Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Just before the Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, leaves, what I have to say on this subject is especially pertinent to him as a Green Party Minister of State. I thank the Rural Independent Group for bringing this to the floor so we have a chance to discuss it again.

The buzzwords in a debate like this are "climate crisis" and "climate urgency", but these have led to the cost of living and the different actions, or lack of action by Government, that have led to a cost-of-living crisis. There are many solutions that go with the aforementioned buzzwords like a reduction in emissions or the cost of the fines we pay for not reducing emissions. There is the cost of reduction in farming through convergence, for example. This and other measures led to an increased cost of living, and that is where people are suffering. We must tackle the emergency but we have to be real. All the figures we hear relate to 2030 or 2050 but what about today and what we can do today? That is what people are interested in primarily.

If we want to reduce carbon emissions, there are carbon-neutral schemes and reduction targets we can use. I do not just mean electric cars. We can look to using hydrotreated vegetable oil, HVO, as a replacement for fossil fuel diesel immediately. The figures on the amount of diesel cars and engines we have in the country are astounding. Some 36% of cars, over 80,000 tractors and upwards of 110,000 heavy goods vehicles, HGVs and light commercial vehicles operate on diesel. There are also diggers, generators and other types of commercial equipment. HVO could be used to fuel them today as it is interchangeable without any need for mechanical alteration to a diesel engine. There is not even any change required at the petrol pumps as all we need is a sign that says "HVO". The reduction in carbon emissions is 90% in the particulate emissions when HVO is used. There is a reduction in NOx of upwards of 30%.

It is astounding to think that for five years running, sectoral interests such as the Irish Road Haulage Association have requested a measure from Government in the budget that sees HVO treated differently as a green fuel over and above diesel. The current position is that excise duties are applied to HVO in the very same amount as they are to diesel. We hear every day that diesel is the fuel that is causing the climate emergency and causing our carbon emissions. What we do not hear is that we have an alternative that would save 90% over diesel, which is a tenfold benefit. We do not even hear about it. The reason it is not being used is that when the same excise is applied to HVO as it is to diesel, it actually makes it 20 cent per litre dearer than diesel. There is, therefore, no cost benefit to anybody.

There is a massive environmental benefit to the whole island of Ireland and to people in general, particularly in built-up areas and cities such as Dublin. The Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, said the biggest offender is the Dublin Port area and that static traffic is creating NOx emissions, which are bad for lung health. With all the buzzwords like climate emergency and climate crisis, however, we still do not see Government coming up with the incentive required.

The use of HVO provides the ability for farmers to replace the sugar beet industry. An EU directive was brought in to say we can only plant 7% of our hectarage for oilseed rape for the production of food or otherwise or for the production of HVO. It does not matter; the figure is 7%. That would equate to 33,000 ha of Ireland’s landmass. It could be refined here on the island. It would mean we would provide energy security by growing and refining HVO to the tune of 20%. We say every day that we do not have energy security. Our gasfields are about to close, but we will still have them until 2030. We could have this next spring. We could tell farmers the incentive is that this a carbon-efficient rotation crop. It will do wonders for carbon sequestering. The farmers do not get the benefit of that, mind you, but that is another benefit the Government would have. Currently, Government uses the farmers' sequestering of carbon for its own benefit. It is time the Government gave back and admitted we have an alternative, but we are not providing the proper incentives in order that it can be utilised. That is a great shame. What we are seeing here is Government telling us it cannot reduce excise when we know it can. It does not have the will to do it. Government should be providing greening schemes that do not penalise and reduce farmers' production. We should be growing 7% of our hectares under oilseed rape on the basis of refining that into HVO, which is interchangeable for the hundreds of thousands of vehicles I just named, not least the 110,000 trucks and light commercial vehicles on our roads. It should be mandatory for anybody entering the city to use HVO so that we do not get the build-up of NOx emissions. That can only be done if there is an incentive that makes it cost effective, however. From what I outlined, any such scheme would be cost neutral. It is certainly environmentally beneficial. I have not heard from Government why this is not being done. In his answer to this motion, perhaps the Minister of State can outline that. I can see no good reason we would not try to save 90% of emissions and why we would not reduce NOx emissions by 30%. Let me tell the Minister of State that doing so actually reduces the use of AdBlue, of which nobody really knows what the effects will be in the future.

This is a proposal that can be instigated tomorrow. The farmers only need to be given notice to grow it next spring. There is no reason not to and, if there is, I expect the Minister of State to outline it. I believe this is a perfectly good and environmentally friendly proposal. If it cannot be done, I ask the Minister of State to tell us why.

See this speech in context