Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Wednesday, 25 February 2026
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy
General Scheme of the Private Wires Bill 2025: Discussion
2:00 am
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
No apologies have been received. The first item on the agenda is pre-legislative scrutiny of the general scheme of the private wires Bill. This committee has previously agreed to undertake pre-legislative scrutiny of the private wires Bill. Over the course of our next two meetings comprising four sessions, the committee will engage with a range of stakeholders and interested parties. The purpose of this session is to engage with officials from the Department of Climate, Energy and the Environment. At the next session we will engage with representatives from An Coimisiún Pleanála and the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU. I welcome the following officials from the Department: Ms. Emer Griffin, principal officer; Ms. Rachel Hettinga, administrative officer; and Ms. Kathryn McKimm, administrative officer. I remind everybody in attendance to make sure their phones are on silent mode or are switched off.
Before I invite the witnesses from the Department to deliver their opening statement, I advise everybody on 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 any charges against any person or entity by name or in any such 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 the 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.
In terms of the format of the meeting, I will invite the witnesses to make an opening statement to a maximum of five minutes. Once those statements have been delivered, I will call members to put their questions in the order in which they have indicated to me. We operate a rota system, that provides every member with an initial five minutes to engage with our witnesses. It is important to note that the five minutes are for both questions and answers and, therefore, it is essential for members to put their questions succinctly and for witnesses to be succinct in their responses. Please note that the duration of this meeting is limited and times must be strictly adhered to. I ask everybody to be focused in their contributions. I now call Ms Emer Griffin to give her opening statement on behalf of the Department.
Ms Emer Griffin:
I thank the members of the committee for the invitation to attend this meeting on the pre-legislative scrutiny of the general scheme of the private wires Bill 2025. The intention of introducing a private wires framework is to support the building out of Ireland’s electricity grid while accelerating the roll-out of renewable energy and electricity storage solutions. Private wires will be introduced in limited circumstances where they have been developed in line with the following overarching guiding principles. The national electricity grid is a crucial piece of national infrastructure and will remain in public ownership; the national electricity grid will remain the preferred way to connect generators and customers of electricity; private wires will be developed with the consent of local communities and landowners; private wire developers will not have wayleave or other powers to use land; private wires cannot undermine the financing of the national electricity grid; those entities with a private wire must pay the full cost of the service provided to them by the national electricity grid; and private wires will be built to the same technical and safety standards as the national electricity grid and will be capable of being taken in charge by the system operators.
The private development of electricity infrastructure will unlock new investment and will form part of the solution to issues experienced by electricity generators and customers in Ireland. The publication of the private wires policy framework was a committed action under the climate action plan and the 2025 programme for Government. Its importance is reflected in its inclusion in both the large energy user action plan and the accelerating infrastructure action plan. To inform the development of this regime, the Department conducted a public consultation in 2023, with 128 responses received from a variety of stakeholders. An output of the consultation was the publication of the guiding principles in July 2024, which then supported the development of the private wires policy statement published last July. The statement identified the need for, and informed the approach to, developing legislation and supporting regulations.
In developing the general scheme, the Department engaged with an extensive array of stakeholders, including members from the demand side of industry, renewable generation groups, NGOs, farmer associations, system operators and more. The general scheme supports four circumstances where private wires could be a more effective route to grid development. These are as follows. First is a connection from a single generator to a single customer. This could be a direct connection between a generator, for example, a wind farm or solar farm, and an electricity customer, perhaps a factory that wants to decarbonise.
Second, the policy will unlock hybrid connections. This could be a wind or solar farm sharing a grid connection with another generator or a battery installation owned by different companies. Hybrid connections are anticipated to aid the development of Ireland’s battery storage industry. In the third use case, private wires will be allowed to facilitate on-street charging of electric vehicles for domestic use. Finally, private wires will allow a firm that self-supplies electricity to provide electricity to a neighbouring customer where the line does not have to cross land owned by a third party.
The Bill is being drafted as a priority for the Government with a view to being enacted later this year. The Bill will amend the Electricity Regulation Act to allow for the creation of a private wires regulatory regime. It designates the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, as the safety regulator for private wires and grants powers to the CRU to make regulations around the inspection, compliance and enforcement of private wires standards. This will also include reference to emergency and incident response particularly in the case of risks to public safety. It introduces a licensing regime for private wires. Licence applications will be assessed based on criteria set by the CRU which will include the promotion of renewable energy and the impacts on the national electricity grid.
A limited step-in right for ESB Networks, ESBN, is also being provided in the case that a private wire needs to be decommissioned and removed in the interest of public safety where the original company is unable to provide this service; such as in the case of company bankruptcy, wire abandonment or other issue of last resort. Additionally, the Bill will give power to the CRU to create a safety regime for internal collector cable systems of renewable energy projects.
Finally, the Bill will give the Minister the power to provide assistance, including financial assistance, to the CRU in the development of the regulatory and safety regime for private wires as a stopgap until private wires are operational. Once the private wires regime is up and running, the regulator will be able to recover the full costs of private wires.
Private wires are but one way in which the Government is working to expedite grid expansion and development. It will not add any additional cost to consumers. The national grid will remain in national ownership and will be the de facto connection point in all cases. However, in the four discrete circumstances I referred to, there is potential for greater efficiencies to be offered through private wires opportunity.
I thank the committee for its attention and my colleagues and I are happy to take any questions.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Ms Griffin. I invite members to engage with witnesses.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has the Department done any assessment of the Bill's impact on carbon budgets and emissions savings? Does the Department have any plans to publish that analysis?
Ms Emer Griffin:
In preparing the Bill, it was formed by the public consultation and we very much see this is about accelerating renewables. We see it having a benefit in terms of reducing emissions ultimately in terms of rolling out renewables. There has not been a detailed analysis of emissions. Until the legislation refines the scope exactly and the framework is in place, we could anticipate the level of projects coming through and only at that point will we have a better sense of the overall impacts when the legislation is established.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does the Department have any plans to make sure private wires cannot connect directly to fossil fuel generators?
Ms Emer Griffin:
In terms of fossil fuels, establishing this legislation is not about compromising on our sustainability and decarbonisation objectives. We very much see this and what informed the public consultation was from the renewable industry. However, to be frank, the legislation does not explicitly prohibit thermal generation, acknowledging that thermal generation will still be a transitionary fuel as we evolve our energy system.
It is important to note in the existing legislative framework, such as the climate Act, particularly section 15 which there has been further clarity on recently, the recent ruling still applies very much. Anyone who is applying for a private wire will need to apply for planning in the same way they would for any other development and the obligations there on climate would need to be considered in the same way.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We had the recent Coolglass ruling. Is the Department looking at how this legislation could ensure decisions align with the Supreme Court's Coolglass ruling and our climate Act duties?
Ms Emer Griffin:
I think that the ruling there brings further clarity to public bodies in how they have to interpret their obligations under section 15 of the climate Act. That will have to be taken forward. I do not think there needs to be anything further put into the private wires regime itself. We have criteria informed by the guiding principles about the CRU when looking at applications. There is a principle about promoting renewables and that is consistent with the principles it has already under the Electricity Regulation Act about grid policy, to account for renewable energy policy and the public service obligations to promote the use of renewable, sustainable and alternative forms of energy. It is complementary in that sense.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What kind of analysis has the Department done on electricity bills and the possibility that prices will increase and that they will fall on consumers? Has the Department done any analysis on that?
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Ms Griffin does not think it will have any impact?
Ms Emer Griffin:
No, the intention is that it will not have and that the cost of developing private wires will not be passed on. We acknowledge that there will need to be a review of the methodologies and connection applications and the licensing charging framework will need to reflect that. One of my colleagues may come in on some of the other examples.
Ms Rachel Hettinga:
The Deputy asked if there has been any analysis done. What we have been looking at is what is happening in other EU jurisdictions and how they connect these privately owned electricity wires to the rest of the network. This is something we will have to consider when revising the charging methodologies. One example is in Poland where they use a fixed cost solidarity-----
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Apologies, in Poland they use what?
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that solidarity levy put on customers?
Ms Rachel Hettinga:
No, it is put on the private owner of the wire. We have not determined the full charging methodology that we will employ in private wires in Ireland but this is just one part we are looking at. We are also looking at other countries like the UK, Belgium and Germany to see what they are doing there.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Ms Hettinga for that.
I just want to try to fully understand the process. Essentially there would be a large energy user that needs access to electricity and it would put in a planning application. Is that correct? Is that the intention? The large energy user would make a planning application, it is granted and it would build it and put in the wires. Then is it licensed to the ESB? Is that how it works? Who owns it?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
So, will it remain privately owned?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
One of the things as a nation we are quite proud of is, the ESB as a public entity is very much valued. Is there not a risk this could undermine the publicly owned infrastructure that really underpins our electricity system if we are allowing for what are essentially private operators to own parts of that system?
Ms Kathryn McKimm:
I thank the Deputy for that question and I completely understand that concern. It was raised in the public consultation and that is why private wires will be introduced on such a limited basis. This will not be a proliferation of many different private wires. There will be limited uses that were identified as key benefits from the public consultation. We hope that the introduction of this regime will alleviate some of the pressure on the ESB in its current grid roll-out to allow industry to build these limited wires and the ESB can then refocus and put more time into the national goals, as mentioned.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This is primarily policy for industry for large energy users.
Ms Emer Griffin:
I would not say that. The national grids will remain the preferred route for connection. Like Ms McKimm said, it is in limited circumstances where they will connect. We are also giving that power to ESBN for a limited step-in right. I think that is in head 7.
Acknowledging that this wire will be privately owned if, for whatever reason it would benefit the national grid, ESBN will be able to come in and take over that wire, should it feel it is necessary. If the private owner of that wire vanishes, for whatever reason, like bankruptcy, there is power for ESBN to step in and take ownership. There is protection from the perspective of both the public interest and that of the national grid. That is how we have tried to mitigate that risk. In limited circumstances, it could be large energy users applying, but I think it could be more generators, like the Deputy said, including renewables such as a solar farm or wind farm applying to be a direct customer. It can be from the other way as an opportunity to optimise the use of renewables in the system.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
When Ms Griffin talks about limited circumstances, has she a percentage or preferred amount of the grid that private wires would make up? Is there a threshold beyond which the Department will not go? She talked about the step-in facility for the ESB. If the ESB decides that that private wire should be in public ownership, who pays for that? I presume the ESB would have to pay?
Ms Emer Griffin:
It would have to. We have acknowledged that there would have to be compensation to the owner but a private developer looking to build a private wire will pay for the build-out initially. If there was an impact relating to reinforcements to the wider grid, it would have to pay for the licensing and fixed charges. Ultimately, this is not about introducing a potentially cheaper route for building. It is about a more efficient route and seeing the benefits of alleviating pressure on the grid and supporting renewable build-out. The cost piece is more a time cost rather than a monetary cost but it will be on a case-by-case basis for any project. That is the case even for things being built now, when they are contestable, engaging with ESBN and EirGrid and trying to get a sense of what the cost will be. Factoring costing and charging into the future will be a complex area that we need to look at. CRU has been saying that to us too.
We have not set a threshold. When I talk about discrete circumstances, it is those four use cases. The first is a private wire from the generator to the customer in its entirety. That is where we see the most benefit and opportunity here. The other ones that have been informed from the public consultation about electric and hybrid vehicles are probably more limited, I imagine. We do not have exact numbers on that. We see the national grid as the preferred route.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This will be much more efficient for generators such as wind farms delivering electricity to data centres. We are having such issues with energy security and energy supply because far too many data centres are eating up the energy. If we are going to make it even easier for them to access renewable energy, that means that individual householders will not be in a position to have access to renewable energy. There is only a certain amount of renewable energy being created at the moment and we are chasing our tails with it. My fear with this is that this a policy for industry and we are going to make it easier and easier, as we already have over the last ten years, for these large energy users to really monopolise our electricity, renewable energy and our grid.
Ms Emer Griffin:
I will mention the CRU, the general scheme and how the framing of this has been informed. The national policy statement, as the Deputy said, was developed prior to CRU's 2025 decision on data centre connections. CRU acted independently of Government in that decision, which requires the 80% additional renewable energy, but also sets a very high bar for how data centres specifically can connect. Other large energy users are not covered under that decision. How data centres may or may not be able to use private wires as opposed to other large energy users would be distinct, because data centres will have to participate in the wholesale market, if they are of a certain size, under that CRU decision. That could have implications for them with regard to opportunities under this scheme.
Ms Rachel Hettinga:
We have specifically provided that any private wire development needs to be supportive of additional renewable generation, so it is new generation. The intention of this is to not draw down from existing renewables that are in the system or any renewables that have entered the renewable energy support scheme, RESS. The intention is not to draw down any of our existing decarbonisation practices or any of the existing renewable capacity in the system. It is adding more and supporting it in a parallel and complementary pathway.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Looking at the limited circumstances, there are a couple, I think numbers 3 and 4, relating to electric vehicles, where people are self-supplying electricity, which I am quite sympathetic to. To describe them as limited may not be accurate. A private wire linking a singular generation or storage asset to a demand site is literally a wire linking a supply to a demand. That is as wide as can be. That is not limited. That is an extremely wide provision and there are no caveats about all other opportunities having been explored or about where it is not appropriate. It is an extremely wide circumstance. The way it is described is not an exception. We are really looking at a potential new rule. When we say the public grid is preferred, in what sense is it enforced that the public grid is the preferred option?
I would have sympathy for certain aspects but the way this is being framed seems to be in response to what had been a de facto moratorium, with a new policy that had limited connections for real reasons. I am looking at section 37A. Ms Griffin said it does not preclude new fossil fuel infrastructure, so we could be looking at private fossil fuel infrastructure with private wires linking it to large energy users. I know Ms Griffin mentioned it is a transition, but transition is when one is moving away from a thing. Building what Ms Griffin has described as brand new infrastructure that is based on fossil fuels is not a transitionary activity. That needs to be seriously examined. I would like to know how that has been examined.
Ms Griffin mentioned that it is going to be additional renewable energy. We know it could be additional renewable or additional fossil fuel, according to how the Bill is worded, but if it is additional renewable, has there been an analysis of what that does? If an entity is building a wind farm, will there be an incentive for it to wait and get four, three, two big customers, or one very big customer, rather than connecting to the grid? What will that do with regard to the State achieving this? We need new renewable energy going into the State system. Is there a risk that we could be getting delays because the State is competing with what private users can offer for new wind farms and solar generation? Does that create a knock-on cost for the State?
If we have a new grid, effectively, has there been an examination of potential cases that might be taken under the Energy Charter Treaty, going from a full State system? If we introduce competition between the State grid and a private grid, do we open ourselves up to the many legal challenges that come with competition?
Ms Emer Griffin:
On the last one first, the first thing to clarify is that it will not be a separate grid. It is literally wires. We are not supporting a separate network. That is an important distinction at the moment. It would just be a wire from point to point, if one thinks of it physically rather than as a complex network. That is not something that is being brought forward. Given the complexities and that Ireland has one operator, looking at other countries, this is a starting point.
If in future there seems to be an appetite or need for that, we think the use cases here would be part of a network or green energy park type of circumstances, where there would be hybrids and the contiguous premises example as well. At the moment, though, there is no facility to support a private network.
We would see these circumstances as limited in terms of when they apply to the CRU to get approval for a private wire. We have put in that the CRU would perhaps consult with the system operators as well to assess the appropriateness of the endeavour and if it should be on the grid. It is not an absolute right. It is necessary to apply to CRU and there will be criteria that it will look at. I refer to what we have in the guiding principles, and it may add its own in terms of the regulations. The legislation we are proposing is the primary framework. There will be further detail in terms of what will inform a decision in respect of making an application. I will use the large energy users, LEU, connection decision as an example. It came out in 2025. EirGrid and ESBN are putting in place connection assessment criteria that they will be using. It will be similar when they make other decisions about connections. There will be consideration of those principles about promoting renewables and security of supply on the system so there will not be a negative impact. That is how we are trying to mitigate some of the risks the Senator raised there. I do not know if there is anything else to add on that.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There was the question on fossil fuels and on renewable energy being directed there versus into the general network.
Ms Rachel Hettinga:
I will briefly touch on the fossil fuel piece. I fully respect that it is an area of concern, especially with our increasing climate ambitions, the need to reach net zero and our 2030 targets. The Senator will see that under head 7(4), each project the commission assesses will be required to show how it promotes renewables. While we say fossil fuels are not expressly prohibited, they will need to show how they are promoting renewables. That is quite a high bar to be able to achieve. It is under that that we bring in the whole transitional fuel aspect. If that requirement can potentially be shown to be there, the commission may take that into consideration, but the full intention is that each private wire must promote renewables. Now, the implementation of these criteria will need to be examined further when the regulatory regime is set up. This is something we are engaging with the commission very regularly on and I hope further detail will emerge in the context of the regulatory regime after the primary legislation is set up. I apologise. What was the other question?
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I asked about the issue of renewables and it potentially being more attractive for renewable providers to provide their output to these large-scale energy users. I would like just a "Yes" or "No" answer concerning whether a risk analysis was done under the Energy Charter Treaty as well.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Department might let us know subsequently if the Energy Charter Treaty was considered as part of that. There was just that question then on the competition for renewables.
Ms Emer Griffin:
The RESS auctions have been very successful. There is nothing preventing renewables being built privately at the moment. A lot of renewable projects are going through the RESS auctions and developing privately as well. We do not see this private wires initiative as having a negative impact. We see wider benefits to renewables overall in Ireland and to achieving our decarbonisation objectives and optimising the use of renewables in the country. We would not see it as a negative. We actually see an opportunity here through the provision of private wires.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is new usage, though. It is not addressing previous or existing usage. We are talking about a new supply, but also new demand that absorbs it.
Ms Rachel Hettinga:
Just to clarify, there is nothing in the general scheme of the Bill that requires it to be new demand. This is so we are compliant with the energy efficiency directive, which is to aim to reduce Ireland's energy demand to meet our climate targets. This could be a user on the system that decides to connect to new generation to alleviate the pressures on the national grid.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. I am going to ask Senator Noonan to chair for 30 minutes, please, with the agreement of the committee. Is that agreed? Agreed. I thank the committee.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank everyone for coming in and for all the work that has gone into the general scheme of the Bill. It is great to see there is a progression in private wires. I think it is much needed for the country.
I want to ask one question. I think it might have been clarified for one of the other speakers. I apologise, I was running from another event. It has been raised publicly in the context of many of the submissions. Can the word "new" in head 7(1)(a) be defined? I refer to a new renewable generator, say wind or solar, having multiple private wires going to an eco-village, an industrial park or a high-energy user. At what point will subsequent connections be disallowed once the generation is no longer new?
Ms Kathryn McKimm:
I thank the Deputy for the question. In that example he gave of multiple connections, the private networks, as previously mentioned, will not be allowed under this policy, so it would be a single wire. Multiple connections to a renewable generation site would not be facilitated under this general scheme. It would be a single wire, and "new" would be the single wire in that case.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I just think that should be reflected in the Bill, especially if there is a huge curtailment of a solar farm that does have an energy user it could give the power to. One of the main intentions of the Bill would be to reduce the loss of solar and renewable projects. I would love if that intention was clearly reflected throughout the drafting to avoid future legal ambiguity.
The next issue is head 7(2)(b). Why must separate customers be on "contiguous" premises? If we are legislating for private wires to be constructed, why are we restricting customers to adjoining premises?
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. Would the CRU's safety and licensing powers that will be implemented not already prevent private wires becoming the de facto distribution networks in that sense?
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It was said that we are limiting complexity to ensure the private wires do not become the parallel distribution. I understand and I respect that, but would the CRU's safety and licensing powers not already prevent private wires? Equally, if we are going to do private wires, I expect they are still going to - and I think it does say this in the general scheme of the Bill - abide by the same safety laws that the ESB is already implementing. Effectively, this would already stop private wires becoming the de facto distribution network.
Ms Emer Griffin:
Currently, all the safety decisions around these situations, in respect of the technical way they operate from an engineering perspective and how they can have these connections, are going to have to be reviewed. We can see that this is already happening under the normal hybrid connections. It is something that has been evolving. We are looking at it for multiple legal entities for hybrid connections, which is a slight step forward in that regard. This means there is an acknowledgement of this point. We have a technical working group in place with the system operators and the CRU to try to tease out these pieces and these are the actions we are going to take forward in the expedited delivery plan. We have the legislative framework here, but we are not saying for a second that there are not a lot of tricky technical elements here that need to be clarified. It will have to be reviewed and updated in the context of private wires to facilitate that.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I agree 100% with Ms Griffin. I welcome all the work that has gone into this general scheme. It is just important for me to say on the record that if safety and system integrity are to be protected through regulation, geography is not really going to be the safeguard. We all know that. It is going to be the licensing that will be in place in the Bill. This was referenced already, so I appreciate that is already being looked at. I think three or four of the public submissions mentioned that word may unintentionally block viable industrial decarbonisation projects, especially for high-energy users and people that are already reliant. If the goal of this Bill is to decarbonise and improve our energy system, which I do believe and I hope it is, I do not think that word should be in there. I have 34 seconds left, but I will come back in.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Ms Griffin very much.
Malcolm Byrne (Wicklow-Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I apologise as I was attending another committee. I welcome the introduction of this Bill. We need to move as quickly as possible on it. I agree with Deputy Heneghan's point about the word "new" and clarification within the legislation. It makes sense.
I have two questions. The first is about the general timeframe and how ambitious we will be. Let us say we move to enact this legislation - I will not say by the summer even though I would love to see that happening - this year. How quickly does the Department envisage a number of proposals operating under this and the scale at which it would be operating?
Ms Emer Griffin:
On the timeline, we have been given priority drafting. We are engaging with the OPC on that at the moment. We are also working at a technical level on some of the aspects to inform both the primary legislation but also the work that will have to be taken on it to operationalise the scheme afterwards. The intention is that when we finalise the draft of the Bill, we will bring back an expedited delivery plan to Government for approval which will state at a high level some of the actions we will be taking forward.
To operationalise some of the things, like getting the resources for CRU and preparing the administrative side along with the regulatory decisions, takes time. We fully accept that. In parallel, we are trying to engage on the drafting piece at a technical level to see what actions we can be progressing to have a sense we can support that as best we can to move quickly.
Malcolm Byrne (Wicklow-Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I presume this is in parallel with the large energy users plan.
Ms Emer Griffin:
Yes. That came out in January and the private wires commitment is an action under that as well. It is about accelerating infrastructure. On the regulatory piece for this, depending on the use cases and in the spirit of other policies coming out of Government at the moment, we want to ensure the process mirrors the existing applications process for connections and licensing. At the same time, depending on the application in question, such as for EVs, we do not want to over-regulate either. It is about having an efficient process that makes sense for a domestic customer and a larger customer as well.
We will try to expedite the timelines as best we can. It will be challenging but the other thing we did in bringing the general scheme to Government was acknowledge there might have to be advanced funding for CRU. This will be a new function it is getting and it is a substantial function. While private wire developers will have to pay for any wire they install and will have to fund it ultimately, until the scheme is operational, CRU will not have that funding.
Malcolm Byrne (Wicklow-Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will use a very specific example. Arklow is in my constituency. Looking in parallel to the development of offshore renewables, which is vital, at our digital infrastructure, Ms Griffin will be aware of the Echelon data centres which have planning permission, contingent on renewable sources of energy being able to power them. In terms of our digital infrastructure, this Bill will be absolutely critical. As we move on our offshore renewables, which I hope will happen very quickly, as well as onshore renewables, Ms Griffin might talk me through the legislation and how the CRU will be upscaled. When will we start to see the real impact of this on the ground?
Ms Emer Griffin:
It will be as soon as we can get the scheme operational. On impact on the ground, other policies like the accelerating infrastructure report that came out on the planning side will obviously have a co-benefit in terms of supporting the objectives here as well. There are wider actions, both for Government and the other agencies, in terms of resourcing them, ensuring the processes are efficient along with the timeline on decisions on any applications. That will support this as well. For ourselves, I would not be able to put an exact timeline on it.
Malcolm Byrne (Wicklow-Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I appreciate that and I thank the Department for its work on this. It is important as all of these are interlinked. Even on our consideration of that, we need to make that point and make the point about resourcing CRU, which will be vital as a part of this.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank our witnesses for coming in today. Staying with that topic of the timeline for progression, I appreciate there are many moving parts and I appreciate there is a lot of technical work that needs to happen in the background, such as additional financing to the CRU, etc. What does the Department need? Is it additional resources? Is it additional expertise in-house in the Department? Does it need round-table meetings with other bodies, such as CRU? What does the Department need in order for this legislation to progress as quickly and efficiently as possible?
Ms Emer Griffin:
As I mentioned, we are working at a technical level with the system operators and with CRU. We will also be working with other relevant Departments on some specific parts of the legislation as well, along with the OPC. Those are our key inputs at the moment and what we are dependent on to get this through. The relevant legal advice goes through some of the tricky issues. That is in the immediate sense.
On what we need after that, it will be resourcing for CRU. Under the general scheme, there will be powers for CRU to regulate and there will be powers on the safety side as well given to it. CRU kind of has that in its organisation and it is quite separate. There will be two arms of resourcing that will need to be established. It is a new function for it. Monetary resources will be needed but people will be needed too. It is a very competitive environment out there. Certain bodies will say they have a challenge with staffing already.
They are some of the things of which we are mindful - getting the staff in as quickly as possible and getting the regulatory piece in place. That is probably the bit we need to look at. That is why there is the ask for advanced funding so that can get those resources in quickly. That is something we have identified at the outset and the general scheme stage to try to ensure we can move this in as quick a way as possible. We also want to ensure that whatever we do, we want it to be workable and make sense. It is about balancing the timeframe with something that is effective and brings the actual benefits we want it to.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is great. I thank Ms Griffin. I have some questions for CRU. On the actual piece here, will the Department publish a clear statutory or regulatory definition of "contiguous premises", explicitly addressing cases where the sites are separated by a public road or corridor? Is that something the Department is considering or looking at?
Ms Kathryn McKimm:
We are currently liaising with the OPC. As Ms Griffin mentioned, we are at the drafting stage at the moment. We are discussing introducing potential definitions. It is not in the general scheme but we understand clarity might be needed so we are working with the drafters to see how that could best be put forward.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. When does Ms McKimm think that might be ready?
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It will be included as part of that. That is fine. Given that private wire developers cannot obtain wayleave or CPO powers, what national mechanism will the Department establish for routing over public roads so developers are not forced to navigate inconsistent local processes?
Ms Emer Griffin:
It is at the developer level to engage with private owners. We very much see that in their hands and control to be able to engage, if it is privately owned land, on what they feel they need to get clarity on in terms of that ownership piece. That is with the developers. We are not giving any additional powers to them. We see that as one of the distinctions here. It is about private wires so that is not something we have factored in, to be honest.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
One really important part of this legislation is the ability for electric vehicle owners to route a cable under the footpath, in many instances. Has the Department engaged with local authorities on this? There have been instances in the past where people have gone out to the companies, got the work done and there have then been issues with the local authority and there have then been issues with CRU, etc. What engagement has happened with local authorities because they have a lot of experience here already in dealing with potential issues?
Ms Kathryn McKimm:
I thank the Deputy for the question. We have engaged with the Department of Transport on this and its zero emission vehicles Ireland unit, ZEVI, which specifically deals with the rollout of electric vehicles. Through that, we have engaged with local authorities. They seem to welcome this addition. There are many citizens around the country who are quite eager to get access to charging. It also helps our overarching goals of decarbonising our transport industry. We will continue to engage with them in the drafting process.
The reason we introduced an authorisation for EVs instead of a licence was exactly to the Deputy's point and to consider that local authorities have a lot of specialist knowledge in this area so we could give them more of an oversight role than the CRU. That was deemed as the best way forward. Engagement is ongoing but it has happened.
Naoise Ó Cearúil (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a couple of questions. Data centres are taking up more and more of the energy that is produced by the State.
It is anticipated it will be around one third of the energy used in a few years' time. Following on from a question that may have been asked earlier, their use or the use in private wires of fossil fuel will be lessened. Private wires are a good thing but, ideally, renewable sources will be used to power them. My understanding is that fossil fuel-powered private wires are not excluded, despite the Department's own policy on that. When the Bill comes in, will fossil fuels be specifically excluded?
Ms Emer Griffin:
No, we have not proposed to explicitly exclude fossil fuel generation as part of the applicants here. I said earlier that from the public consultation and the intent here, it is about accelerating renewables, and it is part of the wider sustainability and decarbonisation objectives. The promotion of renewable energy is a criteria CRU will have to take forward in assessing applications. The existing legislation through the Climate Act and the obligations there for public bodies are also applicable for any development. They are the main points in the fossil fuel piece.
As regards data centres, I mentioned earlier the CRU decision, which was published after the general scheme on data centre connections, requires data centres of a certain size to participate in the wholesale market and to have generation. That is very separate to this scheme. Under that scenario, because they are participating in the wholesale market generation, it will be grid connected. It is not going to be something that can apply for a private wire. Currently, in that specific context, it will be quite separate to this scheme.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes, but the short answer is it is possible fossil fuels could be used in private wires. It has not been excluded.
Ms Rachel Hettinga:
There is potential there in very limited circumstances where the applicant for a private wire can demonstrate their project promotes renewables. The reason we have not excluded it is that, as Ms Griffin mentioned earlier in the session, natural gases are being considered as a transitional fuel, given the variability of renewables, in order to get more renewables on the system to meet our decarbonisation targets. Unfortunately, that is the reality until we have more storage and alternative variability management practices.
The Deputy will see in the Bill that this is why we are encouraging hybrid connections - to facilitate more storage in order to move away from fossil fuels. However, each individual applicant for a private wire will have to demonstrate compliance with those criteria to promote renewables.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is there not a risk this could then increase the use of fossil fuels and gas?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In the policy document, under current proposals, it says that any user taking all their electrical capacity from a private wire will not be required to pay network charges to the system operator, despite using the public grid for backup. Is that the case? Could other users of the grid, in effect, be paying for their backup?
Ms Rachel Hettinga:
No. As soon as a user of a private wire has a grid connection, whether it is backup or anything else, they will be required to recover network charges. This is only in the case of, say, an isolated system, where an individual user has no connection or generator connected to the grid. In that case, they would not need to pay system charges because they are not connected in any way.
As soon as you have a backup, you will be required to contribute to the network charges. We will be evaluating the charging methodology to ensure that is fair and equitable for all users of the electricity grid.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Will they be using the grid for backup in case there is any difficulty?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The witnesses might be able to clarify one final thing. In the document on page 11, it says the reserve network capacity cannot be allocated to future customers, meaning that extra network enforcement will be required to meet that demand. There would then be an increase in cost for network customers. Could a data centre that gets energy from a private wire or generator still hoard capacity, if it can get energy from the market also?
Ms Emer Griffin:
We mentioned the technical pieces of introducing private wires because that is the operational security. Then, we have the security supply piece, which we also need to be mindful of when introducing this scheme.
Safeguards will be introduced where a customer has access to the private wire and a connection to the grid. This will have to be reviewed in the context of any connection and that they get to the grid, so that those mitigations are in place. The idea of more flexible products and flexible connection agreements is something CRU is proposing. It is working with the system operators under the national energy demand strategy, and this is something that was recommended in the IEA energy security report. By making our system more flexible with more flexible offerings, such as flexible demand connection, someone who may have a private wire could be offered a flexible connection and not a full connection, to mitigate that security of supply risk.
There are other things coming out that are complementary to this which we would see as a route to ensuring those security supply concerns can be mitigated, and we will be working on that basis.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I apologise for being late for the start of this presentation. The committee may have touched on this earlier but getting back to what the Department sees as the general rationale behind this, the need for it and the need for putting it in now, could the witnesses elaborate a little on why it is private wires and why now?
Ms Kathryn McKimm:
Currently, only the ESB is able to supply electricity, and this where the need for private wires comes from. This would allow for limited circuit access, where this could be privately supplied without the DSO and TSO obligations being placed upon the developer. That is the crucial legislative reason it is being introduced. As regards why now, the public consultation began in 2023 and there was much support from the renewable side and many other industries. Since then, it has been moved on through the guiding principles and the policy statement today. There has been much public support for this, and we are trying to move this as quickly as possible. If we also look at European countries, there are many examples of privately-owned infrastructure. Ireland is quite an anomaly in that sense, in keeping apace of industry development, as well as achieving renewable energy goals. That is one of the reasons it is being introduced now.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We are an outlier in Europe regarding how this operates.
Again, going back to basics, why not resource the publicly-owned network? Is it that it cannot be done fast enough or is this a matter of being more agile or something? Obviously, ICTU and other bodies have raised issues with this privatisation of a public service, which for the duration of the State has been entirely in public hands.
Ms Emer Griffin:
We see it as an opportunity, in that there is a massive grid programme in place under PR6 to enhance and expand an unprecedented level of investment. With regard to what the system operated at, we are trying to build out the grid there for everyone's benefit. In certain limited circumstances where a developer can say they can build and own this and they do not have to go to the system operator to get full assessment to get direction on whether they are going to build and approve all that and manage the process, it is about allowing the resources within the system operators to do the build out that benefits everyone. Then, in limited circumstances where one person is getting a benefit through a connection and they built that private wire for themselves, they have project certainty and they have put the investment in, it is taking that application demand away from ESB. That is where we see it having that efficiency piece.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Are there impediments to greater investment in the ESB rather than this or is this about taking workload from the ESB, rather than investing in it, and about saving costs from the State's perspective? Is that part of the rationale?
Ms Rachel Hettinga:
We view it very much as a complementary process. One will see the guiding principles for the national grid as a very critical piece of national infrastructure. That is the Government's priority in the first instance. Through that public consultation, specific circumstances were identified essentially due to the topography of the land or the project itself where doing a private wire could be beneficial not only to the entities involved but to the national grid as a whole. For example, if a wind farm wanted to connect to the national grid, it may have to go way out one way and then connect around a town just to connect to its demand customer next door. Instead the operator can just shoot a line right directly to them and it has benefits because the system does not have to do those deep reinforcements, which would add significant costs not only to the application fee but to the wider customers in the region. As Ms Griffin said, it also takes off that demand from the system in order to complement the processes. The limited circumstances in the policy provided for in the general scheme are a direct result of those consultation responses that were received by the Department.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The witnesses may have touched on this earlier, but from a liability perspective, where does liability lie and how is that being dealt with in the Bill?
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We might move to a second round. We are due to conclude this session at 1.45 p.m.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It was said very succinctly that right now we have only ESB supplying but this would allow other operators to supply. It is introducing an element of competition that is different in terms of electricity supply and the piece that is there. This is why I mention things like the energy charter duty. Even if I look to CETA and its operations, it has a ratchet clause, where if something that is in public ownership or public control is opened up to private action, it cannot be reversed. I am concerned about the risks of this becoming a thing whereby we set up a set of other potential legal challenges in relation to what is seen as preferential or state aid to the ESB, for example. That is the question. The witnesses mentioned regulatory impact assessment but I would like to know what analysis has been done of the legal challenges that could be opened up in relation to this issue. This is one of the issues we need to scrutinise at the committee. If the witnesses do not have it now, we would like to have more on that.
Coming back on the cost, it is going back to that same scenario. On that question, Ms Griffin referred to promoting renewable energy. That, however, is very abstract. It could be a giant billboard to say, "Let us have renewable energy", whatever that might mean. If the Department is saying that these companies should be transition, at what point do the witnesses think large energy users should not be using fossil fuels? When does the Department see that new large energy users should not be using fossil fuels?
Ms Kathryn McKimm:
We envision that the CRU in its role as the independent regulator of utilities would have sufficient expertise to examine where the threshold would lie. We are still working it out in the technical groups. We are hoping more information on that will come with the regulations following this legislation.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We are accelerating a piece of infrastructure yet we are saying we want large energy users to be free from fossil fuels. I am asking what year. When does that happen? Even if there is a case for private, and there are certain arguments there, are we getting ahead of it if we are saying that we will give it to them even though they are not ready to do it purely on renewables? Surely being able to deliver this purely on renewables is the basis for saying that we can afford this new energy infrastructure. I say this in the context of numerous sessions we have just had about energy security and what happens if the interconnector goes and all the rest. It seems to be a security risk to be having new fossil fuel infrastructure come in. I would like an indication of when the Department thinks large energy users will stop using gas.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
When does Ms Griffin think new large energy users should be required to stop using gas?
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
But this is another structure-----
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
However, we are digging. That is my point.
I also have a short question, which I had asked earlier but did not get an answer to. If there is a brand new wind farm or a solar farm and the owner is looking to sell energy, is it the case that there may be an element of competition if he or she chooses to give it entirely to one large energy user, for example, or if he or she sells it into the grid? Does that introduce an element of-----
Ms Emer Griffin:
It is up to a developer. The auctions are there and there is a competitive price. On whether they go directly to anyone, this is also the case with power purchase agreements at the moment as well. When renewable projects are built there is the RESS auction. They operate next to each other and at the moment there is not a conflict with competition. That is a healthy market when they both are there.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
And the State could be bidding within that market anyway.
Ms Kathryn McKimm:
There are inherent positive benefits to connecting to the national grid, which will remain in place, that will allow them to operate through the RESS schemes, as Ms Hettinga mentioned, and other kinds of securities that the national grid supplies and that private wires or private developers may not have with a single wire infrastructure. There will still be support and there will still be a desire to connect to the national grid over a single wire for renewable energy projects.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for joining us. I thank An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach for the opportunity to contribute. I would like to touch on implementation, forced efficiency and the pace of implementation. We have experience with the likes of the CRU in this setting where officials have almost looked for more time to complete the likes of large energy user policy. They subsequently ended up before the infrastructure committee where we tried to get it expedited and delivered at a faster pace. If the CRU are fundamentally part of this whole process, how can we have confidence that it is going to be delivered at the pace required? I am conscious that we get one shot at this. When I am speaking to different stakeholders on the ground, there is certainly a feeling that, whether it be Eirgrid or CRU, people are not bursting with confidence.
Ms Emer Griffin:
On the timeline piece I was mentioning earlier, which we are going to put together when the Bill is going back to Government, together with our expedited delivery plan, it will lay out the key actions we need to take forward this year and into the future in terms of moving in parallel to the building progress. We want to ensure that the regulatory or secondary legislation we need to be in place to support this can be teased out. We are starting that now. We are not going to start that in 2027. We want to be working on these in parallel to try to create efficiencies where we can. When bringing the general scheme to Government, we acknowledged that there would need to be resourcing of crew. That is something we are going to go back to the Government with as well and look at how we can facilitate that as quickly as possible. That is another mitigation there.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Then CRU has gone on the record to identify and highlight the policy levels that are coming at them and the additional regulations. How will this be optimised in terms of resourcing and how is it going to be measured?
Ms Emer Griffin:
I will acknowledge as well that it is quite complex. We do not want to be rushing something with unintended consequences. In the defence that there needs to be public consultation on any criteria, assessment or regulatory pieces that go in place, there will be certain things that we cannot remove from the time frame. It is just about trying to work on the-----
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a fear we will talk about this forever at a time we need to give confidence to sectors that we want to push on with our infrastructure and start delivering. Unless we can get certainty around what those resources look like, what the accountability looks like and what those key metrics or KPIs will look like in terms of how we will hold these organisations to account we are just talking shop, basically.
Ms Emer Griffin:
Yes, and that is why we want to go back with the expedited delivery plan at the same time in order to have those actions. We will agree them with the CRU and engage with it in parallel with doing the Bill at the moment so we are trying to ensure we have a time-bound action framework in terms of what the key steps are and what needs to be delivered and when. By the time we have that plan in place, we will be able to go back to the Government to say the legislation will be enacted by year end. We hope to have the regulatory piece by X date as well based on this plan. That is what we are working on, to be able to give that assurance to anyone who is looking at a private wires scheme that when this plan lands he or she will know when he or she should be able to apply to by because that is the overall time frame we are working with so that is the kind of assurance. I take the Deputy's point and that is something we are trying to work on at the moment.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I presume the customers who are self-suppliers of electricity facilitate peer-to-peer energy transfer from households? Is that the case?
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Not on a smaller scale, household basis.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We have had quite a lot of discussion here during the past few months about overshooting our carbon budgets. There is quite a significant risk with this legislation, with the large energy user action plan and the big energy users. Maybe their contribution to the share of the burden is not a question the witnesses can answer. It looks most likely that the State will overshoot its current carbon budget at the next carbon budget cycle and if there is not a guarantee in place that these private wires can only deal with electricity from renewables only, then we face a significant risk in allowing fossil fuels almost a free rein in this. How do we mitigate against that and is it something the committee could put in our report as a recommendation?
Ms Emer Griffin:
Under the large energy user action plan the intention is the co-location of energy with renewables creating that efficiency. From the engagements I have had with industry, there is a huge appetite to decarbonise. Companies are coming with innovative solutions and want to be connected to the renewables. A data centre is required to have 80% renewables under the key decision. From our perspective and how we put those criteria and principles in, we feel there is strong framing to ensure renewables are first and the risk of just connecting to fossil fuels is mitigated sufficiently. I do not want to repeat what I said earlier either.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Will the CRU and the Department introduce a public interest prioritisation framework for grid connections? This would ensure housing and decarbonisation are prioritised over large energy users.
Ms Emer Griffin:
Yes. The connection principle at the moment is on a first come, first served basis but the connections for these would be on a tiered basis depending on the kind of connection voltage. That is what we are looking to engage with CRU on. In terms of households that would be a very separate route to private wires and it would be looking at removing that application demand from the ESBN. It should hopefully alleviate and address that and have a positive benefit on doing housing connections and we see the interlinkages there.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask speakers to be as brief as the can, please. Deputy Whitmore is next, then Senator Duffy.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am still trying to get my head around the principles. When we look at an electricity grid, the benefit of it is it is dynamic. Electricity flows to where it is needed from where it has been generated. The operator has a potential to balance out supply and demand. It is a very fluid ecosystem. What the witnesses are saying is that they will remove the potential for these large users, say a wind farm, which is just directly supplying a data centre, from the transmission service operator, TSO, obligations of the grid. They will be outside the grid, which means that potentially in the event of a security of supply issue, that wind farm will not be required or able to feed into the grid for the national benefit. Is that correct? It has been removed from its TSO obligations. The witnesses said the PSO and the TSO obligations will no longer be on these entities so there will be no public service obligation and they will not be paying the levies in the same way as households are for renewable energy. They also will not be participating in the TSO systems obligations that are placed on them. They will operate very separately to the grid, which will actually make our grid less secure.
Ms Rachel Hettinga:
I will add clarity that we are not removing any generation that is already on the system because we are very clear this is additional, new generation that will need to come on. In the same way that if building owners wanted to add solar panels to the roof that is their own generation, they can apply to their own energy needs. This is just an off-site generator that can then be used for their energy needs. It will not have been connected to the national grid and therefore it will not have an impact on any of the security of supply issues there.
We are conscious there are wider issues that need to be considered under supporting the national grid and that is something the Government has committed to continue to explore but private wires are very much viewed as a separate but complementary process to enable the decarbonisation of other industries.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would see it not as complementary but undermining. When we compare a large data centre with solar panels on someone's house, a large data centre will potentially use the same amount of electricity as 250,000 homes so the two cannot be compared. I understand it is for future development but we still have such a long way to go in making our grid secure. When we talk about the investment in the grid, a considerable amount, if not the majority of that investment, is going to shore up the grid because of the data centres that are already on it. We are not even dealing with the new ones. It seems we are creating this system whereby there will be a two ties electricity service in this country. That completely undermines the whole point of having a grid, which is that it is all interconnected and creates a balance in the system.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Chair and the witnesses for coming in. I have been listening in online for a lot of the meeting. I am based in County Mayo and we have a significant amount of wind generation and a lot of opportunity in terms of industrial and commercial development as well. I very much welcome the moves being made on the private wires legislation.
My question concerns practical proposals or working examples. Has there been any assessment of suitable areas that could be prioritised to avail of this new legislation?
Ms Emer Griffin:
The spatial analysis is probably more work that is being done on a plan-led proposal under the large energy user action plan. Private wires will be very much developer-led. If someone is proposing to build a private wire, he or she will do an assessment of what they feel is a more appropriate connection in terms of whether it is on the grid. They will have to do the normal environmental assessments and all of that for their own planning application and to determine, and in this case go to CRU to say this is why they feel a private wire is more appropriate basing it on whatever criteria that are put in at secondary level.
Where the spatial analysis comes into play is, as I mentioned in the large energy user action plan, there is an assessment being done to identify potentially spatial-led and plan-led development for energy intensive users in the medium term, post 2030.
Action is being taken within the Department to start that process to see the benefits there. Under the large energy user CRU decision for data centres, which was published in December, the system operators have to publish where this capacity is now. That will inform where there is capacity and then they would have to do their own assessment of whether it makes sense to use private wire or go through the grid.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Ms Griffin for the clarification. I fully support what is being proposed. I spoke just yesterday to a gentleman who is involved in this, and I have family members and know many people from Mayo who are working internationally to build data centres and other large infrastructural projects. We have an opportunity here from an economic point of view to realise the potential of Ireland and harness the renewable energy we can create here while also increasing economic activity. It can make us more strategically supported internationally if we have multiple strategically important projects like those we have outlined. I support the proposal fully and thank the witnesses for their contributions.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Will the committee have the Department in again regarding private wires?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is a matter for the committee.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. I acknowledge the contributions of all the members on private wires. The same concern has been changed rolled out when we have changed a lot of things in Ireland. It is really an opportunity we need to seize. The concerns about the restrictions that need to be in place with private wires are valid. I have a few questions that might clarify it. From an engineering perspective, the purpose of the Bill is not to bypass the grid but to relieve the pressure on it. We have local generation, storage, efficiency, industrial decarbonisation, in some cases housing, and shopping centres. Hybrid systems could be very beneficial and we need that to have security. Will the Department elaborate on the role private wires are expected to play in reducing pressure onr the national grid and enabling renewable generation? Data centres are a set load. The set loads that we have with data centres enable us to know the demand they have. The fact they have a set load of demand allows renewables to be built either near them or with a supply chain, which would encourage FDI into Ireland to be used for renewable generation in respect of data centres. If this Bill was used in that sense, we could increase our renewable generation and allow Ireland to be a hub for the future. That is what really needs to be done here. I agree with some of the members that we cannot allow this to be used as a greenwashing tactic in the sense of diesel generators off site. That is something the public needs to know. On the benefit of data centres, right now, yes, they use one fifth of Irish electricity. I did my thesis on data centre waste heat utilisation. This needs to be solved. If we could use the private wires Bill to enable a quicker roll-out of renewables, that is what needs to be done. Will the Department confirm if there will be a system relief mechanism or an important part of the Bill that will restrict the use of diesel or hydrotreated vegetable oil, HVO, generators by large energy users?
Ms Emer Griffin:
I think the obligations on large energy users in terms of their connection and the requirements are in the 2025 CRU decision on data centres. It is very specific and it is a high bar. A lot of those back-up diesel generators are now fuel cells and are moving more towards cleaner alternatives as well. They do have to have EPA licensing in terms of run hours as well. There are restrictions on those. From my engagement with industry, on the back-up piece, they are moving to cleaner options all the time. On the points the Deputy mentioned previously about the opportunity we see here with the renewables, I do not need to go into them again.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Will a part of the Bill would restrict this? I acknolwedge the recommendation by CRU, but in regard to the heads of the Bill, while we are going to make committee recommendations, will that be taken on board by the Department?
Ms Emer Griffin:
It is not something there currently, to be frank. I think we were saying that the decision on private wires would be done through the criteria that CRU will assess. We have these discrete cases but we do not specify the type of applicant in that at the moment. That is not something we are proposing to do. We want to have a framework that is not overly limited at a primary level. There will have to be secondary legislation and regulations where some of those specifics will probably come in more. We will take away the Deputy's point as well.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We have to wrap up as there are two other sets of witnesses waiting to come in.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Can I ask the witnesses to reply to me afterwards? Just very simply, has there been an energy security impact review of this? We have just heard about LNG and how that is there because of what we are going to be facing. If we have new wind and solar farms that do not have a transmission system operator, TSO, obligation, I am asking if there has been an energy security review.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We are not having another round. The officials might come back to the committee in writing on that matter. I thank them for coming here today. We will publish their opening statement on the committee's website.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In this second session on the general scheme of the private wires Bill, we will continue our pre-legislative scrutiny of the Bill. I welcome from An Coimisiún Pleanála Mr. Peter Mullan, chief executive officer, and Ms Ciara Kellett, director of planning; and from the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, Dr. Phil Hemmingway, director of decarbonisation, Ms Loretta Joyce, director of energy safety, and Mr. Paul Nagle, emerging regulatory frameworks manager.
Before I invite the witnesses to deliver their opening statements, I want to advise them 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 the 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.
In terms of the format of this meeting, I will invite the witnesses to make an opening statement to a maximum of five minutes each. Once those statements have been delivered, I will call on the members of the committee in the order in which they have indicated to me to put their questions. I will allocate four minutes per member for questions for this round.
I ask Mr. Mullan for the opening statement on behalf of An Coimisiún Pleanála, please.
Mr. Peter Mullan:
I thank the committee for inviting us here. I am happy to assist in any way I can. I have just a short statement. I am here with my colleague Ms Ciara Kellett. She is the director of planning on the strategic infrastructure side with responsibility for strategic infrastructure applications.
An Coimisiún Pleanála is Ireland's national planning body. We are responsible for making independent, timely, quasi-judicial decisions on appeals arising out of planning applications and direct applications in relation to strategic infrastructure projects, including electrical infrastructure. That is why we are here today. Our role is set out in statute. We were established on 18 June 2025, becoming An Coimisiún Pleanála, but before that, obviously, we were An Bord Pleanála. We were established almost 50 years ago. Our 50th anniversary is next year. An Coimisiún Pleanála operates under complex national and EU planning legislation. We are neither a policymaking body nor an enforcement body. It is not our role to comment on Government policy, but we are always willing to offer our advice and expertise in general terms when invited to do so. We are happy to assist the committee today in any way we can.
We do not anticipate a major impact from the private wires legislation, as proposed, on direct applications or normal planning appeals to An Coimisiún Pleanála. As noted, the commission has a consenting function for electrical development, and our casework already includes applications for cables and wires from non-statutory undertakings. We note that it is not intended that developers of private wires will enjoy any statutory powers to acquire or use lands - CPO functions, in essence.
As regards electrical infrastructure applications, the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, provides for strategic infrastructure development, SID, applications to be made directly to the commission, but not all electrical infrastructure applications, such as onshore wind and solar, would qualify, given their size. The types and sizes of development that fall under SID are set out in Schedule 7 to the 2000 Act. They include large projects in the energy, transport, environmental and health infrastructure sectors. To qualify as a SID, a proposed development must be one of the specific classes prescribed in Schedule 7 and must exceed the defined development thresholds for that class. If a development is not determined to be a SID, the application is made to the local planning authority in the normal way but may come to us by way of an appeal within the appeal period.
Section 182A of the Planning and Development Act 2000 refers to electrical transmission lines. Section 182A(9) provides a definition of "transmission" that includes, inter alia, a high-voltage line where the voltage would be 110 kV or more. Applications for such developments are lodged directly with the commission.
Members are all aware that the Planning and Development Act 2024 has passed the Oireachtas but parts of it have not been commenced. Part 4, Chapter 4 of that Act proposes changes to the types of electrical infrastructure that will be submitted directly to us in the commission. Section 82 details "Chapter 4 development" types and defines "electricity transmission infrastructure development" to mean:
(a) development consisting of infrastructure for transmission within the meaning of Directive (EU) 2019/944/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council ... on common rules for the internal market for electricity and amending Directive 2012/27/EU, or
(b) development for the purposes of such transmission,
and includes an interconnector within such meaning;
If electrical development is not determined to be strategic infrastructure or "Chapter 4 development" under the 2024 Act, applications will be lodged with the local authority, as I have said.
In relation to the general scheme of the private wires Bill, the draft heads before the committee today, heads 6, 7 and 8 state that the CRU will have the responsibility to grant either licences or permissions for private wires. Our understanding, and I stand to be corrected on this, is that the reference throughout the Act to the commission is in fact a reference to our colleagues. It gave me pause when I read it for the first time, but when I got that clear in my head we were clear. Therefore, our understanding is that there is no change proposed with respect to planning consent functions and that it will continue to be our responsibility and-or that of the respective planning authorities to approve permission for private wire developments.
From a review of the heads of the Bill, we do not anticipate significant changes to the planning consent function carried out by us, an coimisiún. We will continue to make robust and independent decisions whether or not the applicant is a statutory undertaker. We thank the committee for providing us with the opportunity to attend today. If there are technical questions and so on, we are very happy to assist in any way and to assist our colleagues with the committee's deliberations.
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
I thank the joint committee for inviting us to outline the role of the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, regarding the drafting of the new private wires legislation. Private wires, in our view, have the potential to become a useful part of Ireland's evolving energy system, enabling direct connections between generators and demand customers without the electricity passing through the public network. The design of any such framework has significant implications for Ireland's energy policy, the development of renewable resources and the continued safe and efficient operation of the electricity grid.
The CRU is engaging with the Department of Climate, Energy and the Environment on our analysis of the general scheme in a number of areas where further policy clarity is required and would be welcomed. This includes the overall objectives of the introduction of private wires - for example, whether it is aimed primarily at greater integration of renewable energy generation, addressing system operator or grid constraints, addressing industrial policy or as a climate mitigation measure. It appears tthe objectives of private wires have evolved between the time of the drafting of the policy statement and the drafting of the general scheme.
For example, the policy statement indicated a preference to continue connecting generators and demand to the national grid and indicated that the objective of any change would be to accelerate renewables and storage deployment. It is not yet clear, however, how the legislation will ensure preference of connection to the national grid. In addition, the general scheme drafting appears to enable private wire development for both renewable and conventional generation. These observations have been communicated by the CRU to the Department and we understand that the Department is considering them.
Clarity of legislation on the foregoing topics will guide how private wires should subsequently be assessed, licensed and governed.
The potential for privately owned electricity lines already exists under section 37 of the Electricity Regulation Act. These are referred to as "direct lines" rather than "private wires". The CRU is of the view that leveraging the existing direct lines legislation may provide a more efficient or streamlined basis for delivering some of the intended outcomes as set out in the private wires general scheme.
The private wires general scheme assigns a number of significant new functions to the CRU, including regulation, licensing, monitoring, applications assessment and the development of technical and safety standards.
Both electricity system operators, namely ESB Networks and EirGrid, along with local authorities, planning bodies, national standards bodies, environmental and safety regulators and others will need to be involved in this process as appropriate, and appropriate roles must be clearly defined in legislation. The CRU has raised this with the Department of Climate, Energy and the Environment and understands that the Department intends to give further consideration to assignment of private wires functions.
Private wires may be directly or indirectly connected to the national electricity grid and this will have implications for system planning, system operation, system safety and future investment decisions. In certain cases system operators may be required to take over private wire infrastructure.
The interaction between private wires and electricity tariffs also requires careful consideration. If projects rely on the public network for any element of system security, for example if a project has both a private wire connection and a connection to the national electricity network, there must be equitable arrangements in place to ensure these users bear an appropriate share of the fixed costs of the national network.
The projected demand for private wires will need to be carefully assessed to understand the impact on tariffs, network planning, and other areas of regulation. Development and introduction of new energy policies typically take considerable resources to progress from conception to operational roll-out. Early clarity, adequate resourcing and prioritisation across all agencies would support a more efficient introduction of any new framework. The CRU places consumer protection at the heart of its regulatory decision-making processes. Private wires will initially serve industrial or large commercial users, as we understand it, and the CRU would welcome additional clarity on the application of consumer protection measures to end users of private wires as the drafting process proceeds.
I would like to thank you for the opportunity to address the committee today. This concludes our opening statement, and we are happy to take any questions from the Chair and committee members.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Thank you. I now invite members to put their question to and engage with the witnesses.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Chair and I thank the witnesses for being here for this important discussion.
Are the witnesses satisfied with the safeguards in an instance where there may be a large windfarm or energy creation connecting with a data centre, for example? If a private wire connects both, that meets the objective for both facilities. From a planning and future-proofing point of view, are the witnesses satisfied with what is currently proposed in the legislation if, in five years' time, a new development takes place and then, two or three years down the line, another development takes place, meaning we are tearing up the road every couple of years to put in additional infrastructure? Is there an onus on the first development to future-proof wires along roadsides or wherever they are connecting? I welcome the witnesses' thoughts on that.
Mr. Peter Mullan:
I thank the Senator. There are a number of matters he set out there. From a planning perspective and from a planning application perspective, each application would be assessed on its own criteria. The environmental protections and the various other protections would be judged within that basis. There is nothing in this legislation as I read it that is going to change that. I do not think this particular Bill makes anything different there. The role of An Coimisiún Pleanála stays the same. Each application is decided by itself.
The infrastructure point is valid. I might ask Ms Kellett to help me in relation to this. Certainly, regarding telecommunication masts and that, there is a requirement that various facilities are shared etc. That seems to me to make a lot of sense. In terms of the laying of wires, I am not sure that is something An Coimisiún Pleanála would get involved in but I would hand over to Ms Kellett on that.
Ms Ciara Kellett:
That obviously depends on the scale of the wires. As we explained, direct applications into An Coimisiún Pleanála have to meet certain criteria. There are a lot of exemptions in the planning Act. For instance, 20 kV lines and so forth do not need planning consent per se unless there are other difficulties as described in Article 9 which may force them into the planning system. However, there are exemptions for certain cables and wires. There are smaller 38 kV lines that would go to the local authority. As I say, particularly large lines of 110 kV and above would generally come into An Coimisiún Pleanála as direct applications. We do not see that changing based on what we read in the heads of the Bill.
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
From our perspective, one of the important features here is that as the operators of the national electricity network, where a facility is either directly or indirectly connected to the national network via a private wire, EirGrid will need a really good understanding of the operational characteristics of a wind farm or a demand facility in terms of the potential interaction with the national network. That is one point.
In terms of the general scheme of the private wires Bill, there is no provision as far as I read it around future-proofing. However, the permitting and licensing role that the CRU will be given will have with it particular requirements and conditions. I assume there will be some level of technical standards that private wire developers will have to build to as well to define-----
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Should the legislation include that? Is that something the CRU will identify?
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is it a concern at the moment that it is not in it?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
When it comes to future-proofing in terms of overbuild, for example, where we are dealing with a private wire it may be down to the private developer. The private wire developers will not be building elements of the national network; they will be building private wires for their own use.
Mark Duffy (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The point I am raising is that the same developer could go back looking to do the exact same thing on another part of the road in five years' time, or, indeed, another developer may want to do it in close proximity. It could be continuous, as opposed to running it on one corridor or route.
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
There could be a compounding effect there. Certainly, it is something where it would be useful to have additional consideration from the Department. In terms of the national network, EirGrid and ESB Networks plan the network and as part of that they consider future-proofing. They look at anticipatory investment and overbuild, but that is separate from the private wires piece.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses.
My first question is for CRU. In the opening statement Dr. Hemmingway mentioned that under section 37 of the Electricity Regulation Act there is already a mechanism there in terms of direct lines to provide for some of the requirements that this Bill might intend. Could he elaborate on that, please?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
Section 37 is around direct lines. It provides a legislative basis where a developer is refused a connection to the national network on the grounds of capacity or where there is a dispute in the context of the terms and conditions being offered by one of the electricity system operators. It provides a provision to develop a direct line which is very similar to a private wire. It is a privately developed, privately owned wire that is not connected to the national network. That has been in legislation for a very long time but there has not, to our knowledge, been any real demand for it to date. The regulatory framework that sits behind that has not yet been developed. Essentially, it has not come into effect. We have placed it on our 2026 work plan for development because we had started to receive more queries about direct lines and the ability to apply for them, for example. As the legislation for private wires progresses, we will have to give consideration to how those two things fit together or do not fit together. One of the pieces of feedback we have given to the Department is a suggestion that consideration might be given to whether the direct line section 37 legislation might be amended to deliver a lot of the benefits that are foreseen under the private wires piece.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That relates to my next question. Is there potential for section 37 to achieve all of the objectives of this legislation, given that it has not really been fully developed to date and it is already there? Could it just be developed in a stand-alone manner, separate from this Bill?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
We think there is potential for it to deliver many of the benefits of private wires. I understand the Department is taking it away to analyse it more closely and understand whether there are any difficulties associated with it. It could lead to a more expedited process in terms of the legislation and in terms of not having two parallel processes - a direct lines process and a private wires process - that may do largely similar things.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is interesting. The next question is on the CRU's role and additional functions in regulation, licensing and monitoring arising from this Bill. We are concerned about additional cost being placed on household energy bills. Given there would be a lot more expected of the CRU, does Dr. Hemmingway anticipate this could have a knock-on impact on household energy bills?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
My understanding is the Department has indicated it does not wish to see any impact on household bills as part of this. It is important to get clarity on what will fund the activity within CRU and any other agency working on private wires. CRU is primarily funded by levies across regulated areas - electricity, gas, water - on customers. We are still awaiting clarity on the mechanism of funding and whether there will be, for example, Exchequer funding in the early days which might transition to a levy on private wires developers. We are not fully clear but would welcome further clarity on that.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will follow on from Senator Noonan's comments. Earlier on, I expressed my concern to the Department about having a parallel energy system and the potential for it to undermine the security of the grid. The bigger the grid is, with the more capacity and flexibility, the more opportunity it has to balance supply and demand. If we start hiving bits of it off, that will undermine the security of the grid. I would be interested in the witnesses' thoughts on that.
I have concerns about not just the security of the grid as a piece of infrastructure, but also the financing of it. We were told any of these operators would be outside the PSO system as well as the TSO system. There is a risk that the burden of financing the grid and its operation will fall on households. That is usually what happens. There are reports today that householders are paying nearly twice as much as large energy users for electricity and seven times more for network charges, which is incredible. Considering the stresses and strains large energy users are placing on the energy system and grid, they should be paying for that but they are not. I am concerned that having private wires where there is a contract between two entities - say, a wind farm operator and a data centre - they are operating outside the totality of the grid and that could impact on the security of the grid and its financing. Will the witnesses comment on that?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
I thank the Deputy for the question. It is important that EirGrid and ESBN would have a clear understanding of the operational characteristics. What I mean by that is that where conventional or renewable generation is installed via private wires connected to a demand customer, who may also be connected to the grid, it is important that the system operators have a good understanding of and insight into the potential behaviour of the generating asset, so they can protect security of supply. It is primarily a role for the Department to perform an impact assessment of potential legislation on security of supply and ensure that is appropriately catered for and mitigated.
In terms of the costs on other consumers, there will be a need to carefully consider the principle of cost causation. Where there are, for example, tariffing arrangements for demand customers connected to the national network but who also have a private wire behind their facility, detailed consideration must be given to ensuring they are paying for whatever costs they are driving on the national network. Work will be needed there in terms of tariff reviews.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does Dr. Hemmingway believe large energy users are currently paying for the costs they are driving? I do not think they are. When we look at the investment gone into EirGrid for PR6, a lot of that is going to secure the grid because of the data centres opened over the past ten or 15 years. I do not think they are paying appropriately for their demand on the grid. Does Dr. Hemmingway think that is the case?
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a few questions for An Coimisiún Pleanála. Given that rapid data centre growth is driving most new electricity demand, given how much renewable energy being added is going to meeting that demand rather than to reducing fossil fuels use, and given how all public bodies have to ensure decisions comply with the climate Act, what role could An Coimisiún Pleanála play in that by, for example, refusing applications for private wires linking data centres to fossil fuel plants? This happened in Lumcloon. Shannon LNG is another example. How will An Coimisiún Pleanála ensure private wires developments do not exacerbate the grid congestion that is already delaying housing connections? Housing is the most important problem we need to solve in the country at the moment. I worry that we are creating demand and this Bill might have an impact on that. What can An Coimisiún Pleanála do to ensure that does not happen?
Mr. Peter Mullan:
I will share that question with my colleague but at a high level I will answer a number of points the Deputy made. We make decisions on all planning matters, including data centres, grid connections, etc. We must pay attention to section 15 of the climate Act, which places obligations on us. Most of us are aware of the Coolglass decision by the Supreme Court, which gave complete clarity on the obligations of all State agencies and developers in relation to applications under the climate Act. At a high level, that policy and guidance has been given by the Supreme Court in the last fortnight and that is to be welcomed.
There are six data centre applications outstanding at the moment in the organisation. I have no view as to whether that is the right amount, a big amount or a small amount. It just is. It is not an enormous amount but I take the Deputy's point----
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They are sucking up all the energy.
Mr. Peter Mullan:
I take that point. Our view is if they are plugging into the national grid system, we generally do not have a concern because that is supplied by the national grid.
We take the policy as set by the Government in relation to it. However, I take the Deputy's point. I will ask my colleague to supplement a couple of the things I have said. By way of some reassurance in relation to the private wires and the work that might be generated out of that, and whether it will affect other obligations under other planning applications, we are up to date in relation to all housing planning applications. The latest figures are from last year in relation to large-scale residential development over 100,000 units, normal planning appeals and all the various different issues. With the exception of SHDs, which is a completely different debate, we are up to date in regard to planning applications. We are getting them through the organisation on time. I do not anticipate that this Bill will have any direct impact on applications. I believe that is the question the Deputy was asking. I do not anticipate it will affect the workload. Some 70% of our work is housing and housing related and I do not anticipate this will affect that per se. We are already deciding private electricity grid applications at the moment. Our view is that this Bill, while it might provide for a different legislative mechanism, will not change the nature of the applications.
Ms Ciara Kellett:
We already have applications coming in from private applicants to connect wind farms or solar farms to the grid. We do not see that changing in terms of how we approach the assessment of those projects. As I mentioned earlier, depending on the size or the scale of the development, whether they come directly into us or they arrive into us following an appeal of a local authority decision, we will deal with those and we will have regard to all the Government policy with respect to the particular development, whether it is the renewables, a wind farm or section 15 of the climate Act that will be guiding us, regardless of the applicant. I hope that answers the question.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a couple of questions for CRU. Does it believe the proposed Bill will support the development of offshore wind?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It does not rule out fossil fuels.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is there a risk that fossil fuel use could actually increase as a result of this?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
If it enables the additional construction of fossil fuel generators then that risk may stand. What we would be particularly interested in regarding the subsequent regulatory implementation is having legislation that is as clear and tightly defined as possible so that when it comes to the point of CRU developing criteria against which private wires applications should be assessed, that it is really clear from the outset what should and should not be permitted.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that a political view or does CRU have a particular view on that? If so, how should the legislation be phrased?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In regard to community-owned microgrid operators, co-operatives are not specifically recognised. Is there a reason for that? Will they be included at a later stage?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
I do not know. However, our reading of the general scheme as it is currently written does not preclude domestic customers from engaging with some of the use cases under private wires, although I gather the intention is more so driven by larger scale generation and industrial customers.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It could be included then. For the sake of charity, it would be an idea to have that in there, that they are not being precluded.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
A prioritisation strategy decision was taken on 10 December that the Government can move away from the first-come-first-served model for grid connection. I am not sure whether this question was asked earlier. In regard to housing and transport, we saw the story over Christmas about the energy capacity to build the MetroLink, for example. These are the issues that should be prioritised - public transport and housing. However, the Government has not moved away from the first-come-first-served model and we think priority should be given to those sectors. What is Dr. Hemmingway's view on that?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
The first-come-first-served principle or way of operating is quite common throughout Europe. What we are seeing more recently through the European Commission's grid package is a potential move away from that, considering different models of allocation. In Britain, for example, they have moved to a first-ready-first-served approach rather than first-come-first-served. They are seeking demonstration of significant progression of a particular project so that one cannot apply early and not develop quickly. There will be more to come in that space.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Which grid connection should be prioritised if there was a data centre, a housing scheme and a MetroLink or some public transport-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does the Deputy mean a private wire connection or in general?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
Currently I do not believe there is anything in Government policy or legislation that says one should be prioritised over the other. We are doing some analysis internally to understand whether there are any hooks within the Electricity Regulation Act which would allow, for example, ESB Networks to prioritise or hold capacity for households, for example, or, if there is not sufficient clarity in current legislation, to suggest to the Department whether legislation could be brought forward to do that if that is desirable from a Government policy perspective.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for coming in today. I have questions for the CRU mainly. I listened to the opening statement with interest and I sensed a certain scepticism or wariness about the proposed legislation, although I do not want to put words into your mouth. It was said, interestingly, that further clarity is required from the Department on the overall objective of the legislation and indeed that the objective seems to have changed potentially from a previous policy statement to what we are seeing now in the heads of the Bill. Will the witnesses go into that in a little more detail, please?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
In the main, our observations on the general scheme and our feedback to the Department to date has been that there are quite a few areas which are open to interpretation. For example, the preference that the national grid remains the primary way to connect generators in demand, etc., could be thought of in quite a few different ways. One meaning could be that one must first apply to the national grid and be refused. That is a test and it could be determined it is not a feasible route forward. Another possible meaning is that the majority of connections should continue to be connected to the national grid but actually quite a large proportion could come through private wires. Our recommendation is that the legislation be very tight and very clear on what private wires intends to enable and what it does not intend to enable. Another example is that the policy statement referred to any change being with the intent of promoting renewables or further acceleration of renewables, but there is also reference to security of supply within the general scheme. Again, if down the line CRU will have to establish criteria to speak to those policy objectives, it is really important that we have a sound legislative basis on which to do that.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Would Dr. Hemmingway advocate for explicitly prohibiting private wires from connecting to fossil fuel generation?
Would he see that as creating issues for the CRU somewhere?
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On a broader issue, does the CRU have concerns about the part privatisation, at least, of what was a formerly a fully nationalised asset, that is, the national grid? Would it have concerns about that from a safety and regulatory standards perspective?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
From an economic perspective - I will pass to my colleague on the safety perspective - what we would be thinking about is customer protection and whether the full suite of customer protection measures that currently apply to all consumers will apply to consumers who are just connected to a private wire and maybe not the national grid. The second piece is around the financing of the national grid and not undermining that. The third piece is around the potential for private entities connected to private wires and also connected to the national network and ensuring they pay their share of whatever cost they drive to be connected to the national network as well as a private wire. I might pass to my colleague on the safety piece.
Ms Loretta Joyce:
I thank the Deputy for his question. On the safety side, we have fed some comments back to the Department in relation to the Bill providing whether they should be built to the same standards or if it refers to technical and safety standards. We want to ensure the appropriate body is involved in developing those standards. For example, there is the National Standards Authority of Ireland. Emergency response is a key one for us. We have fed back comments on how it works at the moment. ESB Networks will respond if there are fallen wires or outages. It is identifying that service provider and who that is. It will have to be practical to implement and ensure safety.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is great. I thank the witnesses.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have two questions. I refer to this issue of applying to the grid first and getting a connection to the grid. If you cannot get a connection to the grid, private wire becomes an option. Who is going to make that decision or how will it work? Let us say a facility developer feels that is in their own interest. There is capacity and availability on the national grid and there is a route but, for whatever reason, they decide this is more efficient or faster. How is that going to play out and whose decision will that be? It is quite a technical decision, I would imagine. Will it be An Bord Pleanála that will make that decision? Who will make that decision?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
It is not yet clear and it comes back to the objectives of introducing private wires. For example, the general scheme does not require that a developer first apply for a connection to the national network and only then could they build a private wire. Coming back to objectives, is one of the objectives to make it cheaper, for example, for an industrial, demand or large-energy user, or whatever, to connect to generation? If that is one of the objectives, there needs to also be a test as to whether the national grid already has the capacity to cater for a connection. It is not exactly clear how those things will work together in this instance.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It strikes me that it is a bit fraught with issues with regard to that decision-making. It is quite technical in nature, I would have thought.
The CRU made the point about consumer protection. Is it that it foresees a situation where you could effectively have residential consumers on the end of a private wire system or line, and they effectively will not have the protection one would get on the national grid at the moment? Is that what the CRU is saying? Is it making the point more for commercial users or is there a distinction?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. Nagle's concern is that there is a question mark around consumer protection. He is coming at it from that side, is that it?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Nagle.
Lorraine Clifford-Lee (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses very much for their presentations. I ask Dr. Hemmingway to refer back to what he said to my colleague in regard to it being a matter for the Department to define what private wires are. Could he confirm whether he feels it is a political decision?
Lorraine Clifford-Lee (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does Dr. Hemmingway mean the Minister and the Government?
Lorraine Clifford-Lee (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I wanted that little bit clarified.
Could I ask whoever wants to answer about the resilience of the grid? Do the witnesses believe the introduction of private wires will add that element of diversification that will aid the resilience of the grid, or will it take from the resilience?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
Broadly speaking, the exact shape and form of private wires, the legislation and how it is finalised will contribute to dictating that. I am not really answering the Senator's question but I think that will need careful assessment as the legislation is finalised to ensure that any resilience issues or benefits that could be created are harnessed.
Lorraine Clifford-Lee (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Dr. Hemmingway. That does actually add some clarity for when we are moving ahead, ensuring that if we get to that point of developing the legislation, we are conscious of that.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am going to give members another minute each if they would like.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On that point, can Dr. Hemmingway specify what elements would need to be incorporated in order to ensure resilience for the grid? What are the sort of tick boxes he would need to see? Also, on the tariff reforms project, is that something the CRU decided itself to do or was it directed to do it? Why has that project started and when will it be finished?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Dr. Hemmingway said that whether the Bill takes from or adds to the resilience of the grid will depend on a number of things. What needs to be included in the Bill to ensure that it adds to the resilience rather than taking away from it?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
It is primarily around the ability of the system operators - in other words, EirGrid and ESB Networks - to access any data they need to make sure they understand what is happening behind the meter, if there are generation assets, and to understand, in terms of future system planning, what is coming behind the meter. They will need really good visibility for system planning but also system operation to make sure that the national network can be catered for and that the interaction of private wires with everything else on the national network is really clear and there is a really good operational understanding. I think that is the primary piece. I will check if Mr. Nagle wants to add anything.
Mr. Paul Nagle:
In relation to that and many of the other aspects we have discussed, it would be really helpful if we had a view on what is the forecast on the uptake of private wires. What is the likely number of applications? Is it in tens or hundreds of megawatts? What will it look like two, five or ten years' time? We could then be a lot more informed on all of things, such as licensing, tariffs and the impact on safety. It is difficult, at the moment, to have a precise view on any of these things without having some sort of view of that. I realise there are probably limitations where, potentially, you cannot put in caps or those kinds of things in legislation but at least we would have some sort of other guidance. It does not need to have pinpoint accuracy; it could be a range but that kind of information would be really helpful.
Ciarán Ahern (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a question again for the CRU. In regard to the demand for this legislation, the witnesses mentioned the direct lines legislation that is already in place. Has anyone availed of that legislation to date since it was enacted? The witnesses might have mentioned that they have been contacted by certain organisations in relation to that.
What kind of organisations were they? How many of them were there?
Did the Department engage with the CRU directly about developing that legislation or putting a regulatory structure around it before embarking on the private wires?
Dr. Phil Hemmingway:
On demand for private wires introduction or legislation, we do not have a good sense of what level of demand or uptake might come. On the direct lines legislation, that has been in legislation for a very long time. There has not been demand for it. More latterly we have had some queries from prospective customers that were refused connections from the grid. That is a very small number, though.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I want to tie in with the RED III directive and the private wires and how we are blocking renewables. What specific steps have been taken operationally to ensure consistency across local authorities and faster pre-application engagements so private wire projects do not stall at planning stage like we are seeing in the renewable sector at the moment?
Mr. Peter Mullan:
Local authorities are obviously not in my bailiwick but we are aware some of the local authorities have concerns about RED III timelines and the areas of expertise that are there. I was at a meeting this morning where that was discussed.
Our obligations under RED III depend on the size of the application, etc. We are confident that we are resourced enough to meet the application in respect of any applications that come to us under RED III – 26 weeks, 48 weeks, 52 or 55 weeks or whatever. We are confident we will be able to make those decisions within those timelines. It is difficult to know what is in this Bill in relation to it but I do not think it will make any difference to our role in deciding applications.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I appreciate that. From speaking to industry and users, people do feel as though RED III is being used as a weapon by councils to elongate decisions on renewable energy projects. There is massive discrepancy in how policy is being implemented by local councils. What plans are in place to improve the pre-application engagement process to enable developers? That is the same thing I already asked. Is there sufficient staffing of the NPWS and the National Monuments Service, for example? Are there plans to ensure there is conformity in local authority approaches on certificates of completeness or is consideration being given to the possibility of maintaining the status quo of allowing developers to choose whether to submit applications to local authorities or the commission?
Ms Ciara Kellett:
I will not be able to talk on behalf of the local authorities but the larger applications that come directly to us must engage with the pre-application process with us and we continue to do so. Last year, for instance, we had 100% success in turning around those decisions within the statutory timeframe and it is our intention to continue to do that.
On the RED III question, currently there is no change to how the grid connections are managed through the planning process. RED III was more focused on the renewable energy developments themselves as opposed to the grid connection. The European directive refers to grid connections but that has not been transposed into our legislation as yet.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I can send specific examples after the meeting.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for coming in and taking part in this pre-legislative scrutiny. I propose we publish their opening statements on the committee website. Is that agreed? Agreed.