Mr. Jim Gannon:

To respond to Deputy Ryan, at the moment solar photovoltaic, PV, activity is catalysed both by incentivisation and regulation in this country. Quite a bit of photovoltaic capacity has been put in through our better energy communities programme, which will cost a little more than €20 million this year, and it is growing all the time. Accelerated capital allowances allow people to chew back through tax for solar PV technologies more quickly than they would normally be able to. The home renovation incentive also gives a VAT exemption for PV. On the regulation side, the near-zero energy buildings for both residential and commercial purposes will generally lead people towards PV. On the research and development side, we funded research on blockchain last year and have funded research on PV technology itself. We have performed the supply chain study which the Deputy is talking about.

We also conducted a study of the planning aspects, including what planning guidelines look like in other jurisdictions and what lessons could be brought back to Ireland. As such, I would not say that there is little activity or no incentivisation.

I was asked a specific question about what I would vote for tomorrow. I am not sure. I will get to the end of it. Net metering has been an almost abject failure in the various European countries where it has been attempted. Grant support is a case in point. It is what we have and what we know. A PSO exemption has been discussed in Ireland. It would have a considerable cost in terms of the background systems and executing it would be challenging. Generation tariffs have worked in some jurisdictions and not in others. If asked tomorrow to make a decision, I would say that we should go with what we know until we see something better. Unfortunately, that means grant systems. While grant systems work and incentivise activity, they can become blunt over time and turn into inefficient market supports that are depended upon by a supply chain. They need to have an end in sight. Such systems need to prime a market without necessarily having the market resting on them.

Then there are the other issues at domestic and commercial scales that the supply chain and PV customers are mentioning. On behalf of the Department, we hosted a workshop on microgeneration during the renewable energy share, RES, consultation. We invited people to attend. Separately, we suggested that the microgeneration community get together to decide what it should collectively submit to the RES and to outline the common challenges.

Planning remains a challenge not just in terms of the uncertainty around the conditions, but the uncertainty around the exemptions that are in place and whether they are still appropriate for updated technologies. The quality and depth of the supply chain is a major issue. What would happen if we turned on a massive tap of incentivisation tomorrow? Even in our modest deep retrofit pilot, the quality has not been there to date. It is not the supply chain's problem, but it needs to be developed over time. We need to ensure that the designers and the people who will tie into the various ESB Networks boxes consider what the implementation of 30 or 40 of these devices in a housing estate that is just 45 houses big with one box at the end will entail.

In terms of the quality, specifications and standard of products entering the market, the SEAI's experience has been that, if one turns on the tap too quickly, the supply chain, through no fault of its own, has a challenge keeping up with demand. There is a risk. It happened with other technologies eight or ten years ago. If the tap is turned on too quickly, it can discredit a technology or give people a first bite that is negative as opposed to positive.

We are pro-microgeneration once it is cost effective for the consumer and the community. There are technical and economic challenges if microgeneration is just viewed from a cost-benefit analysis perspective, but there are social benefits in terms of the individual taking ownership of it in his or her home, as Deputy Dooley mentioned, and accepting other technologies and infrastructure. Those benefits can be significant and provide a major opportunity for the supply chain to grow to a sustainable level.

The challenge for us is that, if one incentivises to a large degree at the start, the supply chain will not necessarily grow in a sustainable way. That is part of what we are examining. We are testing it, looking for the training and technical gaps and determining what sort of capacity is needed in light of those gaps. Significant activity is under way, but there are challenges depending on the route one takes and the speed at which one turns on incentivisation, be it purely regulatory or purely incentives.