Mr. Se?n Finan:

Just to add to the point, it is important to recognise, in answering the Cathaoirleach's second question, that the AD process creates nutrients in a different form.

In effect, the digestate is similar in nutrient uptake potential to chemical fertiliser. It mineralises the nutrients, whereas raw slurry takes a while to work in that it has a change from one form to another. The value and benefit of digestate, therefore, is significant on grassland. The value of this is that there is, potentially, less risk of run-off if heavy rain falls after spreading digestate in a low-emission spreading system. This is because, compared with raw slurry, the nutrients are more easily accessed by the growing plants.

Additionally concerning digestate, there is a regulatory challenge around its use. For farmers using digestate, it contributes to their 170 kg organic limit. Effectively, therefore, we are not talking about like for like when we speak about a desire to displace chemical fertiliser with digestate. Chemical fertiliser is inorganic and has a different classification-----