the Dublin area.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
After that, I think Iarnród Éireann is phase 3 to be rolled out, and following that will be commuter bus services outside the Dublin area. Does Mr. Creegan have a timeline for when that will be complete?
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
I do not, because we need to see what funding we have available and we do not know yet what our capital funding, year by year, is for the next couple of years. That needs to be distributed. The Department of Transport got an overall allocation from the Department of public expenditure. It needs to do the sector plan to divide that money among all the projects, and then I will be in a position to be able to be clear and say the next phase will be rolled out further on a certain date. To clarify, the commuter service in the Dublin area will be covered in the roll-out.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
But not outside. I am a bit confused. I would imagine that if the NTA was signing a contract with a company, it would have asked the company for a timeline for how quickly it can put this system in place if the funding was available. Was that not asked of the company? Has it not done a business plan going forward, with Gantt charts or whatever other project management plans in place?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Just from a climate perspective. I get that. We need to look at the broader barriers too. Let us answer this question, but-----
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
This is really important. In order for people to use public transport-----
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
-----and move out of the car, we have to make it easy for them. This is a part of that. This is one of the things. I think Mr. Cooke mentioned that a contactless system was important.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Has the company not planned that out? I find it unusual that the NTA does not have any date for the final implementation of this.
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
It is not, because it is what we call a framework contract. We said for definite that we could fund the greater Dublin area, which we had funding for. We have a series of options that we can call up under the contract with certain pricing pre-priced in it. As we need something else, we have the ability to draw it up under the contract, but we have not required a timeline because until we know the funding, we do not put timelines against it.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
I find that unusual because I would have imagined it could be the case that the different systems would be put in in parallel for Iarnród Éireann and commuter bus services, and that the systems for that could be developed in parallel with the system for Dublin. It seems like a long and expensive way to put in fundamental infrastructure.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
The Netherlands has done it and completed it two years ago.
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
-----as a single contract, no. In this case, the back office, which is the brains of the system, is sized to do the whole country and all the elements of it. That is put in place first. We bolt on other sections as funding is available and we can do it. I am happy that the way we are doing it is correct. I just cannot confirm that the funding is there to give a firm delivery date for places outside of the greater Dublin area.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
The other important point mentioned is public acceptance and buy-in. Most of my experience of public transport is in my constituency, so I will make my point in that context. My constituency has the DART, commuter trains and rural transport. It covers all of the remit. One of the biggest problems is not that people do not want to use public transport but that the service is either not there or is so poor they cannot rely on it. That is the challenge. It is about the operation of the service in many instances. We have buses repeatedly not showing up, timetables that are all over the place and an absence services that people have been seeking for years. I have spoken to the witnesses many times about the electric DART to Wicklow town. There is no bus between Wicklow town and Greystones and they are 20 minutes from each other. Greystones has the DART and Wicklow town gets three services to Dublin every day. The infrastructure and the service are just not there. I do not know where the impediment is. Is it that the Government is not funding it? Is it the prioritisation of where services go? Drogheda and Portlaoise have fantastic train services. Portlaoise has 32 train services every day, Drogheda has 16 and Wicklow town has six. It seems that good services are being made very good at the expense of really poor services, such as Wicklow town. Is there a prioritisation issue?
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
I know Deputy Whitmore is very familiar with this, and she is aware of what is being planned for the Wicklow area. We have done a lot of good things in Wicklow. The Deputy is also aware of many of those. I know Deputy Whitmore knows that we have a project under way with Irish Rail to increase the frequency of DART trains to Greystones to three an hour. We were the ones who came up with the idea of running battery trains hourly from Greystones to Wicklow.
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
We hope to get it done in three years. We have to go through a process of purchasing trains and chargers and getting planning permission. That process is under way.
In addition, there are various changes in the Connecting Ireland services which, again, Deputy Whitmore is aware of. BusConnects has added a lot of services in Wicklow. It is not a case of us underprioritising Wicklow. It is a case of us having to do all of the projects in a logical way within the funding envelope available to us.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
The difficulty is that this project has been in the plans for five or six years. It has been promised on multiple occasions but keeps being pushed out. Is there a final date for it?
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
My first question is for the NTA. One of the key strategic objectives in terms of trying to reduce our emissions from transport is the need to reduce the level of car use. We spoke to the Love 30 campaign last week about default speed limits, which are an issue for local authorities. Default speed limits of 30 km/h in urban areas and a proper definition of what urban areas are, because they are expanding significantly, would be key enablers to giving families the confidence to get out of cars and allowing children to have safe routes to cycle to school. Do the witnesses have a view on this?
On rural public transport, we have seen a huge surge in the uptake on various the routes. I am thinking of the 891 in my neck of the woods in Kilkenny, which runs to Piltown. The uptake has been phenomenal. These are the significant enablers of getting people out of their cars. Many people are now making the choice not to drive to work or to appointments. The services provided on the routes are fantastic.
Similarly, we have concluded the review of the Lingaun Valley loop, which is a free transport service on a tourist route in part of Kilkenny. It has been successful. Schemes of this type could be moved out of pilot status and made mainstream. I am thinking of places such as the Burren and other parts of the country where we could have this option, both from a tourism perspective and from the point of view of local public transport. What are the views of the witnesses on that?
Much of the uptake is linked to price. We have seen a reduction in price in recent years, and free transport for children aged under nine and under 12. This has had a positive impact. I would like a view from the witnesses on what they think of this general approach. For me, it has been absolutely transformative. Scaling it up into the mainstream would seem to be the way forward.
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
The programme has been branded as Connecting Ireland. I agree it has been transformative. Wherever we have rolled it out, it has been embraced and used. Suddenly people have an option to travel which they never had before. As Senator Noonan said, the fare adjustments make it all very attractive overall. Getting the resources to roll it out has been a challenge. We do not know just yet what funding we will have next year and in future years, and we will need to see that. We would definitely like to do much more in this area. Giving people who have no option but to drive the option to use public transport is one of the big things that would make a dent in our emissions.
With regard to the 30 km/h speed limit areas, I am not sure I will comment on the default position of doing it overall. In general, we have done transport strategies for all of the metropolitan areas. We very much support the lower speed limit of 30 km/h in residential areas. We are totally comfortable with the roll-out. The default position is slightly more complicated.
With regard to connections to tourist locations, we do much of this already. We link up with Fáilte Ireland on identifying service gaps that need to be filled and we try to plug them into Connecting Ireland. It has sort of been mainstreamed at this stage. Connecting Ireland is a pretty mature programme. It is a matter of growing it further. As Senator Noonan stated, it has been a game-changer for many people.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
My next question is probably for the road hauliers, but it is a general question on bypassing our urban centres. Mr. Hyland mentioned the issue of trucks braking. Some pilot work has been done on efficient driving for HGV drivers. Separately, in urban areas, there is a significant challenge where truck drivers have to constantly brake and stop-start. This has an impact on fuel use. There is a disjointed approach to the bypassing of towns. I am thinking of places such as Kilkenny, which has not had a completed ring road for the past 30 years. More generally, will Mr. Hyland expand on the issue of the impact of fuel use on trucks that have to brake and stop-start in urban centres?
Mr. Ger Hyland:
Leaving the urban centres to one side for a minute, take the toll roads. For the past five years we have called for the removal of the barriers at the toll booths and for an express HGV lane that we drive through at 20 km/h or 30 km/h. It does not have to be 50 km/h or 60 km/h. If we could go through at 20 km/h or 30 km/h, the amount of fuel we would save would anywhere between 1 litre and 2 litres every time we come to a toll booth. If there is no traffic in front of us when we come to a toll booth we have to physically come to a complete stop, then the toll barrier rises once it recognises our tag, and then we go through. If we arrive and there are eight or ten cars in the lane in front of us, it takes us five to ten minutes to get through the toll booth. There should be a specific lane with no barrier for trucks at all toll booths. The technology is there to pick up the toll tag and let us through. I will give an example. The most polluted place in Ireland is at the toll leading into Dublin Port from the port tunnel. It is also one of the most polluted places in Europe. We have called for TII to remove the barriers on all toll roads, and specifically the one going into Dublin Port.
Mr. Ger Hyland:
We have called on it to move back the reader to allow the toll barrier to lift. We are still going through at 5 km/h or 10 km/h.
Part of the reason there are trucks in towns is because they are avoiding the tolls. It is now cheaper to go through the towns than it is to go on the toll roads, by the time we take into account the additional fuel we use to stop-start and the additional time it takes.
For most tolls in Ireland, the cost for us to go through the barrier is €7.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
If drivers are making the choice to bypass the tolls, that is having a knock-on impact in towns from both a safety and an air-quality point of view.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
I thank the witnesses for their presentations. I hear what Mr. Hyland is saying, and I think it is an interesting thing that we could follow up on. Hydrotreated vegetable oil was mentioned. My understanding was that we do not have enough, that we cannot source it locally and that it would have to be imported. Am I wrong?
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Would it negate any environmental benefit if we have to import it?
Mr. Ger Hyland:
The reduction of the HVO has improved, but some of the problem is that we are using FAME in Ireland, some of which is coming from the slaughter industry. Some of it is coming from used recycled vegetable oil. It is not the cleanest fuel. We have found that where it has been overused in our mix, some people would have engine problems. We have had fuel injection problems as a result of using it. Our experience is that HVO is more available in Europe than ever before. It is the quickest way for our industry to go green. I propose that the Government takes a very serious look at this, and, instead of paying EU fines, supports our industry for once.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Mr. McPartlan indicated. Would he like to come in on that?
Mr. Kevin McPartlan:
We are the fuel suppliers. We do not have concerns about the availability of HVO. Is it being produced in Ireland? No. We are not producing any significant quantities. We are not producing any fossil diesel either. At least not the feed stocks. Obviously, the refinery is producing HVO along with fossil fuels. Significant reports have been commissioned by European bodies and national bodies. Imperial College recently did a significant piece on availability and stated that we are perfectly comfortable meeting all the current needs. Neste, which is the biggest producer of HVO in Europe, has stated that it has plans to double production. We do not believe there is any real cause for concern. We can ramp up the use of HVO and meet that need.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
There is concern about palm oil being used in it in the context of deforestation. That is a global concern.
I have a question for the Society of the Irish Motor Industry. The advantages of electric vehicles were referred to. None of my kids wanted to get a car. When the first one had a child, he had to get a car. Unfortunately, he did not buy an electric car. He has one now. Is there anything we can do in terms of grants for electric vehicles? My constituency is primarily urban in nature, but there are also huge rural areas within it. With the lack of reliability of public transport, some people need cars. How could we make sure that they choose electric cars rather than those that run on fossil fuels?
Mr. Brian Cooke:
The market is evolving. We are starting to see more cost-effective cars that cost less than €30,000 coming to the market. As I highlighted earlier, the number of used cars coming to the market in the next two to three years will increase significantly. That is where the opportunity lies. When we get to that stage, there is a possibility to support the used car market as well, particularly for younger people who do not have the financial wherewithal to buy new vehicles.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
What changes would Mr. Cooke like to see in the context of the grants that are currently available?
Mr. Brian Cooke:
We are still at a critical phase. What we have we effectively need to hold. The current grant system should remain in place for the next couple of years. In addition to that, we should look at enhanced grants. They could be based on the values of the car or income thresholds. France has a social leasing system where the cost of the car is capped, but it also caps the income that the person who avails of the grant can get. Some of those cars are available for as little as €100 a month, and the maximum can be €200 a month. Constructing that type of system is not easy. There is a financial services element to it. That is something we could definitely look at and it could attract people, anyone for whom an electric car is key to his or her commuting. Anyone who is not as financially strong could benefit from that. There could be some sort of social element to the grant system going forward. The grant system can evolve. What we have today we may not need in two years' time. That might be the time to tweak the grants so that they are more effective for more people. It is all about bringing more and more people into the EV space.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Some families might have two or three cars and there are problems with parking. If we could improve public transport and get families down to one electric car, it would be a huge improvement.
Does Mr. Creegan have any information on the DART+ West out to Kilcock? Has the NTA found a depot yet for it?
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
We got our planning approval for DART+ West some time ago, as the Deputy is aware. There were two judicial reviews in respect of it. They have both been resolved, but the approval for the DART+ scheme is separate to the depot. Irish Rail is virtually at the end of an option selection process. We should be submitting a planning application for a new depot by quarter 2 of 2026.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
I want to ask a local question about the 115 bus route. I have written to the NTA but have not received responses. I do not know why we have an email for the NTA when it is so hard to get a response from it. Who has the authority the move a bus stop? The bus stop for the 115 was moved on the old bog road because it was stated that it was dangerous. It is a very straight, wide road. I do not know why it was moved. Who has the authority to move bus stops?
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
I will check why the Deputy did not get a response. We do try to respond as promptly as we can to all the queries. When it comes to bus stops, the local authorities have the final say. There is a section in the Road Traffic Act 1961 which states that a local authority can decide where a bus stop is. We are involved in that there is no use in putting a bus stop in a place where we would not want to provide a service to. There are two parties. I do not know what happened in that case. If it is removed for safety reasons, I would be surprised if that was not at the instigation of the local authority but I do not know it closely enough.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
I think it is about smoothing the route. People have to walk 2.5 km down-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Maybe the NTA could ensure that a response goes back after this meeting.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
When the NTA is allocating routes to private companies, what kind of oversight does it have to make sure that the fleet is in working order and that the operator has replacement vehicles in case of breakdowns?
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
There are two different models that we use. For the larger contracts in the Dublin area with Go-Ahead Ireland, we actually provide the vehicles as part of those contracts. We have a set of requirements in the contracts as to how the vehicles are to be maintained and kept in good condition. When it comes to the Connecting Ireland services, generally we tender those services where the operator provides the vehicle and there are smaller operations. There is an arrangement in place where a spare vehicle is accessible, but because they are small operators they do not tend to have the spare vehicle sitting in their yard and have to make separate arrangements.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Should that not be necessary when private operators are being given licences for public transport?
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
I need to be careful because what I am talking about are contracted services where we are contracting to have the service provided. As I said, we have an arrangement in place where replacement vehicles are provided, but it might not necessary be immediately because they might not be available.
The Deputy may be referring to commercial services which are licensed by us, but we have no jurisdiction over what level of spare vehicles they have or how they maintain the vehicles. We are authorised to either grant or not grant a licence to operate a particular route. Maybe that is what Deputy Cronin is referring to.
Maeve O'Connell (Dublin Rathdown, Fine Gael)
I thank the witnesses for coming here today. I effectively have two big questions. I want to give our witnesses a bit of an introduction to me. I am not a permanent member of the committee, so they would not have my bio. Before I got elected last year, I was a councillor in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, but I was also a lecturer in TUD, and my area of focus was governance and sustainability. Over the ten years that I was teaching, we introduced new ESG reporting requirement for companies, which I am very encouraged by because hopefully that will introduce a level of transparency and eliminate and reduce somewhat the level of greenwashing that was common in industry, among some players out there. For me, one of the key things around all of that is that if we are requiring that of businesses, surely we should be requiring the same of ourselves. We should have that level of transparency and accountability in order that we can say the measures we are introducing are delivering the results we want. As we all know, what gets measured gets done.
I was a councillor with Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown and it was very much one of the pioneers in rolling out a lot of the active travel schemes, the safe way to school schemes and greenways. The council piloted many different schemes and learned a lot from that. Nationally, more than €1 billion has been invested in all of these various active travel schemes over the past five years. We now have a huge amount of data, or so I would have thought.
Again, I agree with former speakers that the single biggest difference we can make is making that transition from cars to sustainable forms of transportation. However, my challenge has been trying to find any real data in terms of whether this is making a difference around the emissions. The one study that was actually done in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown to see the outcomes of some of these changes, which included new lanes, road closures and safe streets - pretty much the full panoply in this particular area - did not measure emissions, which was a shame. I do not know whether that made a difference, but one of the outcomes was there was actually less walking and cycling in the area. My question is: what is going on there? I do not have the answer to that. We have spent over €1 billion and we have been doing this for five years. Are we getting a return on that? Are we spending it in the right way?
We do need to get that modal shift, but are we doing it in the right way, because if we are not getting the emissions reductions from spending €1 billion on these schemes, then maybe we need to start examining how we are doing it. We only get what we measure, and I do not know if we are measuring that.
The number of passengers on bus journeys has increased. That is really positive as a form of sustainable travel. I have not been able to get any data on this. Our witnesses may have that. Regarding those new passengers, is that the modal shift we want? Have they gotten out of cars to take bus journeys or have they gotten out of trams and DARTs or off bikes or stopped walking to take those bus journeys, in which case we have not actually gained anything? Are we getting the return on investment? Are emissions coming down from these investments? How can we tell? If they are not, we need to redirect.
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
I am happy to share. There has been a big investment in active travel and sometimes it is difficult to measure. We can do simple things like measure the number of cyclists using the route and the Deputy will have seen automatic cycle counters in various places, but getting an overall feel for what is happening is not that easy. One of the things we are very aware of is that when it comes to cycling in particular, you need a network there to make it useful to a lot of people. One road or one street on its own is only part of a person's journey, and it is not enough to say to a parent it is safe enough for their kid to use to go to school. We are very conscious that there is a point at which we need to do more measuring, which is when we have a decent network developed. We are not there yet. We do annual national travel surveys where we try to get a feel for the modal change. Each year we do a national household travel survey. I am sure the Deputy is familiar with it. To be honest, it is not showing a big shift at all. There are marginal changes at most.
On the bus passenger side, we are seeing a big increase in bus passengers. We do passenger surveys to identify various things. However, one of the things we do not ask is whether the passenger transitioned from something else. I am not sure how we identify the new passengers. That is the difficulty. We are surveying all of the passengers on the buses. Identifying new passengers is not easy. In terms of gathering metrics, we can get simple metrics about usage relatively easily. It is much harder to get mode share changes. The way we are doing it at the moment is on a national basis.
On the cycling side, until we get that network, we have not reached a tipping point where we can see a big update. Our view is it will come, but we need to build more of the network first.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
On the point of redirecting, Mr. Creegan is saying the National Transport Authority should not redirect until it gets to a critical mass of the network.
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
For the past couple of years we focused on trying to incrementally pull together a complete, coherent network so that many people have an A to B journey that is safe all of the way. We are not there yet, and therefore we are not seeing the type of change we expect a full network will make.
Mr. Eugene Drennan:
On question on the statistics, the impact of the legislation and how it is working, the carbon tax was put on yesterday. This carbon tax is going to be put on until 2030. It is unfair because of the supply chain. It is okay if goes to the end user at some stage, but there is double taxation. I refer to the ingredients or the makeup of fuel - the FAME and the bio. Our excise and taxation is on energy. Because we are using recycled product, a product with a poor energy level, we are not getting the quality. My friend, Mr. Paul Jackman, used the analogy that if you went for a pint of stout and the barman pulled the pint almost to the top and let it rest but then filled it up with water, would you feel you got a quality pint? That is what is happening us with the mix. The feed to the fuel is so poor. It is enshrined in 2030 legislation to charge this tax until 2030. It does not matter what it is called; it is taxation and excise. There are five taxes on fuel and on the supply chain. Within that, and from the study in TUD, I will point out that although this is enshrined legislation, there was another Act there long before it, and that is the unintended impact of any legislation. Is it achieving what it is meant to? Has it caught some sector wrongly? Is it unfair? We believe the current level of taxation, because we are not getting the product, is a sleight of hand. It is a triple taxation. There is a touch of the new buzzword "shrinkage". It is the same package, but the goods within the package are not matching what they should.
Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)
I welcome all of the witnesses here today, and thank them for their very comprehensive briefings. They were very informative.
My first question is to Mr. McPartlan. He mentioned that Fuels for Ireland called for an expert group to be set up. Will its role be advisory? A body has to be set up to regulate the fuels coming in, that is, their quality and blend and ensuring they are up to standard. The reason I say that is that I read an article in The Irish Times last year that stated that one haulage company spent €20,000 repairing damage to an engine. It is becoming a very common problem. Not alone is there that issue, but in my own constituency offices I am hearing more reports that there are issues with the quality of fuel, which is putting another huge financial burden on the haulage companies that are already grappling with carbon tax, toll fees, minimum wage increases for their workers and so many other costs. It just seems unfair. If the expert group does not encompass what our witnesses are calling for, would they support the need for an independent regulatory body to monitor that fuel?
Obviously, the fuel is needed. I agree that we need imports, but it has to be done right. It cannot have unintended consequences or more financial burdens for a sector.
Mr. Kevin McPartlan:
The expert group we have called for relates to the impact that the cost of taxation and other Government policies will have on fuel. To take this morning as an example, the carbon tax increase last night means that approximately €1.05 is paid in tax to the Government on every litre of petrol. It is slightly less for diesel; it is approximately €1 for diesel. There are then compliance costs, one of which is the renewable transport fuel obligation, RTFO, scheme. The focus of the expert group should be on those areas.
I do not wish to dodge the Deputy’s question on fuel quality. I cannot accept that this is a common problem because, as I was coming here, I did not see tons of cars, vans and trucks on the side of the road with problems. There is independent fuel quality monitoring in Ireland. Under the European fuel quality directive, it is required that all member states have a specific standard of fuel quality monitoring. That monitoring is being carried out in this country for more than 20 years and there has never been any sort of substantial non-compliance with the fuel quality directive. We know the product we are selling is meeting the fuel quality standards absolutely routinely. We do not accept that there are any calls for concern on fuel quality.
Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)
I can forward the emails, knowledge and information I have to Mr. McPartlan that show there is an issue. There most certainly is an issue.
With regard to his second point about the European directive, why do we always look to Europe to hold our hands? Can we not set up a regulatory body ourselves in Ireland? I say this as an independent TD, but I know TDs across parties raised the issue of fuel quality in the Chamber during the previous Dáil. Those TDs came from across all parties and constituencies; they were not just from my constituency. There is an issue in this regard. It is a growing problem. If it is affecting five or six companies, that is five or six too many. I know for a fact that a lot more than five or six companies are affected by this issue. They have had first-hand experience of it.
I certainly take Mr. McPartlan's point about monitoring fuel costs. That absolutely needs to be done by an expert group, but so too does the monitoring of the quality of fuel. It must be done or we are going to have a much bigger problem down the track. Companies want to use the more efficient fuel that is better for the environment, but there has to be some oversight. We do not need to look to Europe to do that for us. It is good to have that layer in place, but we need to do it here as well.
Mr. Kevin McPartlan:
The testing of fuel is set by a European standard. That is why we look to Europe. The compliance in Ireland is guaranteed by a independent lab that conducts the sampling and testing. Its reports go to the Department of Transport and onto Europe from there. The Deputy said she will forward me evidence. I am not suggesting that no haulier has ever had a maintenance problem with a vehicle, but how can it be said that those problems are a result of fuel not meeting a standard, which we know is being met? It is objectively and independently assessed.
Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)
There definitely are issues. We can agree to disagree but there are issues.
I have a final question. I thank the Chair for allowing me the opportunity to contribute. We have a carbon tax allocation of €950 million in 2025. Haulage companies are under severe pressure. Mr. Ger Hyland has outlined some of the costs they have to bear year after year with no incentives. I was strongly opposed to the carbon tax and I still am. If we cannot get rid of it, however, something needs to be ring-fenced to subsidise the haulage sector, which is an important part of our supply chain. While the proper thing to do would be to exempt the haulage sector and agricultural sector, which is vital for food production, from the carbon tax, if that cannot be done, we need to look at ring-fencing an amount so that they are supported directly in their sectors. That would keep their trucks on the road and allow them to keep doing the good work they are doing.
I have another question for Mr. Hyland. In the context of supports, the effectiveness of the zero-emission heavy duty vehicle purchase grant scheme was in Ireland’s Road Haulage Strategy 2022-2031. My sense of that when I read it was that it was putting the cart before the horse because how can a haulage firm be expected to have the money to purchase one of these vehicles, even with the grant, if it is already inundated with costs? Did many people avail of that grant? Would practical measures to support hauliers, such as rebate packages or subsiding HVO, be better than the purchase of heavy duty vehicles, which is putting the cart before the horse?
Mr. Ger Hyland:
First, I will answer the question about subsiding HVO. For our industry, that is probably one of the most important things we are looking for. We know we need to decarbonise our industry. That measure is low-hanging fruit and very easy to do. We need help and support from the Government to do it, but they are not forthcoming. We are not getting them. We submitted a proposal again this year in our budget submission, which was backed up by a report we got done from PwC. Our figures were all justifiable and they all stood up, but we got no help this year in the budget again.
As an industry, our members are just so frustrated and exacerbated. We do not know where we are going to go. We are after getting another 2 cent per litre. For the average Joe, those 2 cents are an added expense on his fuel tank every week in his car, but for companies like mine that are buying 40,000 litres of fuel at a time, probably twice per month, they are huge. We are a small, rural-based company that is paying an average of €15,000 to €20,000 per month on tolls and now we have another 2 cent per litre on our fuel. The transport industry is probably one of the last industries left in rural Ireland. Unless we get help and support, we will follow other industries, such as our publicans and local shops. We will just disappear slowly but surely, one by one. A lot of our industry is made up of truck-based businesses with one to five trucks that employ local people, such as relations, next-door neighbours and one thing or another. The average age of our hauliers is 60. We are an island nation completely disjointed from Europe. Unless we get the proper support from the Government, our transport industry is slowly and surely dying on its feet.
Mr. Paul Jackman:
On behalf of the IRHA and its members, I have to take issue with Mr. McPartlan’s presentation. The most recent ETC fuel quality report is based on figures from 2022 submitted by each member state. Ireland submitted the absolute minimum number of samples that are mandated to be taken, that is, 100 samples. The inverse is Belgium, which has a state-based authority, Fapetro, overseeing its fuel. It took more than 2,000 samples. Ireland took 100 samples and had no discrepancies. Fapetro, however, reported 31 discrepancies. We have never reported, as Mr. McPartlan said. Who is responsible? The ETC report states that Fuels for Ireland is responsible for taking the samples, presumably off their members. It only takes samples from forecourts. It does not take samples from blending stations or bulk-delivery points for hauliers. There is no State oversight of fuel quality in Ireland. On the website of the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, CCPC, it categorically states there is no State oversight of fuel quality in Ireland and that if someone has an issue with fuel, they should go to an independent authority to have it checked.
I wish to expose another report carried out by the consultancy firm, Byrne Ó Cléirigh. The report states categorically that 18% of Ireland’s biodiesel is produced from category 1 tallow, which Mr. Hyland referenced.
The EU average, including the UK, is 4%. We are four and a half times higher for the inclusion of tallow, animal fat, in diesel. In used cooking oil, it is three and a half times. That is official. It is from a Government report done by consultants for NORA and the Department of Transport. We are saying that there is an issue. I thank Deputy Nolan for raising it. This is absolutely an issue and it needs a response. SIMI will confirm that the number of diesel passenger cars has gone from nearly 80% in 2012 down to below 20%. Now more than ever, diesel is the fuel of commerce. While we can talk about HVO coming in to a certain extent, the 7% FAME inclusion rate, is known as EN 590 quality diesel. Every truck on the road has EN 590 stamped on its tac. That is the basis of its warranty. We have had members with new vehicles where the dealership has refused to cover the warranty on the vehicle when it has shown fuel problems because the diesel in the tank has been tested and it has failed the EN 590 standard. In this forum it must go on the record that fuel quality in Ireland is an issue. The secondary component, as Mr. Drennan referenced, is the consequence of the poor quality, which is increased consumption. I have a statement from DAF's technical department which manufactured the engines for their trucks and it says that any inclusion rate of FAME that is unprocessed or raw biofuel over 7% means their engines are not meeting the emission targets. That is a design criterion for their engines. They are based on EN 590. It needs to go on the record that the transport industry in Ireland has a problem with its fuel, not only because of the five or six taxes that we are paying on it, but also because of its quality. It needs State intervention and oversight.
Mr. Eugene Drennan:
The RECAST energy efficiency directive is going through Europe now. The Danes do not charge any excess on that fuel because it is such rubbish. You use it at your own risk. You must have better quality fuel to attract excise in Europe. If we do not address it here, the Europeans will do it for us and we will have no say in it.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
I will come back to the Irish Road Haulage Association and ask a couple of questions about its presentation. What is it saying about the future for road haulage? Replacing the older diesel trucks with Euro 6 models is diesel for diesel. There is probably a decarbonisation benefit from the State's perspective but perhaps not a massive one. What are the witnesses saying about HVO and biodiesel? It was said that tax rebates work. Are they looking to get a tax rebate on that fuel? What is the actual ask?
Mr. Paul Jackman:
I will deal with Euro 6 first. We made a proposal for the Department on the diesel rebate scheme, so that it would lean over a period to steer the industry towards Euro 6. The Chair says diesel for diesel, but a fact about the Euro 6 diesel truck is that it will run on 100% HVO. Some of the other trucks need modification and some can even have issues with it but the Euro 6 truck, and many of the Euro 7 trucks which are coming, are set up to run on biofuel. The clean vehicles directive was revised last year to include fuels for the internal combustion engine, which was not the case previously. It includes hydrogen for an internal combustion engine; the battery electric, CNG, LNG, liquid, biofuels, HVO and synthetic and paraffinic fuels. Like what has happened with cars, the clean vehicles directive has had to tune into the real world.
There are 6.6 million HGVs in Europe but production capacity in Europe is 347,000 trucks a year. Even if all the factories in Europe started to make only EV trucks tomorrow, we are looking at 20 years before we have replaced the existing fleet. We are looking at the internal combustion engine being a significant component of transport into the future. It is about looking at fuels that we can get into that. I was at a production facility with some of our members. The facility was able to produce a maximum of 300 diesel trucks a day. Its EV truck production centre is next door to it, which produces between four and five a day. That is the ratio at the moment. We all know it is going to change over time, between supports and improvements in the ability of the electric trucks to mesh into what is going on in the real world.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
So effectively, what the association is advocating for is a new generation of diesel truck which opens up biofuels. Is that it in summary?
Mr. Paul Jackman:
Yes. If we had a model Euro 6 diesel truck ticking over here during this meeting, not one of us would ask to leave the room. They are incredibly clean. They have done tests in Munich that show that what is coming out of the exhaust is cleaner than what has gone into the air filter because the treatment system is so good. Between that and transitional fuels, the Euro 6 and 7 trucks will be part of the mix. The fact that we have not even accelerated our support for that in any way has resulted in the trucks here being old. In Dublin, our capital, in particular, there is no advantage in running a Euro 6 or 7 truck in the city or even an electric truck versus a 1988 Euro 0 truck. The dots are not connected.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Okay. Mr. Cooke talks about support for used EVs, which would be based on a household threshold income. Is he saying that second-hand EVs would need some class of financial support?
Mr. Brian Cooke:
That is more the social aspect of it. Most people buy second-hand cars, in particular people who cannot afford new cars. As that stock is starting to come in - from next year we will have vehicles from 2020 to 2023 - if we want to bring more people into the electric vehicle piece, we could do a couple of things. First, we could encourage people who perhaps have a seven- or eight-year-old car or even a ten-year-old car to change to an electric vehicle. In France, they have an income threshold for their social leasing for people who could not otherwise afford a second-hand car.
The other thing the Government could do is provide a support. There has been an issue because of the immaturity of the market with used EV residual values. It would encourage retailers, in particular outside Dublin, to accept EVs as a trade-in.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
There is no build-up of a stock of second-hand EVs that are not selling at the moment.
Mr. Brian Cooke:
Not at the moment, but if the Chair had asked me that question even six months ago, there would have been a build-up. There is a reluctance, in particular outside the major urban areas, for retailers to take in used EVs. That would almost create consumer confidence in the industry and it would encourage retailers to go looking for used EVs. If you are buying a used EV, the seller is inevitably going to buy a new EV. All the services say that for more than 90% of people who have an EV now, their next car will be an EV as well.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
I thank Mr. Cooke. My next question is for Mr. McPartlan. Could he give a definition of technology neutrality? It is in his statement. Is it technology that is not any worse from a climate-emissions perspective?
Mr. Kevin McPartlan:
It is to say that we should be obsessed with our actual objective. We should be looking at the interest rather than the position. So many incentives have been put exclusively on EVs, as if they are the only way to reduce the carbon emissions from transport but we need to look at all the available options.
While I have the floor I might respond to the remarks about fuel quality.
Mr. Kevin McPartlan:
This is really important because the standards that are set at European level are very strict and very well enforced. The testing is in accordance with a European standard. It is undertaken by Fuels for Ireland, but the sampling and analysis and all the chain of custody is beyond anything we have any control over. We do pay the bill. We are very happy not to pay the bill. The Government is required to do this and we do it as an act of good faith. We communicated that to the Department of Transport in case it would reassure people that the testing is more independent. All the samples are taken from forecourts, because that is where our chain of custody ends. It is exactly the same fuel that goes into a forecourt as would go into a haulier's yard. If there is a problem after it has left our control then there are all sorts of other things over which we do not have control such as tank hygiene and other elements which I will not go into. We have to look at where else the problem can exist because we can categorically establish with objective analysis that the fuel that is dispensed by the tanker going into a yard or into a forecourt is meeting the standard. We can see where it has gone wrong. It happened in Scotland a couple of years ago that there was a genuine problem with fuel quality where vehicles were strewn all over the place.
I had to take the opportunity to clarify that.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
That is fine. In relation to the statement from the NTA, the NTA has a good overall view as to where things are at. We are looking for barriers that this committee can document and then pragmatically try to advocate for to assist as much as we can to get to the 2030 target. If I was to put Mr. Creegan to the pin of his collar, what are the two barriers the NTA would list? It goes to Deputy Whitmore's point that the projects are happening but they are taking a very long time. What are the two things this committee could advocate for across the sector which would definitely make a difference?
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
I will say one that is easy and one that is hard, if that is okay. As to the easy one, it has taken longer to role out major infrastructure projects. The members all know that. That is being dealt with now at central government level. There is a task force in place and there are various initiatives coming out of it. There is an absolute commitment to unlock some of the causes of delay in the planning system previously, which I think have been sorted out, in the approval system, which is being sorted out, and in the legal system, including judicial reviews, which are being looked at. That is one big area which it is worth alluding to but which, I think and hope, has been successfully addressed.
To address the harder and unpopular one, despite all we are doing to put in new infrastructure and new services and to electrify, there will have to be measures to manage car use in urban areas in particular. Whether it is a low-emission zone or various other measures, the work we have done on transport modelling indicates that if we do not do something in that area, we will not be able to reach our targets through the other measures alone. We know how deeply difficult, unpopular and hard to do those things are. They have been done elsewhere, however, and they are things that Ireland will have take on in due course.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Mr. Creegan said the NTA has done work in that area. Is there anything he can share with the committee or send in to us so that we could look at it because it would be of interest?
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
In our transport strategy for the greater Dublin area, we did a calculation to show how far short of the emissions targets we would be if we did everything in it and we set out the various steps that could be taken to plug the gap. I am happy to abstract that and send it to the committee.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Returning to Mr. Creegan's point, tolls or restrictions on people going into the city would be deeply unpopular. At this stage, it would also be deeply unfair because, as I said, if we take Wicklow as an example, people want to use public transport but the service is not there for them. For example, the 133 is the bus from Wicklow town into Dublin. Every September, there are problems because more students are trying to use it. On one particular day, the 7.20 a.m. bus was full and was delayed; the 7.40 a.m. was full and delayed by ten minutes; the 8.10 a.m. was full and delayed by ten minutes; the 8.40 a.m. bus was full and delayed by ten minutes; and the 9.30 a.m. was full and delayed by 30 minutes. A student who was waiting for that bus ended up getting her chronically ill mother to drive her in to her examination. She has since bought a car. That is the problem. If Mr. Creegan comes to Wicklow, all he will see are cars, usually relatively old ones, with "N" and "L" plates on them. People are being forced into cars because the service is not there.
I am sure the NTA has received a lot of representations on this as well. Capacity on the train from Gorey to Dublin has been reduced by 30%. Instead of having a seated capacity for 262 people, the four-car train now only has a seating capacity for 185 people. Numerous people have fainted on that train because they are standing for an hour and a half on the journey into Dublin.
There have been some improvements. I am a bus user and I appreciate it when it works, but there are so many areas that need improvements. If someone takes a bus or train and it is so uncomfortable that they cannot take that bus or train again, they will purchase a car if they are in a position to do it. How does the NTA resolve those issues?
Year after year, I have been talking about the issues on buses in September and we still do not see any improvement. Similarly, on the capacity of the trains, four carriages on the trains from Rosslare into Dublin are not enough. People keep on raising these issues and they are not seeing any improvements in those particular instances. How can we deal with this? I have been contacting Bus Éireann, the NTA, Go-Ahead Ireland and Dublin Bus but we are not seeing the improvement we need to see. What is the answer because people are getting really frustrated and I am getting frustrated raising it? We see the poor outcomes that arise when people do not have the services they need. People are buying cars and that is making everything worse and making it harder to achieve our targets.
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
The Deputy knows that we take these things seriously and we try to make changes. We have added a lot of capacity to the 133 service. We monitor when we need to add capacity and if we have vehicles and drivers available, we add capacity. I will take away an action to look at the 133 service again. We changed the timetable a number of months ago and we put an additional service in as part of that change.
Some of the challenges we face are worth noting. Congestion on the roads causes all sorts of problems. We timetable a bus to run a route and start a return journey. However, where the road has got more congested or there is an event on, the bus does not get to its route end and it cannot start the return journey. I appreciate that this affects people but we are stuck with that. We do not control that. We try to make changes, such as on the N11, where there is a proposal to create bus lanes along the motorway, which has its own problems.
On the train from Gorey to Dublin, I was not aware that there was a change made to reduce the capacity but I will check it out. I genuinely was not aware of that. The Deputy will know our view on the long-term position of that corridor. We need to run an hourly DART to Wicklow and then a much more frequent service from south of Wicklow, but that would require interchange at Wicklow. However, I will check out that issue because I am not aware that the train fleet was adjusted.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
I think the change was to the grey to green carriages or vice versa. It has been causing a lot of problems. I would appreciate if Mr. Creegan looked into that.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
I have two quick questions. The first is for the motor industry. We heard from a lot of speakers about incentives and promoting EV sales. I acknowledge that there is a constituency out there that has to drive. If more people take public transport, there will be more room on the roads for people who have to drive, but a lot of the EVs being sold now are huge, heavy SUVs with significant environmental footprints. They pose significant dangers to vulnerable road users around them. Some 50% of new EV sales are plug-in hybrids, which, in my view, are a form of greenwashing of cars. A lot of people do not bother plugging them in and they run off the diesel or petrol engines. With our climate emissions obligations and the cost of fuel in mind, is the industry doing anything to promote a shift towards smaller, lighter, more efficient vehicles rather than huge SUVs being sold? Are there steps the Government should be taking to incentivise such a shift? My second question is for the NTA but I will let SIMI respond first.
Mr. Brian Cooke:
There are no incentives for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and we are not asking for any incentives. There have not been any incentives for five or six years. The focus for us on favourable taxation treatment or favourable benefits is entirely on electric vehicles.
There is a move under way. Looking at our own file, there are 22 EV models costing less than €30,000 and, by definition, they are smaller cars.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
The move has been towards car growth over the past decade or two.
Mr. Brian Cooke:
Yes, there has been over the past 30 years. There is a variety of factors. Part of that has to do with regulations in relation to vehicles, including passenger safety. We had a big general safety regulation, GSR, last summer that added to both the cost and weight of a car. Having child seats is also a factor. As a child playing football in north County Dublin, I remember my dad would have seven or eight children in a small car. That is not possible any more.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
There are fixes for that. You can get car seats for the full back seat.
Mr. Brian Cooke:
Generally speaking, people buy the cars that fit their needs and their budgets. Large SUVs account for approximately 5% of the new car market. While I accept that cars have grown in size, a lot of that has to do with personal choice.
Some of it is do with regulations. The industry is moving to having more and more smaller models available, city cars for want of a better description. There are more models becoming available and there will be more in the next two or three years. Inevitably, when a new technology comes in, not just electrification, it tends to be on higher-value cars, and then it finds its way down. We are seeing that and we are seeing more smaller cars. I know of one new car which is for sale for less than €20,000, for example. That move is happening. It is not one size fits all. For people who want to drive a small car, or only need a small car, that option is becoming increasingly available to them.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
I have one last question for the NTA. One of the challenges the NTA has put down is public acceptance and buy-in to change. On a constituency level, it just feels like more public engagement is required when it comes to the welcome changes we are making to our bus routes via BusConnects and things like that. I cannot tell you the amount of time my office spends explaining the changes in bus routes to individual constituents who contact us, explaining that a route used to be called a number and now it is a letter but it actually goes to the same places, or almost the same places, and exactly where it stops. Is it a resource issue? A lot of this information is online. Maybe it feels like sometimes older people are being left out. I would suggest maybe a leaflet drop in an area where a route is changing or even individual staff members having more public meetings and public engagement. It would really help people. It would alleviate the fear of change that sometimes can happen when these really positive changes are coming through. Does the NTA need more resources for that?
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
No, I cannot use that excuse. I will not use that one. We did an enormous amount of consultation on BusConnects, which the Deputy is referring to there. Unfortunately it was a couple of years ago and it has taken us longer to implement than we would like. Part of the engagement and knowledge of that has been lost at this stage. We do things but I appreciate that when we are making changes to the bus network in particular, we need to have big communications campaigns. We are doing a change on 19 October on what we call the F spine from Tallaght to Finglas. There is a leaflet drop of 250,000 leaflets going out. There are briefings to public representatives and a major communications campaign, plus people on the street at bus stops for a period. We do all those things but I have found, as I am sure the Deputy has himself, that even though we do all that there will still be people who have not received the information and need a follow-up of some type. We will certainly do that wherever we need to do it.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
This has been a really useful session and a serious eye-opener for me. I sense a level of frustration from a lot of the sectors. The committee's reporting on this needs to reflect that frustration. It appears to me that there is a failure to look at these issues overall in the Department through an emissions reduction lens. That is what we are trying to achieve here. If there are measures that could be brought forward, tangible, implementable measures, they should be brought forward. I thank all the witnesses. I have a final question to Mr. Creegan again. He is taking the brunt of the questions today. This goes back to the point Deputy Ahern made around managing car use in urban areas. We are talking about significantly larger vehicles in urban areas and a real, significant challenge, perhaps in a skill-set in local authorities from an engineering point of view but also the bigger challenge of communication to the public about the reallocation of space in our urban areas. The issue in Ireland is not necessarily car ownership, it is car use and the sustainable use of cars. There is a big need for a public awareness campaign. Separately, there is a significant need for reskilling at local authority level in terms of reallocation of space and communication of the rationale behind taking out, perhaps, five or six car spaces to accommodate a cycle lane. I am talking about smaller towns rather than the big urban centres, where there is a real problem.
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
For the smaller scale interventions, the Senator is right, there needed to be upskilling in the local authorities. We have done a lot of training and webinars and provided guidance materials to local authorities to do a lot of those things. They are difficult and resource-intensive. It is actually easier to build a big motorway, having been involved in it, than it is to build some of these smaller things. The amount of engagement with people that is needed is far greater. On the bigger issue about towns in general, I know there is a plan for a demand management policy under preparation with the Department of Transport, which eventually has to go through Government. That would be helpful in giving a policy framework to allow more things to happen, which would probably require training for local authority personnel as well. It would be a vital first step.
Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)
I have one quick question for Mr. Cullen. In terms of the sales of electric vehicles, in the last three years are the sales increasing, decreasing or staying the same? Are they solid or what way are they?
Mr. Brian Cooke:
We are at about 22,000 new electric vehicles this year, which will be the best year. 2023 was the best year and there was an 18% fall in 2024. There is a variety of reasons for that. We have turned a corner. It has not just happened in Ireland but across all European markets. Part of it is that there is a greater range of vehicles that suit more people, not just from a budgetary perspective but from a range perspective as well. The market is on its way up. It needs more of a push to get up as quickly as we need to meet our climate change goals. It is definitely going in the right direction. We have turned a corner but I just fear the bend is a bit longer than I would have hoped.
Mr. Brian Cooke:
There is a behavioural piece where early adopters are quick to come to the market. We probably exhausted that cohort so we need to get into the early mass market, and they need more convincing. There was a lot of misinformation out there about electric vehicles, information about batteries and climate impact that were actually incorrect. The Irish media have taken a much more balanced and responsible approach to it than the media in the UK, say, or other markets. That was one thing. There was also a reduction in the grant, which went from €5,000 to €3,500. It was not so much the numerical amount but more the signal that perhaps we are not as committed to the climate issues. In 2023 there was also a backlog of sales from 2021 and 2022, partly due to supply issues, that probably increased the 2023 market. It probably would have been flat, if we look at the two years together. We are definitely going in the right direction. The dynamics that existed last year are not there at the moment.
Mr. Paul Jackman:
On the truck side of that question, this year sales of EV trucks in Europe are up 50% on the same quarter last year, so there is a lift, but it is based on 1% of truck sales last year. It is a poor figure in real terms. The Chairman referred to the barriers. From an environmental measure of carbon footprint, we have scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. The production facility is scope 1, the auxiliary activity is scope 2 and scope 3 refers to third-party contractors. If a haulier goes to a company with the proposal to electrify their fleet, they need a rate increase for reasons of reduced productivity due to the weight and increased capital cost. The factory, the customer, has no incentive and no gain from reducing scope 3 emissions. It is not on their carbon balance sheet.
Second, we have seen how cars have progressed. The older EV cars depreciated at a faster rate. I know it is less now. An electric truck bought two years ago has extraordinary depreciation on it. The manufacturers are incentivised to register new vehicles. It is in their interest to accelerate through technology to make redundant the earlier generation, to bring in a new generation to get new registrations. We see the improvements. The energy density has gone from 100 kW to provide 1 tonne weight, to 150 kW. That is from a truck. There are huge improvements all the time. I have approached manufacturers on this. I have asked them if they will guarantee that when the battery, motor and software improve, I will be able to upgrade my old vehicle to maintain its relevance. The answer is no, I would have to buy the new vehicle. The way it is engineered for the manufacturers is working against the consumer and the purchaser.
This is an EU thing. The two barriers are the scope 3 emissions having no relevance to the customer, and the incentive for the manufacturer to accelerate the depreciation of the first generation by holding back technology to improve the second and third generation, making the earlier vehicles almost obsolete. So, the depreciation the hauliers are expected to absorb is off the charts in comparison to the diesel trucks.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
I will pick up on Deputy Ahern's point related to buy-in around electric vehicle charging. If I look at the likes of Local Link and EV chargers, they came on a similar journey at the same time. The perception, whether it is true or not, is that Local Link and the service it provides would be on a much more positive platform and trajectory than EV charging. It may be because we can see these buses in local towns and villages and people are using them, but there is definitely a body of work required to encourage people to get into EV charging. It has really hit an obstacle in terms of convincing people it is the way forward. It is to be hoped we will see an increase in car numbers, but we definitely need to iron out a lot of the creases at local level in terms of rolling out that infrastructure.
If we are finishing up, I have one point to brainstorm with witnesses. They have mentioned congestion and the whole area of Dublin being congested to the extent it is. There have been talks of outer ring roads like an M75 or whatever else. Do witnesses have any thoughts in terms of alleviating congestion through the introduction of a motorway? Mr. Creegan has experience in motorways so that is what prompted the question. Should we be looking at a whole new approach through a motorway from north to south right through the spine of the midlands, and truly opening up the country in terms of regional development?
Mr. Hugh Creegan:
I was involved a number of years ago with a proposed route that largely did that called the Leinster orbital route. It went from Drogheda through Navan down as far as Naas. I actually think the answer is no. At that time we were doing something called predict and provide. We were predicting car use and providing for it. The more modern way of doing it now is to predict and manage. I am definitely more in the zone of saying we need to manage the infrastructure we have. We need to put more people onto public transport and we need to somewhat reduce car use. We recognise lots of car use is still required and it is not about trying to wipe it out or anything. Personally, I do not think building a large motorway project like that is required. We do have a good motorway network at the moment, built largely in the noughties. I do not see the need to go and invest a few billion euro into that particular proposal.
Mr. Ger Hyland:
We absolutely do. I think the Deputy's suggestion makes absolute sense for a simple reason. I am from the Deputy's neck of the woods, from the county next to his. We have towns like Mountmellick beside me. The only employer in Mountmellick at present is SuperValu. They have become commuter towns and that is all the houses are. Some 70% of the freight coming into Dublin Port is delivered within a 50-mile radius of Dublin. We need a corridor, as the Deputy said, from north to south down through the midlands, to bring some of these factories to our local towns. Our local towns are dying on their feet. They are just becoming commuter towns for Dublin. I think what Deputy Clendennen absolutely makes perfect sense.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
On that note I thank everyone for coming. We will be publishing all the opening statements on the Oireachtas website. May I presume that is okay? Great, thank you. On behalf of the committee, I thank all the witnesses for their attendance today and for their contributions. It was a very interesting topic and one we will have to come back to.