Johnny Brady (Meath West, Fianna Fail)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. I will focus on the effect of the EirGrid proposal on my county and the pylons from Woodland through County Cavan to Northern Ireland.

Any potential health risk posed by overhead power lines is unacceptable. Pollutants from electromagnetic fields produced by overhead lines will subject the weakest and most vulnerable in our communities to the possibility of illness and distress. If technology can facilitate the laying of cables underground from Rush to Woodland, County Meath, consideration must be given to laying them underground the rest of the way to Kingscourt, County Cavan, and Northern Ireland.

There are a number of other reasons for considering the underground option. The negative visual impact on our landscape of the pylons will militate against the development of tourism in the area. The pylons will also have a detrimental effect on protected wildlife and their habitats and they will traverse areas rich in cultural and archaeological heritage and special areas of conservation. Another issue that must be borne in mind is the threat they will pose to property values along its route. Putting the line underground appears to be the safest means of ensuring a secure and reliable electricity service to the area. The possibility of over-ground pylons being part of the EirGrid plan for Meath has been a major cause for concern among local people, particularly those who live close to area through which the pylons may pass.

The main argument against the use of pylons is on health grounds, an issue that all Deputies will agree is of the utmost importance. Since 2000, 107 scientific papers have been published in peer reviewed journals, of which 69 linked electromagnetic fields to various forms of cancer, 30 were inconclusive and only eight showed no links. Research carried out in Britain in 2005 found that living within 200 metres of high voltage power lines increases a child's chance of getting leukaemia by 69%. Within 600 metres it was increased by an average of 20%. All technology carries benefits and risks which have to be carefully weighed at all times. I do not doubt the significant benefit of a sustainable electricity supply but in this instance the alternative option of going underground appears to eliminate risk and should therefore be given consideration.

Another reason for thinking carefully about overhead lines is ecology. The issue of climate change and our responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions has been brought centre stage. Putting the North-South interconnector and future proposed extra high voltage lines underground may be significantly more environmentally responsible than the construction of overhead pylons. Another advantage of going underground is a smaller carbon footprint due to reduced land use and material choice. While an overhead line requires a 60 m wide strip to be kept permanently clear for safety, maintenance and repair reasons, an underground cable of the same capacity requires only 10 m.

In today's world we are more aware than ever of the need to protect our environment. As the age of industrialisation and new technologies, the 20th century saw many advances. Our world has changed significantly in a relatively short period. This generation has been tasked with responding to the challenge of protecting our environment and undoing the damage that has already been done. By putting the lines underground we will be playing a small part in protecting the environment. The underground route would eliminate the noise pollution associated with overhead lines. We are all aware of the constant buzz that accompanies overhead lines which can irritate residents in their vicinity. An underground route also eliminates collision and electrocution hazards related to wildlife and, in particular, birds.

Farmers and landowners are opposed to the use of pylons on their land for a number of practical reasons. Farmers describe the difficulties of working around pylons in fields. An underground route would eliminate this problem completely. Farmers are also legitimately concerned about having to work on a daily basis under overhead lines. Nobody would want to put their own or their family's health at risk, regardless of how small that risk may be.

It should also be remembered that land and property devaluation can be a consequence of overhead power lines. I understand that planning permission for new houses will not be allowed within 200 m of an overhead 400 kV line, which virtually eliminates many fields with roadside frontage from planning applications. EirGrid proposes to place the lines closer than 50 m to existing dwellings. More than 60 studies have been carried out over the last 50 years on the impact of overhead power lines on the value of residential property. The most common claims cited in court cases in America are reductions in market price, properties being slower to sell and a decrease in sales volumes. Issues such as visual and noise pollution were often identified as negative influences on property values.

In assessing the choice of going over or underground, the issue of our heritage and landscape cannot be ignored. It is impossible to put a price on our special heritage because it is part of all of us. The north east is an area rich in heritage, from archaeological sites which are world famous to scenic landscapes that need protection from visually obtrusive structures. Locals are understandably concerned about the effect of overhead lines on areas that are of vast historic significance. While the issue of costs has been raised by those who are in favour of taking the overhead route, can a price be put on people's health and well-being and the heritage of a special part of our country? I have seen reports that suggest the additional cost passed on to the consumer due to going underground would come to no more than €2.20 per month. Is this too high a price to pay for peace of mind for thousands of people?

I am aware that there are two sides to every argument. I welcome the fact that an independent study on the EirGrid interconnector is taking place. The study commissioned by the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, has broad terms of reference that allow it to examine several aspects of the interconnector, including the cost of putting it underground. This is an issue that requires careful consideration. The interests of the people living in the areas affected must be borne in mind at all times and must come ahead of any monetary or business considerations.

I thank the Minister for commissioning the study. We are all delighted he has done so and we await the outcome. We hope it will allow the cables to be placed underground.

See this speech in context