James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I also commend Deputy Smith on bringing forward this Bill. As Deputy Dooley said, Fianna Fáil will support it. We are in a climate emergency. Despite President Trump's tweets, snowfall in winter does not automatically mean climate stability. We live in a time of extreme weather and repeat extreme climate events. I learned even earlier today that the ESB dam on the River Shannon was built to withstand a one-in-10,000-year flood. Unfortunately, those water levels that were once considered one-in-10,000-year events are now considered one-in-150-year events. This shows the journey we have taken in relatively recent times, over the past 60 years since the construction of the dam. I crossed the Liffey at the ESB dam at Poulaphouca, Ballymore Eustace, in my constituency recently. We see similar weather events reoccurring and the entire Liffey basin, with which I am familiar, flooding repeatedly. Flood events are becoming the norm on many local roads and areas adjacent to streams and rivers, which is completely unacceptable, as are the storms and the adverse weather conditions we have seen recently, be it Storm Ophelia, Storm Brian or the other storms we saw last winter.

Ambition and aspiration are needed and we need to think big and bold, and this Bill does so. When we think we cannot achieve things, we should look to people such as Elon Musk, who last night sent his car into space, and the creativity and ambition of man that is realised in such endeavours. Where there is a will, there is a way. Such people find it possible to do things that were previously thought impossible. We have seen leadership in such places as London and Paris. I understand a ban will be imposed on non-electric vehicles entering the latter city from 2030 onwards. We are seeing more and more such initiatives in cities around Europe and indeed the world. Targets and aspirations are being set and imposed, but in statute, although these countries often give themselves lead-in times, 2030 in the case of Paris.

We also see the success of renewable energy in many areas but not yet in Ireland, a point to which I will return. We see this in such countries as Portugal, Spain and Germany, some of which have achieved negative pricing when they have got a particularly good spell on renewable energy, particularly wind and solar. We should be in a position to do likewise but we are nowhere near. We have seen this happen and become the norm in other countries that run entirely on renewable energy for continuous periods of two or three days when this has been achieved and done well.

I am disappointed with the Government's approach to date, notwithstanding the good work of the committee. The Chairman of the committee, Deputy Hildegarde Naughton, myself - I am Vice Chairman - and the cross-party membership are doing some excellent work. I am disappointed with the Government as a whole. I recently asked the Taoiseach what provision is being made for the possibility that the State will incur fines of over €1 billion if we do not make our targets for 2020. His response, which was quite flippant and dismissive, was that it was an issue for next year and not this year so the question was out of scope. It is far more serious than this year or next year. We need to think about the next 100 years. The State is on the hook potentially for €1 billion. We established this at the committee and the figures are borne out in the detail. For moral as well as financial reasons, this is not a place we want to be.

As Deputy Dooley indicated, Fine Gael, on entering Government, appointed an advisory council but then proceeded to ignore its recommendations. Professor John FitzGerald, one of the most esteemed climate experts attached to Trinity College, spoke about how the Government, unfortunately, will fail to meet its target and that its strategies are completely inefficient for mitigation in the short and long term in the area.

I mentioned the moral argument but the financial argument is also strong. It is a fact that fossil fuel extraction in Ireland has been unsuccessful. We do not have a series of coal mines, even if we were minded to go back to using them. With regard to driving revenue to the State, the Corrib gas field has been successful from an output point of view but it has not been commercially successful. Shell sold its stake having made just under €1 billion in losses. This means a loss to the taxpayer because loyalties are calculated based on revenue and profit. If extraction is resulting in losses, there is no gain whatsoever for the taxpayer.

The Bill is in line with national trends on divestment. We supported last year's legislation on companies divesting assets relating to fossil fuels industries. That legislation was passed. There is a trend worldwide whereby up to €5 trillion of holdings in fossil fuels funds have been divested. There is a variety of renewable energy options and I will touch on them in a few moments.

I have a few concerns about the Bill and I hope they can be addressed or mitigated on Committee Stage. I will return to them then. I am concerned about energy security. Were the Bill to pass today we would be saying "No" to any non-renewable sources being used to produce energy in the State from the day of its enactment. This is a very noble, laudable and desirable goal but I worry about its implications because we are not even making 50% renewable energy, as I understand it, so where will the other 50% come from? If we cut off sources such as the Corrib gas field, the alternative is to import energy. Natural gas is understood to be a transitional fuel from the high pollutants of coal and oil through to renewables. In order to fill the gap, we would have to import nuclear energy and energy generated from non-renewable sources elsewhere. I look forward to the discussion on this. I am concerned, however, because it is stated that we will not be allowed to use Irish gas but that we will import French gas or energy generated by nuclear reactors in France or the UK. I want to understand this further because a very important point arises in the context of from where our non-renewable energy come if we do not produce it here.

I mentioned the Corrib gas field in the context of transition. An opportunity exists there up to 2050. I want to understand a bit more about how this might work. With regard to foreign direct investment, which is critical to our economy, when people invest in the State, there are a number of things they look for, including energy security and energy supply. There is uncertainty about 50% or more of the supply if it is based on imports. We have the UN interconnector in respect of which complications are arising on foot of Brexit. The interconnector ceased functioning a couple of times during the past 12 months for technical reasons so there are issues with it. How do we fill the gap?

A caveat in respect of foreign direct investment is that we sometimes hear about multinationals or other companies coming in. They tend to have very green boards and strong corporate social responsibility and they may state that they will only use renewable energy. This sounds great and it is something to which we all aspire and sign up. It is very welcome. Perhaps that is a discussion for another day, but we have to be careful that we do not allow a company to come in and only use renewable energy by taking from the finite amount of renewable energy on the grid rather than generating new renewable energy to use itself. In the context of a particular facility being 100% renewable, there is a difference between taking energy from the grid - and so from someone else - and a company generating new renewable energy that it can use to sustain itself. The latter case is something we want to encourage and we want to see.

There are difficulties with some renewable sources and I hope we can surmount them. There is a big community backlash against wind energy. The big operators in this area have not endeared themselves to local communities in the past and this is something about which we have to be very conscious when we promote renewable energy. I cannot understand why the Government would not support an offset scheme for solar power in order to allow GAA halls, local community halls and houses throughout the country to put a couple of solar panels on their roofs, plug into the grid and get discounts on their energy bills. They could lead by example with regard to schools and communities. There was a scheme in place at one stage, but the Government has not restored it. Perhaps that is something at which the Minister could look. It would be a very positive move if he were to do so.

There is huge potential in offshore wind. The Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment recently discussed the possibility of generating huge amounts of wind energy off the west coast. A number of stations could be put in place out of harm's way. I do not think there would be much community backlash if something is five miles or more off the coast in the Atlantic Ocean. There is great potential to tap into wave and offshore wind energy.

I am particularly concerned about energy security and what would fill the void in the short term until we get to 100% renewable energy, but that is a debate we can have on Committee Stage. The Bill is much needed. It relates to a subject that is very important to everyone in the House, everyone in the State and everyone on the planet. I welcome the Bill and we certainly will support it. I look forward to further debate on Committee Stage.

See this speech in context