Mr. Eugene Drennan:

We will put it in the ring now but I am sure other Deputies will be interested in this. I will introduce one of our novel ideas and my colleague, Mr. Jackman, has put a lot into presentations on HVO and cleaner diesel. We can perhaps bring that in on the back of questions from other Deputies.

Deputy Durkan mentioned food safety and the security of food in the EU and also the old beet acreage. In our proposals, we were teasing out the ten-year plan on the road freight sector, which was adopted one month or so ago. It was acknowledged within it that diesel was the only show in town in the short term. That does not seem to have as much focus in this low-carbon economy in chapter 13.

Within that, in moving to the new technologies of Euro 6 and Euro 7, the technologies of these engines reduce 20% of carbon and maybe towards 25% in their own technology. Then, we can add that they can run on HVO, or partly on HVO. I mention the old acreage of the beet because the security of food at the start of the EU is not quite as urgent as it was heretofore. The production is there and there is overproduction in some countries. The old acreages of the beet, plus some of the acres that will be available for farmers if they give up or lessen their amount of cattle, could be grown as sunflower and rapeseed. Tied in with that is that rapeseed would be for the production of HVO for the market here.

It is an agenda of Europe that food products must in the first instance be used for food. Because we are an island and we need to reduce the carbon, however, that would automatically add 25% of an additive to a fill of diesel with the modern technology. It would take us straight into the first barrier and first line that is required by 2030 of a 50% reduction. It may need some sort of derogation that we could do it in the interim, again, because of our island status and because it would be used in the first instance. Any moneys and grants that would be available for farmers, which would be more than welcome to them, would be tied into this production with a fair return for it but it would be kept for indigenous industry here. Rather than just paying them to get people out of production when they have always been used to production, we should keep them in the production of something. Giving a grant to get out of production is really rewarding the lazy. It does not reward the man who was an intensive farmer and worker all his life. If this product can be grown and refined here and, in the round, the subsidies to us, rather than a carbon subsidy would be to a carbon reducing subsidy. We have to tie the cost of the HVO and the use of that oil to be on par with the commercial rate of diesel at that time. Then, we will be at our 50%.