Brian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

45. To ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the specific steps and actions being taken to meet obligations in various sectors in view of the publication by the Environmental Protection Agency on greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy targets. [21951/17]

Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

47. To ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the measures he plans to take to achieve targets on greenhouse gas emissions (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21824/17]

Brian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will allow me a point of order, there is a small issue I want to raise in respect of Priority Questions. I submitted a priority question about the post office networks and received a reply stating that the Minister has no responsibility to Dáil Éireann for this matter under Standing Order 36, and that it is an operational matter for the board and management of An Post. I opened the Questions Paper today to find Question No. 68 was allowed, which asks the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment a question regarding the post offices. I thought the Minister and the Minister of State, Deputy Ring, had sorted out this political bun fight as to who was responsible. I had the impression from all the reports over the last couple of weeks that the matter had landed on the Minister, Deputy Naughten's desk. Members raised it as far back as nearly a year ago. It is very unfair to us and to the public. Somebody needs to take responsibility.

The current question is in respect of climate action. A recent EPA report shows that we are far behind on our obligations. What actions are being taken in the various sectors?

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 45 and 47 together.

If I might first respond briefly to Deputy Stanley's point, I am taking responsibility for the post office network but legal responsibility has not yet formally transferred over. I was quite willing to answer questions on An Post and had replies prepared for it but that is a decision that was made outside my control.

Ireland has legally binding emissions reduction targets for each year between 2013 and 2020 under the 2009 EU effort-sharing decision. For the year 2020 itself, the target set for Ireland is that emissions should be 20% below their value in 2005. This target represents Ireland’s contribution to the overall EU objective of reducing its emissions by 30% by 2020 compared with 1990 levels. Ireland, Denmark and Luxembourg share the most demanding 2020 reduction target allocated to EU member states under this decision. 

On 13 April, the Environmental Protection Agency published its latest projections for Irish greenhouse gas emissions covering the period to 2035. For 2020, the year to which the Deputy’s question refers, the EPA’s projections indicate that emissions from sectors of the economy covered by the 20% reduction target could be between 4% and 6% below 2005 levels by 2020. This represents a deterioration compared with previous projections. This deterioration was not unexpected, given the welcome return of economic growth to Ireland in recent years. It does nevertheless confirm that Ireland’s greenhouse emissions continue to track broader trends in the economy, and serves to underline the difficult choices ahead as we try to reduce emissions in line with our international commitments.

In order to address the gap to Ireland’s 2020 targets and to begin to lay the foundation for the more ambitious reductions that Ireland will need to make towards 2030 and beyond, it will be necessary to pursue a range of further emissions reduction measures through the first and successive national mitigation plans. The objective of the national mitigation plan is to set out, on a whole-of-Government basis, what Ireland is doing and is planning to do to further our transition to a low carbon, climate-resilient and environmentally sustainable economy by 2050. The plan will reflect, in particular, the central roles of key Ministers responsible for electricity generation, the built environment, transport and agriculture, forestry and land use sectors.  It must also be recognised that the first plan is a work in progress, reflecting the reality of where we are in our decarbonisation transition, having regard to a number of factors including curtailed public and private investment over the course of recent years. The first plan cannot, therefore, provide a complete roadmap to achieving the national transition objective to 2050. It will, however, begin the process of development of medium to long-term options to ensure that we are well positioned to take the necessary actions in future decades. This will be an ongoing process aimed at incremental and permanent decarbonisation. The plan will become a living document; it will be made accessible on my Department's website, will be subject to annual progress reports, and will be updated on an ongoing basis as analysis, dialogue and technological innovation generate further cost-effective sectoral mitigation options. Recognising that funding climate action to the required level presents an enormous challenge for Ireland, a key part of this process will be to evaluate Exchequer and non-Exchequer options for financing Ireland's transition.  

I also recognise the need to foster wider societal engagement with the climate challenge, motivate changes in behaviour and create structures at local, regional and national levels to support the generation of ideas and their translation into appropriate cost-effective actions. To progress this, I recently announced a national dialogue on climate action to provide for an inclusive process of engagement and consensus-building across society, aimed at enabling the transformation to a low carbon and climate-resilient future.

Brian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In his reply, the Minister said the upturn in the economy and the fact that we were going to miss the targets completely could not have been foreseen. It was foreseen. Several of us raised the fact that this was going to happen when there was an economic recovery. We raised it while the legislation was going through the House and the committee. We pointed out that the absence of binding sectoral targets would lead us to where we are now, namely, to a carbon cliff. It is clear from the transcripts that I and others were saying this. Electricity consumption is to experience a 40% reduction by 2020 and we are only at 25%. The contribution from transport is supposed to be 10% and we are at 3.3% according to the EPA report. The contribution of renewables to heat should be 12% but at best we will hit 6.5%. We are not even halfway there in most cases. Outside the emissions trading system, ETS sector, we are going to be somewhere between 4% and 6% overall, and that is if we are being hopeful. The figure should be 20% below 2005 levels. This is a catastrophe. What is the financial cost to the State going to be, never mind the cost in embarrassment?

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I take the Deputy's point about binding sectoral targets. We are engaging with my colleagues, the Ministers for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Transport, Tourism and Sport and Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government to give consideration to putting a process in place. I do not think we should be looking at binding targets at the moment. It is a long way to 2030 and 2050. It is also important to remember that we are currently in negotiations in respect of these targets. Do targets need to be put in place? Absolutely. That is something I am working on with my ministerial colleagues.

On the renewable energy targets, the Deputy is right that electricity is a 40% target. At the moment we are at 27.3% and the projection is that by 2020 we will have reached our 40%. In respect of heat, the target is 12%. We will be somewhere between 10% and 11% based on current projections. For transport, the target is 10% and we will be somewhere between 8% and 9%, based on projections. I acknowledge we are going to fall short according to current projections and we have work to do. We are not, however, significantly short, based on the projections. I would confidently predict that we will reach our target on the electricity side if we can deal with the international challenge, now called the Irish problem, of having a 75% loading on the grid of a volatile energy source, namely, wind. That work is ongoing. We will soon reach a 65% loading and, with technological developments and the DS3 programme, we expect to hit 75%.

Brian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister's officials and advisers are very optimistic people. I cannot see how transport is going to reach 8% or 9% by 2020, given the rate at which we are going in the opposite direction. There will need to be a great number of electric cars put on the road to turn that one around. I am trying to be honest.

There needs to be an honest assessment of this because we are not in a good place. We have hit a carbon cliff. We are trying to play catch-up and we need specific measures. What specific measures are being put in place? What is happening in transport? The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport should be in the Chamber telling us. We need to find sectoral targets. Does the Minister not agree at this stage?

I wish to ask the Minister, Deputy Denis Naughten, a particular question regarding the Minister with responsibility for local government. I realise that the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government may be distracted with the housing issue and other matters, but he has a major role to play. For God's sake, there is supposed to be reform of local authorities. There is a role for local authorities as the tier of government closest to the people. Why are we not engaging with local authorities in the task of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions as well as engaging communities through the local authorities?

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are engaging with local authorities both in respect of the mitigation plan and through the forthcoming adaptation plan.

Specific reference was made to reaching our targets on transport. The vast bulk of those targets will be made up with the biofuels obligation. However, we are looking at further low-emission vehicle incentives. We are looking at how we can stimulate the electric vehicles sector. We are looking at supports for low-emission vehicles. We are looking at reforming the motor tax system and supporting eco-driving. Several initiatives are in the mix at the moment. I expect to see progress on these over the coming months. Some of these will be part of the whole budgetary process. Therefore, I cannot tie myself into making commitments until I have the financial resources to do it. Discussions are ongoing with the European Investment Bank and further afield in respect of accessing resources to help us to meet our targets. Funding other than Exchequer funding is involved. There are some novel initiatives.

Another point on transport relates to broadband. Rolling out high-speed broadband throughout rural Ireland would mean that people would have to travel less. We could establish hubs throughout the country to allow people to either work remotely or from their local town rather than having to travel to a city. That would reduce transport needs. There are challenges globally and at European level in respect of transport, but there are also challenges unique to us and we need to look at unique solutions for those.

Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are some in this world who will deny that climate change is actually a problem. Some of them control the most important and powerful countries in the world.

Brian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They control the counties too – like Kerry.

Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Indeed. In case people did not hear Deputy Stanley, he referred to County Kerry.

I am astonished at the lack of urgency from the Minister and the Government. There is no sense that we are in trouble. In fact, the estimates for the scale of possible fines for not reaching our targets by 2030 are in the region of between €3.5 billion and €5.5 billion. If the estimate of not dealing with the polluter pays principle relating to water charges was on this scale, everyone would be screaming mad about it. However, no one is screaming mad about the dreadful position we are in regarding emissions.

Some of the better scientists in the world associated with the Stop Climate Chaos coalition have rated Ireland's achievements as "F", which is low indeed. This rating is in the document before me and contains a big black "F" for failure. This failure is a catastrophe for us not only because of the level of fines but because of the actual environment and climate that we live in. I am keen for the Minister to address that question. Does the Minister have a sense of urgency?

I assume, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, that I will get an opportunity to come back in. Is that correct?

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

First, Deputy Bríd Smith is right. There are people who deny the existence of climate change. However, no one who came to my constituency during the winter of 2015-2016 would deny the issue of climate change. I have seen the impact of it, just as Deputy Stanley has seen it. We know the exact nature of that impact. Deputy Dooley has seen it in his constituency as well.

Deputy Bríd Smith referred to a lack of urgency. The major challenge is that the implications will emerge over time. We are looking out to 2030, 2050 and beyond. We need to bring that closer to home. That is why the review in the policy area in respect of air quality is so important. It will have an impact on improving air quality. Four people per day are dying directly as a result of poor air quality in this country. If we can reduce particulate matter – black carbon, which is soot – and improve air quality throughout the country, we will have a knock-on impact not only in respect of health status but by improving the pressures on our health service and dealing with climate at the same time. We need to break it down from that point of view. We need to bring urgency to how we deal with this matter, here and now.

Another point is important. Deputy Bríd Smith is correct in respect of figures somewhere between €3.5 billion and €5.5. billion. I do not have the exact figures but the Deputy is correct: they are substantial. We are working up those figures in order that we might provide not only a justification of the cost but also an indication of how we can stimulate elements of the economy to ensure that we can create jobs and drive this agenda forward.

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A final supplementary question from Deputy Bríd Smith.

Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do I not get to come back?

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, with a final supplementary.

Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I believe more energy is spent on looking for greater flexibility in how we can measure our targets rather than actually reducing them. I will offer two examples. One has already been mentioned and it relates to transport. We have a budget of some €10 billion for transport and we intend spending two thirds of it on roads. That does not deal with what needs to be dealt with, which is getting cars off the roads and expanding public transport. Two thirds of the €10 billion will go on roads, yet we have no problem seeing the demise of a national transport company on the basis of losses of between €7 million and €9 million per year. Meanwhile, Transport Infrastructure Ireland sits on €100 million while twiddling its thumbs. It does not know what to do with the money.

The other matter is not necessarily the responsibility of the Minister. This is why we need joined-up thinking on the part of Government. I am referring to the question of beef and beef exports. We are increasing the volume of beef for export. We are doing deals with Saudi Arabia and we have seen the consequences of that already. We are doing deals with Egypt and we are seeing the consequences of that as well. These are political consequences, but the consequences for us amount to not dealing with our emissions. In fact, we are increasing them. There is no real attempt to join up the thinking and look at where we can reduce our emissions by having proper public transport infrastructure and by not growing the volume of beef or exporting more beef.

Finally, I will quote the Minister. He has said in the past that the reality of our problem is that we are on a journey seeking a carbon-free impact from human activity and that this will only succeed through social acceptance and engagement. I maintain that it is not a journey but a fight. In fact, it is battle with companies and the system of capitalism. They are addicted to fossil fuels because they get vast profits from them. Until we challenge that, we will not be properly challenging the question of climate change.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am glad Deputy Bríd Smith raised the issue of agriculture. In today's Irish Independentfarming supplement, this issue came up in the context of Brexit. An article pointed out that Brexit will force farmers to look at competition issues and how efficient beef production is in this country compared to other European and international players.

Colleagues in the House from rural Ireland will know that the vast majority of suckler farmers are using the payments they get from Brussels to subsidise farming practices. That is unsustainable in the long term. There are ways whereby we can make agriculture more efficient from a carbon perspective, as well as ways to ensure that farmers get a far greater return for the product they are producing. In fairness, the beef data and genomics programme is an innovative step to start that process. It is a difficult process. We are trying to shoehorn into the beef sector technology advances that have taken 25 years to develop in the dairy sector. It is a step in the right direction. It is seen internationally as an innovative measure to deal with the real and practical problems. We need to come up with solutions across the board. These include using broadband to deal with our transport issues, as well as using other novel initiatives. We should not always be replicating what is going on elsewhere. There are major opportunities in the context of the oceans and our natural resources.