Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate on energy security. My interest in this area was particularly heightened following the decision of An Bord Pleanála some years ago to reject applications by ESB to co-fuel peat and biomass at Lanesborough and Shannonbridge. That decision brought forward and cliff-edged the decarbonisation of Bord na Móna by some eight years. Its impact on Offaly and the region was and is severe. It forced me at the time to ensure that the Government ring-fenced carbon tax revenue and contributed to a just transition fund to assist with fuel poverty-proofing. It also meant that the peat regions of Ireland would be included in the then coal regions transition fund initiated by the EU together with the national development plan, which matched that funding last year, totalling €170 million. Efforts are ongoing to ensure that such funds can have the effect required and desired. As a representative in the area, I personally will continue to insist that the body charged with administering those funds, namely the Eastern and Midland Regional Assembly, will have at its heart a commitment in agreement with Offaly County Council's proposal that recognises the areas and counties most impacted by this acceleration and by job losses and their impact on the local economy.

Our country's energy security, provision and potential today are, unfortunately, far removed from where they should be. Yes, of course, many will be quick to say that our commitment to renewable energy resources is succeeding and that 40% of our electricity generation comes from renewables. That may well be the case but it is predominantly by virtue of land-based wind provision. What happens when that wind blows excessively? There has been inadequate battery provision to store the excess. When the wind does not blow, with little or no battery storage, as I have alluded to, the system relies on coal and gas. Much of the plant charged with that responsibility is outdated and expensive to maintain, and the wholesale energy market is then heavily weighted in favour of those providers. That ensures that prices are excessive and studies have been provided to prove that. That was the position in advance of the unfortunate war in Ukraine, which has created further pressures, obviously.

What, then, of the original promises and commitments that were made relating to the type of provision we expected to see in respect of solar energy; the farming community's commitment and the potential there that is yet to be realised; industry; and community schemes, which are also untapped in the way envisaged initially? All of that, I am afraid, reflects poorly on the Department, EirGrid and the CRU. We know that when auctions for renewable projects were held over the years, some were won but not followed through and provided. In 2016 four specific auctions were won, but in 2021 they were reneged on and only fines were paid, with our grid being the one to remain challenged, with the loss of that 450 MW, not to mention the 200-plus MW in respect of Lanesborough and Shannonbridge. As I said, that ensured that the grid remained challenged. It ensured that the wholesale market was further deprived of fair and relevant competition, ensuring high prices for business and consumers.

Another failure, unfortunately, can be laid at the doors of those within the Department, EirGrid and the CRU, again before the war in Ukraine became a reality. Following the failure to meet energy provision targets, there was a realisation in 2021 of the need to provide for winter 2022. It was what could be described as a mad scramble for energy provision to meet this winter's demand. EirGrid bought land in Huntstown for a reported €10 million. The Planning and Development Act was amended in June 2021 to allow semi-State providers not necessarily to have to apply for planning permission, which again contravened and contradicted the sort of competition that would have been expected in that marketplace. There were talks of the ESB providing emergency generation at North Wall. That was abandoned despite the making of a €10 million down payment, a fact which is yet to be fully contradicted, highlighted or relayed before either House or any of the committees here. That stalled because a competitor challenged the questionable process in the High Court, with the conclusion amounting to the reality that there was a failure to provide the extra power, the extra potential, that was required to meet the demands we are now witnessing this winter. That too, I am afraid, is a failure on the part of many within the Department, EirGrid and the CRU. We are now aware that EirGrid is procuring and purchasing up to 650 MW for winter 2023, supposedly relating to sites at Huntstown, Tarbert and Shannonbridge. I assume that those sites are gas-fired but I am yet to be made aware of what they are. I estimate, based on consultations with those in the know, that the cost to the State in respect of that provision will be a further €800 million. This would never have been necessary had the 450 MW auctions materialised. That is not to mention the excessive end price faced by the consumer or, as I said earlier, the issue of the reliance on outdated plant and machinery and the maintenance of that and, therefore, its impact on the price as well.

That is just a snapshot of the performance of the Department, EirGrid and the CRU. I know that many look to blame the likes of data centres and that they are a sort of bogeyman when it comes to the reasons our energy security is so strained. If, however, we want to continue to attract high-value corporation tax receipts from high-tech companies, we must have storage capacity. We committed to be in a position to have that capacity many years ago. The Minister will be well aware of that commitment. He made it himself during his previous time in government. Our infrastructure capacity too could have made better progress. The north west, for example, is badly served. Again, that is a combined failing, like it or lump it, on the part of the Department, EirGrid and the CRU.

I have been raising these issues for a number of years with the Minister, the Tánaiste and Ministers of State who took questions and Topical Issue matters about these issues when raised. I have been in touch with the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission for the past two years or so. I will copy this contribution and others made and other information relating to what I am saying to Mr. McCarthy, whose investigation is ongoing, as alluded to by many speakers earlier. What do I hope to expect or what should emanate from that? I hope, first, that our ambition relating to offshore wind is greatly enhanced, as great as it might appear to those in the know, by many multiples of the 7 GW it is thought will be provided by 2030.

The idea that we could have a brand new industry the size of the current Irish economy - over €300 billion in three decades - must be exciting and challenging. However, based on the performance to date by those in the Department, EirGrid and the CRU, I hope there would be a complete overhaul of the processes, procedures, planning and personnel if we have any hope of realising the tremendous opportunity that exists there. I thought the day of passing the buck to regulators was over in the context of the Financial Regulator and the commitments we got from that office back in the mid-2000s but it would appear that it is not with regard to this issue either. During the course of many of the debates to which I have alluded, I was informed that the regulator says everything is in order.

I hope the McCarthy report and the report commissioned by the Attorney General with regard to the Planning and Development Act will allow the Government to make the bold decision of recognising the fact that the processes and procedures cannot accommodate what needs to be done in this country - even with the Maritime Area Regulatory Authority being put in place. A seven-year wait from the time of recognition or inception to delivery should not be allowed to continue so some bold decisions must be made. We know efforts to rectify planning arising out of many failings 40 years ago have resulted in stifling and curtailing residential development in the form of An Bord Pleanála and all that has emanated from it in recent times, let alone the failure to have a statutory time period for it to make a decision.

The issue of judicial review is stifling residential and commercial permissions and permissions in agriculture with regard to Glanbia and the Banagher plant. The judicial review process is getting in the way of development at a time of crisis in residential development and the provision of energy. Major infrastructural benefits that could accrue from the development plan will no doubt be held up by those processes. It is incumbent on Government on receipt of the McCarthy report and the report from the Attorney General to set out to this House how it will amend those processes and procedures within the Planning and Development Act to such an extent that there will even be a sunset period by which the current system must be set aside to allow these developments take place to allow housing to meet the demands of the programme for Government and the demands of those we have the privilege of representing. On foot of the failures associated with our previous commitments regarding the provision of security and the war in Ukraine, and the huge additional pressure that places on price, competition and the provision of energy, it must be addressed by virtue of those two reports, which might be the most important reports this Government might receive in its lifetime. The Minister has huge responsibility to face that head on and make very bold decisions that can realise the ambition of an industry that can give us €300 billion - the size of our economy today - given the potential for offshore energy, particularly on the west coast.

See this speech in context