Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 26 September 2018

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate Action

Third Report of the Citizens' Assembly: Discussion

2:00 pm

Chairman:

I welcome members, delegates and those watching the proceedings on Oireachtas TV to the fourth public session of the Joint Committee on Climate Action. Before I introduce the delegates, at the request of the broadcasting unit, I ask delegates, members and those in the Visitors Gallery to turn off their mobile phones or switch them to flight mode as they interfere with the broadcasting service. On behalf of the committee, I extend a sincere welcome to Mr. Mark Griffin, Secretary General of the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment, and his officials. I also welcome Mr. Peter O'Shea, Mr. John Lawlor and Mr. Sean Murphy from the ESB and Mr. Jim Scheer and Mr. John Halpin from the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI.

By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if they are directed by it to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person or an entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

Members are reminded of the long-standing ruling of the Chair to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I call on Mr. Griffin to make his opening statement.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I thank the Chairman and the joint committee for the invitation to attend. The Department of Communications, Climate and Environment has been following the proceedings of the committee with a degree of interest in recent weeks. I am pleased to be the first Secretary General to be invited to appear before the committee.

Addressing climate change, whether through decarbonisation of the economy or preparing to adapt to the impacts of climate change, is one of the most significant challenges facing the country. It is a complex whole-of-government and society issue, with long-term impacts that require policy solutions in the near term. The Taoiseach and the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Deputy Denis Naughten, have acknowledged that Ireland is playing catch-up on its international and EU obligations. Figures published in May this year by the Environmental Protection Agency project that Ireland’s non-emissions trading system, ETS, emissions may be no lower than 1% below 2005 levels by 2020 in the context of a targeted 20% reduction. These disappointing figures are nonetheless a snapshot reflecting the extent of policy implementation at a particular point in time. Importantly, they do not include any projected benefit from the significant investment of almost €22 billion in climate action which will be made in the next decade under the national development plan.

I wish to address the complex sectoral challenges involved, as well as outlining progress in several other areas. On the plus side, we are making progress in the area of renewable electricity. Ireland is recognised as a world leader because of its success in integrating intermittent renewable energy generation with an isolated electricity grid. Preliminary SEAI figures show that at the end of 2017 we generated just over 30% of our electricity consumption from renewable sources, up from 26% in 2015 and 4.25% in 1997, the base year for the renewable energy directive. EirGrid grid management programmes are recognised as being at the leading edge of global research in this area. We have an ambition to achieve a figure of at least 55% for renewable electricity on the grid by 2030. The recently approved renewable electricity support scheme will help to deliver on that ambition.

The structure of Ireland’s economy, involving dispersed population settlement, car-based commuting and the central role of agriculture in the rural economy, requires the Government to balance economic and societal objectives with the imperative to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.

We have not yet managed to decouple economic growth from growth in emissions in the transport and agriculture sectors which dominate non-ETS emissions, accounting for 75% of emissions in 2020. The EPA’s 2018 reports on greenhouse gas emission projections show continued growth in emissions in these sectors to 2030 in the absence of further measures being taken.

The policy framework to set Ireland on a path towards achieving its near-term targets, as well as its long-term - 2050 - decarbonisation objectives, is set out in the national mitigation plan which was published in 2017. It provides a framework to guide Government investment decisions on measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from four key sectors: electricity generation; the built environment; transport; and agriculture, forestry and land use. The plan sets out 106 actions and 60 measures to reduce our emissions. It is a living document which is being updated on an ongoing basis as analysis, dialogue and technological innovation generate more and more cost-effective sectoral mitigation options. The next update on the plan will be published as part of the 2018 annual transition statement later this year. Implementation of the national mitigation plan in this manner means that we are making continual, incremental inroads into addressing these long-term challenges.

It is worth highlighting some of the measures included in the national mitigation plan that are being actively addressed. They includecarbon pricing measures through the emissions trading scheme, ETS, for power generation and large industry, with a carbon tax being applied to other sectors; existing support schemes for renewable energy deployment; an ongoing programme of energy efficiency retrofits for the existing housing stock; implementation of the Near Zero Energy Building standards, nZEB, for new residential and commercial buildings; implementation of the public sector energy efficiency strategy which targets a 33% efficiency improvement by 2020; strengthening of the biofuels obligation scheme, with the rate of biofuels in the national fuel mix to increase to 10% from 1 January 2019; implementation of a range of agri-envionment schemes through the Rural Development Programme 2014 to 2020, including the beef data and genomics programme, the knowledge transfer programme, GLAS, green, low-carbon agri-environment scheme and the organic farming scheme; and the forestry programme, with an ambition to increase national forest cover from the current figure of 11% to 18% by the middle of the century.

The committee will be familiar with the headline commitments on climate action contained in the national development plan. They build on existing national mitigation plan commitments and, with almost 20% of total NDP funding for the period 2018 to 2027 to be spent by the State and State companies on climate related measures, represent a significant step-change in our approach, both in terms of scale of ambition and the funding needed to meet the climate challenge. Key initiatives in the national development plan include: energy efficiency upgrades of 45,000 homes per annum from 2021 and providing support for a major roll-out of heat pump technologies; delivering energy upgrades to BER B level in all public buildings and a minimum of one third of commercial buildings; implementing the new renewable electricity support scheme to deliver an additional 3,000 to 4,500 MW of renewable energy, with the initial focus on shovel ready projects which could contribute to meeting our 2020 renewable energy targets; the roll-out of the support scheme for renewable heat and national smart metering programme; transitioning the Moneypoint plant away from coal by the middle of the next decade; having at least 500,000 electric vehicles on the road by 2030, with additional charging infrastructure to cater for planned growth; a €500 million climate action fund to leverage investment by public and private bodies in innovative climate action measures; and public transport investments, with €8.6 billion in funding in the next decade under national strategic outcome 4 of the national development plan. The combined effect of existing national mitigation plan measures and new NDP commitments is contributing to containing pre-2020 emissions at lower levels than otherwise would be the case and will also take us some way toward meeting our 2030 targets.

The preparation of a national energy and climate plan, covering the period 2021 to 2030, is one of the key provisions of the recently agreed EU regulation on the governance of the energy union. It is an overarching, consolidating regulation that will streamline a large number of energy and climate planning and reporting requirements. The national energy and climate plan, NECP, will include trajectories for national emissions, renewable energy and energy efficiency and outline the measures required to achieve these trajectories. The first draft must be submitted to the European Commission by 31 December, with the final version due by 31 December 2019. We will commence preliminary consultation on the NECP within the next few weeks, or earlier, the findings of which will inform the initial draft NECP, with at least one further consultation on the draft plan during 2019. Ireland’s NECP will set out our proposed contribution to EU level targets for renewable energy and energy efficiency which will be informed both by our NDP commitments and our ambition to largely decarbonise the energy system by 2040.

In the electricity sector we will see the deployment of additional technologies in the next decade, with solar and offshore wind energy, in particular, playing an increasing role. We will further decarbonise the sector by ceasing to use coal and peat in electricity generation. In the transport sector we will increase our use of sustainable biofuels, move to electrify the car fleet and deploy renewable gas and compressed natural gas solutions for the heavier commercial fleet. In the heating-cooling sector we will significantly increase the use of heat pumps and sustainable biomass in the commercial sector. By combining these actions with a robust energy efficiency programme at domestic and commercial levels, we will significantly reduce emissions from the energy sector.

A separate requirement of the governance regulation is the preparation by each member state of a new long-term low emissions strategy. Each strategy must be prepared by the start of 2020, have at least a 30-year time horizon and contribute to long-term greenhouse gas emissions reductions in the European Union in accordance with the Paris Agreement. The strategy will further elaborate on sectoral pathways for Ireland to meet its long-term decarbonisation objectives to 2050.

We need to consider how we respond to the impacts of climate change. No matter how successful our mitigation efforts prove to be, we are already locked into a scenario where globally we know that we are vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Observations show that Ireland’s climate is also changing and the observed scale and rate of change are consistent with regional and global trends. Earlier this year the Minister published Ireland’s first statutory national adaptation framework which aims to reduce the vulnerability of our environment, society and economy to the impacts of climate change and thus increase our overall climate resilience.

The national adaptation framework identifies 12 key sectors within the remit of seven Departments where sectoral adaptation plans are to be prepared for submission to the Government for approval by 13 December. Each local authority will also be developing its own adaptation strategies under the national framework. Building capacity within both central and local government administrations to engage with climate adaptation is very important, particularly at regional and local level. In that regard, in January the Minister announced the establishment of four climate action regional offices to co-ordinate and drive climate action at local level and committed €10 million to support their work. Furthermore, the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment is continuing to support the ongoing development of a climate information platform - Climate Ireland - which is providing hands on training and guidance for the regional teams being established within these offices. In addition, the Department continues to support the EPA's climate change research programme which plays a critical role in informing our responses to adaptation.

The Minister and the Government have welcomed the report and recommendations of the Citizens' Assembly. Many of the assembly's recommendations on climate action are already being implemented by the Government. For example, on public sector leadership, the public sector energy efficiency strategy requires public bodies to implement the Nearly Zero Energy Building ,nZEB, standard two years in advance of the private sector and provides a framework for investment in public buildings retrofits - recommendation No. 2. The new renewable electricity support scheme, RESS, provides for communities to develop their own renewable electricity projects and for developer-led projects to offer investment opportunities to local citizens and communities - recommendation No. 6. In relation to sustainable mobility, strategic outcome 4 of the national development plan commits to investing €8.6 billion in the next ten years. Capital funding for cycling and walking infrastructure will increase threefold between 2018 and 2021, with over €110 million allocated for urban cycling and walking infrastructure in the main cities - recommendation No. 8. A strong package of measures to support the roll-out of electric vehicles is now in place, supporting the NDP objective of having at least 500,000 electric vehicles on the road by 2030 - recommendation No. 9. The Minister is promoting strong action at EU level and in Ireland to address food waste - recommendation No. 12 - and reduce packaging, in particular plastics - ancillary recommendation No. 2. The Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government is implementing the Nearly Zero Energy Building, nZEB, standard for new residential and commercial buildings - ancillary recommendation No. 4 which will come into force from 1 January 2019.

Much of the discussion in and on the work of the Citizens’ Assembly has focused on the need to recognise the economic and social, in addition to the environmental, opportunities provided by the low carbon transition. The imperative to take advantage of these opportunities is also made explicit in both the national policy position and the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015.

There is now a large body of international and local evidence that examines the potential gains for the economy in taking strong action to develop the low carbon economy. The Government's support for energy efficiency measures in our building stock is supported by detailed analysis, commissioned by SEAI, that evidences not only savings but also employment gains, market and supply chain development opportunities and macro-economic benefits that can be achieved from energy efficiency investments. In 2017 alone, Exchequer investments of €70 million in building energy upgrades supported more than 2,000 jobs across Ireland. Elsewhere, the development of the bioeconomy and the development of a stronger emphasis on value-added, sustainable food production presents real long-term economic opportunities for Ireland's agriculture and food sectors, which will have the potential for real improvements in the emissions profile of the sector over the longer term.

Ireland's publicly funded research is also recognising these opportunities. The recently concluded refresh of our national research priorities has added energy, climate action and sustainability as one of six overall themes for the 2018-23 period. This will comprise the two broad pillars of research - decarbonising the energy system and sustainable living.

The Citizens' Assembly also demonstrates that individual citizens can produce very clear recommendations when provided with an opportunity to reflect and consider in detail a specific societal change. It also underlines that Ireland will not achieve its climate objectives through Government action alone and engagement with wider society on an ongoing basis will be essential. This is a model that the Department intends to develop further through initiatives under the national dialogue on climate action, which was launched by the Minister last year, to deliver on the objective of broad societal engagement in the low-carbon transition. On 23 June, a first regional gathering, under the auspices of the dialogue, took place in Athlone. Further regional gatherings are being planned and details will be announced by the Department in the near future.

In conclusion, the Government is already implementing many of the recommendations made by the Citizens’ Assembly and considering the best way to follow through on others. We are implementing long-term climate mitigation and adaptation strategies through the national mitigation plan, the national adaptation framework and the national development plan and will be streamlining our EU climate and energy reporting via the national energy and climate plan, NECP. Citizens are being consulted on how best to tackle climate change through the national dialogue on climate action. We will launch a consultation on the NECP very shortly. We have a long way to go and huge challenges ahead. We also have to see and grasp the huge opportunities that exist if we embrace a low carbon future.

Chairman:

I thank Mr. Griffin and call on Mr. O'Shea, head of the strategy unit in the ESB, to make his opening statement.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

I thank the committee for affording us an opportunity to brief members on our views on these matters.

Climate change is one of the biggest challenges that face humanity and globally there is a critical need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to protect future generations. This need is acknowledged in a range of international agreements and national policy documents that set out ambitious targets to restrict global warming and eliminate greenhouse gases.

The ESB welcomes the work done by the Citizens' Assembly in terms of its consideration of climate change. We greatly welcome the establishment of a dedicated committee to consider climate action. We are particularly encouraged by the fact that the Citizens' Assembly fully accepts that climate change is real and has sought for it to be at the centre of policy-making in Ireland. For this, the organisers of the Citizens' Assembly should be highly commended. The challenge for us in the ESB is to lead that transition where we can but in the most cost-effective manner for the customer and we stand ready to do so.

When considering climate change and how Ireland can adapt and mitigate its impacts, it is very important that we consider actions in terms of greenhouse gas emission reductions. While there is significant discussion of renewables targets, renewables are but one means to decarbonise. To this end, focus must be first and foremost on greenhouse gas emission reductions to ensure a policy focus that delivers the most cost effective solution.

It is instructive to consider the make up of Ireland's greenhouse gas emissions by reference to a CO2 equivalence. In the most recent data for 2016 produced by the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, it has shown that total greenhouse gas emissions were just over 61.5 million tonnes of CO2 equivalence, that agriculture is responsible for close to a third of those emissions and that electricity generation, transport and heat are responsible for around a fifth each. By 2050, Ireland will need to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions from the energy sectors, which is heat, transport and power generation, by up to 95% to play its part in the global action against climate change.

The key narrative of the decarbonisation journey in Ireland to date has been the increase in renewable electricity. In 2016, renewable electricity accounted for over 27% of electricity demand in Ireland. In our view this number is on a trajectory to hit 40% by 2020, driven primarily by wind generation. Ireland is recognised as being at the cutting edge of integrating intermittent renewables on to a small island system. We should be very proud of that achievement.

More renewable electricity will be required but ESB believes that action is required in other areas. We have given significant consideration to how Ireland might decarbonise. In late 2017, we published a report in conjunction with international consultants, Poyry, entitled Ireland's Low Carbon Future - Dimensions of a Solution. I have a copy of the report if members wish to read it. The report considered broader energy emissions in an holistic manner, namely all of the emissions generated by heat, transport and electricity. The report set out a series of low regret recommendations that were informed by international precedent across the various energy sectors. These recommendations form a key part of ESB's own Brighter Future strategy.

The key tenet of the joint report is the increased electrification of heat and transport that must be underpinned by the decarbonisation of electricity through zero or close to zero carbon technologies. To achieve this we must consider the following three dimensions.

First, we need to get ready now for a transport modal evolution where a significant portion of the vehicle fleet transitions from internal combustion engines, ICE, to electric motor propelled vehicles. To achieve this we need to put in place a comprehensive network of public charging infrastructure. We also need to prioritise the electrification of public transport and increase the use of electrified rail freight. Since the charging infrastructure must be in place to provide public confidence in purchasing an electric vehicle, we believe that State support is required for this infrastructure as has been the case in many other jurisdictions. We will be putting forward our case for support in due course through initiatives like the climate action fund.

Second, we need to decarbonise Ireland's heating requirements through a variety of measures. Existing housing and commercial stock should have an energy efficiency retrofit to significantly reduce energy consumption on the basis that using less energy in the first place reduces the decarbonisation problem. Retrofit programmes represent huge opportunities for new employment right across Ireland and have enormous benefits in terms of Ireland's balance of payments. All of the 500,000 expected new houses in the coming decades should have a heat pump installed rather than a fossil fuel burner, especially as the cost implications for new homes are negligible. The same applies to new commercial buildings. Existing fossil fuel heat sources should be replaced by electric heat pumps where possible. Otherwise, biomass or biogas should be considered. However, we need to note that both fuel source quantities are constrained by the availability of raw material.

Third, in order to underpin the scale of electrification required we need to decarbonise the electricity system. Undoubtedly, renewable technologies like onshore and offshore wind and solar photovoltaic, PV, will play a massive role as will storage and interconnection with other markets. However, even with significant renewables, Ireland will still need a backbone of dispatchable generation to meet the demands of society when its neither windy nor sunny. Unlike many other electricity systems around the world, Ireland does not have significant hydro power potential, biomass is a limited resource for many reasons and we have an outright ban on nuclear generation. ESB is of the view that carbon capture and storage, CCS, technology will be required in Ireland given the lack of alternatives to complement renewables. We believe Ireland needs to act now to consider CCS in a specific Irish context. We would greatly welcome the establishment of a dedicated Government-led working group to fully explore this option.

Chairman:

I thank Mr. O'Shea and call on Mr. Scheer, head of the low carbon technologies department at the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, to make his opening statement.

Mr. Jim Scheer:

I thank the committee for affording the SEAI an opportunity to address members today.

The SEAI is Ireland's national energy authority that invests in and delivers appropriate, effective and sustainable solutions to help Ireland's transition to a clean energy future. We work with the Government, homeowners, businesses and communitiesto achieve this by providing expertise, capital funding, educational programmes, policy advice, research and demonstration support for new technologies. A part of SEAI's remit is to contribute to the evidence base for policy making in Ireland. This is supported by research, development and demonstration, RDD, statistics and modelling functions. We use a broad range of data sources, including data collected from the programmes delivered by SEAI. We administer the national energy modelling framework as part of our statutory functions. We execute this in partnership with a range of domestic organisations, Departments and State agencies with expertise in the Irish economy and energy sector, and with international organisations such as the European Commission, the International Energy Agency and EUROSTAT.

Our modelling function is central to the preparation of the national energy and climate plan, NECP. SEAI has direct experience of incentivising and delivering measures that reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the residential, commercial, public, industrial sand transport sectors. In a separate advisory note to the committee, we outline a summary of some of the key measures we are delivering that align with the recommendations of the Citizens' Assembly. I will highlight a short selection of these key opportunities now.

Ireland’s public sector building stock represents a significant opportunity for the Government to take a leadership role in our low carbon transition. By the end of 2017, the public sector in Ireland had reached a level of 20% energy savings from energy efficiency, meeting the overall 2020 national target. However, further work needs to be done to reach the 33% efficiency improvements savings target, as was set by the Government for the public sector, beyond the national target. To facilitate this, SEAI has run an award winning public sector programme for a number of years, funded by the Department of Community, Climate Action and Environment. The programme delivers material impact through capital projects, mentoring on energy management systems and capacity building within State bodies, such as the HSE, OPW, local authorities and the Department of Education and Skills. The programme includes a strong monitoring and reporting mechanism requiring all public bodies and schools to engage with their energy performance annually and work towards the 33% target. The programme has a strong focus on capacity building within State entities to make sustainable energy practices the norm in the Irish public sector. SEAI is developing a long-term pipeline of projects to assure high impact and cost-effective delivery of sustainable energy retrofits. This aggregation model will also allow non-Exchequer funding to be brought to bear, as volume increases to meet Ireland’s ambition. SEAI is currently working with State bodies to pursue non-Exchequer finance alternatives.

There is also a clear opportunity to deliver significant upgrades of homes through State-owned housing. The use of this stock as an exemplar of a national Government-led programme, represents an immediate opportunity to meet our residential retrofit targets.

Delivering actions that connect citizens to the need to act is also vitally important. In 2017, SEAI commissioned an assessment of models to support community ownership of renewable energy in Ireland to recognise the importance of community participation in the transition to a low-carbon society. This has supported development of options to provide for community renewable energy development and deployment, via the renewable electricity support scheme, RESS.

In addition to this input to the RESS development process, SEAI has been supporting microgeneration technologies through programmes delivered on behalf of Government for several years. In 2018, SEAI removed supported for new fossil fuel boilers and added grants for heat pumps, solar PV, and domestic battery storage. As EU Clean Energy Package starts to facilitate the generation, export and receipt of a market price for microgeneration export, the evidence base provided by these pilot programmes nationwide will help to de-risk this transition. With this evidence base, Ireland should be able to deliver the best-fit market mechanism at optimal cost to the exchequer and high value to the consumer.

In further support of communities over the last three years, SEAI has grown the sustainable energy communities network, which today boasts more than 200 communities spread across the country. We provide technical mentoring and advice for communities to develop their own energy masterplan. This process identifies the opportunities for them as they determine their own low carbon transition, including the potential for renewable energy. Through the renewable electricity support scheme and by looking at other market constraints, it is essential that communities are empowered to invest in renewable energy projects where these are economically, socially and environmentally sustainable. SEAI will continue to work with the various Departments and regulatory bodies to help to ensure that this becomes a reality.

SEAI delivers Ireland’s grants for new electric vehicle, EV, purchases and for home chargers with funding from Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment. We are also engaged with the motor industry in delivering roadshows at various events and locations to increase the level of test-driving and user experience. Through the latter half of 2018 we will finalise a fleet replacement programme, which supports public and private sector businesses to test a range of EVs alongside their existing fleet to consider switching to EVs.

Our data show that in 2018 EV sales in Ireland will likely double as a result of the various incentives, including the grants, toll charges, benefit-in-kind, and fleet and taxi purchase scheme. As adoption of EVs grows, it is increasingly important that the charging infrastructure meets demand. In our role supporting the low emission vehicles task force, co-chaired by Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment and the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, SEAI will be central to the provision of this infrastructure and a transition to lower emission vehicles.

Price signals that drive low-carbon investment and behaviour are key. An extension to the carbon tax could play a crucial role in reducing energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions, especially if a long-term trajectory is sent as a clear market signal. In many countries, the ring-fencing of carbon tax for climate mitigation activities can help to finance cost effective sustainable energy interventions. It can also links the taxation more directly to heightened awareness of its need and impact.

There is a much longer list of actions than I have had time to mention here, and many of these are detailed in the Government's national development plan and highlighted in other Government policy papers and include opportunities for: district heating; decarbonising gas; electrifying heat and transport and activities to further decarbonise electricity, transport and heat; and promote energy efficiency. All of these are required to achieve our goals.

The Department has highlighted already the importance of the upcoming national energy and climate plan, NECP. To highlight SEAI's contribution to the plan, in its review of national energy and climate plans, the European Commission will consider member states' NECP commitments against the outputs from a new EU model. SEAI is supporting the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment and liaising with EU officials to ensure that that model is based on the latest available data for Ireland. Further to these inputs, SEAI provides a central supporting role to the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment, via development of energy projections for Ireland to 2030 and 2040, as part of our statutory authority to produce the national energy statistics and national energy projections. These will meet many of the analytical requirements of the NECP. The scenarios are being developed in consultation with the Department and other key stakeholders. We are further supporting the Department across wider policy development in research, development and deployment, and innovation on sustainable energy activities.

The EU's recent suite of legislation, including the governance regulation, mandate minimum levels of effort for member states to adhere to, in terms of emissions reductions across the economy. Member states are, however, fully entitled to design more ambitious plans. This is crucial, as it is currently unclear as to whether the EU targets are ambitious enough to deliver on its commitments under the Paris Agreement. Against this backdrop SEAI is grateful for the support and resources committed to us via Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment. We are committed to supporting this committee, and wider Government, to transform Ireland into a society based on sustainable energy, technology and practices. I thank the committee.

Chairman:

I thank Mr. Scheer.

We are going to follow the same speaking pattern again. I propose that Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy takes Senator Mulherin's place. Then we will have Senator O'Sullivan, Deputy Dooley, Senator Marshall and Deputy Stanley. We will have our ten-minute slots at the beginning. Deputy Stanley will be the first speaker in our five-minute slots.

I will start with my own questions. I will begin with the Department. Reference was made to the national development plan and the measures over the next ten years that will reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. No analysis has been done on this. When will that analysis take place? Does the Department believe we will reach our 2030 targets based on the national development plan?

As regards the burning of peat for electricity, as we know that has a significant impact on our carbon emissions. There are also sustainability questions that arise from importing biomass fuel, depending on where it is coming from. Should we not have strict sustainability criteria on the importation of biomass and what would the Department's views be on that?

This committee is going to visit the Tipperary Energy Agency in the coming weeks. We will see community-owned wind farms. We will hear from the community which has solar panels and which is working collectively at community level on reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. There is clear expert evidence that community and citizen participation works in relation to our energy transition. What is the Department doing? What initiatives and supports are there in order to roll this out across the country? This is an example that is clearly working very well. We need to hear concrete proposals from the Department on what it is doing to help us reach our targets.

What discussions has the Department had with the ESB in facilitating citizen participation and allowing people to sell their surplus energy on to the grid?

On offshore electricity generation as part of the solution, we heard last week that there are a number of issues around planning, regulation and licensing in building offshore wind farms.

Where do we stand in the context of dealing with those challenges? What is the capacity of the grid? Will it be capable of taking that energy on, distributing it throughout the State and feeding it on into Europe?

The committee was told last week that the Department of Education and Skills has advised that heat pumps are unsuitable for new schools and that any unused energy generated from solar panels had to be spilled. It was stated previously that schools were ideal for solar and PV panels because they could export excess energy to the grid when closed at weekends and during the summer, thus generating money for the schools themselves. What is the situation with regard to Government policy on microgeneration? Is there a need for a more joined up approach from Departments vis-à-visour public buildings and the supports available through the RESS?

I ask Mr. Griffin to start with those questions and I will then bring in my colleagues.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I have given the committee a sense of the range of measures that are set out in the NDP. Any fair observer would say that the plan is very ambitious in terms of what the Government wants to do on the climate front, particularly in the context of renewable energy. One can see a very significant step change in investment in comparison with previous years. The figures show that we were moving from a period of significant underinvestment, for a range of reasons, in climate action and renewable energy into a space where €1 in €5 to be invested under the NDP will be spent on climate action measures.

In the national mitigation plan, NMP, which preceded the NDP, we carried out a detailed analysis of the contribution towards our carbon reduction targets of various national mitigation measures, where that data was available. The next big step for us is the development of the national energy and climate plan, NECP. That will require us to look at the targets we have agreed at EU level, like the 32% renewable energy target which is EU wide, the 32.5% energy efficiency target, the 30% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the non-ETS sector target and other sub-targets which do not get as much attention or prominence, such as the target for interconnection. We then need to set out in great detail for the European Commission how the totality of existing measures and measures yet to be identified, designed and put in place will assist in the achievement of the various targets. That work has started and we expect the first consultation on the NECP to go out in the next week or two. The Department is already engaged in some of the preliminary drafting work. We circulated a document to the committee in the last day or two on the role of technical research and modelling, TRAM, in modelling the impact of the various measures. All of that work will be fed into the NECP.

On the issue of peat and its sustainability in the context of electricity generation, the Minister has stated on numerous occasions in the House that, as per the NDP, our intention is to get out of peat no later than 2030. Our intention is to get out of coal-based generation at the Moneypoint plant no later than 2025. In that context, a lot of in-depth analysis is ongoing in the Department and in the ESB, as the plant owner, as to how we can achieve that. The Department is acutely conscious of the fact that saying something like "getting out of peat" needs to be understood in the context of the importance of the plants to the midlands. There is a commitment in the NMP to prepare a report on a just transition and how we manage the situation whereby 4,000 people in the midlands are directly or indirectly supported by Bord na Móna's activities. That work is ongoing. The other important point about Bord na Móna, as an entity, is that it has already made significant progress in decarbonisation of energy generation in the plants for which it is responsible. By 2024, approximately 85% of the electricity generated by Bord na Móna will be renewable, through a combination of co-firing at the three existing plants, two of which are owned by the ESB. There has also been a very significant investment by Bord na Móna in wind energy and the company is moving into the solar energy space as well. Bord na Móna is very conscious of the need to get the transition right, not just from the point of view of environmental sustainability but also to ensure that the company remains a very significant part of the midlands.

On microgeneration, we did some initial survey work on the existing scheme which is run by the ESB, the only supplier in the market to offer a microgeneration scheme. The Minister launched a new scheme in the summer which supports investment in solar PV and battery storage up to a maximum of €3,800, that is, up to €2,800 for the solar PV and €1,000 for battery. We have said that we will review this scheme within a reasonable timeframe to see how it is functioning. The scheme is for self-consumption at the moment but we are giving thought to the potential impact of allowing the spilling of that electricity onto the grid, how that might be managed from an electricity supply perspective and how it might impact the PSO and so on. There is a bit of work to be done on that before we embark on a more extensive microgeneration programme. We are also conscious of the fact that the second renewable energy directive, which was just negotiated at EU level, is very clear that the community has to be at the heart of it. Effecting transformational change of the type that we have to achieve over the next few decades cannot be done without community involvement at all levels. This means that we must involve communities in the decision making process and make sure that communities are more actively engaged. Obviously, from a generation perspective, microgeneration is part of that. We have also written into the RESS provisions a requirement for community involvement in renewable electricity schemes. A developer would be required, for example, to allocate a certain proportion of the scheme for community involvement. There will also be the traditional community contributions that we expect developers to continue to make. We would also expect in the auctions that we will be running over future years that a component will be available for communities to bid into. Obviously, we have to look at how that bidding in is financed and how we can support communities in that way.

In terms of the planning regulations and licensing, work is ongoing, led by Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government, on the development of a marine area and foreshore (amendment) Bill. That will provide the licensing and regulatory framework to allow offshore as distinct from foreshore developments to take place. There is already a mechanism in place to consent schemes within the foreshore area.

Reference was made to grid capacity. When one looks at the demand scenarios, even the low-carbon scenario prepared by Eirgrid looking out to 2030, the reality is that we will need to continue to invest in grid, whether that is through reinforcements or additional grid capacity.

We also need to develop our grid connections to the European Union. We have one that is beyond the feasibility study at this stage, the Celtic interconnector between Ireland and France, which is approximately 700 km in length and about €1 billion in cost. That will make a real difference in terms of the connectivity we will require. A private sector company is promoting a Greenlink project, which will introduce a further grid connection between Ireland and Wales. We already have the existing 500 MW grid connection between Ireland and the United Kingdom.

That is a quick run through of the questions the Chairman posed. There is a final point but while I am not sure if I am in a position to answer it; the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, witnesses may be able to do so. It is on the issue of the schools. I do not want to land the SEAI in this-----

Chairman:

We can come back to them on that. Regarding the just transition, is it not time to have a task force for that? What is the position in respect of the task force?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

We have a commitment in the national mitigation plan to develop a report on the just transition, which will focus on more than the Bord na Móna issue. I believe the timeline we have for that is 2019 for initiating and finalising a report in that area. Obviously, we will have to involve all the stakeholders. This is not something we will take upon ourselves to do.

Chairman:

Should a task force not be set up in respect of transitioning people from-----

Mr. Mark Griffin:

In all likelihood, that is what will be required. We have not finally settled on the shape of it but we will need to talk to people directly affected by it.

Chairman:

So that will not happen until-----

Mr. Mark Griffin:

Next year.

Chairman:

Does Mr. Griffin know at what point next year?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I do not have a precise time at this stage but we have 160 measures to move under the national mitigation plan. We will move that as quickly as we can because we understand the priority that should be attached to it.

Chairman:

On the national development plan and the analyses regarding reduction of our greenhouse gas emissions, based on the analysis the Department has done to date, when can we expect to start seeing the graph turn downwards in respect of improvements in our greenhouse gas emissions? The Climate Change Advisory Council, whose representatives have come before this committee, have been very negative in terms of Ireland working towards our 2020 targets. When does Mr. Griffin believe we will get a proper picture in respect of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions, given the announcement of the national development plan?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

We will have to have the full picture in place by the time we submit a final national energy and climate plan to the European Commission by the end of next year.

Chairman:

The end of 2019.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

The end of 2019. As I said at the outset, that will have to examine all the targets we have to deliver including renewable energy, energy efficiency, greenhouse gas emissions, interconnection, redesigning of the markets and so on, and it will have to add up.

Chairman:

We will be able to see a clear projection graph in respect of our greenhouse gas emissions reducing.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

Yes, and the work the technical research and modelling, TRAM, group is doing, the SEAI involvement in that, as well as that of University College Cork, UCC and the ESRI will feed into the process. This will be a very well-informed plan. There will be no room for equivocation, which is very important. It will be informed also by the public consultation processes we will run.

Chairman:

Do the SEAI witnesses want to come in on the school issue?

Mr. Tom Halpin:

On the matter of the schools, the Chairman referenced heat pumps and the suitability of photovoltaic panels. The general underlying principle with heat pumps is that the building itself must be energy efficient in the first instance to make them economically viable. It is not a blanket statement that they are not suitable; it is just that certain building stock may not be suitable. Having said that, the SEAI is actively engaged with the Department of Education and Skills, and we are engaged in a Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment-funded programme, which will provide €14 million over three years, to do deep retrofits of 30 schools, and I believe heat pumps will feature in those.

Chairman:

Is putting photovoltaic, PV, solar panels into new schools not part of that?

Mr. Tom Halpin:

The issue with photovoltaic is different in that where the occupancy of a school may not justify it and we end up spilling the electricity to the grid, as the Chairman said, then it is uneconomically viable. However, in instances, and we are supporting them through our community scheme and in the case of the schools programme, we are supporting PV where the occupancy extends into later in the evening or the school is used extensively during the summer when there is a higher level of availability of solar energy. It is not a blanket fit, so to speak, but the Department of Education and Skills has strong guidelines on this and it is not always suitable.

Chairman:

It is not always suitable for new schools, is that what Mr. Halpin is saying?

Mr. Tom Halpin:

I am sorry. I cannot comment in respect of new schools. I am not familiar with how that interacts with regulations but with respect to retrofitting it onto existing schools, it is not always suitable.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

These sorts of buildings will also be covered by the energy performance of buildings directive. I do not have the detail on that but there are obligations around it. One would imagine they would have to be similar to the obligations for dwellings under the near zero energy building-----

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Can I ask a quick question? Did any of the witnesses here watch Ms Marie Donnelly's presentation last week?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I did not watch it.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If Mr. Griffin watches that he will understand the question.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Griffin said he was watching the committee's work very closely.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

No. I said I was paying close attention. I do not have time to sit through all the presentations, unfortunately.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Griffin was paying close attention but he was not paying that close attention.

Chairman:

I have one question for the ESB on the infrastructure. Reference was made to needing Government support to roll that out. Can the witnesses explain why it would need that? If we are to have this transition whereby electricity will replace petrol and diesel for cars, that would be a very positive business model for the ESB. Can they explain the reason the ESB would need Government intervention supports to roll out infrastructure for electric vehicles?

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

It is a fair question. If we are to move from the current internal combustion engine-driven transport system to charging systems, we currently have approximately 1,100 public charging points across Ireland. We have more in Northern Ireland. We put them in place on foot of a scheme agreed with the regulator. As we look forward, there are more organisations than the ESB looking to put in place new charging mechanisms but to do so on a commercial basis, we have to get a return on the asset. If we look, for example, at some of the businesses we are doing in Great Britain now, we are engaged in both London and in Coventry in what are effectively local authority-run schemes where bids are made and, on foot of winning a bid, the company builds the charging points. It is all about the economics of it. We do not make money from the electricity being provided from the unit to any great extent, and the unit is quite capital intensive.

We welcome the availability of moneys from the climate action fund to ensure we can put in place a more comprehensive scheme of charges into the future.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

On the point about the schools, I would be happy to take it up with the Department of Education and Skills and feed something back to the clerk to the committee, which might provide some clarity around that.

Chairman:

If we cannot get it right on a new building, it raises serious questions about energy efficiency within our public buildings if this is a scheme that is seen as being a positive for energy efficiency.

I will call our members now and I will start with Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all the witnesses for their attendance. I have a question for Mr. Griffin on recommendation 1 of the Citizens' Assembly regarding a single organisation responsible for ensuring that we achieve our targets. The committee has been receiving different views on that and there seems to be an emerging view that across Departments at a very senior level, a committee of Secretaries General being answerable to the Taoiseach's office would be a good model to pursue. I note that the national adaptation framework has seven Ministers who will produce sectoral adaption plans by next year. What are Mr. Griffin's views on that?

My other question concerns getting information to the citizen. We have heard about the terrific work of the Tipperary Energy Agency and a number of other agencies across the country that are doing work, but it is clearly not in every county. I note the Department has four climate action regional offices. Will they be operating in each local authority or will it be more regional, such as at the regional assembly level?

Also, is the proposal that I and many others have made on communicating to the citizen via RTÉ and Met Éireann one of which Mr. Griffin's Department would approve, considering RTÉ comes under his Department's remit? Met Éireann is under the remit of the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government but I have no doubt it is something he could work on across Departments.

On the renewable electricity support scheme, RESS, and communities developing the renewable electricity projects, is this something the Department sees farmers being able to avail of, because many of them are interested in the PV potential there? Will European models, for example, enable them to connect to the grid, supply their own electricity and then sell it? Is that something the Department envisages coming in under that particular scheme?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

On the first question, it would be helpful to set out the structures that are in place to manage this across Government in order to give a clear sense of the level of join-up in place across Departments at official level and at Government level in dealing with this issue. In 2016, when the Government was formed, it took the view that we should have a climate action and energy Department, which is why my Department inherited the climate functions from the Custom House in 2016, and we have managed both policy agendas since then. There is Oireachtas oversight through the annual transition statement process, and since last year each sectoral Minister for each sector is required to brief the Oireachtas on progress in his or her own area.

On the delivery of the national mitigation plan and the national adaptation framework, there is a high-level steering group chaired by the Minister which has the senior officials from the relevant Departments feeding into it. There is Cabinet-level oversight by a Cabinet committee, which has been quite active this year in looking at the climate issue. As one would expect, there is Cabinet consideration of this matter from time to time, and we have been to Cabinet on a number of climate and energy-related issues during 2018. The Cabinet committee is fed by a senior officials' group, and the representation is generally at Assistant Secretary level. Therefore, Mr. Michael Manley is a regular attendee at that, along with Mr. Brian Carroll, the Assistant Secretary in the climate area.

A new innovation, for want of a better term, is the Project Ireland 2040 delivery group, which is a group comprising the relevant Secretaries General who have responsibility for areas mandated in the national development plan. I sit on it, and it is chaired by Mr. Robert Watt, Secretary General of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, and co-chaired by Mr. John McCarthy, Secretary General of the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government. It includes the Secretaries General of the Department of Health, the Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, the Department of Rural and Community Development, the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, and the Department of Education and Skills. There is a good cross-spectrum, therefore, of Departments that are tasked with delivering significant outcomes under the national development plan, not least climate-related outcomes. The group generally meets once a month and reports to Government on a regular basis. The first report was last week.

From my perspective as a Secretary General of a Department, big-ticket items that arise in the climate or energy area, whether they be new policy, policy development, a commitment of money or discussions about Estimates which affect this in particular, all come through me. We have a good framework in place to manage what needs to be managed on this front. In truth, I am not sure of the value of a new independent body. There is already another independent body out there. The committee has already Professor John FitzGerald, who is the chair of the Climate Change Advisory Council. He calls it straight, and he was straight with the committee on what he thought was going well and not so well with our climate agenda. We are obviously cognisant of that, and we listen closely to what the advisory council says. Ms Laura Burke is an ex-officiomember, as is Mr. Jim Gannon, the head of the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, and other eminent members are well equipped to assess the issue and make recommendations, as they have done on a number of occasions. On that issue, I think we are well geared up.

I will ask Dr. John O'Neill to talk about the climate action regional offices because he has been heavily involved in the national adaptation area for some time now, and was instrumental in setting up the offices. I will ask Mr. Manley to comment on the RESS scheme and, in particular, the community dimension.

Dr. John O'Neill:

The Deputy mentioned the seven adaptation plans across the 12 sectors, which is an important point to raise on the policy coherence side of things. We have a national steering committee in place with all the sectors, that is, all the Departments which can interact on that, and it met only yesterday, in fact. It meets quite frequently, and the whole idea is to have that cross-sectoral interaction at the sectoral level. Taking the governance point a bit further, the local authorities are also represented on that group, as are the regional assemblies. As Mr. Griffin mentioned in his opening statement, the Minister made €10 million available this year to set up four regional climate action offices, which were set up on a regional basis initially to deal with the climate risks. Cork County Council is dealing with the south west, while Mayo County Council is dealing with the north-west region. Dublin City Council is co-ordinating for the Dublin region, while Kildare County Council is controlling the midlands. The role of those regional offices is to co-ordinate activity on the climate action agenda with all the local authorities in their respective regions.

The initial focus of these offices is on adaptation. Not only do the sectors have to do their own sectoral plans for adaptation by September next year, but the local authorities have the same deadline. The idea behind the local authority offices is to put some capacity building at the local and regional level. It has been mentioned several times as part of the overall climate action agenda. It will span not just the adaptation side but will include the mitigation side as well.

Chairman:

Would anyone else like to comment?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I would like to come back in on one thing that I neglected to answer, before I hand over to Dr. O'Neill. It is on the question that was raised about the role of Met Éireann and RTÉ. The best way to frame it is that Met Éireann is heavily involved in the analysis and support of much of this work, particularly on the adaptation side. It was involved in the national adaptation steering group and contributed to the development of the national adaptation framework, which was published some time ago. It also sits on the steering group for the climate action regional offices. It is involved in the climate information platform, Climate Ireland, which I mentioned in my opening statement. It is also centrally involved from a long-term adaptation perspective with its climatological analysis, forecasts and so on, and it is establishing the national flood forecast and warning service. It is usually involved in the space, therefore.

On RTÉ and the role it could have in public awareness, we would need to think about what we want the organisation to do. If we go out with a communications campaign, it would need to be well structured. Off the top of my head, I see value in a programme like "Nationwide" being involved in this space, and there are obviously other environmental programmes on RTÉ such as "Ear to the Ground".

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What does Mr. Griffin think about using the weather forecast as a good opportunity to convey information to the public?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

We could look at that and talk to our colleagues. There may be value in the forecast saying something on this issue from time to time as part of the public-facing role of Met Éireann, and we will take the matter up with it.

Our biggest area of focus in terms of public awareness to date has been around the national dialogue on climate action and how we get that bottom-up, local and regional engagement and engage citizens at all levels in ensuring that they contribute to the process of achieving that transformational change we will require over the next few decades. I will ask Mr. Manley to talk about the renewable electricity scheme, RES, and micro generation.

Mr. Michael Manley:

In respect of micro generation, our system of energy, particularly electricity, is changing significantly. Twenty years ago, a monolithic ESB did all the generation, transmission and retailing. Unbundling and bringing in new actors in the supply and generation of electricity have been the key issues over the past 20 years. The next step is in the clean energy package. It involves bringing the citizen and community into that space. It will require an enormous amount of work. We are looking at it on a number of different levels. In the RESS, we are looking at the scale production of energy and trying to find a way to put communities into commercial projects. The RES provides for mandatory participation and systems to do that. That is on a commercial scale. There will be smaller schemes that we envisage will be community-led. We are looking at how we can support those and how we can look at models of giving early support finance so people can come together, get their ideas together and work them out. How can we put expert supports in there because very few communities anywhere in the country would be able to say "what about design, construction and finance?" and ask how to take long-term finance on board?

Micro generation is on a smaller scale. This is where people can put solar panels on their roof and spill it in. This raises significant questions about equity. Italy had significant problems this summer. There was not that much electricity demand on sunny Sunday afternoons, there was a lot of solar power, it was spilling into the grid, commercial generators were losing revenue and they were looking to see to how they recover that. These are not insurmountable things. We must try to design a market that accommodates all of that. We will not be recalcitrant. We talk about a clean energy package and it tends to be focused on the renewable and efficiency objectives but there are four market instruments as well which, hopefully, will come to the Council this December. Article 16 of the electricity market directive states that communities are entitled to own, establish or lease community networks and autonomously manage them. Article 21 states that communities are entitled to generate renewable energy, including their own consumption, and store and sell their excess production of renewable electricity. Article 22 states they are entitled to generate, consume, store and sell renewable energy. We must legislatively bring those into operation in Ireland. The deadline is 2021. It will change profoundly how we do things. The steps we are taking at the moment are only a start. Many people are happy to get grant support for micro generation while others want to be much more actively involved in the market. We want to design a market that welcomes those who want to be active in the market and the many citizens who are quite happy not to be involved. The European consumer bodies have been very active at this level and have pointed out that consumers are busy people. They are trying to get to work, care for children, get child care and do all the things they want to do. Some will be very interested while others will not so that will be a pretty complex market.

With regard to the question about farmers getting involved, there will no badges saying that farmers need not apply. Is a farmer developing on their own land a commercial developer and, therefore, in the commercial pot or are they working with their community so there is broader support and, therefore, they are in a community project? We have met some of the community groups and had this discussion with them. When is community commercial? If a number of businesses come together, is that a community or a commercial project? We must work these things out.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The witnesses from the ESB talked about carbon capture and storage technology and how we are going to need it. Could they elaborate on that?

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

Carbon capture and storage technology is where one continues to burn the fossil fuel but the carbon is captured either pre or post-combustion and then transported to another site and stored so carbon does not find its way into the atmosphere. The different parts of the technology have been tried and tested. There are 3,000 km of carbon network in the US. It has not had the same push over in the past ten-odd years. We feel it is a technology that needs some further support. When one looks across the various road maps across Europe, one can see that generally carbon capture and storage features heavily in each of them as a means of ensuring that carbon is prevented from going into the atmosphere and that we can continue to run the system through a combination of renewables and thermal plant.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What about fly wheel technology and battery storage? Has the ESB a view on that?

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

All of these technologies will have a part to play but there are limits to what they can achieve. Battery technology is advancing steadily. The energy density of batteries is increasing day by day and week by week and that is what is putting the real emphasis on electrification of transport and electric vehicles. These are limited enough in terms of the actual storage an individual device can provide but when one uses the law of large numbers and put a lot of them together, one starts to get to something that is useful. I told this committee 18 months ago that if we were to store one day's worth of electricity in Ireland in the Turlough Hill-type power plants for when the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine, we would have to build 60 new Turlough Hills. This constitutes massive storage capability but also a level of implementation that is not credible right now. Equally, were we to store one day's worth of electricity in batteries, if one takes the Tesla Powerwell that is currently available commercially and is a 10 kW-hour battery, one would need something like 14 million of them on houses in Ireland so this is six or seven batteries on the side of every house. Again, this says to me that there is something that can certainly contribute but it probably cannot achieve a full day's worth of energy storage. The challenges are real, which is why the we in the ESB would say that when we look at the technologies, we should not discount any of them because the challenge is so big that we have to get to the end of this and all of these technologies have a part to play.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Would the ESB have any resistance to the idea that the individual citizen could generate electricity for themselves, connect to the grid and sell because there might be the impression that this is the case?

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

I have heard those impressions. In our networks business, someone can turn up, notify and fit their micro generation installation. They can turn up and fit up to 3.6 kW on a domestic premises. I will give the Deputy an indication of what 3.6 kW is. It is around 12 solar panels. If one goes to three-phase supply, it is larger at about 10 kW, which is about 40 solar panels. In Europe, three-phase supply is brought closer to domestic premises than happens in Ireland or the UK so the capacity is lower but we will be well beyond the requirements of the new renewables directive in terms of people being able to just turn up and connect their plant to the system. That is the technical piece.

When we look at the commercial side of it, we think that when the smart metering scheme is put in place, it will be a game changer because we will be measuring electricity imports and exports from each individual home and we can work out the value of it. The RESS package at European level will require a value to be placed on that and payments to the customer. Over the past couple of years in advance of that, we have run two pilot schemes. One is in our supply business, Electric Ireland, where we have offered a tariff of ten cent per unit to existing customers. We have had to stop offering that. It is not available to new customers but we have maintained it for the eighth year in a row. To the best of my knowledge, we are the only electricity supplier that has offered that to its customer base and that pays the customer from electricity billed from solar panels or any other local micro generation. In our networks business, we offer a package to install the kit and provide an import-export meter. On top of that, we offered ten cent per unit of electricity generated from it. In the networks business, that cost was effectively socialised across all customers for a period but, again, it was a pilot to see how the network would operate under these conditions. It has not been continued because we have done the learning from it. ESB is at the forefront of looking to do these sort of initiatives. Electric Ireland offers a package for existing customers whereby we will give an interest-free loan to install some of these capabilities. Again, it has been taken up in reasonable numbers.

Photo of Grace O'SullivanGrace O'Sullivan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. I am always reminded of the mobile phone and how 25 to 30 years ago, people carried a large battery cell phone around with them and how it is such a small device now. We should embrace the challenge, particularly with regard to renewable energy and having a healthy environment in which to live.

I have a number of questions for Mr. Mark Griffin. What does he envisage to be the role of this committee in the development of the national energy and climate action plan? He said there would be consultation.

Last week we had an amazing presentation from Ms Marie Donnelly. One point that stood out concerned the capacity of offshore wind and the facility at Porto, off the coast of Portugal. It is a floating device. It is clear from everyone we hear from that Ireland, as an island nation, has tremendous capacity. We should be very ambitious in this field. If we get it right, not only will we mitigate but we could also be supplying the rest of Europe.

I have a number of questions. What do the delegates believe is a realistic projection for the future of renewable energy in the next two decades in Ireland? What source of renewable energy would be best for us to use here?

I am a member of the Green Party. My colleague, Deputy Eamon Ryan, introduced the Community Energy (Co-ownership) Bill in the Dáil in November. The focus of the Green Party is on community energy and community access to energy. What is the position on community co-operatives being able to generate and have access to the grid, not only to supply energy to their own community but also to supply further afield in order to generate funding that would stay in the community. I refer to rural areas and areas around the country in general.

I speak to farmers in the south east fairly regularly. I am from Waterford. There is definitely a blockage in terms of gaining access to the grid. Farmers cannot gain access to it. I am curious about this. If a farmer were to put 25 acres under solar PV panels, what would it deliver for him on the farm? What would it deliver for the community? What could a farmer with 25 acres earn? Farmers are under pressure and need to have other sources of income.

Will there be a bigger role for new technologies such as ocean and tidal technology in the next 20 years or so? What problems will there be regarding their access to the grid?

Mr. Griffin said the national mitigation plan will be updated with carbon-pricing measures through the emissions trading scheme for power generation. Could he clarify what he means by this? Are changes foreseen to the emissions trading scheme, such as measures to increase the permit price? Will it continue to be business as usual in this regard?

With regard to Moneypoint, I have a few questions. It was mentioned that there are plans to close it around 2025. What is the position on those plans? What provision is being made for the staff? This was asked earlier.

With regard to biomass, can the delegates assure me that biomass will not play a significant role in the 55% renewable energy target for 2030?

Chairman:

Could those questions be answered first?

Photo of Grace O'SullivanGrace O'Sullivan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sorry, I have several more questions.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

The Senator is on a roll. I will answer some of the questions and ask colleagues to join in. On the first point, on the role of the committee in the development of the national energy and climate action plan, it is very clearly stitched into the terms of reference that it has an important role. It all depends on the timing of the committee's report. There will clearly be views expressed based on what the members have heard and their opinions on potentially new measures that might be inserted into the plan or matters that absolutely need to be considered. The suite of hearings the committee has already had, and those to come, will place members in a strong position to offer opinions on many points that might feature in the action plan. Maybe it will be the report itself that we will consider as part of an input to the national energy and climate action plan because it constitutes a de facto consultation.

On the Senator's point on offshore energy, I apologise to the Chairman because she also raised it in her opening remarks. Will offshore wind play a role? The short answer is that it will. It is more complicated to determine when. We prepared an offshore renewable energy development plan in 2014. It set out that there was potential for approximately 4,500 MW of offshore wind energy and approximately 1,500 MW of wave and tidal energy. Wave and tidal energy is further down the road and requires a significant amount of further research and development, some of which we are funding in the Department.

The offshore energy technologies are well developed. Mr. Manley had an opportunity in recent weeks to visit a fixed offshore wind energy scheme being run by SSE in Wick, off the coast of Scotland in the far north. Statoil has six demonstration turbines, using floating technology. One of the challenges we face when looking at the next renewable energy strategy is the trade-off between what constitutes the most cost-effective technology and developing a diverse pool. We will need to achieve the latter. It is clear from the figures that onshore wind generation is still the cheapest. When one looks at the costs per megawatt hour in 2017, one sees that the figure for large onshore wind is about €89. The large offshore wind figure is about €129. Therefore, we have to balance the need to diversify the portfolio with the impact on the consumer. We expect that, over a relatively small number of years, the costs will come down. We have been seeing very substantial reductions in the cost of solar in the past few years. We believe offshore wind generation is likely to form a considerable component of the renewable energy portfolio, perhaps in five, ten or 15 years. As the Deputy said, there is great potential. Ireland has 900,000 sq. km offshore, which is ten times the size of our island land mass. There is massive potential in this regard. All of these factors are knitted in. It is unfortunate that EirGrid representatives are not with us today. Having significant levels of offshore wind energy generation probably requires a fairly fundamental redesign of the grid. Do we run it across the country? Do we run it offshore? Are we to generate offshore wind energy solely for our own consumption or should we be looking to export? What does that mean in terms of the volume of offshore wind energy one would want to bring into the system? How should the grid be structured to sell the energy to other administrations?

With regard to the cost of community energy and access, I will ask Mr. Manley to answer. Our colleagues in the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland might have views on the issue also.

I will ask the ESB representatives to talk about Moneypoint because it is clearly doing a lot of work on that issue.

A review of the emission trading system, ETS, was undertaken as part of the climate suite over the past year or 18 months. That review has been completed. It has done a number of things and I will ask Mr. Maughan to come in on that. Maybe Mr. Manley could answer first, then Mr. Maughan and then the ESB can talk about Moneypoint.

Mr. Michael Manley:

I will talk a little bit about the community piece at a micro and scale level. On the question of grid, the Commission for Regulation of Utilities has recently published enduring connection policy 1, ECP-1. The "1" is important. That report is focused on the short term and 2020 targets. The question of our future approach to how we allocate grid and how we deal with the community group and how we diversify across sectors will be key. There is a massive amount of solar energy out there, more than we could take. It would also be highly peak and would not be dispatchable 24-7, 365 days a year. We will get a better sense from the first renewable electricity support scheme, RESS, auction of where solar is at in terms of the price mix.

To pick up the Secretary General's point, we must balance the participation by keeping the system stable and functioning but also keeping it price competitive.

The offshore option is quite expensive. The UK commissioned its largest offshore wind farm three weeks ago at a cost of £140 to £150 per megawatt hour. That is a staggering number. All kinds of promises are coming forward of reductions and falls in prices, but at the moment we have not seen those numbers coming to the market. The UK prices are steep.

I am not sure I am giving the Senator a full answer. The Commission for Regulation of Utilities would have to look at how it revises the grid access policy so that we deal with smaller, more community based developers. Again, the question will arise as to what is community. Is it a farmer with 30 acres, or is it a group of people coming together in an area and aggregating what they can bring to the system?

Photo of Grace O'SullivanGrace O'Sullivan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is my question. What is the Department doing to support energy co-operatives?

Mr. Michael Manley:

There is a lot happening. The Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, can answer a little further, but we already have more than 200 sustainable energy communities. Of those, 55 are developing large macro plans, looking at all the things they can do, including generation, efficiency, management and self-consumption. The target of the SEAI is to grow that number to 500. In many ways, that is taking the Tipperary energy model and growing it out. Communities are going to need trusted intermediaries which they can go to and who talk with authority about energy issues and give advice. Then again, that will have to be paid for, so how can that be structured into the system that pays for all the energy costs?

Mr. Frank Maughan:

On carbon pricing, I understand the Senator's question was put in the context of the national mitigation plan, NMP. The Department's mitigation plan was a reaffirmation of the Government's commitment to carbon pricing as a core policy measure within climate policy. There are two sides to carbon pricing: the emissions trading scheme, which is an EU level measure and, separately, there is carbon tax which is a national, domestic measure in the rest of the economy.

As the Secretary General mentioned, the ETS has recently undergone reform at EU level and a new directive was put in place earlier this year. Member states have until autumn of next year to transpose that into domestic legislation. As was mentioned, that reform is already starting to see some impact on prices within the ETS. The participants in the scheme are starting to look towards the constraints that they will face over the next decade and that is staring to push prices up which, from a climate point of view, is a positive movement.

Overall, at EU level, the directive requires the ETS sector to reduce emissions by 43% on 2005 levels by 2030, so it is ambitious and a steep curve that the sector must achieve between now and 2030.

There is a separate commitment or measure in relation to carbon tax, which is a domestic measure, and I think the committee has already heard evidence on this point from both the advisory council and the ESRI. The ESRI mentioned that it has done work for the Department of Finance over the last year on foot of a commitment in the mitigation plan to look at the potential impacts on increasing carbon tax. Clearly the outcome of that work is a question for the budget and so the Department is not in a position to say anything about that today as it is a matter for the Minister for Finance. That is giving effect to the commitment in the mitigation plan that was taken up by the Department of Finance when the plan was published last year.

Chairman:

Does the ESB want to come in on some of those points?

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

I will talk about the connection question. As Mr. Manley said, the enduring connection policy is in place. My understanding is that it was open for months and several gigawatts of new plants sought to connect in that period across a couple of hundred applications. The issue is that grid capacity is scarce and that is why there will be difficulties in different areas. From the ESB perspective, it tries to lead the demand, if it can, and build out capacity in advance of the requirement but there will always be difficult points where more people want to access the grid system than there is availability. That is for the system operators in ESB Networks, and more so EirGrid, to objectively decide how they allocate that capacity.

Chairman:

I think the committee should ask EirGrid for a note about taking offshore and micro-generation and putting that on to the grid. The committee will do that in writing and maybe ask it to come in, if necessary. I am sorry to interrupt Mr. O'Shea.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

Moneypoint is a complex question. The context is clear. Moneypoint will transition away from coal by 2025. That is policy, and that is what we are working towards. It is complex because Moneypoint is the largest store of energy on this island. The site can hold three months of energy on the island and it is, by a long way, the largest store of energy. If there is a disruption in gas or anything like that, Moneypoint would be hugely valuable. We need to factor that into our thinking in terms of the exact timing of it coming off the system. It also is capable of providing 20% of our total amount. More importantly, as a synchronous plants on the system, a plant which is synchronised with the frequency of the transmission system, it is very important in terms of acting as a counterbalance for the amount of intermittent power on the system. One cannot run the system 100% on wind. One needs some inertia on the system from big power plants. That is the technology as it exists right now. That might change in years to come. It is a complex question as to when it comes off and how to choose the best time for it to come off. The context of it is 2025 when it transitions away from coal.

There are options like maintaining a coal capability in the event that it might be needed but not plan to run it. That is not a great option but it is an option nonetheless. Could gas be put into the plant and replace it with gas plants? What about a biomass plant? The biggest coal plant in Great Britain, Drax power station, has converted to biomass. There are many issues with that. Could wind be put, either onshore or offshore, on the site? The ESB is working through all those options now and talking to people down at the site. It is not an easy question to address.

We are entering a new market structure on 1 October. The Integrated Single Electricity Market, ISEM, goes live between Ireland and Great Britain from 1 October. The first question we must ask of the old market participants, and not just the ESB, is what is the need for a new plant in that market? Is there a need for a new plant and what does one do with Moneypoint in that context?

Those are the things that the ESB is considering right now. It is not a simple question, but we have a period now to make sure we get it right because it is of huge importance to Ireland as well as the ESB.

Photo of Ian MarshallIan Marshall (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their thoroughly enjoyable presentations. Like some of my colleagues, I would like to reference Ms Marie Donnelly's presentation last week which was really informative and it is certainly worth reading.

On the information provided by Mr. Griffin, obviously it is not going to be one solution that solves these problems, but it will be a combination of things and it is a case of trying to prioritise and put money where it is most wisely invested. It is an approach of carrot and stick.

I was going to ask a question on investment in research and development in wave and tidal technology but it was touched on briefly. We live on an island and it is not something that is researched and invested in heavily in other parts of the world because they do not have the access to tidal occurrence the way we have.

Mr. O'Shea made the point that close to one third of emissions are from agriculture. Agriculture and agrifood are very close to my heart.

We must identify that agriculture is one of the villains of the piece, but it is also one of the few industries that can be part of the solution to the problem. Its ability to sequester carbon is often overlooked. Windmills, solar panels and other things cannot sequester carbon but agriculture can.

I was going to ask specifically about biomass, on which probably there is a difference of opinion. There was reference to the nature of farm businesses and small isolated individual SMEs. Has enough work been done on the potential of biomass? Bearing in mind that we live in a temperate climate, with good access to water, we have an ability to grow the biomass sector. We are well positioned to grow feed stock which can often be an alternative income source for a small farm business. We are certainly well placed to do so, but sometimes biomass is overlooked. We are doing some work in looking at products such as hemp that produce oil, protein and fibre. We are also looking at biopolymers from hemp which can bioremediate and decontaminate soil. Moreover, if one gives a small family farm an alternative crop to grow, all of a sudden there are social goods. It is something we need to factor in.

I am due to attend a meeting tonight which will look at the calculations for emissions from agriculture and whether we have them right. It is often easy to jump at the easiest fix and if agriculture is a big offender, legislate hard against it.

On Mr. Sheer's piece, I will make two points. I do not want to go over ground we have already covered. Obviously, community ownership is key. We are lagging light years behind our European counterparts in pursuing initiatives to encourage SME businesses to generate and sell power to their neighbours or adjacent businesses. It is something about which I have always shouted and I am encouraged that the European Union has now referenced it and is making a point about it. How do we use it as a catalyst? There is probably a collegiate spirit and we merely need to put measures in place to make it happen.

On electric vehicles, when one lives in a rural environment, one does not have access to charging points. It is a big problem. The problem one will encounter is that as the uptake increases of electric vehicles, the first difficulty which will lead to it being dead in the water will be presented by access to charging points. It is all well and good when one's life and work are based in Dublin, but in rural areas one has large distances to cover to access charging points. Having enough of them is key. In the past few days at a charging point I saw two or three vehicles waiting to use it. If we do not provide adequate charging points, it will kill off the industry.

It is honourable and creditable that the intention is to move away from peat by 2030 and coal by 2025. The Bord na Móna ambition to reach a figure of 75% for renewables by 2024 is creditable. However, I am genuinely concerned about the commitment to deal with the 4,000 people in the midlands whose lives will be adversely affected. I refer to the businesses and families who currently derive their income from the peat industry. I am interested in learning more about what the transition will look like and the alternative business propositions for the people concerned. It is one thing to say there will be a transition and a cessation of burning peat, but we have a responsibility to offer the people concerned alternatives and a long-term vision or strategy for a different business.

Chairman:

In answering the questions asked I will start with Mr. Halpin.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

I am happy to pick up, first, on the issue of community energy, much of which Mr. Manley has addressed. Through our community energy network of 200 member communities we are funding energy master plans which are looking at the options available.

Renewable energy is not an option for all. It is about efficiency in the use of renewables and looking at the make-up of communities and what their particular energy needs are. Through our smart grid programme we are funding research into the development of micro-grids. It is looking at the legal, technical and economic complexities and all aspects of what it is to have many micro-generators in one area feeding in to the grid to meet needs in the area. That option is being considered. That supplements what Mr. Manley stated.

On electric vehicles, Senator Ian Marshall's observations are absolutely correct. In some respects, they are not for everyone. Certainly, they are more suited to the needs of an urban than a rural driver. That is mostly related to the limitations on the range of the batteries. Having said that - I am picking up on Senator Grace O'Sullivan's analogy with the mobile phone - electric vehicles bring with them a change of culture. Charging will take place mainly at night in a driveway. Rural dwellers have a advantage over many urban dwellers who live in terraced houses, etc. SEAI is providing a grant, not only for new EV purchases but also for home charging points, both for new and second-hand purchases. This means that motorists will be able to charge their cars at home at night while the car is idle. The range of most new vehicles is heading towards 200 km or 250 km, although it might profess otherwise on the data sheet. While electric vehicles are not compatible with everyone's life at present, they are increasingly becoming compatible. In the note we provided for the committee we acknowledge that as the demand for electric vehicles grows - there has been a doubling of sales so far this year - infrastructure will have to be provided to meet it. Much like the telephone networks, it will be an iterative process, but we see advances all the time.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I will continue on the electric vehicle theme, on which SEAI has started the discussion. We have in place a low emissions vehicle task force which has done a considerable amount of work in that area. There is a range of supports in place, with which the committee is probably familiar. They include VRT relief of €5,000, a purchase grant of €5,000 for electric vehicles, a new grant of €600 that we introduced at the start of the year to support the installation of a home charger, a benefit-in-kind rate of zero per cent for battery electric vehicles, a low motor tax rate, a grant of up to €7,000 to support the use of electric vehicles which has been taken up by a number of taxi, hackney and limousine operators and a discount on tolls of 50% for BEVs and 25% for PHEVs. There is a considerable amount of work ongoing in that space. We are very conscious that moving from having 6,000 electric vehicles on the road to 500,000 by 2030 will require a further major transformation. There is a lot of work to be done by the group in looking at issues such as the building regulations, the planning regulations and how, for example, one can attach an EV charging point to street lighting, etc.

On the home charger grant, to reflect the level of enthusiasm since the scheme was introduced, we have approved 740 applications. Payment is pending in 209 cases, while 498 grants have been paid. Therefore, there have been approximately 1,500 applications under a scheme that was introduced in January or February this year. We have paid 21 grants to the NTA for use of electric vehicles in the taxi, hackney and limousine sector.

The point that charging infrastructure is critical is correct. We understand a decision is likely to issue from the Commission for the Regulation of Utilities that will confirm in more detail the role of the ESB in respect of existing e-car infrastructure and provide greater clarity on how it will manage a programme of scale. We have made provision in the €500 million climate action fund for organisations to bid for EV charging infrastructure and expect a number of such applications in the first tranche.

Going back to the first point raised by the Senator on research and development, we have invested €31 million in the ocean energy sector since 2013. It has funded a number of schemes in counties Mayo, Galway and Cork, including the Galway Bay test site, the Atlantic marine renewable energy test site in County Mayo and the tank scale site in County Cork.

We have a further €4.75 million to be spent on ocean energy research in 2018. If one broadens it out into the research programmes more generally, the SEAI has done a lot of research on the prototype development scheme. There is a new behavioural economics unit in place in the SEAI, which will be really important in creating the shift and dealing with some of the inertia that exists in terms of moving to some of the new technologies. We have an internal energy research budget ourselves and we fund a substantial research programme for the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA. We are not short of money. We remain very committed to ensuring that we are at the cutting edge. We work very closely with academic institutions on the research agenda generally.

On Bord na Móna and the just transition, I know for a fact that the new chair and CEO are acutely conscious of that and they either have or will shortly bring to the board a proposal for what Bord na Móna might look like in 2030 when it is shifting out of the peat business in the coming years. If he is looking at the transmission of this meeting, Tom Donnellan, the CEO, probably will not thank me for saying it but Bord na Móna is hugely involved in that process. As an organisation that will be very deeply affected by the carbon transition, it might be no harm to ask Bord na Móna in for a chat to see what it is doing because there is a lot of creative thinking about how to harness the natural resources and use people who have been involved in energy in the midlands to see how the organisation might look in the next decade, post a transition to a lower-carbon Bord na Móna.

On the biomass issue, Bord na Móna is very involved in investigating how to increase the indigenous biomass supply. It is looking at agricrops, principally willow, forestry by-products, including thinnings and branch pulpwood, as the main sources of biomass material. All the biomass used by Bord na Móna is fully in compliance with EU sustainability standards. The pressure remains to get the supply chain right and how one builds a domestic biomass capacity to ensure that in time, one is not reliant on imports because the imports themselves have a carbon impact. Bord na Móna is looking at a whole suite of issues.

We have our own bioenergy plan. Deputies Eamon Ryan and Catherine Martin tabled a number of parliamentary questions in recent days as to where we stand on that. Mr. Manley will speak a little about it. There has been a number of very significant developments on the biomass and bioenergy front since that plan was originally conceived. We want to ensure that the plan that emerges ultimately makes sense, as it will have to be part of the feed-in to the national energy and climate plan.

Another big thing that is happening in terms of biomass and renewable heat is the SSRH. I am not sure what the acronym stands for.

Mr. Michael Manley:

It is the support scheme for renewable heat.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

The SSRH has been through a number of iterations. That is a big initiative for us and we have committed to spending €300 million on it over the course of the national development plan. We have Government approval for it now and we published the first part of it, which is a grant scheme, at the start of September.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

I will speak briefly on transport. The ESB's ecar business is responsible for operating, developing and rolling out the ecar charging network. Its analysis from operating the network in recent years indicates that the vast majority of charging for electric vehicles will be done at home rather than at public charging points. However, there is a really big caveat in that regard, because in order to build confidence among the public that they will not get caught with range anxiety, we need to have the charging network. That goes back to the question from the Chair at the very outset, in the sense that a lot of the chargers are required to be there but they might not be used on a 100% basis.

In terms of biomass and biofuels generally, we see biofuels as having an important part to play within the energy mix in Ireland in the years to come. The development of both biogas and biomass has attractions for the agriculture sector. I note, however, that when one sees the word "bio" in front of fuel, it means it will be scarce because of the development around it. One positive thing from Europe with the new renewable package is that there have been questions and concerns about whether biomass is genuinely renewable. The latest directives in Europe put very strict sustainability criteria against biomass to ensure it is genuinely renewable.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses from the ESB, the Department and the SEAI. Mr. Griffin mentioned that communities have to be at the heart of it. I come from the midlands and I agree that we need wind energy but question the approach of the Government and companies driving the wind farm industry in my area. We must take a responsible approach but the opposite has been the case in the Department's approach. There has been a failure to bring forward guidelines for wind farms or to put any kind of regulatory framework in place for the location of wind farms. In the meantime, the wind farm industry has been allowed to steamroll over communities and to drop large turbines, up to 170 m in height, right around counties such as Laois and Offaly. From what Mr. Griffin said today I welcome the fact that communities will be at the heart of it. It is good news if we are going to change that approach. I will leave the committee happy this evening. Could Mr. Griffin elaborate on the issue?

In terms of the midlands and the just transition, as a former employee of Bord na Móna and the ESB I have a particular interest in the issue, as do many people in my constituency who work in both companies. I am genuinely concerned about the situation. I do not see even an outline plan in place for what will happen after 2030. It is almost 2019 now. Mr. Griffin should not take what I said about the wind farm guidelines personally, but the Department has failed. Four Ministers have also failed in that regard. We are on the fifth Minister now. I do not know whether the failure lies with the Ministers or the civil servants or if it is a combination of both. Could Mr. Griffin outline why we cannot have wind farm guidelines? My view is we do not have them because somebody wants to allow wind farm developers to put wind farms in place and then to close the door once the horse has bolted. That is what it looks like and that is how communities and county councillors see it in areas that are affected. It is not just councillors from the party I represent, Sinn Féin, but those from all parties.

In terms of peat and 2030, I do not see any plan in place. I pass the power station in Edenderry almost on a weekly basis. The same is true of west Offaly, Ferbane and Lanesborough. I do not see any plan to create a biomass industry for those power stations. There are limitations. Reference was made to the scarcity of biofuels. We must be careful with them. We do have potential for biogas. The ESB mentioned that. I understand it is starting to look seriously at the option now. We have a significant agriculture sector, which is not a bad thing, but we also have a significant amount of agricultural waste and that is a problem. From talking to people who have developed plants, in particular the one in Nurney, I believe we have an opportunity for jobs, to reduce greenhouse gas emission and to get money into rural communities. This could be a win-win situation if we develop the biogas industry.

To go back to power stations and the transition, we accept that the willow scheme was not a success. There is a lot of marginal land in areas around the power stations.

What trials are being done in, for example, north Offaly where there is a large amount of marginal land? I have heard references in this meeting and other meetings of this committee to people being retrained to work in other parts of the energy sector. A person who is 45 or 50 years of age and has been driving a tractor for Bord na Móna for the last 20 years may not be up for being retrained for retrofit work on housing schemes and so on. It may not be easy to do that. My view - I said this to Bord na Móna - is that the transition is not happening at sufficient speed.

On electric vehicles, as mentioned already the anxiety is around range. For people living in rural areas, the electric car is not an option at this point. Also, I would not be happy to charge an electric vehicle at night if I thought that the energy being used to do it was coming from the interconnector from Britain, generated by nuclear power or by coal from Moneypoint because that could make things worse. There are a number of parts to this puzzle. There is no point in everybody driving around in electric vehicles if the energy being used to power them is being generated by dirty coal or nuclear power. I ask the witnesses to address that issue in terms of the transition. Another serious concern is that the charging network does not yet exist. The ESB is currently providing it free of charge but that cannot continue because it is a commercial semi-State company. I ask the witnesses for the SEAI and the Department to set out the plan for a comprehensive electric vehicle charging system throughout the State because we need a plan if this is to work.

On schools and farm buildings, three years ago my parliamentary assistant and I went to see the co-operative wind farm model in Templederry, County Tipperary. On the journey there we noted as we passed the valley that a large agricultural shed, covering approximately an acre and a half, was being erected. We stopped to take a closer look. I recall saying to my assistant that the shed presented a great opportunity for a solar panel. I am sure some Department provided grant aid for that shed, which is fine. I have no problem with that. There are many new schools in my constituency, for which I have already credited the Government. Almost every school in Portlaoise is new and all of them have large south facing flat roofs, particularly Scoil Bhríde which opened recently, but not one of them has a solar panel. Where is the joined up thinking from Government? Is it that Ministers are not knocking heads or that the Secretaries Generals of Departments are not communicating? What is happening? I have heard it said that we will be generating power when it is not needed. Over the next six months, from winter to spring, all of our schools will require heating. If we install solar panels on school roofs and there is a spillover during the summer, we can turn them off. There are solar panels on buildings in India and Spain where the sun beams at between 40o to 45o Celsius and they are able to manage it. They use this power to heat water and so on during the day and it can be banked and used in other ways. If it can be done in those countries, where it is about twice or three times as hot as it is here, surely we can do it here where we have a moderate climate. I do not buy the excuse that we would be generating power that is not needed. Why are we not putting solar panels on our school roofs?

I met the IFA today at its annual lobby, as I am sure did all members here. For the first time ever, one of the issues on its shortlist of requests which it puts to Deputies at budget time was support for renewable energy. It has moved on this issue. That is a step in the right direction. What is happening at departmental and SEAI level? I ask that the ESB witness address the issue of charging points.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I thank Deputy Stanley for his questions. I understand his frustration in regard to the wind energy guidelines.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have been waiting on them for six years. It would not happen anywhere else.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I understand. We have been trying to reach a resolution on this matter for a long time. It is a commitment of the programme for Government in 2016. In June of last year, we agreed and published a new approach in terms of wind energy development. This involves a more stringent noise limit consistent with World Health Organization standards and a more robust noise monitoring regime to ensure compliance with the standards. We will move from a guideline setback distance of 500 m to a visual amenity setback of four times the turbine height between a wind turbine and the nearest residential property, subject to a mandatory minimum. This is a move from a guideline to a mandatory requirement. It also involves the elimination of shadow flicker and the introduction of new obligations in regard to engagement with local communities on the provision of community benefit. The hard part was getting to a point where we believed we had a suite of measures in place that would address the concerns that local communities expressed around shadow flicker, noise and setback and amenity impact. While this work was ongoing, a European Court of Justice decision issued stating that a strategic environmental assessment, SEA, would be required for the amendments to the 2006 guidelines. We had not anticipated that an SEA would be required but we expect this work to be completed in 2019 and the new guidelines will be in place at that point.

I assure the Deputy that there was no conspiracy on the part of the Department or the Minister. There are many matters about which the Minister expresses frustration to officials in the Department. This is one he comes back to time and again because he struggles to understand why it is taking so long to finalise. As I said, we now have agreed guidelines that we believe will work and allay the concerns of local communities. The commitment to the model exists. The next step is to complete the SEA process, which is being conducted by the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government. That Department, which has responsibility for the wind energy guidelines, is moving that process through the system as quickly as possible. The advantage of an SEA process is that it will give the public a further opportunity for input. I appreciate and fully accept the Deputy's frustration. We know it is an issue for local communities throughout the country. I reiterate that there is no attempt on our part to make this process any longer or any more onerous that it has been thus far.

On the transition in regard to Lough Ree, west Offaly and Edenderry, I know from conversations with the chairman and the CEO of Bord na Móna that they are working to find a model for the company that will work post 2030 and, as mentioned by the Deputy, takes account of the fact that there are people who drive a truck who do not necessarily want and are not in a position to be retrained. A huge amount of work has been already done. I am not clear where Bord na Móna is at in terms of its internal processes. I do not know if the board or staff have been briefed. In terms of just transition, this is an area that is deeply affected.

In terms of the economic development of the midlands, the company is important to the region. It is a clear example of an organisation that is thinking hard about the effect of a just transition, whether it can expand further into those sectors in which it is currently involved that are not peat or carbon related, and what new initiatives it can pursue using existing natural resources.

Chairman:

I invite the delegation from the ESB to discuss EVs.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

A question was asked about the electricity used to power an EV's battery. I put together some numbers last year that I shared with several people, and I would be happy to share them with the committee as well. With the current electricity mix of 27% renewable power and the remainder gas and coal, how efficient is it in terms of carbon produced per kilometre to drive an EV compared with a vehicle that has an internal combustion engine? The numbers show that it is almost twice as efficient. As the 27% figure grows to 40% by 2020, the ratio gets even better. As we move to a fully decarbonised electricity system, the ratio falls away because the battery's power has become fully decarbonised.

The same numbers apply to electric heating. If someone installs a heat pump, it will be just short of twice as efficient carbon-wise with the current electricity mix. There are a range of reasons behind that, but it is important to reflect on the fact that the power going into the batteries or heat pumps makes them a more efficient carbon answer than the existing fossil fuel alternative.

Chairman:

Mr. Halpin might add to that.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

On our website, we have a calculator that allows potential purchasers of EVs to do a comparison for a typical range of 15,000 km. That figure might be substantially greater when driving in a rural environment. As Mr. O'Shea stated, there is a significant saving on energy with the current electricity mix.

Regarding solar panels in schools, the Deputy dismissed the occupancy issue, but a fact of schools is that they have high occupancy levels from September through to May or June. During July and August, they are at virtually zero occupancy. Many schools have no occupancy at night.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A PV panel works at this time of year as well.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

It does work-----

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Not as efficiently, but it does work.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

With its electricity not being used at night, the issue is that it may be generating more than can be used.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Its electricity can be used for other purposes. That is what happens in Spain, India and elsewhere.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

Part of the PV pilot that we are supporting for homes will consider how to use technology to make better use of PV when it is available. Separately, the building regulations will shortly be subject to revision and the concept of near-zero energy buildings will formally be introduced as part of the energy performance of buildings directive. Under its principle of cost optimality, a full cost-benefit analysis is done of what is the best technology to bring a building to virtually zero energy use and zero carbon emissions. Depending on a building's use, it results in certain prioritisations. This applies not just to schools, but to all commercial buildings. The prioritisation will decide the best mix of technologies and how to make buildings more efficient.

More so than other technologies, it is relatively easy to retrofit buildings with PV panels if the business case improves, but it is not always the case that it is commercially sensible to invest in PV for schools. No different than any other large property owner, the Department of Education and Skills has to make decisions about how to use its budget sensibly.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

May I ask about biogas and farm buildings?

Chairman:

Is that question for the SEAI?

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

And the Department.

Chairman:

The Deputy might repeat his question.

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to know the situation. We give grants in respect of farm buildings, and an increasing number of farmers want to get involved and have another income stream. Many also now wish to play their part in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. They are users of power. If they could erect solar panels on some of their farm buildings, it would help.

Chairman:

Mr. Manley might respond.

Mr. Michael Manley:

While I do not mean to be glib, the glib answer is that, if they want to put solar panels on their farm buildings' roofs to generate power, they can do so. There are planning requirements, but if someone wants to self-generate-----

Photo of Brian StanleyBrian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What is that grant scheme?

Mr. Michael Manley:

There is no grant scheme for it. No more than anything else, it is a commercial enterprise. What is being sought is what is referred to as a tariff, that is, a price. Opposed to the commercial price of electricity, some people will need a support price. We will see more in that regard after the outcome of the next renewable energy auction scheme when questions about how solar feeds into this situation, how much of it will be commercial and utility scale and how much will be small scale have become evident. When I spoke earlier, I referred primarily to wind power in the context of microgeneration and community generation. Solar will have a role in that regard as well.

Other than planning regulations, there is nothing stopping anyone from putting panels on roofs. If someone wants to have the capacity to sell that power into the market, though, a major market redesign will be required because our market is not configured to facilitate that currently.

Chairman:

I have a list of members wishing to contribute, but they are unable to do so at the moment. I will next call on Deputies Pringle, Eamon Ryan and Deering, in that order.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My questions have changed somewhat as the day has progressed, so we will see how I get on.

When answering the first question, Mr. Griffin outlined the various State bodies with a role in addressing climate change. The gist of what he was saying is that there is not a need for an additional body. How do the existing bodies entice or mandate actions? Is their work made available to the public? How can that information be accessed? I am unsure about whether it is available, but perhaps it is. What powers do those bodies have and what can they do?

What is the Department specifically doing to ensure Ireland meets its 2020 or 2030 targets? We have heard much about what the EU is doing, has planned and is putting in place, but we have not heard anything concrete about what is happening in Ireland. What can the Department with responsibility for climate action do legislatively to make changes happen, for example, to make offshore wind energy generation possible? I do not want to know what the Department with responsibility for the environment or whatever is doing, I want to know what Mr. Griffin's Department can do.

Mr. Griffin stated, "The structure of Ireland's economy, involving dispersed population settlement, car-based commuting and the central role of agriculture in the rural economy, requires the Government to balance economic and societal objectives with the imperative to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions." Will he expand on that point and explain what he means? How will rural Ireland fit into the climate change agenda that he mentioned? There is no mention of rural Ireland in any of the outcomes.

My question for the ESB may have been answered. It stated that there is no barrier to the connection of a single house's renewable power to the grid. Later, however, it stated that there is by indicating that there is no tariff. What is the situation? I had another question for the ESB, but I cannot remember it.

Chairman:

The Deputy can contribute again. Mr. Griffin might reply.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I will take up the Deputy's first point about my description of the current governance arrangements.

On the question about to how to mandate action, the Government is at the top of the pyramid of all the things I have described. As for the arrangements that are in place, I mentioned a group of senior officials on infrastructure and climate action, a Cabinet committee on infrastructure and climate action, and the high-level group that the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Deputy Naughten, chairs. This group specifically monitors delivery of the national mitigation plan and looks at what is happening in the national adaptation framework, at progress being made on the 12 sectoral plans spread across several Departments, and considers inputs from the Climate Change Advisory Council as well as inputs from the Departments at various stages of the year in relation to resource requirements. For climate action, we fed into the development of the national development plan which has been approved by Government as the key underpinning document for delivering a substantial investment under the national development plan of approximately €22 billion in climate measures and approximately €8.6 billion in sustainable development.

We work closely across Government. There is a myth that has permeated that Departments operate in silos, but that is not the case at all. We work closely with colleagues at all levels in our organisations to ensure what the Government commits to achieving under a programme for Government, a national plan or a national mitigation plan, is delivered. I struggle to see what a new or existing independent body would do over and above the structures that are there and that are clearly mandated by Government, which we are accountable to Government for delivering on.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is there anywhere we can see what that body actually deliberates on?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I can provide an overview.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is what the body does routinely published?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

The work of the body?

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

The progress that has been made under the overarching governance frameworks is reported on by the sectoral Ministers to the Oireachtas as part of the annual transition statement. Until last year, one Minister reported on behalf all Ministers, but all Ministers with responsibilities for sectors are now required to report to the Oireachtas on an annual basis.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The answer Mr. Griffin has outlined shows why oversight is needed. It is not clear and even Mr. Griffin was not clear on it. We must make it clear for everybody in order that everybody can see it.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

In fairness to me, I was clear on approximately 90% of the components. My colleague was good enough to prompt me on the last bit. What we can do is set out for the committee what the governance structures are. We will make an assessment of our view of how that covers the basis that was in the first recommendation from the Citizens' Assembly.

On the 2020 and 2030 targets, we have published our national mitigation plan, which sets out 60 measures, 40 of which are under development. We can provide the committee with a copy of that as well, which may be helpful. The national development plan, already in the public domain, sets out the range of climate and energy measures that will be delivered over the period of the national development plan.

On energy efficiency and renewable energy in relation to the transport and agriculture sectors, all of that is there. The legislation is again a function of Government, which approved a general scheme of a Bill and mandated the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government to bring forward the legislation, and I understand it was the subject of pre-legislative scrutiny in the Oireachtas at some point. We are in dialogue with that Department about progressing the Bill to the next Stages. We are also a member of the marine planning group chaired by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Creed, which looks at the general issue of how our marine sector can contribute to Ireland's economic development, and the Maritime Area and Foreshore (Amendment) Bill is a point of discussion at that committee from time to time. We input to that process as well.

What we need to do to meet the various targets for 2020 and 2030, and how we will do it - building on the national mitigation and the national development plans - will be set out in the national energy and climate plan to be finalised by the end of next year.

Chairman:

Would the Deputy like to comment before we turn to the ESB?

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is one other point. This offshore wind issue has been ongoing since approximately 2014, and the legislation needs to be updated. As the Department with responsibility for climate change, does it see that as a problem in dealing with climate change issues? We are now in 2018, which is four or five years down the line, and it will be another couple of years before it will be dealt with. Does the Department see that as an issue? I am not asking Mr. Griffin to call his colleagues in the Department into disrepute but I ask if he sees it as a problem.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

Not in the immediate term, because as we said offshore wind of scale outside the foreshore limits is likely to materialise in a number of years. We have had that discussion most recently with the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government about what we need to do to drive this legislation to a conclusion.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is the reason that this is so many years off-track because this has not been done?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

That is not the reason. It is a number of years off because of the cost of the technology, rather than whether a consenting process is in place. There are a number of schemes that have already consented, which got consent under existing foreshore legislation. There is nothing to prevent them from a consenting process moving forward, but I pointed out earlier there is still a significant difference between the cost of the megawatt-hour support that is required for onshore wind as compared with offshore wind, but we expect it to converge somewhat over the next number of years.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to ask a question on rural Ireland.

Chairman:

Will the Deputy please be brief? I am conscious that I skipped the order of contributors. More members have joined us but as the Deputy was here from the beginning I skipped one or two people who were before him. I am conscious of the need to get answers for the questions. Would Mr. Griffin like to comment briefly?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

On the narrative of rural Ireland, it was mentioned earlier in my presentation and, I think, in that of the ESB that the structure of our system is different from what is seen in other member states. If one looks at Ireland's greenhouse gas emissions, approximately 28% of our emissions is from the emissions trading system, ETS, sector while approximately 72% is from the non-ETS sector. The rest of the EU, by comparison, breaks down as approximately 45% and 55%, respectively. If one does a deeper dive, looking at the non-ETS sector, which is the bit with which we struggle most, approximately 46% of the emissions in Ireland was from agriculture, according to the 2015 figures. In the EU 28, the non-ETS sector makes up approximately 18% from agriculture.

We have a very different challenge to address in terms of how we deal with rural Ireland, with the agricultural sector and with that sort of trade-off between addressing the climate challenges and the whole issue of food security, the impact on rural Ireland and jobs in rural Ireland, which is obviously something the Government has to reflect on.

Chairman:

I am going to go to the ESB for now.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

Clarification is important here. The first element was the microgenerators, which are small generators, typically up to 6 kW on a single phase. That is equivalent to probably 20 solar panels, that fall under our notify and fit scheme. One has to notify ESB that one intends to install these. There will be an interaction with the ESB around standards, and ensuring that the scheme is okay. It is not an interaction as to whether the capacity is there, typically, to take that.

Where there is scarce capacity for larger windfarms or larger solar farms, that goes through the standard enduring connection process that I mentioned earlier. It is in that standard enduring connection process that there may be scarcity in terms of the capacity available on the system. We try to build out the system in advance, to ensure that the capacity is there but in some circumstances, if one has a number of generators looking to connect at a particular location, that capacity might be scarce. That is typically when one is talking in megawatt numbers. In the first scheme one is talking in kilowatt numbers, in the second scheme one is talking in megawatt numbers.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are no barriers in the first scheme.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

No. The ESB is notified through the ESB distribution code. There will be an interaction between the ESB and the customer on the standards and the type of equipment going on to it. There is, however, no capacity constraint. That is typically how it works.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The ESB will respond within a timely-----

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

I imagine so. I have no detail on that here.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay.

Chairman:

Had the Deputy questions for SEAI?

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, I had not.

Chairman:

I will bring in Deputy Ryan.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a question for SEAI. Mr. Jim Scheer said he did modelling work showing that we were 50 million tonnes short on the 2030 climate target. Could he give me an update on that?

Mr. Jim Scheer:

Of course. We ran a number of scenarios for consideration by the Department and we tend to model the existing range of policies and measures that are in place at different times for different scenarios. We run a baseline scenario, where we look at existing policies and measures up to the latest year, where we have energy related data, which is 2017. We have an advanced scenario, where we include the policies and measures that are included in the national mitigation plan. At the moment we are working with the Department to run scenarios that will feed the national mitigation climate plan to include the national development plan policies and measures announced.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Can I have access to that work?

Mr. Jim Scheer:

Yes, absolutely. We will be publishing our report on the energy projections in the coming weeks and that will include some assessment of the impact of the national development plan measures and the impact on renewable outcomes for 2020 and 2030 and also the emissions balance on the energy-related emissions side. That will be available in a couple of weeks.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Can I ask the Secretary General how the national development plan was published without including any climate assessment or before there was agreement on one?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

Sorry, I am not sure what the-----

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How was it that a national development plan was signed off by Government before there was an understanding or assessment of what the climate impact would be?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

Let me consult as I am not exactly sure what the question is that the Deputy-----

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How was it that a national development plan was signed off by a Government before there was an understanding as to what the climate impact would be?

Chairman:

Is the Deputy talking about the analysis done on the greenhouse gas emissions? Our greenhouse emissions would be reduced as a result of implementing the national development plan.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

As we have set out in the national development plan, many of the measures relating to the energy sector are measures that represent a continuation of policies we know are working on the ground such as the increase in the number of homes being retrofitted to 45,000 a year.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have heard all of this already.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I will get to the point. There will be investments in energy efficiency on commercial and public building stock and supports for changing from oil-fired boilers. There are all of the renewable energy supports with the transport investment and so on. What we will do now as part of the work feeding into the national energy and climate plan is take that detailed assessment that Mr. Scheer and the people working with him in the SEAI and the transport research and modelling group, TRAM, have done and see exactly where that level of investment positions us in terms of meeting our 2020 targets. The whole purpose of the national energy and climate plan is to look at sensible things that have been included in the national mitigation plan, at self-evident measures that have been included in the national development plan which would give a very significant carbon reduction dividend, and then make that assessment as to what additional mitigation measures may need to be included to ensure that the target that we have set for 2030 is achievable.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am asking our questions very quickly and I do not mean to be rude, but I do go back to the question. Why was the national development plan signed off before we knew what its climate impact would be?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

The national development plan includes a whole suite of measures across a whole range of sectors amounting to somewhere in the region of €115 billion, of which we have managed to corner about 20% of the spend. I believe the prudent course is, as we have set out, to assess the impact of the national development plan measures and the flexibilities that are included in the effort-sharing regulation and the impact of each individual measure in the national mitigation plan and then draw conclusion as to whether that will fully meet the 2030 target - I do not expect it will. We will see then what additional measures we need to bring forward, whether it is in the nature of further investment, or regulation, or taxation to plug the gaps that will arise on the various targets we have set out.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am reminded of the scene in the film "Jaws" when they see the big shark going by and they think that they are going to need a bigger boat. We are going to need a hell of a bigger boat to tackle climate change, and Mr. Griffin has a critical position in that regard. Our job is to help him in this way. I agree with Mr. Griffin's own Minister when he says that the mitigation plan is not working and is a failure. The national development plan is facing entirely in the wrong direction in that there are plans for some 65 major new motorway and national roads; allowing peat to be burned until 2030 is a climate crime; agriculture emissions are rising under that plan; there are no plans or legislation for plastics recycling or the development of a circular economy; and, there is no forestry plan. I could go on to each and every sector. I have a real problem with where we are. The question is that none of us would want to start from here. I ask the question because I believe that there should be an honest assessment of the national development plan and a realisation it is not fit for purpose in climate targets. It is going to have to change as part of our submission to the national energy climate action plan, the first draft of which has to be done by Christmas. We have a role in that and we want to open it up and see what we can do to help. Can Mr. Griffin present this committee a copy of the first report of the Project Ireland 2040 delivery group issued to Government last week? Could we have access to that report?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I understand it was to be published, let me check the position on that.

If I can come back on the national mitigation plan. My own Minister did not admit it was a failure.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He said it was not working.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

There was a report in the newspaper that was a bit unfair to what he actually said, because I listened to the transcript of the interview and he never said that.

On the circular economy, I agree with the Deputy that there are things there that may well feature in the national energy and climate plan. The important thing is that when the national development plan was published, we had not yet finished the negotiations on the renewable energy directive. We were still in trilogue with the European Parliament on targets.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We were fighting it at every turn. In each of those European packages, I saw the files coming from Brussels, and in each case we were fighting it, which makes me believe that Europe is not going to be easy for us in this whole process. We are going to have a tough job to explain to the Commission what we are doing. If Mr. Griffin's Department would like to see the circular economy developing maybe his Department might stop fighting the waste reduction Bill, which I think helps us, and has been sitting there for the last year.

I will ask one other question. The first draft of this national energy and climate action plan is being published next week-----

Mr. Mark Griffin:

It is a consultation paper. It is not the first draft.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is fine. It is a consultation paper. We asked last week could we see it and were told we could not. Does that consultation paper exist now in a way that we could see it before it goes to public consultation?

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I expect the Minister will be in a position to clear that very shortly so we can get it to the committee then. I will respond to the Deputy's point, because I do not think it was a fair reflection of what the Department was doing at EU level. In discussions at EU level, we have always made the point that what emerges has to be fair, achievable, affordable and cost effective. That is a duty-----

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We were assessed by the Climate Action Network, which assesses what is going on in Europe, as being the second worst. I could go through each file and paper line by line and show the amendments that we tried to make. They were all seen in the European climate community as regressive and gave Ireland the same reputation as Poland. That is the reality.

Chairman:

I ask Deputy Eamon Ryan to let Mr. Griffin answer.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

That is one perspective on it. The Taoiseach himself said when he spoke to the European Parliament at the start of the year that we were a laggard. The definition of laggard means slow progress. I am not denying that there has been slow progress but there is a whole range of reasons why progress has been slow over the last number of years. When we set our targets in 2009 it was just ahead of the biggest economic recession that this State experienced. Unemployment went from just over 4% to 15.6% and GDP plummeted. It is important to make these points because members are making sweeping statements. We had to ensure that when we came out of the processes on effort sharing regulation, that the demands on the Irish economy and the Irish people were fair, achievable, affordable and cost effective.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It depends on the perspective. My perspective is that this can be good for the Irish economy. This is not easy and other countries are not that good either. It is a difficult process. I have a question for the ESB. The Government's package is a good one and this national climate and energy plan structure is right because it says we have to think 30 years in advance. We have to think big and that we will be doing 20 GW of offshore and 5 GW of interconnection. A million homes are going to have to be retrofitted and we are going to have to spend €5 billion on social homes. It is that kind of big thinking. We have to stop thinking about whether we can do just about the minimum so that we can get away with scraping in. To back up what I have been saying, according to Professor John FitzGerald, who is a fair and neutral observer, we are completely off course and heading rapidly in the wrong direction. Between now and Christmas is when we need to turn the entire thinking with a Whitaker-Lemass moment. To be honest, I did not hear or feel it here today. I hope we can work together during the next three months to turn it into an ambition that we then can turn into a reality. There are all sorts of uncertainties, and Mr. Griffin has a tough job, but we should be ambitious.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I certainly will not argue with the Deputy on that point. When I talk about how we position the negotiations at EU level I think we were being fair - recognising where we are starting from. That does not mean in 2030 that I want to see Ireland again saying that we have not achieved a target. I can assure members that there is a huge commitment at Government level to ensure that what we have agreed to EU level, both on renewable energy and effort sharing regulation and ETS, will be delivered. We have some of the building blocks in place such as the national mitigation plan, the national adaptation framework and the national development plan. The circular economy will plug into this now that we have a better understanding of what is emerging from that. We will be tested rigorously on this and not just at national level by the Oireachtas but by the European Commission. We also will be rigorously tested to ensure that what we produce in the national energy and climate plan can deliver by 2030. If we look at the way that it is structured, we will be reviewed regularly on progress on renewable energy and energy efficiency and climate targets by the European Commission. There are measures in there to make sure that if we do not comply, then we will suffer accordingly.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My two very last questions are for the ESB. It is difficult to predict what is going to happen in 2050 and that is what we are trying to do here. I would love the ESB to present other experts. I acknowledge the Pöyry consultancy produced this report and is very credible, but what energy expert believes that biomass in power generation is going to be the real future? That is particularly the case in recent years when the cost of alternative renewables have plummeted. It is all about interconnection - which was not mentioned - and storage. I would love to see carbon capture and storage, CCS, happening but look at the cost of renewables plummeting. CCS is not happening anywhere at scale. Will the ESB present some other energy experts who think that biomass in power generation makes sense for Ireland? I would love to compare that with some of the international think tanks that I could bring in that would say that is cuckoo.

The ESB stated that State intervention and support was needed for power stations for EV vehicles. I agree fully with that. How much would Mr. O'Shea spend on that? The Minister for Finance, Deputy Donohoe, is next door. I am going to go into him now. How much should I be asking for and what should he spend that on?

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

I will take the second part first. It is a number of small tens of millions to deal with the fast-charging networks. That is where I would spend it - on the motorways and the main thoroughfares. As I mentioned earlier, analysis from our EV business unit, ecars, indicates that the vast majority of charging will be done at home rather than on journeys. I would spend it on the fast-charging network on motorways but I would also spend it on revamping the existing set of public chargers. It is a relatively small expenditure in the overall scale of discussing billions of euro of transition costs across the entire energy sector. This is a small piece of it.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is it €25 million?

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

That would go a long way. I would like to go back and check that number. I have not come in with a number on that but that is my assessment. My instinct would be that it is relatively small compared with the other costs of meeting the transition.

Chairman:

Will Mr. O'Shea come back to the committee in writing on that?

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

I certainly can.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I apologise for cutting in but we expect to see applications coming into the Department by 1 October for this infrastructure as part of the first round of the climate action fund.

Chairman:

I thank Mr. Griffin.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

On Deputy Eamon Ryan's first question, 2050 is a long way away but the electricity system requires long-term planning. Our analysis indicates that we need to maintain some form of balancing power on the system to balance out renewables. Our 2050 position is that we see renewables grow to 50% by the middle of the next decade and, beyond that, up to around 65% or 70% when we get towards the 2040 and 2050 mark. Many of the roadmaps we have looked at - I will refer to Mr. John Lawlor on UCC - but I am pretty sure that the UCC roadmap has biomass as a key part-----

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I totally disagree with it.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

It is in there, however, and Deputy Ryan asked me about other experts. UCC is expert in this area and that roadmap has biomass in it. Are there issues with biomass? Yes, there are. There is no doubt about that. From the perspective of Ireland Inc. and the options we have, we are not going to have nuclear and there are issues with biomass but it will contribute somewhat, although it will not deliver the balance of power that we need. That is where we come to CCS as being a technology which has not had the investment we would like to have seen happening over the past ten years or so. We think that increasingly, it will be required because there will be a requirement to have relatively large-scale high-inertia plant on the system to balance out the intermittent renewables. Technology could change. There might be major advances in power electronics that would allow a larger scale of intermittent sources of power on the system but that is not where we are right now.

There was a question in this committee 18 months ago about what our long-term ambition might be. The chief executive of EirGrid mentioned 75% a level of intermittency to which he could see a pathway. At that time, 18 months ago, EirGrid was at 60% and has since got up to 65%. He said we could see a pathway to 75% but could not see a pathway beyond that at that point. It has now gone as far as 65%. We need to get to 75% to deliver an average of 50% of renewables on the system. It is a big requirement. We are at the leading edge of this in Ireland, and are very proud of that, but there is a requirement for us to look at how are we going to make up the last leg of this race. We think Ireland, uniquely, has a requirement for CCS compared with the rest of Europe. As we do not have large-scale hydro or nuclear power, we do not have the options other European countries have.

Chairman:

I thank Mr. O'Shea. I call Deputy Jack Chambers.

Photo of Jack ChambersJack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank everyone and apologise for missing some of the contributions. I was in and out because it is a busy day on a Wednesday.

I apologise if some of the questions have been asked. Last week, I asked around retrofitting. Does the current quality of retrofitting match European standards and is it future-proofed so we do not have to redo the project? What are the present standards around new builds in the context of climate proofing?

On a question for the Department on public buildings, what spark can it deliver to try to future-proof all capital investment around climate change? As the Chair mentioned, new schools are being built that will probably require retrofitting and there is an acceleration of capital investment. When will the Department be able to tell the Oireachtas that it is climate-proofing everything that is happening around public investment? Is a legislative framework required for that, given it is a complex piece? It has to happen if we are to flip the balance around this. The expected continuous capital investment will require proper climate-proofing. The witnesses might answer those questions.

Chairman:

I call the SEAI.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

In respect of retrofitting, we have a number of schemes and home energy grants for both those who can pay and the energy poor, up to and including special interest groups in the fuel poor area. To date, through our schemes, some 360,000 homes have been retrofitted and the State has invested €460 million in those retrofits. On a scale, this would be deemed to be from shallow to moderate retrofit, given most of the schemes have taken a relatively piecemeal approach - it could be anything like an attic insulation or wall insulation, or combinations thereof.

More recently, we introduced a deep retrofit scheme that is looking at precisely the measure referred to by Deputy Chambers, which is how to take the home as a holistic energy system, look at its precise needs and decide what is the most appropriate solution. We are investigating how to bring homes up to an A3 rating or better from what can be a poor starting point such as a G rating. It requires a significant investment and can range from €5,000, €10,000 or €15,000 all the way up to between €50,000 and €70,000 for deep retrofit. We are supporting that currently with grant schemes offering in the region of 50%. We have 36 projects approved so far and these will demonstrate what is possible. However, it is not only the technical solution that it is necessary to unlock. First, there is the willingness of people to make that investment, and we are doing this analysis through our behavioural economics team to discover the triggers for people to make this investment, rather than making the investment in, say, aesthetic aspects of their home or holidays or cars, given there are always competing priorities. The other point is to look at how this is financed. If it was to proceed, the State would have to invest in all those homes at a cost of €30,000 to €40,000 each. We need to look at how to unlock low interest finance for those who can afford to finance this sort of activity. We are engaged in a number of pilot programmes with the banks and credit unions to find what are the trusted lenders in this sphere.

Of course, what this also points to is there is no silver bullet. Had that silver bullet been around, I presume Mr. Griffin and many others would have liked to have had it many moons ago, but there is none. It will be a case of trying to find the many combinations that work in different environments. All along, we will have to be conscious of the energy poor sector, those who are incapable of affording this, who will have to be brought along. That will probably have to be 100% subvented by the State, as it currently is.

Photo of Jack ChambersJack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the point on advancing the more complex issue, this goes to back to the question on the grid and microgeneration This will be the big incentive, namely, how to get a home to become an export unit in itself. Where are we on that? I believe that will be the thing that will flip the domestic behavioural economics whereby the home or a group of homes within an estate can become an export unit. This would say to people that not only would they have no bill, but they would be able to export onto a grid.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

That is likely to come about in time, given we are aiming for nearly zero energy buildings. It should be said that the new regulations coming in next year not only bring in near zero as an energy performance requirement for new build - Ireland's building regulations have been advanced all along - but they also bring in the requirement that if a person is renovating more than 25% of a building, they will have to move it to at least a B rating. That means that as soon a people attack a house for renovations, for example, to put on a conservatory, develop an attic or build over a garage, they are starting to get into the space where the entire home has to be treated as an energy system. In time, it will come to a point where people will be chasing additional sources of income through being energy positive but, in the first case, the incentive is to get the builds down to a near zero rating. Moving a person to a point where they ask whether they are prepared to invest that level of money and wait 20 or 30 years for the payback, if they are not getting incentives, is a harder nut to crack.

Photo of Jack ChambersJack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When will we be able to crack that nut? When would the ESB expect that to be a possibility? While it is complex, I am interested in this.

Dr. John Lawlor:

The first thing that strikes me when talking about retrofits, as we heard from Mr. Halpin of SEAI, is how big a task it is to deliver deep retrofits of scale. When Ms Marie Donnelly was before the committee last week, she talked about dealing with the problem of new houses and said we must "stop the leak". I would like to reiterate that point. We are putting carbon into new houses at a time when we do not need to because the energy efficiency of those new houses is so good that they definitely do not need anything other than a heat pump to heat them.

In respect of being able to have houses that can export excess generation onto the grid, commercially, ESB is the only supplier we know of that provides any sort of scheme that does that, although it is currently closed. I would like to make clear, however, that ESB receives no money for the generation that it pays people to provide it. It is a service we provide. We pay people but we get no money back. The systems in place are not in place for us to get paid for that electricity. Under the renewable electricity directive, there is an obligation that we all must end up putting in place systems that will allow parties who export their excess electricity onto the grid to be paid a reasonable rate. That puts a timeline on a solution to this problem being found, which I believe is by the end of 2020, when the directive comes into force and into national legislation. That will effectively put a timeline on resolution of this problem because we will have to have our systems in place to facilitate that. It is clear that smart meters will be a key element in the delivery and in terms of paying people appropriately for their excess generation.

Chairman:

I ask the Department to comment.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

To pick up on a couple of issues raised by Deputy Chambers and to add to the figures SEAI has given on the number of houses that have been retrofitted in recent years, it is important to recognise also there is big programme of work ongoing in the local authority sector where, between 2013 and 2017, some €116 million was spent and 64,000 local authority homes had an energy efficiency upgrade.

On public buildings and climate proofing, I will ask my colleagues to deal with two elements. Mr. Manley will talk about what we are doing in respect of energy efficiency in the public sector, and there are a lot of good things to say about that. There is then the flip side to that, which has more to do with the adaptation end and how we climate proof infrastructure. I will ask Dr. O'Neill to comment on that.

Mr. Michael Manley:

The public sector was given a higher target than the rest of the economy when, at the start of this decade, it was given a target of 33%. We are currently at about 20% and we are making good progress. One of the things the Department has been concerned about is putting energy efficiency centre stage in public bodies. Understandably, people in the justice sector are concerned about justice rather than the buildings they occupy, and the same goes for education and healthcare.

Last year, the Government approved a new programme on public sector energy efficiency. A large part of the programme focuses on governance and making sure that everybody in the public sector has an energy performance officer and reports regularly on what is being achieved. That is part of the governance, the structure and the reporting but we also matched that with funding. Between last year and this year we have provided €14 million to the Office of Public Works, OPW, which is again looking at pilot projects. I am sorry to keep using the term "pilot project" because I know it sounds like one is sampling. The reality is we are testing many new techniques for our building supply chains and building experiences. Traditional building methodologies were very forgiving. If a door was a little too wide the surrounding lintel was so strong that it held up everything. Many of the new technologies are very technically specific. They must be installed and maintained expertly. Building that capacity within the system is really important. That is why there has been a heavy focus on the pilot phase, certainly in 2017-18 and possibly into next year.

We are on a good trajectory. There is a specific provision in the national development plan for public buildings but I forgot to bring a copy with me. I cannot remember the number but I have no problem relaying it to the clerk of the committee. There is a reorientation. In fact, the Government has endorsed a new strategy whereby every single body must report on where it is at. The Secretary General has found the relevant page, which states there will be investment in energy efficiency of existing commercial and public building stock with a target of all public buildings and at least one third of total commercial premises being upgraded to building energy rating, BER, of B over the life cycle of the plan.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

I keep the document under my pillow.

Photo of Jack ChambersJack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What is the BER of the Department's main building?

Mr. Michael Manley:

It has a BER of D1 but we are moving from that building.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

We are not moving for that reason. The problem with many Government premises is that they are rented. In the next number of years, we will move to a custom built, environmentally sustainable and energy efficient premises that uses every conceivable technology.

Chairman:

We will invite the OPW to appear to discuss public buildings.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

Dr. O'Neill wants to discuss adaptation.

Dr. John O'Neill:

Yes, I will be brief. It was just to talk about the other side of what Mr. Griffin said in terms of climate proofing from the adaptation side. That is a key challenge for the sectors. We mentioned that we have 12 sectors under seven Departments. On the energy and the gas network side, the issue is not only decarbonisation but also how to make infrastructure climate resilient into the future in terms of the impacts of climate change. All sectors, including transport and agriculture, must think about this, as must the local authorities in terms of the plans they will have. There is that kind of drip-down from the national side to the regional and local sides. Every decision must take climate resilience into consideration.

Photo of Jack ChambersJack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a final question on electric cars. The Department is investing in trying to roll out more charge stations across the city, which is welcome. On the issue of pipeline battery technology, in ten years the battery capacity of an electric car will probably be greater than the current combustion model. Do we need to run an economic model on our investment in the battery points? Most people will probably utilise more energy efficient battery charging at home. Should we try to incentivise home charging as much as charging points for electric cars? It is important that we encourage the purchase of electric cars. However, within ten to 15 years the fuel station will be in big trouble but so will the electric charge points on which we will probably spend a significant amount of money.

Mr. Michael Manley:

The Deputy is preaching our aim. We know that the range of batteries is increasing. It will be a challenge to get the balance right between putting enough in for this transition phase----

Photo of Jack ChambersJack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Mr. Michael Manley:

It will be a challenge to get the balance right between putting enough in for this transition phase-----

Photo of Jack ChambersJack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

For now.

Mr. Michael Manley:

------and not ending up with stranded assets. Charging at home fits with most life cycles and technology issues. However, we have to manage the present as well as plan for the future and getting that balance right will be really challenging

Photo of Jack ChambersJack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Mr. Michael Manley:

-----because charging at home fits with most life cycles and technology issues. However, we have to manage the present as well as plan for the future and getting that balance right will be really challenging.

Chairman:

Last but not least, I call Senator Mulherin.

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There has been a series of votes in the Seanad and I apologise to the witnesses for having to leave the meeting to attend them. I apologise in advance if I repeat some of the questions.

I wish to ask about the new nearly zero energy building standard that will apply from the end of the year. It is necessary to build large numbers of houses and we have plans to do so. This is the topic of conversation every day. How much per unit will achieving the new building standard add to the cost of building the various types of housing, from private dwellings such as four-bedroom semi-detached houses to social housing? What additional costs must we budget for to ensure we meet the new standard?

Many people have retrofitted and made their houses more energy efficient. In terms of carbon taxes, what will happen to households that have heavily invested in making their houses more carbon efficient and less reliant on carbon? Some people may consider going off grid and becoming self-sufficient rather than taking electricity from the national grid. There are different ways to become self-sufficient, including installing solar panels. Maybe this is a policy matter but how should all of this play into how carbon taxes are applied? Will a PSO levy be universally applied to electricity bills? There is scope to incentivise people and reward people.

As we heard, people will seek to borrow money to adapt their homes. Low-cost loans to help people to make their houses or properties more energy efficient were mentioned. Sums of €30,000 and €40,000 were mentioned. I am not sure whether these would be needed for domestic or commercial buildings. These are very stark realities. The fact that new builds and major renovations are to be hit by this requirement and an additional cost will be news to many people. I am not saying the new building standard has not been talked about. However, the message on energy efficiency and climate change is sometimes unclear or people just do not hear it.

Mr. Griffin highlighted the progress the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government is making in investing in upgrading local authority housing stock. As we discussed with Professor John Fitzgerald, these upgrades simply involve the installation of more efficient oil boilers and households will be stuck with them for the next 15 or 20 years. People who live in a local authority house are not presented with a choice of heating systems. The choice is made for them, yet they must pay in the form of carbon tax on coal or whatever else. The Department has already spent a substantial amount on these upgrades. Are they good value for money? Does the energy rating of homes improve following the upgrades? What is the average energy rating of houses that have been upgraded by the local authorities?

The SEAI has spent a significant amount on grants to people seeking to improve the energy rating of their houses. How many homes have a BER A? I am sorry but I did not hear the figures given for the number of houses that have been grant-aided and the number of additional units. How much did that cost?

I have raised the issue of land use for some time, certainly as far back as Mr. Pat Rabbitte's time as Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. On the one hand, we had the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine setting out its 2025 targets, while, on the other, we had the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment, of which Mr. Griffin is Secretary General, talking about energy crops, carbon sequestration and all of that sort of thing. The problem was that there did not appear to be any formal engagement between Departments on the issue of land use. We have only a limited amount of land and there must be agreement on how best to use it. The Departments must interact to some degree on their plans. What have they agreed? How does the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment view the targets set out in Food Wise 2025?

We are being told that land use is an issue or a problem. On the agriculture side we are even told - we had a man from An Taisce before the committee - that reclaiming certain land can release excess carbon so, where farmers are trying to make land more productive, they should not. There are an awful lot of gaps between the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the witnesses' Department in respect of this issue. These gaps need to be filled in order to give a clearer picture of what we are doing and what direction we are going in. The question is really what has been done formally. What agreements and so on are in place between the Departments? I asked the question of both the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the then Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, at the time. I continued to ask it over a period of time and an answer was never given.

On the issue of renewable electricity on the grid - this question is particularly for the ESB and I am sure the Department also has an interest in it - there is no doubt that there are serious challenges around transmission. There has been talk here of offshore wind and so on but even in parts of the country in which there is onshore wind there is no proper grid. It is very piecemeal. For example, Grid West was abandoned. There were issues around Grid West and I would suggest that there are issues around the fact that, at the time, the State or Government and EirGrid would not contemplate undergrounding. I know EirGrid is mandated to deliver grid in the most efficient and cheapest way but the reality is that it has cost so much and there has been so much delay in realising the build-out of transmission that this should be taken into account. How are the issues around grid going to be overcome?

If we were to go with offshore wind, we have a SEAI wave energy test site in my own county and, although that technology is probably a bit more into the future, there is obviously potential for offshore wind there as well. We have no transmission capacity or grid, other than to Bellacorick where there is a former peat-burning power station. There is no grid whatsover so any electricity generated there will be on the distribution line, or whatever way it is done. The concerns of communities have not been tackled. I address this to the ESB in particular as this is its sphere or area. What is the way forward on this? I know there is always talk about rewarding communities - and I know Eirgrid is charged with rolling out the transmission infrastructure - but surely undergrounding has to be looked at further. Equally I understand that electricity could be brought around offshore even though I know this will all add to the cost.

Chairman:

Just to let the Senator know, we will be bringing in EirGrid in respect of the grid.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

To start on the local authority housing stock, I cannot actually give the Senator the answers or tell her the decisions that have been made on the choice of technology. I do not know whether the SEAI can do that. I understand the Secretary General is coming before the committee.

Chairman:

The Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government is coming in in two weeks time. We can put those questions then.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

On the schemes the SEAI supports, since the start of this year the decision was taken that we would not fund oil boilers as part of any upgrades. The transition to a low-carbon economy is not going to be cheap. Part of the issue we have to think about in the centre, and about which we are thinking already, is how one engages with communities to explain this. There will be a cost involved but there will be benefits in the long term in terms of health, the environment, social issues, the economy, jobs and all that kind of stuff. There is certainly a job of work to be done in the centre and at local and regional level to explain that. I think the national dialogue on climate action will have a role in that respect.

The Senator mentioned Food Wise 2025. Again, the committee will have my colleagues from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine before it shortly enough. We are, and have been, working very closely with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine around bioenergy, biomass, carbon sequestration, and energy crops. We are trying to align what sometimes appear to be policy tensions between the targets under Food Wise 2025 and the things we need to do to try to decarbonise a lot of sectors that are in the non-emissions trading scheme, ETS, sector. My Department is represented on the Food Wise 2025 high-level implementation group at assistant secretary level. We have an assistant secretary from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine represented on the group on climate action chaired by the Minister, Deputy Naughten. We are teasing out issues around the other things we need to do, looking at everything we have done across all the sectors and the commitments that exist and being aware of the pressures in particular sectors, to ensure that commitments we have entered into will be met absolutely by 2030.

I might ask Mr. Maughan to say something about carbon tax and the point the Senator made about how people investing in energy improvements will be taken into account in the design of a carbon tax system. When Mr. Maughan is done perhaps the SEAI could comment on the nearly zero energy building, NZEB, standard, what it entails, and the costs involved.

Mr. Frank Maughan:

In answer to the Senator's question, if I understand it correctly, if one considers the carbon tax as a sort of consumption tax on fossil fuels which applies to householders, to people driving cars, and to businesses in terms of how they heat their buildings etc., the more the types of interventions we have been discussing this afternoon are rolled out and the less fossil fuels are used in the transport system and in the built environment, the less liability people will have to pay the carbon tax because their consumption of fossil fuels will decrease. From that point of view carbon tax is a price signal to householders and to other consumers in the economy to say that we want them to consume less fossil fuels in their day-to-day activities, in how they heat their homes and in how they drive their cars. It will be of benefit to the consumer who decides to invest in a deep retrofit of his or her house because he or she will ultimately end up paying less in carbon tax because of the fact that he or she will be consuming less fossil fuels. That is the very simple answer.

Obviously there is a separate question in terms of where the carbon tax will go over time, about which I spoke briefly earlier. There is a question and the committee has already heard advice on where the carbon tax might need to go in the medium term to make sure the signal to householders and other consumers is strong enough to create that incentive in the economy. The committee has also discussed this issue with the advisory council. The two types of interventions - if I can call them that - travel in parallel. They affect the decision-making process for consumers, householders and firms when they come to make these types of interventions and investments in upgrading their homes and replacing their vehicles and so on. It is all part of a package. I hope that answered the question. I am not sure if that is what the Senator was getting at.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

I will just come in on two of the points. With regard to the nearly zero energy building, NZEB, regulations and how much they are likely to add to the cost of a unit, I cannot say that specifically because that matter would be dealt with by the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government. What I can explain is that the principle underlying the NZEB regulations, which is set out across the EU under the energy performance in building directive, is that, based on an econometric model, the additional costs of the works involved in achieving near zero energy performance are recovered over the period of ownership of the property. It pays for itself. It does have an added cost but it pays for itself in the reduced energy requirement.

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Halpin mentioned a figure of €30,000 to €40,000. What was that about?

Mr. Tom Halpin:

What I was mentioning there was the cost of upgrading an E-rated or F-rated to an A-rated property under our deep retrofit pilot programme as we are experiencing it at the moment.

That is an upgrade so it is retrofitting. It is taking an existing building and upgrading its performance as a housing system. That could cost between €50,000 and €70,000 to achieve. This is to get a building to an A rating.

I also mentioned that under the building regulations people doing renovations that impact more than 25% of the property have do energy efficiency works. This requires them to bring it up only to a B rating. The step between a B rating and an A rating is substantial. I have referenced a number of parts of this, including a deep retrofit pilot and the requirements under the building regulations. One is with regard to achieving an A rating and the other to achieving a B rating.

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We discuss affordability in housing all the time, but if another €40,000 is slapped onto the basic cost of building a house to make it energy efficient, that will further impact on property not being affordable. I understand well Mr. Halpin saying that over time these measures pay for themselves, but the problem is people must have the money upfront to pay for them and this is a challenge. It cannot be sneezed at.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

The Senator is conflating two points I made. I said I have no sense of what the additional costs are and I do not know their order of magnitude. That is a matter for the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government. We do not own or apply the building regulations. It is a matter for the Department. The €40,000 amount is for retrofitting, which is upgrading a house when undertaking renovations. I have no sense of the additional cost between building a house under the existing building regulations, which would have a high energy performance, and building one under the nearly zero energy building standard, nZEB, that will be introduced under the new regulations next year. To use the figure of €40,000 as an impact on affordability is to conflate two points.

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To whom will the Department turn for this information? Is the SEAI not the expert? Will it go to the other Departments?

Mr. Tom Halpin:

The Department is responsible for the regulations and-----

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The SEAI is the energy efficiency expert.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

The Department writes the regulations.

Mr. Mark Griffin:

The Department has its own building regulations experts who have responsibility for the building regulations. They have a significant range of expertise in this area.

Chairman:

We can ask them.

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My simple point is this will impact the cost of housing.

Chairman:

This is where financing comes into play, and finding new ways to finance them, be it through credit unions-----

Mr. Tom Halpin:

This is with regard to retrofit. We are looking at financing retrofit. It is important to separate the two points. New regulations relate to new houses. The additional costs likely to impact them have not been defined in this room and are a matter for the Department. With regard to the separate issue of retrofitting, a deep retrofit is likely to cost €40,000, €50,000 or €60,000. If a person decides to undertake this we need to explore financing options. They are two different requirements.

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand, but someone doing a substantial renovation under the nZEB standard will not have a choice. Mr. Halpin is speaking about people deciding to do this.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

Yes.

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

People will be compelled to bring the property up to a B energy rating.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

Yes.

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

At present, I can choose. If I do something substantial with my house that reaches the threshold I am required to bring it to a B rating. People in this position are not in the realm of choice. They have to do it and spend the money. This is an ideal opportunity for us to get to grips with what it will cost to transition. This is why figures are critical. This will impact on ordinary people.

Mr. Tom Halpin:

Again, that is a matter-----

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How we pay for it is a policy debate but we need to see figures. When we hear these figures and hear about the obligations under the nZEB standard, they are stark with regard to how we will have to pay for this along with how we have to support electricity. This is a major undertaking, as Deputy Eamon Ryan keeps telling us. It certainly is and people need to know this because it is serious.

Chairman:

For the purposes of our report, it is important that when we put in place a particular measure or incentive, we are able to assess it in order that we will not disenfranchise a particular cohort of society who cannot afford it.

Mr. Michael Manley:

This may not give any great comfort, I am sorry to say-----

Mr. Mark Griffin:

Do not say that.

Mr. Michael Manley:

-----but let us be honest, which is the purpose of the committee. The Senator asked about the design of the new market and asked whether people who want to be energy islands and opt out would be faced with a charge. This question will have to be addressed. Last year, Storm Ophelia cost €30 million. If the 20 of us in this room decided we wanted to be energy islands and opted out, it would mean 20 fewer people paying the cost of that €30 million. Last week, 186,000 homes and businesses were disconnected because of a storm. The ESB had 2,000 staff out and 500 contractors. I do not know what the cost of that will be but it will be a cost to the system. It is not a reason to fail to do it but it is one of the complexities to be dealt with in doing it.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This system will run heat pumps and cars. It will be so busy, critical and central that the old argument that it would not be used is nonsense and out of date. It is a question of how we cope with the needs and demands of the system. This is the skill. This is the industrial revolution in front of us, with regard to EirGrid and the ESB. We are good at it and it should not stop us using solar energy.

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I asked a question about transmission.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

I will not speak on transmission but I will speak generally about infrastructure build, which is difficult in Ireland. We have seen it in numerous cases. I hope the renewable electricity support scheme, RESS, consultation on community engagement will be successful in terms of renewables. If it is, it might help us develop a model in other areas. There are many cases where it is quicker to build a factory than to build the capacity to get there. There is a balance between having capacity leading demand and demand leading capacity. There are cost implications in all of this. The Senator mentioned transmission and undergrounding. EirGrid had an issue to consider, but it is more complex than just the cost. If a line goes underground it may be a DC line rather than an AC line and that would change the characteristics of the system. It is a very complex area.

Photo of Michelle MulherinMichelle Mulherin (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand, but I am sure Mr. O'Shea has a view on it. The technology is being changed, and there are certain limitations on the DC technology, but EirGrid tried to pursue certain policies on Grid West and other projects, including the North-South interconnector, and where are we? We have nothing. We still have deficiencies in the transmission and in our single electricity market.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

It is a complex area and many parameters feed into it. In solving this in the medium or longer term, we need to consider all options.

Photo of Paul DalyPaul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for not being here for all of the meeting. There were lot of votes in the Seanad at the beginning of the meeting. I caught up with the submissions as the meeting went on. Most of the questions I had in mind have been covered but I have two technical questions for the ESB. Its representatives said it pays 10 cent per unit for the surplus produced by solar panels but it cannot charge for this. Where does it go? If it can be recorded and it is going onto the grid, is it not being used and put on a consumer's bill?

I do not want to sound sarcastic but the ESB is the face of electricity and there is a lot of talk about electrical vehicles. How much of its own fleet is electric? Does it have any plans to electrify its fleet?

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

I will let Mr. Lawlor take the first question because it is one I asked him this morning.

Mr. John Lawlor:

I can give a complex answer on where electricity goes but I intend to give a simple one. It reduces everybody's bills. If we spill electricity onto the system, it is divided among 2 million people and reduces their bills.

Photo of Paul DalyPaul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How does it get into their residences without going through their meters?

Mr. John Lawlor:

It just follows the laws of physics. It is not that it does not go through the meters. Everything is still accounted for through the meters at everybody's residences. This is why I did not want to get into the technicalities. What happens is the assumed losses on the system are reduced. Generators generate electricity and in the old days it went from big generators through the transmission system and the distribution system and into people's houses. The process of sending the electricity and transporting it creates losses. Producing electricity in the system creates minus losses. This is how it is treated in the system.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That makes the system more efficient so the ESB is making money out of it.

Mr. John Lawlor:

No, it means everybody's bills reduce.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It makes the ESB's assessment more efficient.

Mr. John Lawlor:

We charge less.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The ESB does not lose from the generation to the consumer because the loss has been taken on by the consumer who turns it on. As a result, the ESB has less electricity to generate to get from A to B.

Mr. John Lawlor:

I know what the Deputy is saying but it is not just the ESB. The Deputy must remember that all of the generators and suppliers are on the system, so it is a matter for all of the suppliers.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

All of the suppliers will get more efficient.

Mr. John Lawlor:

It is not that they are more efficient. All of the losses on the system are paid for by all of the suppliers, which then charge all their customers for the losses in their bills.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are fewer losses to the suppliers.

Photo of Paul DalyPaul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Where can I see that on my bill if people are feeding into this at this stage?

Mr. John Lawlor:

It cannot be seen on the bill. What I am trying to say is that this is a negative loss which customers will not see on their bill.

Chairman:

Perhaps Mr. Lawlor could provide us with a note explaining this issue.

Mr. John Lawlor:

I will do so.

Chairman:

It should not be too technical. We will then get back to him if we want further clarification.

Photo of Paul DalyPaul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I said it was a short question but I did not say it would be a simple answer.

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will Mr. Lawlor explain how a power plant can generate the same amount of electricity, the ESB can add that electricity into the network and it all gets lost? It would be very interesting to hear that.

Chairman:

Would Mr. O'Shea like to come in to answer?

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

That question deserves a written answer as it gets into a level of complexity that even now this morning we are struggling with.

Chairman:

Is that question more relevant to EirGrid or the ESB?

Mr. John Lawlor:

It is the same.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

We can deal with it.

Chairman:

Okay. I thank the witnesses.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

The second question was about electric vehicles. I will have to come back to the committee with the numbers as I do not have them with me. We see EVs as being very important as we move into the future. In our new office that we are building on Fitzwilliam Street, for example, there will be only 50 car parking spaces and each will be EV-proofed from day one in 2021. I will come back to the committee with the actual numbers. One of the constraints we face is that many of our vehicles are heavy vehicles. The electrification of vehicles is currently focused on smaller and medium-sized vehicles while the trucks we need to carry equipment out to network locations are less amenable to electrification at the moment.

In response to an earlier comment by Deputy Jack Chambers, there are two big trends when it comes to the battery technology used for vehicle electrification. The first is that the energy density of batteries is moving in an upward direction and the second is that the cost of those batteries is moving in a downward direction. It is the coming together of those two trends that makes us believe the electrification of transport is definitely the future. The electrification of vans and lorries will come into range once these trends are sufficiently strong and this will allow the ESB and other companies with large numbers of such vehicles to move our fleets onto electric vehicles.

Photo of Paul DalyPaul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The witnesses can see what I mean when I say how important it would be to bring the public with us on this.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

Absolutely.

Photo of Paul DalyPaul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The public needs to see the ESB fleet go electric.

Mr. Peter O'Shea:

Absolutely.

Chairman:

I thank the witnesses. It has been a long session but an important one for us as members. I thank the members for their patience in waiting for an opportunity to ask questions.

The joint committee adjourned at 5.45 p.m. until 6.15 p.m. on Tuesday, 2 October 2018.