Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the chickens coming home to roost Bill. None of what is before us should come as a surprise to anyone, particularly anyone in government because over a long number of years they have been made well aware of the issues we are facing now. We are told the objective behind the Bill is to provide temporary electricity generation to replace older power plants and meet the growing demand for electricity caused by data centres. Interestingly, on 7 June 2018, after a very long, protracted and detailed set of discussions at Cabinet, the Government published its statement on the role of data centres in Ireland and the enterprise strategy related to it. In the report there is a section on electricity infrastructure that highlights the growing demand that would be placed on the electricity network by continuing to allow data centres to be given connections to the grid and granted planning permission. The report states a large proportion of existing and planned data centres were due to connect to the electricity system in the Dublin area and, based on the committed expansion of existing data centres and expected growth, the total demand could treble within ten years. Sadly, the legislation we are dealing with today is in large part a result of the unhindered approval of data centres connecting to the electricity grid.

The report raises the question of who will pick up the tab for the increased investment that needs to be made in electricity generation, electricity transmission and the distribution networks. Ultimately it is the electricity users who have to pay for it. The customers of the electricity suppliers have to pay for it through their electricity bills. This is done in part through the public service obligation levy to meet the generation aspect. Then we have the transmission costs paid to EirGrid. This particular report, produced in June 2018, highlighted the impact this would have on higher network charges and increased PSO levies. It stated mitigating measures should be taken to minimise these charges to ordinary electricity customers. To date absolutely nothing has been done to mitigate the cost of this. Families throughout the country are struggling to pay their electricity bills. They have to decide between paying electricity bills and putting food on the table. They are subsidising the green electricity going into the data centres and its transmission costs and distribution costs. The Government continues to sit on its hands on this issue. As I told the Cabinet back in 2017 and 2018, it is immoral to be asking families who are struggling to pay their electricity bills to pay for the cost of this additional electricity going into the data centres. That is exactly what the Government is proposing to do with the legislation before us.

Part of the need for the 450 MW of electricity is because we have decommissioned power stations. The impression being given by the Government is that this is to replace older power plants but it is not. We are also replacing some new kit. I brought this to the floor of the House on 3 December 2020 when I questioned the Tánaiste on the two power plants in Lanesborough and Shannonbridge. Mr. Ciaran Mulvey, the Government's just transition commissioner, had said in a report that on its visit to Shannonbridge and Lanesborough the just transition team was impressed by the pristine state of the power stations. Why would they not be in a pristine state? At that point in time they had a ten-year lifespan remaining. I pointed out to the Tánaiste on the day that we were effectively wasting €176 million of electricity customers' money that had been paid towards the cost of those two power plants which were being mothballed because of the decision taken. I said at the time that electricity customers in particular would foot the bill for the demolition of those pristine plants and that they would have to pay for the alternative technology to provide replacement stability on the electricity grid. Here we are today bringing forward legislation to do just that.

What is frustrating about this is that we convinced the Government, and it was written into the programme for Government, that there would be a review of all of this before any decision was taken. A steering group was established. Of course the steering group involved the ESB, which had its own vested interest in ensuring both of the plants were decommissioned.

Sadly, electricity customers have not only paid for the cost of those two plants, which had a ten-year lifespan left, they are now paying for the replacement 250 MW of electricity that could be produced by both of those plants today in the legislation. Just over two years ago, I said we should not make the mistakes that we made in the past, when we demolished our sugar plants in Mallow and Carlow. I argued against those demolitions at the time. Let us not repeat those mistakes. Sadly, we are now repeating them and asking the electricity customers of this country and the families that are struggling to pay their electricity bills to foot the cost of this irresponsible decision that was taken.

The argument will be made that we cannot continue to burn peat. I do not make that argument whatsoever. I did not make that argument in 2019 or 2020, nor did I make that argument when I was Minister. There is substantial biomass available if we issued licensing for the thinning and felling of forestry in this country. Plenty of brash could be brought in and supplied to those two power plants today. Bord na Móna had set up BioEnergy at the time, to source indigenous biomass. In fact, with just €33 million in investment, we could get farmers to plant €10,000 ha of willow over a three-year period, to supply both of those power plants. That can be done tomorrow morning if the political will is there to do so.

The argument will be made regarding planning permission. It would require emergency legislation be brought forward, as it would with regard to Derrybrien. Does it make sense in the middle of a climate emergency to bring forward emergency legislation to invest in fossil-fuel power generation when we have biomass and wind energy alternatives available to us? The Government is not prepared to engage on that objective.

Many of us received correspondence today from the Irish Farmers Journalregarding the emissions reduction targets that agriculture will have to achieve by 2030. This issue will be debated, quite heatedly I suspect, at Cabinet over the coming weeks, as to whether we should be looking at a 22% reduction in agricultural emissions or a 30% reduction, or somewhere in between. The reality is that managing our land far better would take CO₂out of our atmosphere, reduce the harmful effects of climate and improve our oceans far quicker than just shooting down agriculture.

One of the ways to do that would be to support farmers to grow biomass within the vicinity of our three peat-fired power stations - Lanesborough and Shannonbridge, which have been decommissioned, and Edenderry, which is the only plant that is currently operational. If we supplied 100% locally-sourced biomass to those plants, this would reduce agricultural emissions on local farms by 600,000 tonnes of CO₂per year. That would be the equivalent of removing 130,000 cars off our roads. It would generate €465 per hectare, with a price of carbon at €100 per tonne. It would also create 4,000 seasonal jobs in harvesting and guarantee incomes to farmers in the midlands. We could use the Bord na Móna rail network that is still in place to transport that biomass to those three power plants, rather than bring it on road.

It is about a small bit of joined-up thinking. This should not come as a surprise to Government. These are discussions I have had at Cabinet with some of the members of Government that are there today. I have engaged in these discussions with the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, and people are well aware of the alternatives. We are told we are better off investing in fossil fuels and asking struggling families to pay for it. I believe that is immoral.

See this speech in context