Martin Heydon (Kildare South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for coming here today. The part of the slide comparing the different sources of magnetic fields is the sort of thing that drives people mad. I am a Deputy for Kildare South which means that the Grid Link project is the one of most interest to me. The last line refers to the 400k VAC underground cable. Everyone accepts that AC underground is not the best way. That diagram is disingenuous. There should be a figure to show what underground DC would be or else do not show it at all. Many groups argue that AC underground will not necessarily work over a long distance.

The reliability of the primary constraints identified and used for mapping by EirGrid is inconsistent in identifying different routes in different parts of the country. Why is that? Is EirGrid trying to identify primary constraints to match potential preferred routes? Great Island in the south east has increased capacity but apart from short-term jobs provided during the construction of pylons, how does this assist job creation in the south east? Is it not misleading to say that it will assist job creation in the south east when, rather than powering down to jobs and job creation there is too much power there, which EirGrid is trying to move away on the 400kV lines?

There are two gas-powered electricity generating systems in Huntstown in Dublin, which I am led to believe do not generate power currently? Why not? Does Mr. Slye agree that this project is about bulk movement of electricity from one point to another? EirGrid’s forecasts for increased demand indicate only approximately 1.3% per annum expected growth in demand over the next seven years. How then can Mr. Slye justify the huge investment in Grid25? Where will the additional revenue be generated by EirGrid to pay for this expenditure? Why do we import rather than export electricity when we have an interconnector and an excess of supply? Is that a matter of cost?

I agree with what others have said about consultation. The point has been hammered home to day so I do not need to repeat it. I believe that a cost-benefit analysis will happen. It has to. I and all my colleagues here today have called for it. Five options for the grid link project are before us but they are all over ground. We want EirGrid to give us a clear analysis of the difficulties involved in over and underground.

The European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity, ENTSO-E, report of 2012, updated in 2013, stated that project 106 will build an interconnector from Dunstown near Kilcullen to Pentir in the UK with a possible third party involvement, a wind generator, to reduce the cost of shared infrastructure; project 107 from Great Island or Knockraha also indicates that an interconnector will be built, linking to France. Will the potential development of the interconnectors at either end of the Grid Link project be factored into the cost of going underground? Will property devaluation be considered in any cost-benefit analysis? EirGrid imports electricity from the UK, based on half hourly pricing, using the HVDC interconnector which does not seem to cause any problems for the grid. Why can we not use that elsewhere?