Mr. Patrick Swords:

The actual figures show that in the past 16 years global temperatures have been static with no real increase. It is not that everybody thinks the same way we do. There are many parts of the world which do not think the way we do. The Chinese are very analytical. The Chinese Academy of Sciences, which I fully support, correctly pointed out the flaws in the scientific process which has led the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Many technical people do not support the position we are in now. A one in 50 year flood will occur once every 50 years; one must just wait around.

The renewable programme was first initiated 16 years ago by the European Union. No real assessment was done for it. Under the 2001 directive the European Union was required to conduct an assessment by 2005 of the external impact of non-renewable sources. External impacts are the environmental damage costs associated with non-renewable sources. The report was to be repeated every five years. I looked for it but it was never done. It then launched into a massive 20% renewable programme. At no stage was it worked out what was to be built, where it was to be built, what was the impact and what was the cost. People were not allowed to participate in the decision, which was taken at higher levels. With regard to climate change, a figure of €25 per tonne was pulled out of the sky because it did not know what carbon dioxide was doing. It also had a computer model in the National Technical University of Athens which stated we would save X tonnes of carbon dioxide. Nobody has been able to access this programme. It is the confidential property of the university. It is clear from reading some of the side notes to it that it completely fails to take account of the massive inefficiencies we carry on the grid in existing thermal power plants as more and more renewables are put on.

The 20% target was shared among the member states based on their existing renewable capacity and a factor based on gross domestic product. The European Union did not know what was to be built in Ireland, what good it was to do, and when we would achieve the 16% target. All of the member states had to implement in a rush a national renewable energy action plan. Such plans should have been subject to strategic environmental assessment but this was bypassed. Section 5.3 of the template for these plans asked for the expected greenhouse gas reductions, the expected costs and the expected to job creation. The Irish national renewable energy action plan goes from section 5.2 to section 5.4. The table was never filled out. It was not filled out in 19 member states. Other countries such as the UK fudged it. The UK referred to another document which did not assess it either. We need to go back and look at this from square one.