Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Professor McMullin for his presentation. I am trying to get a handle on the difference between Professor McMullin's advice and other advice. Am I right in saying that Professor McMullin has quoted someone arguing that energy security cannot be a defence for prolonging CO2 emissions? That seems to be leading the professor to the suggestion that we should not be putting in any new gas or fossil fuel infrastructure. The counterargument that we hear from other witnesses is that this risks blackout and that we need gas as a transition fuel as we move from a system that is predominantly fossil fuel-based to one that is predominantly renewables-based. I wish to probe Professor McMullin's view on that.

I do not quite understand Professor McMullin's argument for a moratorium on one particular source of energy demand, namely, data centres, and not on other sources of demand. How does he establish the national priorities of one versus the other? Demand management in total seems to be a most important tool but it would be a rather blunt measure to pick one source of demand and put a moratorium on it, while treating others in a different way without an apparent economic, social or any other model underpinning it.

The next issue is whether LNG offers some security for a system that is going to be gas-dependent, at least in the medium term.

As I understand it, Professor McMullin's argument is that LNG in some cases, namely, fracked sources of gas, adds methane. Nevertheless, that is surely on the inventory of other countries which, under the Paris Agreement, are obliged to take that into account and mitigate it in the commitments they make under that agreement. Is it a concern for Ireland, therefore, as to where our LNG comes from and whether some element of it comes from fracked sources? That is a matter for the countries that permit that. We do not permit it. I would like some clarity on that point.