Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Wednesday, 24 September 2025
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy
Engagement with the Commission for Regulation of Utilities
2:00 am
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Apologies have been received from Deputy Heneghan and Senator O'Donovan. The purpose of today's meeting is to engage with the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, to discuss its work in its role as Ireland's independent energy and water regulator. The witnesses from the CRU are: Mr. Jim Gannon, chairperson and commissioner; Dr. Tanya Harrington, commissioner; Mr. Fergal Mulligan, commissioner; Mr. Phil Hemmingway, director of decarbonisation; Ms Karen Kavanagh, director of networks and economic regulation; Ms Karen Trant, director of customer policy and protection; and Mr. John Melvin, director of security of supply and wholesale. I welcome them all to the meeting. I remind everyone to ensure that their mobile phones are on silent or switched off.
I wish to advise the witnesses of the following in relation to parliamentary privilege. Witnesses and members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of a person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.
On the format of the meeting, I will shortly invite Mr. Gannon to make an opening statement for a maximum of ten minutes. Once the opening statement has been delivered, I will call on members of the committee in the order in which they indicate to me to put their questions. We operate a rota system that provides each member with an initial six minutes to engage with our witnesses. The six minutes are for both questions and answers. Therefore, it is essential for members to put their questions succinctly and witnesses to be succinct in their responses. When all members who have indicated have had their initial engagement, time permitting, a second round will commence. In that round, each member will have up to three minutes for questions and answers. Members attending who are not members of the committee will get an opportunity to speak once all members of the committee who have indicated have spoken. The duration of this meeting is limited and therefore the times must be strictly adhered to. I ask everybody to be focused in their contributions. I call Mr. Gannon to deliver his opening statement.
Mr. Jim Gannon:
I thank the committee for having us in. We appeared before the previous committee on a relatively frequent basis and are happy to do that again with this committee. As this is a new Dáil session and the first time the CRU has appeared before the committee, I note how much we value this engagement. The work of this committee is vital in shaping Ireland's response to the climate challenge and ensuring that essential energy and water services are delivered efficiently and safely in the public interest.
The CRU is Ireland's independent energy, energy safety and water regulator. We actively serve the public interest by regulating the provision of these services to Irish homes and businesses. As such, our work impacts every Irish home, business and citizen. We strive to ensure safe, secure and sustainable energy and water supplies for all. We are an integral part of facilitating Ireland's energy transformation, providing an important public service through the protection of consumer rights.
We have been to the forefront in shaping the regulatory landscape to support Ireland's energy security and decarbonisation targets. In terms of the security of supply, maintaining the security and resilience of our energy system in a period of transformation is vital. The CRU has supported investment in flexible generation, the ongoing integration of renewables, storage and flexible demand. We are reforming capacity remuneration mechanisms, CRMs, and system services markets to reward technologies that support system resilience. The single electricity market has delivered just over 1,000 MW derated of multi-year new capacity across the island, with a further nearly 900 MW derated currently under construction as well as additional battery storage. The T-4 auction late last year procured more battery storage capacity than any other CRM auction to date. This capacity will support decarbonisation goals by enabling the storage of intermittent renewables. To further support the development of the all-island market, the single electricity market committee is undertaking a review of its strategy for the period up to 2030.
In terms of grid development, in June the CRU published its draft determination on price review 6, PR6, a regulatory process that takes place every five years. The CRU also recently published key regulatory decisions on the Greenlink interconnector revenue process and an initial assessment of the proposed MaresConnect interconnector. In May, we made a decision on ESB Networks' demand flexibility product which will provide flexibility to the distribution system, facilitating renewable generation and connection of demand customers.
Under decarbonisation, the CRU has published a new electricity connection policy and a national energy demand strategy, set out regulatory decisions on grid connection and charging for offshore wind including the provision of a route-to-grid for projects unsuccessful in obtaining support in Ireland's first offshore renewable energy support scheme, ORESS 1. The CRU also introduced a new regulatory decision to support hybrid projects, increasing the utilisation of the grid and is carrying out significant work in this area. This includes offshore price controls and incentives for the delivery of infrastructure to develop a more resilient electricity system. In addition, the pathway for the transfer of the ownership of offshore and onshore assets to EirGrid is an important step to facilitate the future integration of renewables.
We are also the economic regulator for water and wastewater services, responsible for setting Uisce Éireann's regulated revenue, approving its plans for water charges and monitoring expenditure and performance in its delivery of €16 billion of capital and operational investment for water and wastewater service for Irish consumers. On support and protecting customers through the transition, in addition to the recent winter customer protections announced, the CRU made decisions on the smart meter data access code, which this will create opportunities for suppliers and others to offer additional smart services and products, such as more personalised price comparisons and better tailored tariffs, and on the introduction of dynamic tariffs that will enable customers to make cost savings by moving their consumption to periods when prices are lowest.
Collaboration will be essential as we navigate the transition. We will work closely with the Government, system operators, industry stakeholders, customer advocates and our fellow regulators on the island of Ireland and across Europe to ensure alignment and consistency in regulatory approaches that support all consumers.
While we work to ensure energy security and decarbonisation, as regulators, we are very aware that the energy transition must work for people, not just infrastructure. To support this, in May we published a new strategic plan that sets out our ambition for the 2025-27 period and beyond. At this vital time for energy security, sustainability of supply and structural transformation, we are in ongoing dialogue with Government Departments to significantly expand our workforce to meet the growing needs of society and the environment in which we operate. We are transforming as an organisation to better deliver and empower consumers, support policy development and deliver effective regulation.
Over recent months, the CRU has made a number of significant decisions that directly impact customers across the energy sectors. I will take this opportunity to outline these in more detail, as they illustrate the ever-increasing scope and resource intensive work of the CRU. These reflect the CRU’s commitment to ensuring that services remain reliable, efficient and responsive to the evolving needs of consumers and the wider system across all customer groups. They also underscore our role in working for the public interest and delivering modern systems for the State.
Ireland is going through an unprecedented change in our use and demand for electricity and significant investment is required to ensure our electricity networks are fit for purpose, resilient, efficient and capable of supporting Ireland’s climate and economic ambitions. The CRU’s role is to protect the interests of electricity customers by ensuring that EirGrid and ESB Networks make the necessary investments in infrastructure to provide a more sustainable electricity network. The CRU does this through the price review, PR, process which is carried out every five years. PR6 represents a significant step change in the funding requests from the system operators' allowances and proposes to provide EirGrid and ESB Networks with a package of investment in the period 2026 to 2030, with the focus on incentivising the system operators to deliver on their plans. This will enable the connection of electric vehicles and heat pumps to homes and businesses across Ireland and deliver greater interconnection between Ireland and the rest of Europe as well as the necessary investment and development of the offshore and onshore infrastructure to support clean energy and jobs through Ireland’s green economy. Given the scale of investment required for the proposals in PR6, the network charges on bills are expected to see an increase for a typical domestic customer’s network tariff. This is an investment in Ireland’s future and, when implemented with the correct oversight, will deliver a stable system for the Irish public and the wider economy. It is therefore in all our interests to see this implemented and delivered to the best standards. The CRU’s consultation on the PR6 draft determination proposals closed this month and we will publish our final determination later this year.
The CRU is continuing to work towards a decision on a new electricity connection policy for data centres. This is an update to the existing connection policy in place since 2021 and will provide clarity on the electricity grid connection policy for data centre development. The aim of the proposed decision is to provide a pathway for LEU connections to the electricity system, which addresses risks to security of supply and network constraints while minimising, where possible, potential negative impacts on national renewable energy targets and carbon emissions. We received a significant number of responses to the consultation on the proposed decision we published earlier this year, which we are currently deliberating on. The CRU originally indicated an intention to take a final decision in quarter 3 or quarter 4 of this year. However, given the significant number of responses and the balance of priorities facing the decision, the anticipated publication date is subject to fully addressing the complexity of the detailed submissions received. We would welcome the opportunity to further engage with the committee on this topic as we near publication of the decision.
Customer protection, specifically for energy consumers, is a bedrock of the CRU’s role. In September, we announced additional customer protection measures for household electricity and gas customers for the forthcoming winter. The CRU’s published data has shown that arrears levels are trending at historically high levels as regards the value of overall arrears and the average value of a customer’s account in arrears. Since their introduction in 2022, our measures have aimed to shield consumers from the most severe impacts of elevated energy prices while maintaining as fair, competitive and sustainable a retail energy market as possible. Customer disconnection levels have remained comparatively low, compared with pre-Covid-19 pandemic levels. This is in part due to these protections and supplier commitments to the energy engage code not to disconnect consumers who are meaningfully engaging with them.
Some of the key measures for the coming winter period include minimum timelines for debt repayment plans, discounted tariffs for financial hardship metered customers, the increase of debt repayment on pay-as-you-go top-ups and increased requirements on suppliers for the vulnerable customer register. The disconnection moratoriums for special services and critical services registered vulnerable customers will remain in place, as will the winter disconnection moratorium for all other domestic customers. It is important to note that the data have shown that longer disconnection moratoriums, in addition to longer repayment periods, can bring a risk to customers should customer debt levels continue to increase if payments are not made. We continue to work with the Government through the energy affordability task force as it develops cross-departmental and cross-agency responses to energy affordability.
In the earlier part of my statement, I referenced the increasing scope of work of the CRU. The regulatory frameworks required for the integration of both offshore and onshore renewable energy generation will be significant, as will the ongoing infrastructure development requirements in the electricity and water networks and increased needs in our energy safety mandate. To meet these needs, the CRU has grown our resources and headcount from 113 to 186 in the past two years. We have submitted a workforce plan to the Department of Climate, Energy and the Environment and are awaiting a response to this request for a significant further increase in resources.
The CRU is proud of its work and impact to date. We realise, however, that in an increasingly complex global and national environment, the challenges and importance of our work are increasing. We are ready to meet that challenge and will require additional resources to do so. We look forward to continuing to work closely with the Government, and of course this committee, to achieve our collective ambitions for the energy transition. We will continue to strive for safe, secure and sustainable energy and water supplies for the benefit of all consumers. We look forward to the transformation of our energy systems enabling a new relationship between consumers and utilities. There are many opportunities for Ireland and we will continue to act in the public interest to deliver on these.
This concludes our opening statement. We are happy to take questions.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Gannon. I now invite members in the order in which they have indicated to engage with the witnesses. Each member has six minutes for the initial round. I call Teachta Dála Daly.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Gannon for his contribution. I will keep this as brief as possible as I only have six minutes. He mentioned that the CRU's primary focus is to protect consumer rights and shield consumers. My question relates to regulatory powers in hedging. He will know that Irish energy prices have fallen more slowly since 2022. Wholesale gas prices, for example, have reduced by 70%, but the prices have increased by 74%. Has the CRU conducted any investigations? Is it satisfied it has enough powers to monitor and regulate hedging practices of large energy companies? Has it conducted any investigations that required disclosures from the energy companies? Has it received any complaints from energy companies about the rate at which others are increasing or decreasing their prices?
Mr. Jim Gannon:
On hedging practices in general, as the wholesale electricity price spiked in the early days and months of the energy crisis that followed the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we saw the hedging strategies mitigate consequent price increases in retail. That lagging effect is what we expect from hedging strategies. As wholesale prices have decreased, we have seen a decrease in retail prices from the highs of the past 18 months, but they have stabilised. We noted------...
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Would Mr. Gannon accept that some of them are still 70% higher than they were in 2022, despite the decrease of 70%?
Mr. Jim Gannon:
Without question, absolutely. We indicated to the committee in the midst of the crisis that we did not anticipate that the retail price levels would necessarily reduce to where they had been, given that we are still reliant on gas and we no longer have access to Russian gas and other aspects of the market.
To respond specifically to the Deputy's question, hedging practices are very different across suppliers. Some suppliers have generation, some are focused on the domestic market and some are focused on the retail or commercial markets where the pass-through costs are more closely aligned. There is no single, one-size-fits-all hedging strategy in place among suppliers.
I note that the European Commission recently indicated in policy that it may ask that national authorities - member states, but more likely the regulator - get more involved. It is not precisely clear what that involvement would be.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
With that involvement, is the CRU happy with the amount of regulatory power it has to investigate?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has the commission carried out investigations into hedging practices over the last three or four years that required energy companies to disclose what their practices were?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Which crisis is Mr. Gannon talking about?
Ms Karen Trant:
The report was commissioned in 2023 and it took six months. We required the various suppliers to provide their hedging strategies, obviously on a commercially sensitive and confidential basis. What we discovered, which speaks to Mr. Gannon's point, was that hedging strategies buffered the most severe and volatile crisis for Irish customers. At one point, they were 300% higher than the weighted average retail price, and that was because hedging was keeping it at a particular price. We also looked at their financial resilience because at that point we had a number of supplier-of-last-resort events where we had three suppliers leave the market because it was not commercially viable for them. We found that the hedging practices were in a way supporting customers. They were also supporting the entities themselves, so they could withstand the volatility. Within that report, we also looked at the underlying costs. We brought in financial experts to support us in that review. There was no evidence that prices were being kept artificially high. They were in line with underlying costs and hedging strategies.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Was the CRU happy that the energy companies were reducing their prices in an expeditious manner?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
When the CRU was conducting that investigation, or at any time since, were there any complaints or concerns from one energy supplier about the rate the other ones were reducing?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Some energy companies verbalised complaints to the commission.
Ms Karen Trant:
They will say that the prices are at a particular rate, it is not commercially sustainable for them, and they are going to leave. We looked at that and commissioned an investigation into it. The hedging strategies of particular companies were prudent and they had hedged fortuitously ahead. It had protected them. There was nothing within the investigation that would indicate there were artificially high prices or artificially low prices. We were satisfied with the outcome of that investigation.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. Gannon mentioned data centres. In light of the recent Coolglass Windfarm Limited v. An Bord Pleanála case about the CRU's mandate and the draft proposal on energy users, the CRU previously stated that it lacked sufficient authority under the climate Act to mandate emissions reductions from data centres. Will that be updated in light of the Coolglass ruling? Has legal advice been received following that? Does he think it is practicable to regulate data centres to reduce emissions? A lot of people will say that there is growth and strain on the system because of the large amount of energy that is being and will be consumed by data centres.
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
I do not think the Coolglass final judgment is yet published. We published a minded-to, or draft, decision in February. That set out our proposed approach to the treatment of data centres specifically. We have received over 80 responses from stakeholders, and we have taken great care and diligence to understand each one of those perspectives. We are currently in the middle of a deliberative process and are looking to finalise that decision towards the end of this year.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On the same topic of data centres-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Very quickly, Deputy.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Department recently said data centres had swamped the capacity of grid upgrade and resilience. Investment in the grid was mentioned earlier. Has the commission met EirGrid or the ESB to discuss the concerns about the extra capacity needed? The Secretary General of the Department of the environment said that difficult decisions would have to made about energy targets. In some countries like the Netherlands, they can prioritise for housing over the needs of data centres, whereas here it seems to be a first come, first served basis. Do the witnesses have a view on that?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
We are in regular engagement with the system operators that we regulate. They are EirGrid, ESBN and GNI. We are planning to have a workshop with them on 17 October to get updated data on current system adequacies, security and other matters. In terms of prioritisation, as a regulator we work under the legislative framework that we have. Prioritisation is a matter for public policy. We have looked and called for a plan-led approach to identify, in the round, Ireland's ambitions for this sector in line with the substantive investment package being put forward by the Government in the context of the NDP, and to consider issues of societal and economic need.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We need to talk to the Government about that-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will let Deputy Daly back in. He will get time in a second round.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for their presentations and for coming in today. In July 2025, 301,000 households were in arrears for electricity. What is that figure now?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That would be great. My understanding is that it went up by 10% between November and July. I want to see if that is continuing, so if the witnesses could find those figures, it would be useful. Energy costs are a huge discussion at the moment because so many people are struggling. We have more than 300,000 households struggling significantly with them and we are seeing a lot of the retailers now putting up their prices. I know that is because there are grid costs as well. On average, how much should household bills have gone up by due to the infrastructure needs that the CRU approved over the last year?
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
We recently published the update for October this year. There was an increase of approximately €29 over the course of 2025 to 2026. That was an average of €2.50 per domestic householder. It will be a lot more for large energy users based on what they use. That update is for the forthcoming year. In May this year, we published the draft decision on what we call PR6, which is the every five-year price control on the ESB and EirGrid's network infrastructure plans. We have just finished PR5. Based on the numbers provided by ESB and EirGrid, we estimate in the draft decision for PR6 that, over the coming five years, the annual increase could be up to approximately €15 to €16 per annum. That depends on them successfully delivering on the plans they have submitted. If they do not, the increase could be less because we check that every year.
We only allow them to recover what they actually spend.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What I am seeing at the moment is companies putting up their prices by significant amounts - €200 or €250 on average per year - and are actually blaming infrastructure costs for those prices. I will read from Energia's website. It said it was putting up its prices on 9 October. It said that it worked to minimise the impact on customers and that these price changes are unavoidable due to ongoing substantial increases in electricity system operator and network charges. It said that these regulatory approved non-energy charges that are applied to electricity suppliers are required to cover the costs of ensuring security of supply. Its prices are going up by an average of €200, which is way beyond the cost the CRU is incurring. Does the commission have concerns that energy companies are using the CRU's decision to essentially put up prices for households all across the country? Is this something the CRU can raise with the energy companies because what is presented on that website is misinformation?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Energia spoke about regulatory-approved non-energy charges so this has nothing to do with the wholesale market. This is purely the charges that it has to take on board because of the CRU decision. I find it offensive that Energia is actually trying to sell its price increases to customers by essentially blaming improvements in the grid and network security. It is blatantly obvious that this is what it is trying to do. Is the CRU happy with that approach?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
I will make two comments on two aspects referenced. The PSO charge this year is set at €162.37 million for 2025 to 2026. This is a decrease of €89.42 million on the PSO levy for last year. For a domestic customer, this will mean a drop from, on average, €3.23 per month to €2.01 per month. This levy helps us fund renewable energy and that is regulated. The second one that is of concern is network imperfection charges. These charges have grown substantially. The figure this year is €790.24 million after the SEM committee had disallowed €93 million from the original forecast by the TSO. Imperfections are the technical and operational deviations and inefficiencies that occurred to the physical limits of the grid. That is of concern. There are a number of mitigants we can consider to address that such as enhanced grid delivery, in particular the North-South interconnector; an action plan on dispatched earn for renewable energy; more network investment; and reviewing and refining bidding rules into the market.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What the Deputy is saying is that a company regulated by the CRU is effectively blaming it for a much larger price increase, which cannot be substantiated. Has the CRU any comment on that?
Mr. Jim Gannon:
We meet with the energy supply companies on a quarterly basis, comment on their price rises or reductions and query what they attribute them to. Part of our discussion will be those charges we know of that are increasing. Imperfection charges have increased significantly. The network tariffs that are traditional have increased relatively modestly compared to prior years so we do bring up those aspects.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have read what is on the Energia website. Does that concern CRU and will it immediately raise that with Energia because I have serious concerns about what it is stating?
Dr. Karen Kavanagh:
There is a regulated component. The other part of our customer protection framework was referred to by Ms Trant in terms of monitoring and importing. We also have the customer code of practice, which is a suite of documents involving obligations on suppliers regarding all aspects of customer engagement, including communications. We would be quite concerned if there were breaches of that code of practice and would seek to ensure that there were no breaches. Regarding the narrow piece in terms of the actual tariffs or the elements we regulate, we would need to verify that those charges are in line with what we have set out. We would have to look at any misleading or confusing information being put out in the context of our monitoring framework relating to customer protection.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask the CRU to do that urgently, come back to me or the committee and let us know. Any of the other companies I have looked at have not been as blatant - this is regulatory and they are saying it is about wholesale prices and have added the other things up. This would appear to just focus on the charges the CRU is putting on, so I ask it to look into that urgently.
Mr. Jim Gannon:
We will. When we appeared before the committee's prior incarnation, we spoke about clarity on the bill and consumer understanding of that bill. We have been in touch with peers in Greece, Italy and other locations about that clarity and what best fits and suits. Our team is working on a call for evidence to seek the best way of identifying those clear paths through costs and effectively disaggregating the business cost and the wholesale cost, which is within which those companies compete. It is to clearly define and distinguish those to make sure the clarity is there for all. That piece of work is under way and we will update the committee as it moves on.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The ones I have are July. The number is 301,000. That is what is in the Oireachtas-----
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
So the CRU does not have any more recent ones. In the context of the increasing prices, I would have thought that it would have been continually reviewing maybe even on a monthly basis to see exactly how many households are in arrears.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
So the CRU does not know-----
Ms Karen Trant:
It is in and around 13%. We know it has gone up, particularly on the gas side. We have seen a smaller increase on the electricity side but that is because of the credits, which have buffered the arrears. Gas is concerning. We are looking at that within the context of what we can do and what levers we can pull.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I find it concerning that the CRU has come before a committee of politicians where energy prices are the topic of discussion and cannot tell me exactly how many homes are to date in arrears, either electricity or gas. It is almost October, every household in the country is facing enormous price hikes and it is unlikely we will see credits. If the CRU could find those figures, it would be great.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What are we looking at regarding disconnections versus arrears? There needs to be a sense of urgency here with regular reporting about where we are. There is concern, fear and uncertainty. If we had up-to-date figures, it would be very useful.
Utility providers are essentially blaming the CRU for increases. Should Uisce Éireann also blame the CRU for the 10% increase in commercial charges that is coming in later this year? How can the CRU justify such an increase considering it is not in sync with inflation?
Mr. Jim Gannon:
We get figures from all the suppliers on arrears levels and disconnections. When those figures come in, it takes approximately two months to validate them. We find ourselves having to go back with queries and we have picked up errors before, so it does take some time. We will continue to increase the speed of that validation process as much as we can and will continue to provide updated figures to this committee and others and publish them as soon as we can but it does take some time. That does not reflect a lack of urgency on our part. It just reflects the complexity.
We do that to serve the public interest, to be transparent-----
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am conscious of time. I have a couple of questions to ask. I would appreciate it if Mr. Gannon could-----
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
In relation to water, the percentage increase from October is 9.8%, as the Deputy will be aware, for non-domestic. There are no charges for domestic, so it only applies to approximately 20% of the Uisce Éireann customer base. Uisce Éireann had sought a much higher increase from October, but following-----
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
They were looking for approximately 18%. The reason for the increase of 9.8% is that it is an interim change of the price while we are working on a price control for the next five years, which has been delayed. The process involved is that the Government publishes a water services policy statement, the Minister approves an Uisce Éireann strategic funding plan and that plan is then submitted to us. The increase is a result of the output on the funding plan that has been approved by the Government. That plan, which is on our desks, outlines an amount of approximately €16 billion that will go into water and wastewater services. A significant proportion of that cost will have to be recovered from businesses. It is recovered through the regulatory framework. As a result of that framework, based on the cost of what is being delivered by Uisce Éireann, which is an enormous investment and a huge increase on previous years, as I say, up to €16 billion, is now reflected in a higher price.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In relation to the roll-out of infrastructure, there are discussions taking place between the Department and Uisce Éireann. The CRU has a responsibility in respect of that roll-out as well. Is the CRU's progress happening at the same pace as that of Uisce Éireann in relation to this or is there any cause for concern regarding potential delays because the two plans are not in sync?
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
The short answer is that there will not be any issues. The regulatory framework is working at pace. That pace will not stall in any way the investment that Uisce Éireann is required to make. Uisce Éireann is funded by the Exchequer and through non-domestic bills. Part of the reason for increasing the price from October is to ensure that Uisce Éireann can continue to invest at pace in infrastructure for in new housing and whatever else is needed under the national development plan. The regulatory framework is in no way an impediment to the pace of infrastructure delivery.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In relation to large energy users, the programme for Government makes clear the role that data centres play and how important they are. It also makes clear the ambition to facilitate data centres. It is my understanding that the connection policy has been in operation for over three years. Is that correct?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
We published a decision on this in 2021. That decision stands. There were a number of aspects of it that we needed to consider, in particular generation and climate and renewable issues that we wanted to reflect on in the intervening period. Ireland has been successful in attracting this type of investment. We have grown from 5% of energy demand to data centres to 30% contracted for 2030. However, there is an intervening period where there are physical constraints on the network, especially throughout the Dublin region. Our minded-to decision highlighted that. We have asked the system operators to prepare detailed analyses of capacity. If I bring the Deputy back to the earlier part of the conversation, that is the workshop that we will be having with the three system operators on 17 October.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How long more will this go on for before it is up to date? Dr. Harrington refer to 2021. In tech time, an iPhone that is four years old now is nearly an antique. We need to move at a faster pace in view of how fast this sector moves. When can we expect a report on this?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I appreciate that, but when will the new report and new guidance be forthcoming?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has the CRU missed deadlines already in relation to this?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Would Dr. Harrington have a concern that we are losing investment as a result of the lack of clarity and an update in relation to the policy?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
The regulatory framework, which provides the framework and rules by means of which data centres can connect to the electricity system, stands and is available. The draft minded-to decision signalled an evolution of that, and it is not impeding any industry. The issue is how and when they can connect where there is capacity to do so.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If the issue is in the greater Dublin area, should we be looking at taking a twofold approach to this? In other words, the rest of the country versus Dublin. If there is scope, there is opportunity and there is capacity. Should we be looking at that as a priority? I would have concern that tardiness and the nature of the approach to this are leading to investment going overseas. It has reputational impact as well in relation to foreign direct investment, not only in respect of this but also on a broader sectoral basis.
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
Going back to the data points, it is important to acknowledge that over 30% of electricity - everything that we produce in 2030 - will go to data centres. Over 50% of what we produce today in Dublin and Meath goes to data centres. As a country, we have done an enormous job to attract and retain investment. There is just a physical impediment to what can be connected in certain locations. For that reason, in the context of our minded-to decision, we have asked for clarity on exactly where connections can be made.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I reiterate that there is life outside Dublin and Meath.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We need to see the all-island approach, first and foremost. Are there any obstacles to the CRU delivering its policy paper by the end of quarter 3 or the beginning of quarter 4? Are there any reasons for concern in that regard?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What are those complexities? Dr. Harrington has given a commitment that it will be quarter 3 or quarter 4. I am not getting reassurance to the effect that it will be delivered. What are the obstacles?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Can Dr. Harrington guarantee that it will be delivered in quarter 3?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
I am saying that we are working through that deliberative process assiduously to listen to and take on board the feedback that we have received. We need to take on board a lot of the feedback, most of it in the context of understanding the new issues that we need to consider. We are looking towards it.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will rephrase the question. As to the feedback that has been provided, why is it giving cause for concern?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How would that feedback cause a delay?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does the CRU have adequate skills and resources?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will let the Deputy back in like everybody else.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the CRU for its presentation. The PR6 published recently by the CRU states that domestic customers would be paying increases of between €6 and €16 annually to fund the €18 billion needed to invest in the country's electricity system. A deep dive found that would be up to €80 a year, a 21% increase, whereas data centres will see an 18% reduction in their costs. Why is that?
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
In relation to PR6, as explained earlier, it is up to €18 billion. It is the biggest investment in our energy infrastructure in the history of the State. It is for the next five years and beyond. We talk about these investments in five years, but these are investments in things that will be there for the next 40 years.
What we published in May set out clearly the impact on different types of users. We have lots of different categories, from the ordinary user who may spend, according to an average bill, €1,800 a year. The average bill for a very large energy user could be anything between €7 million and €8 million. Naturally, the delta between a normal household and a business is, because of usage, is significant. Large businesses contribute a huge amount to funding the €18 billion.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They get their discount.
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
The issue that arose in terms of how it was presented in May was because over the past five years we had what we call a temporary emergency generation requirement. We had a security-of-supply risk, which meant that, basically, there might not be enough capacity on the island to serve the needs of the island. A number of plants were kept on stand-by under this temporary requirement. It cost the State, consumers and all of us an awful lot of money to ensure the lights did not go out. That was recovered over a three- or four-year period, mainly from large energy users, which meant that their bills went up enormously during that time.
The statistic I would give the Deputy is that the 2021 versus 2025 bill for a large energy user went up by approximately 170%, whereas the average bill for a domestic customer would have increased by 45%. If we take out the extraordinary cost, which is a one-off exceptional cost that was incurred for that temporary emergency generation requirement, and rebalance it to normal times, the change in that bill for large energy users was far more than that for domestic. We have to take into account that one-off adjustment. While people might have seen the emergence of a document in May suggesting that large energy users are looking at a reduction, when you look at it over five years, you can see they are facing a very large increase.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They are the cause of the demand as well, though. The CRU acknowledges the demand that data centres are putting on the grid.
They are causing the risk of blackouts and brownouts.
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
We meet EirGrid and the ESB fairly often and we speak about these issues, of course. EirGrid manages the grid and the risk of the grid, and it manages it very well. At present there are no immediate alerts, and there have not been immediate alerts in recent years, in terms of the security of supply issue. The demand on the network from large energy is significant but this is where grid investment is required. At present, the grid is catering for what the grid demand is. Again, the job of the network operators is to manage this demand and not put so much demand on the energy network that it cannot cope. This is the responsibility of the semi-States and at present they are doing this. What they are telling us is that to cater for future demand they need to spend up to €18 billion to be able to have 300,000 more houses and all of the industrial development we expect to have. The problem with investment is that it takes a long time to build and there is a lead time between investments. Large energy users and others can build within a couple of years but energy takes five to ten years to build. This is what we need to manage.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I want to ask about another crisis the country is facing. A report commissioned by the CRU recently states ESB Networks has highlighted a risk whereby in the absence of an adequate policy response, the potential level of data centre demand could significantly impact its ability to accommodate demand for connections required to support Government policy targets, such as in housing. Is it the belief of the CRU that data centres are seizing electricity capacity that is meant for new homes? We passed the 5,000 mark in the number of children who are homeless. Does the CRU believe data centres are increasing demand and seizing electricity that was meant to be for housing?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
We set the rules by which people can connect to the grid and the system operators are clearly flagging their concerns about this. The issue is about prioritisation for societal and economic need in balance. How this is done is not the role of an economic regulator. Our role is to set the terms and conditions for connections to the electricity system.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does the CRU believed a moratorium should be put on data centres, particularly with AI and the explosion in demand?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
I thank Deputy Cronin for the question. There is no moratorium. The 2021 decision does not place a moratorium. The revised minded-to decision places additional demands and constraints on data centre entry. This is what we are working to finalise and we are doing so taking on board all of the feedback we had from the 86 respondents to the consultation. We are very conscious of the issues raised by Deputy Cronin, and of the concerns expressed about system operators. This is why we are holding a half-day meeting with them on 17 October.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the witnesses and thank them for their presentation. I have several questions, and one follows the question on data centres. I welcome Mr. Gannon's proposal that we would have an opportunity for further engagement given the delay in putting together the piece of work. It would be most welcome if we could have further engagement because members are quite interested in the issue. It would be most useful.
I have a general question for the CRU. Does the CRU have powers to enforce stricter conditions on data centre connections to ensure they align with carbon budgets and to mandate flexible power contracts to limit peak demand impact? Does the CRU have powers to introduce mandatory real-time greenhouse gas emissions reporting for data centres? In setting the connection policies, does the CRU have powers to impose conditions?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
I thank Senator Noonan and we will be delighted to have some time with him. I will answer some of the points and I will ask my colleague Dr. Hemmingway to answer the others.
With regard to climate, we have set a position in the draft minded-to decision. With regard to greenhouse gas reporting, we have set out how much additional data we will require from any new data centre that connects. I will ask Dr. Hemmingway to speak on the peak connection policy and on the climate queries.
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
I will answer the questions in the order they were asked. In terms of emissions mandate, in other words mandating on the basis of emissions, we outlined in our proposed decision a number of months back that we see challenges there. We are, however, deliberating on considerations for renewable energy, for example, because we have statutory obligations in terms of renewable energy. This is part of our ongoing deliberation between the proposed decision and the final decision.
In terms of peak demand and whether we could require data centres or other customers to perform this type of role, it is something we are actively considering. There are a number of products that system operators are bringing to the market to achieve similar things. We are also acutely conscious of the potential addition of large point loads and what they might do in terms of large demand being added to the system. The proposed decision we published in terms of data centres had a proposal for data centres to bring generation along with their demand. For example, if they brought 100 MW of demand they would bring an equivalent amount of generation, which would operate in the market as well.
On the last question on reporting on emissions, the answer is "yes". In the proposed decision we included a requirement for data centres to report on their emissions performance and their renewable energy performance, such as whether they are sourcing renewable energy.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
My next question is on water. The issue of Uisce Éireann's water charges plan has been raised. Uisce Éireann had been seeking an 18% increase. Specific to the CRU, does it do any projected modelling on potential costs of projects, for instance, the proposed Shannon water pipeline to the greater Dublin area? This will be a significant capital outlay by Uisce Éireann. Perhaps it will require Uisce Éireann to outlay that cost back on commercial customers, given that we do not have domestic water charges in this country. Potentially, we will have another children's hospital on our hands with this project. I am deeply concerned that the capital costs could run. I know some discussions have taken place with farm organisations on the land acquisition for it. There is an issue, if we look at the summer just gone, with the instability of supply. Does the CRU form an opinion on this? There is a security of supply issue and potential knock-on costs to commercial customers with a project such as this. The bigger and broader question the committee could look at is whether we should be looking at more disparate sources of water supply and, obviously, going after unaccounted-for water in Dublin as well as balanced regional development, which we all speak about, rather than continuously feeding the need for Dublin.
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
I will take these questions. We play a role as a regulator to oversee the regulatory framework of Uisce Éireann. In terms of individual capital projects we only have a role in so far as whether it is expenditure efficient. We also place incentives to deliver as much as possible as fast as possible to ensure safe and secure reliable water is delivered. Large projects are covered under the public spending code, similar to other projects. This is under the auspices of the Department of housing. When it comes to the likes of the water project to the Shannon, we were involved in it under gate 1 of the public spending code and we prepared a report based on expert advice we received from a firm based in England, which is an expert in water delivery. The gate 1 process of the public spending code examined whether there was a business case for the water supply project. The outcome of this - the report is publicly available - was a resounding absolute yes. Dublin will have real problems in terms of water supply in the coming ten, 20 and 30 years. Obviously the population growth of Dublin has been such that we have a huge amount of water coming from the Ballymore Eustace plant and off the Liffey.
This is far more than is possible to have over the next 40 years with further expansion. From the business case for the water supply project, it is clear it is required but, in tandem with that, Uisce Éireann is doing huge amounts of work in terms of leakage programmes across Dublin and all parts of the country to remove leakages from what is, as we all know, a very old water system. That is where the €16 billion comes in. There are massive projects under way across the greater Dublin region. There is a big project in Limerick and then there is the water supply project.
In terms of comparisons with the hospital, etc., the board and the executive of Uisce Éireann are the sanctioning authority and the approving authority. They are fully responsible for the oversight of those projects and they report to the Department. Ex post, we would look at all expenditure, including those projects under the regulatory framework, to make sure whatever they spend is spent efficiently, that the needs case is there and that it is reflected in prices when it comes to non-domestic projects.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I apologise for being late. I was speaking in the Dáil. I have a number of questions. I read the opening statement. One question relates to energy costs and supporting consumers. In September, the CRU announced additional customer projection measures to shield consumers from the most severe impacts of elevated energy prices. The pay-as-you-go debt recovery rate has increased from 10% to 15%. Will the witnesses explain the rationale behind that increase please?
Ms Karen Trant:
I thank the Deputy for his question. As he said, we had additional customer protection measures during the past number of years and we have largely maintained those measures going into this winter. We consult and go back out and talk to suppliers and NGOs to see if the measures are having an effect, or if they are having a negative effect. One of the things that came back, among others, is that the 10% rate was too low and would not get people out of debt. They would simply be paying too little. The ask was that it would be larger and that we bring it back up to what it was, which I think was around 20%.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Who was the ask made by?
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Would Ms Trant not see how the debt recovery rate being increased is difficult for consumers?
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Particularly when we see a large increase in the cost of energy as well.
Ms Karen Trant:
I do. We have to balance customer protections with the need for a sustainable retail market. Suppliers are now handling unprecedented levels of debt on their books. We see the number of disconnections is still very low in comparison to what they were in 2019. The number has more than halved. We are mindful we have to be able to put something in place that is sustainable. The other issue is the risk that we put customers into potentially a worse position than they would have been in terms of that debt which keeps increasing.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
By increasing the debt recovery?
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has the CRU engaged with the likes of MABS?
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Great. I thank Ms Trant for that and I will move on. In regard to the large energy users policy-----
Mr. Jim Gannon:
CRU engages frequently with organisations like MABS, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and others through a specific customer stakeholder group we host. Part of that dialogue is whether or not the measures we take can have other risks for consumers. When I spoke about the disconnection moratorium, it is through dialogue with organisations like the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and MABS that we understand that if we extend the disconnection moratorium for too long, sometimes that can result in consumer debt increasing before they engage. This is one of those balanced decisions where we have to look at the consumer outcome and balance some of those risks against one another. It is also important to reflect that these sorts of decisions which we take on an annual basis are now also the subject of dialogue with the national energy affordability task force in the round and in terms of how Ireland and the Government will tackle energy affordability.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Gannon. I will move on to the large energy users policy. When is it planned to be published?
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
When will EirGrid and ESB be mandated to implement it?
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In terms of the LEU policy, how will it align with Government objectives for data centre development specifically along the south-east corridor following offshore wind projects?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
At the moment, the decision that stands is the 2021 decision. The decision we are working on is an evolution of that. We have a draft decision published since February. What that does is it sets out a connection policy and the terms and conditions for that, cognisant of the ambition that is being set out by the State. Ireland has very ambitious offshore renewable energy targets. When that regime and infrastructure - the grid and generating capacity infrastructure that is built in the ocean - is there, there will be a significant uplift in renewable generation capacity. It is about how we navigate between today and that period when that infrastructure is in place. I hope that answers the Deputy's question.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes, I thank Dr. Harrington.
I will go back to the theme of the cost of energy at the moment. What measures have been taken to tackle the increasing cost of energy, particularly in terms of CRU's role in aligning with energy providers and speaking with them? What specific measures have been taken or are being taken this year as opposed to in 2022, 2023 or 2024?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
I will take the Deputy through some of the things we have done on the wholesale side. The single electricity market is an all-island electricity market chaired by the SEM committee. In a number of our decisions, we have reduced down the figures that have been asked for by the system operators. I will bring the Deputy back to the PSO decision. It is a decrease of €89.42 million on last year. In the network imperfections costs, we refused a figure of €93 million from what was originally requested. That is where we use our powers as a regulator to put downward pressure on what we think is not appropriate for a reasonable outcome for the market. We do that to the greatest extent we can. That is on the wholesale side.
Mr. Jim Gannon:
On the retail side, I might pass over to my colleague, Ms Trant, after a couple of points. The CRU does not have a role related to setting explicit prices in the Irish retail market. The market has an open and competitive base as set out under EU law. What the CRU seeks to do is to ensure there is competition in that retail market, including new market entrants. We have had recent inquiries and decisions made on new market entrants, so we believe it is a market that people will come into and create competitiveness and separately through our engagement with consumers, in particular.
We will shortly engage with a campaign focused on switching. We still see switching can provide a €300 to €400 reduction for consumers when they do it and do so regularly. This, it is hoped, will increase competitiveness in the market.
In terms of some of the other aspects we mentioned before, I will not repeat them but we are happy to come back to the Deputy.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is fine. I thank Mr. Gannon. The question is answered, Ms Trant.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a few factual questions because they would be useful. Then I will come to the bigger picture. The figure of 50% was mentioned. Was that 50% electricity usage in Dublin or 50% of energy-----
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
So, 50% of energy generation in Dublin is being used currently by large energy users-----
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
-----which know we largely consist of data centres. To my mind that is quite significant.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is what I wanted to clarify.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I do not think anybody can accuse us of not having put a huge amount of our available eggs into one basket in terms of use. I do not even know if that is the right metaphor.
On the disjoin people are seeing between the decrease for these large energy users and bills and the increase in terms of domestic bills, the witnesses mentioned the temporary energy flexible generation piece. Can I check that because is 2021 to 2025 not the time when there was the previous scandal we dealt with in the previous iteration of this committee?
During some of the Covid subsidy period, domestic households were effectively paying more and paying a greater subsidy, basically subsidising large energy users in terms of their electricity bills. That was realised and had not been stopped. Everyone was asking why it had not been stopped much earlier. When did that occur exactly? We have had a previous record whereby households have subsidised large energy users. I do not know if the debt or the rebalancing that is needed is for large energy users having carried an undue weight previously. That is not what the record shows. What is the difference percentage of the change in bills for large energy users versus households if we discount the temporary energy generation piece?
Dr. Karen Kavanagh:
The issue the Senator is referring to is around the rebalancing which was introduced at the time of the crisis. It was introduced in 2012. The Senator is correct there was a rebalancing between domestic and large energy users. We removed that three years ago. At the time when we removed it, ESB Networks identified that there had been an error in how it had been applied to the tune of €100 million. That was immediately corrected in domestic bills. It was rebalanced against large energy users who had to pay that back over three years. It was corrected for domestic customers immediately. On a structural technical issue, that was on the distribution system. It was relating distribution system monies.
The issue that has been alluded to here and the reason there is disparity across the PR6 piece is because the large energy user customers are essentially connected or more exposed to cost at a transmission system level. The money for the temporary emergency generation was recovered through transmission system charges. They were exposed over the period to transmission system charges in a way that domestic customers were not, which saw their tariffs increase by approximately 175% versus 45% at a domestic customer level. As that is removed, they are seeing the benefit of it being removed. If one was to strip that out and look at the increases across PR6, large energy users and all categories of customers are seeing the impact of PR6 in a way that is consistent with our current cost allocation.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If we are comparing 2021 to 2025, we need to bear in mind that was also a period of time when there was the end of a previously inequitable rebalancing piece that was happening at the same time.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
To come back to the question on the large energy users, I want to pull out on a couple of things to be clear what is and is not, because we have been told previously that CRU can and cannot do different things. That has shifted over the period of time. For example, on prioritisation, there is prioritisation in terms of access to connections. When we look at PR6 in terms of the increase and the ring-fencing, prioritisation can be one approach. There is also ring-fencing as a way of guaranteeing it. Is there ring-fencing of connections for housing and others? Is it the case that the CRU is continuing with the position that it cannot prioritise? I am surprised by it on two levels. First, we have the public duty, equality and human rights that apply to the CRU and its operations. Second, in the functioning and mandate of CRU, one of the things should be to ensure we have a properly functioning State, with housing obviously being a key priority in relation to that.
What is needed from CRU's perspective for it to start prioritising and-or ring-fencing connections for households, housing or public needs, such as hospitals? There are clear examples - I do not want to get bogged down with examples - of situations where we had houses wait eight months for connection in an area where we have data centres that are fully connected and operating.
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
There are some examples of where efforts to implement prioritisation have been put in train. For example, the Dutch regulator has begun a piece of work on that. It is something that we are actively exploring in discussions with the Department, EirGrid and ESB Networks. Our current understanding is that the legislation currently in place that we operate under is not sufficient in order to introduce prioritisation across the full set of potential connection applicants. We then come to the question of which entity should perform prioritisation. For example, there are targets around housing, electrification of electric vehicles, EVs, and heating. However, there are no targets for data centres. We are not currently in a position to prioritise between different social and economic needs. In addition to potentially requiring additional legislation, we would require some policy guidance on that.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It would be useful if we could get a written piece of where the gap is. Is it in the mandate of CRU? Is it in the functions of CRU? Where exactly is the gap in terms of that capacity?
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That would be really useful. I am assuming, from that context, that in PR6 we do not have ring-fencing of domestic connections. Is PR6 planning for, or has it planned for, new data centre connections beyond those that already have a connection agreement?
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask Mr. Mulligan to be specific because my time is tight.
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
There are three key points and objectives. Our job is to enable the scale of investment required to meet Ireland's climate and energy goals. We are there to ensure the value for money to electricity customers through the robust cost oversight and performance incentives. The next point is really important, which is to maintain a network of reliability and resilience, particularly in the face of growing demand and climate-related risks, for example, Storm Éowyn etc. They are the fundamental pillars on which this €18 billion investment is required. Within that, ESBN and EirGrid plan their network out. They prioritise and plan out across the length and breadth of the country. For example, there is a huge winter resilience plan for the west of Ireland.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Unfortunately, I cannot hear the full picture of PR6. I have a number of questions I wish to get to.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have to stop the Senator. I will let her back in, but I have to manage the time.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am very keen to get back in.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is fine. I will let you back in.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is there any ring-fencing for housing within PR6? Is that planned for? Is there planning in this planned approach for new connections of data centres beyond those where there is an existing connection agreement? Within that planning, is there planning for what form of energy users it will be? I ask the witnesses to clarify, but one of the other areas we have been told CRU cannot or will not specify is that new data centres would need to draw their back-up energy from renewable rather than other sources. That has not been clarified. Are there plans for new connections? Are there specifications around new connections beyond those already agreed? Is there ring-fencing for housing in PR6? It is yes-no answers.
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
I will hand over to my colleague in a minute on the data centres. ESBN, EirGrid and Uisce Éireann are planning in the next five years to have sufficient capacity for 300,000 houses, as is planned in the programme for Government. That is in their plans. The capital investment is there to facilitate that. There is a risk about the delivery of infrastructure that we all know about. At the moment, the plans are to invest in that infrastructure to facilitate 300,000 homes across the length and breadth of the country.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is there is no ring-fencing?
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If we still have a first come, first served basis for connections, there is no guarantee of that new capacity going to-----
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Have they planned for new data centre connections?
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
The data centre demand up to 2030 is up to 30% of our energy needs, which that network will meet. The network is also being built for the next 40 years. All that planning is going on too. There are large projections of increased energy usage. That is what ESB Networks, EirGrid, and Uisce Éireann are planning for in those network plans.
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
The investment plans submitted by ESB Networks and EirGrid set out what they are profiling their investment against. It does not include an explicit commitment or statement in the plan for a greater load of data centres. Going back to my colleagues comments about a plan-led approach, there are no policy targets for the amount of data centre connections or demands that the State wishes to have.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
And is there nothing specified in terms of the energy usage?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Sorry, Senator Higgins, I will have to take the time off at the end.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. I have a couple of questions. The witnesses mentioned large energy users coming with generating capacity to meet additional demand, but I am not hearing that is renewable. Is the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, mandating that as covered within its policy or framework?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
Yes, it is. In the draft, or minded-to, decision we have set out to maximise, to the greatest extent that we can under our powers, the use of renewable energy. We are deliberating on the feedback we have had and we are using the varies we have to address both the energy security and climate objectives.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Can the CRU just mandate it? "Maximise" sounds like there is a lot of wiggle room.
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
In our proposed decision from a number of months back we set a proposed requirement around reporting of emissions and renewable requirements. We did not specifically set out a requirement around mandating of renewable energy or mandating on the basis of emissions. That is something we are currently exploring in advance of a final decision and we are taking advice on it. We are acutely conscious of the targets set out by the State.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Now is the time to do that. We have climate targets to meet.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Regarding Uisce Éireann, it was looking for an 18% increase and ended up with a 10% increase in charges. Is that a five year window? Have we any sense from Uisce Éireann whether we may be looking at more requests for increases in the future? Again, Uisce Éireann does not have a domestic customer base. Effectively, it has a commercial base. The figure of 10% is quite a substantial charge, particularly if there are more coming.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Do you have any sense of what they are?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Going back to large energy users, the CRU sees the energy networks. There is a lot of talk about prioritisation of users at the moment, which is fair enough. Are we at a capacity issue yet? Are we saying there is a capacity issue yet, or that it is imminent, and we will be forced into that prioritisation issue? What is the CRUs view on that?
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
We are in the middle of a deliberative process around that draft minded-to decision. That is why we have asked the chief executive of the systems operators, namely EirGrid, ESB Networks, and Gas Networks Ireland, to present the latest information they have relating to system security and adequacy. Our draft minded-to decision outlined the concerns, particularly around the greater-Dublin area. We have asked the system operators to prepare greater analysis and detail around the adequacy of the system. That is why we are having a follow-up session.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
But you are not saying the system is at capacity. Prioritisation is needed when we are coming close to that point.
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
There are two different aspects to this. There is generation and there is grid. We are clear that on the security-of-supply side in terms of the generation fleet, we are in a safe space. In terms of grid, we are concerned, particularly around the greater-Dublin area, and we have asked the systems operators to produce granular detail on where capacity is constrained or available. That is why we are having a workshop with them on 17 October.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Regarding Irish energy prices versus European prices, there is research that shows we are up at the top of league tables of European prices. The CRU only has control of the elements it controls itself. However, what is the witnesses' assessment of why that is? Is there an issue with the pan-European market on the wholesale side, if we are still up at the top consistently? It knocks on to consumers, obviously. What is the CRU's view on what is going on there?
Mr. Jim Gannon:
There are a couple of fundamental and unique things about the Irish system, which I am happy to go into. One important thing for us is tracking retail prices and trying to ensure competitiveness. That is in the public interest. That is what our five teams on the retail side work on all the time. In terms of the rate we benchmark ourselves against in Europe, we work off Eurostat. Eurostat is the European Commission's data and statistics warehouse. It uses the purchasing power standard. This considers the relative cost of living in jurisdictions and inflation rates. Using that, in the second half of 2024, because it aggregates and then deliberates on the figures, Irish electricity prices for the typical domestic consumer were about the ninth or tenth highest in Europe. Separately for gas consumers, they were about ninth highest in Europe. This compares the living standard and cost of living in each of the different countries. Notwithstanding that, we are keenly aware of the pressures some consumers are under.
In terms of the underpinning fundamentals, we are geographically remote from the rest of Europe. It costs more for us to get a molecule of gas onto the system. We are relatively poorly interconnected from an electricity perspective, although that is improving. There are other things we are putting in place, such as smart meters, where we will pass the 2 million mark soon, and incentives we are placing on industry to modify their demand on prices. All of that will result in more efficient grid usage, more efficient generation usage, and downward pressure on what would otherwise be there.
On our island we have one of the most dispersed populations in Europe. Per capita, in terms of wires we have four times the distribution network than the European average. That is our settlement pattern. In terms of operating, maintaining, refurbishing, and upgrading to make sure we can get through the next Storm Éowyn or people can put in electric vehicle charging points, it costs more than in other jurisdictions. Separately, when we want to build wind farms or large solar farms, or want to build storage on the system, or flexible thermal generation to back us up when those wind farms are not turning and when it is dark in the middle of winter, it costs more because we are remote. There are certain fundamental things Ireland cannot escape. However, that does not mean for everything within our control and within our ability to apply competitive pressure to, we should not do everything possible to do that.
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
The solution set going forward is to diversify our fuel mix and bring more renewables onto the system. At CRU and with SEMC, we are actively working to do that through the regulatory framework and also to enhance our physical interconnection to Great Britain and mainland Europe. There are new interconnectors planned for both jurisdictions. Bringing on more and more system services that assist the grid to operate efficiently, along with the large-scale investment that has been committed to and has been finalised in terms of Price Review 6 will all help. Obviously, demand response, which is making sure that people understand where to be efficient with their energy use, will help. All of that, in the round, will get us to a place that is energy-secure and green.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We now move on to the second round for members, who I ask to be as efficient as they can within three minutes.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will be brief. Mr. Gannon mentioned the CRU is a member of the National Energy Affordability Taskforce. I received a reply last night from the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment about the report from that taskforce regarding when it is due and when it will be available. The response stated there will be a series of meetings to prepare for the finalisation of the interim report.
When is the report going to be out? I am not referring to the interim report, but the real report.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is fine; Mr. Gannon does not know. Just in relation to prioritisation, whether it is housing, data centres or EVs, and following on from what was said, the CRU is waiting for the Government to give it a list of priorities or some guidance in relation to prioritisation. Is that the case?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The CRU does not have the plan yet.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. Going back to some of the questions about affordability and arrears, and the €300,000 or €301,000 in arrears on electricity bills and €183,000 in arrears on gas bills, the CRU annual paper on protection measures warned that the withdrawal of the electricity credits could see a spike in the number of households in arrears this winter. In how many meetings with the Minister this year was there a discussion about the withdrawal of energy credits, or were there any meetings?
Mr. Jim Gannon:
I do not believe there have been meetings, from recollection. The energy credits would be something that we administer on foot of any Government decision. Any Government budget decision is just that. Over the past number of years, we have worked with ESB Networks and the suppliers to ensure that when the credits were provided, they were provided, tracked and audited.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Prior to the decision that seems to have been taken to withdraw the credits, did the Government go to the CRU and ask for any analysis about what the impact would be of the withdrawal of the credits?
Ms Karen Trant:
I presented to the Minister and the members of the national energy affordability task force in terms of arrears and what we were doing as a regulator to protect customers. I think it is fair to say they are aware and we have told them we believe the better options are targeted ones, and I think that is their view. How they do that is what they are looking at. We really want to target people who need the support. We have said to the task force that it is obvious if you remove the credits it could have a negative effect. The data shows spikes and troughs when the credit was allocated. It is about reaching out to those customers who really need the help. We are working very closely with that task force to ensure we can do that and we can do as a regulator what we can-----
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does Ms Trant know when the report will be out?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Last question, Deputy.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
So the CRU has the interim report.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Was it today or yesterday it was received?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask because last night the Minister said that he-----
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that to discuss the draft interim report?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Deputy Daly. I call Deputy Whitmore.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In any market, the more demand there is, the higher the price. We have seen an increase in data centre demand from 5% in 2015 to 22% now, and going to 30%. Has the CRU ever done any analysis on the impact of data centre demand on prices across the board? That is my first question. The second concerns how much data centres pay for their electricity. The standard rate is roughly 34 cent per kilowatt hour for residential users. How much do data centres pay per kilowatt hour?
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
I will pass the Deputy's question over to Dr. Kavanagh in a minute. In terms of the statement the Deputy made regarding the more the demand, the higher the cost, that is not necessarily true. As we know, networks have very high fixed costs, so generally, the more demand there is, the lower the unit cost, in terms of economics.
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
I will hand over to Dr. Kavanagh soon in terms of the unit costs. As I said earlier, domestic customers may pay €1,800 annually, while an extra large energy users, XLEU, could be paying up to €7 million to €8 million a year. It is in terms of that scale, but Dr. Kavanagh will give the Deputy the unit costs.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes, but I am looking at the per unit cost.
Dr. Karen Kavanagh:
EirGrid and ESB Networks publish their statements of charges. I apologise I do not have that to hand and so I cannot give the Deputy specific unit rates, but I am very happy to provide it afterwards. The combined bill for an extra large energy user in 2024-25 was about €6.7 million, and that was changing to €6.759 million, so there was a very small increase of 0.02% in the recent network tariff change. I do not have the specific rates, but I can provide that information.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The total amount they paid for electricity was-----
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. Mulligan does not think increased demand in the electricity market will push up electricity prices. Is that his contention?
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
That would be because there would still be a need to recover a huge amount of fixed and operating costs. That is just the laws of physics. This is why large countries like the UK or France, which have 50 million or 60 million customers, benefit from economies of scale and scope. This was what Mr. Gibbons was saying earlier in terms of Ireland Inc. We have just over 2 million customers, perhaps 2.5 million customers, on a large network that is very dispersed. The actual unit price is a factor of that dispersed network, which is a really-high cost network, with four times the amount of network compared with other countries. There is also lower demand because we have fewer users. Many factors are in play regarding what the unit price might be.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Given that we have seen such an increase in demand from data centres, why have our electricity prices not gone down?
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
Again, in terms of network tariffs, which represent, as Dr. Harrington said earlier, about 25% or 33% of the bill, those network charges, when we are talking about an investment of €18 billion, are going up by about between €8 and €16 per annum, which is not much. That is being driven down by the extra demand we foresee over the next ten years. If that demand were not there but we still had to put in place all the poles and the network resilience, the price could be going up further. A downward pressure is being put on future prices by higher demand.
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
I will just add a few things to those points. Ireland is very exposed to the gas international markets in particular. Over 50% of our generation fleet is fuelled by natural gas. When there are periods of Dunkelflaute or when renewable energy is not available, the last generator onto the system sets the price. Again, on a very windy or sunny day, that can be a renewable. The system and the framework are set up correctly for that. What is growing and is of concern are network imperfection charges, which are close to €800 million. They are driven by the need to upgrade our grid and this is why the PR6 investment is so important. We must build and strengthen our national transmission and distribution grid systems. Until we do so, there will be these charges that arise after the fact and after the market in respect of what it means to run that system in real life. We can do a couple of things. We can build the North-South interconnector. We can put a plan in place for dispatch down, which is where a plant, especially a renewable plant, is getting curtailed. The System Operator for Northern Ireland, SONI, has prepared a report for Northern Ireland and EirGrid is preparing a report here. There are several other measures that the single electricity market committee, SEMC, is actively working on. This is an area that is in our control and under active consideration.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This is the final question.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Just on those last points, the PR6 does not set aside any money for any further growth in data centres. It is only dealing with the existing data centres and those that have been approved. Is that correct?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has it specified how much in that €18 billion is due to data centres?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
But have they actually specified, of the €18 billion-----
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes. I think 7% of data centres is the distribution load. It could be €1.5 billion for data centres.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will have to-----
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Just in relation to the pricing, which I will look into, if you are looking at just the cost of data centres from the generation aspect, because that generation crisis that happened a number of years ago cost millions or euro to deal with it, and now-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is there a question there? I have other members looking-----
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They are costing us an awful lot of money.
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
May I just answer that? The €18 billion will be recovered in proportion to what they use. We will recover far more in revenue from the actual cost because we have to recover the cost of those data centres from them. That is why they are paying €8 million to €9 million a year. The actual €18 billion is to a large degree recovered from large energy users.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
So, they will pay back what they-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Sorry, Deputy. We will have to move on. I call on Senator Noonan, Deputy Ó Cearúil agus Senator Higgins.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have just one question. The issue of the potential impacts of Storm Éowyn, other storm events and extreme weather events generally was mentioned. What is the knock-on potential electricity cost of such an event? It has exposed a challenge around a lack of coherence in our rural housing policies. In particular, Mr. Mulligan mentioned the dispersed settlement patterns. We have a real challenge here where there is a very significant exposure right across the country. We saw it in the midlands but also in the north west, where that dispersed rural housing policy is causing us challenges in terms of electrical infrastructure. That has an additional cost, particularly in relation to the knock-on effect of such an event on electricity costs in terms of repair of damage to the grid structure.
Mr. Fergal Mulligan:
To put it in context, Storm Éowyn was probably the most extreme event ESBN has ever encountered, in its own words, and nearly 1 million homes were without a service. That was a lot more than the one-off dispersed nature of homes. Storm Éowyn had a massive effect across the western seaboard, so it was not just rural, remote towns and villages. I think ESBN estimates that the cost of Storm Éowyn was around €80 million to €100 million. It spent over €1.2 billion in 2025 on capital projects. That is the scale at which ESBN is spending money across the country every year.
As regards the impact on pricing of extreme storm events, while the numbers - €80 million to €100 million - are quite significant, smaller storms like Storm Ophelia and others result in much smaller amounts. The impact on network charges is negligible when you look at the scale.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. Gannon spoke about a media campaign the CRU plans to introduce around switching and the fact that households in particular should be looking to switch every year. We know of the likes of Switcher, Bonkers and oneswitch.ie. It can be quite a lengthy process, and that is for someone like me who is technically minded. I am conscious of older people in particular, people who are more vulnerable and people with disabilities, and the difficulty that comes with having to switch every year. I appreciate that there needs to be competition in the market. However, what always surprises me is that there is no type of loyalty programme or loyalty bonus assigned to existing customers of whoever the provider may be. If the CRU were given more powers as a regulator, is this something it could try to tackle? As was said earlier, staying with the same provider the following year could result in a difference of €300 or €400 per annum. By and large, the people being impacted by that most are vulnerable consumers. If there were additional regulatory powers assigned to the CRU, is this something Mr. Gannon thinks it could tackle?
Mr. Jim Gannon:
I will pass over to my colleague, Ms Trant, again. It is that balance between operating an open and competitive market in line with the European law while still incentivising that greater transparency, clarity and effective consumer communications to understand how to get the best tariff for them.
Ms Karen Trant:
We would be on difficult ground legally if we were to tell suppliers that they were to implement a particular tariff for a particular cohort of people. What we do and what we will do with the media campaign that we will go out with in the coming weeks, of which switching is one element, is to try to get customers to engage and to understand their usage, where they can go for information and how to educate themselves around that. It is a complex space - we know that - and we are trying to reach customers to tell them what their options are and what they can do. We also work with the accredited switching websites to make sure that they are working as best they can in order to support customers and make it as easy and seamless as possible. Educating customers is the first piece as well as informing them and giving them options. That is the short-term piece.
There are the other pieces that we will look at in terms of the network, namely, energy sharing and dynamic tariffs. These are all products or mechanisms that we can put in place. For example, what is energy sharing? If I have solar panels on my roof, I can share that energy with somebody in my family who does not have it. We are working with the DSOs and the SOs to make sure we can do that. That is coming from Europe as well. There are longer term measures we want to see, and we want to give customers choice, but they have to be educated in order to do that. We want to give that information in as simple, accessible and digestible a way for all customers.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
EnergyCloud is doing great work in terms of that energy sharing as well.
I am conscious of the time. I ask, in terms of that communication campaign, that there be engagement with the post office network. I am conscious of older people who have increases in their bills of €300 or €400 and are not turning on the heating - the heating, in particular, seems to be an issue around wintertime - whereas if they had those additional savings, they might be more inclined to turn on the heating. The likes of the post office network, which reaches into every community in the country, would certainly be beneficial in terms of that campaign and the communications.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I echo what the Chair said: mandate is very different from maximise. The language in the opening statement is a bit discouraging. It says providing "a pathway for LEU connections ... minimising, where possible, potential negative impacts on national renewable energy targets and carbon emissions." We need to be far past "minimising, where possible" the negative impacts; we are in a space where we need to be positively delivering on our renewable energy targets and carbon emissions targets. Maybe the witnesses could clarify and confirm the following. It was Deputy Daly who brought this up. In the CRU's previous draft policy statement, it had said that the climate Act did not provide a legal basis that was adequate in terms of specifying emission reduction measures, for example, or specifying renewable energy. Is that no longer the case? Is that legal position under review? Has there been an analysis of the impact on our overall national renewable energy target in terms of percentage usage? What we have heard from experts who have come in previously to the committee is that, effectively, the increase in new renewable energy capacity is being matched by an increase in demand from these large energy users such that we are not advancing our overall percentage. Will those be in this connection paper? I am focusing on that because the decision is pending.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Can we just-----
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The last point about that connection thing, Chair, relates to the connection policy. Can the witnesses clarify that? We often hear about demand flexibility. I think demand reduction is something we probably need to look at and we do not. In terms of demand flexibility, is it still the plan that there would be compensation for large energy users for dropping, changing or shifting the times during that period of high demand or can a willingness to pull back on demand at times of high need be an actual requirement of connection rather than something that they would be financially compensated for?
Surely that should be a condition of connection. I had two other questions, Chair, but I am happy to get written responses on them; I might just say them at the end.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is perfect.
Dr. Tanya Harrington:
I thank the Senator for the question. I will take it in two parts. Talking about the draft decision, we have clearly set out our understanding of the climate Act and how it applies to CRU versus the Electricity Regulation Act. That is under active deliberation at present. This is one of the many things we are teasing through. I will not say anything further on it, if that is okay.
I will ask my colleague, Dr. Hemmingway, to come in on the demand flexibility and what is required there for on-site approximate generation and other flexibilities required from the data centres in the proposed decision.
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
On the question of the language of minimising where possible, the legal position is currently subject to review, hence my colleague's comments.
As regards compensation for reducing demand and the effect new data centres might have on the demand versus generation mix, there are two things. In our proposed decision, we have proposed data centres which bring a certain quantity of demand would bring an equivalent amount of generation. Speaking broadly, there would be a neutral demand versus supply balance.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is not specifically renewable, however.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It really should be, to be frank.
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
That is absolutely correct. Outside of data centres but more generally, we have also introduced a pilot looking at the provision of flexible connections - timed connections. For example, this may be to offer a connection where a customer might be willing to agree to terms such as that they would not consume or would reduce their consumption at peak times. ESBN is actively trialling that at present. It has a programme seeking to sign customers up to it. I do not believe it has announced the participation in that pilot but that is an effort to seek to understand if there is an appetite generally for connection agreements that do not give full 100% firm capacity.
Going back to data centres and our 2021 direction - the current policy that applies to data centres - one of the criteria the system operators are required to analyse potential new connections for is the ability to provide the type of flexibility the Senator has referred to. That is the policy in place.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that compensated or uncompensated?
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Chair, may I very quickly give the questions I am happy to have a written reply to?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Senator will ask some questions to which the witnesses might provide written responses.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
One is the question of prioritisation. We are obviously behind the curve on it in the context of energy. In respect of water, is that something that is being prepared for with regard to the question of prioritisation of large energy users versus households?
Regarding standing charges, has there been any consideration of the issue with smart meters and how one of the disincentives is that when people are using energy more efficiently, the standing charges go up? Has there been any analysis of that or how to go about tackling it?
I very much welcome what was said on battery storage and the plans for maybe exponentially scaling that up. We have heard from experts that this is crucial. The witnesses might explain the plan for the next year or two years on battery storage.
Dr. Harrington mentioned the gas markets. I have a question regarding the system we have currently whereby renewable energy prices are artificially higher because they are pinned, in many cases, to gas, when that happens to be the last thing entering the market. Is that something that can only be tackled at EU level? I would appreciate a note on what the steps would be, be it national policy within the Department's remit or at EU level, for tackling this in order that cheap renewable energy, such as solar, can be presented to people in a way that is affordable rather than artificially pinned to an artificial high price tacked with gas. I would appreciate something written on that.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Those are questions for written response back to this committee.
There are a couple of other items that will also be supplied. The witnesses are going to supply up-to-date information on disconnection rates and arrears for the purposes of the committee. I think there was some information on unit rates or another matter that Dr. Kavanagh did not have to hand and was going to supply.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We will get those. The witnesses will provide those to the committee as well.
I thank everybody for attending here today. I propose we publish the opening statement on the committee's website, with everyone's agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed. I propose we bring Mr. John Melvin back because he did not answer one question, so we will have him back for a meeting on his own, if that is all right.
On behalf of the committee, I thank everyone for taking part on today's subject matter. We will now go into private session.