Mr. Jerry McEvilly:

I thank the Deputy for his questions. First, the circular economy is a key consideration in reducing energy demand. I am conscious of the circular economy Bill that is currently going through the Oireachtas. It very much needs to be prioritised. I am more than happy to link in some of our NGO colleagues who are quite active in this space. As regards the energy sector, one of the main issues we see is waste in how energy is used. Evidently, the most important and first response should be energy-efficiency measures.

On that point in particular, I previously mentioned the importance of increasing our retrofitting targets and insulation measures in the context of the Russian situation. The increased funding through the warmer homes scheme is welcome, as is the commitment to develop one-stop shops, but we are concerned that a waiting list of 7,000 households built up for that scheme during the pandemic and the bulk of new investment may only address this backlog and not reach those who are at risk of fuel poverty, including housing assistance payment, HAP, recipients and renters. This was mentioned previously, but a well designed national campaign on getting people's home winter ready would be a low-cost intervention that could deliver significant results. The think tank, E3G, has noted that turning down the flow temperature on condensing boilers could save households up to 8% of their annual costs, while the SFI Research Centre for Energy, Climate and Marine, MaREI, at University College Cork has also highlighted the benefits of reducing central heating temperatures to improve boiler efficiency. Finally, reducing or removing VAT on particular materials and labour for certain energy-efficiency measures would provide a strong signal and should be considered.

On the issue of solar regulations and the lack of progress, I wish it was the case that the only issue was that of progressing the necessary environmental assessment. Our understanding is that the updated regulations have been available for a considerable period - up to one year - but the Department has not progressed the necessary public consultation on that strategic environmental assessment, SEA, for many months. That is the final step and we are unclear on the reason for the delay. I am happy to have further discussions on that.

A general point is that although we in Friends of the Earth are conscious that the CRU is very important, it is not the only authority responsible when it comes to these discussions in respect of energy policy and how the State should be respond. It would be beneficial to also invite in other authorities, including the SEAI. The International Energy Agency has made very good recommendations on reducing fossil fuel use. It would be worthwhile to consider bringing in other State-owned companies on how best to respond to this situation.