Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

46. To ask the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment if he will seek to future proof the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Bill 2020 against potential misuse of negative emissions technology to delay reducing overall greenhouse gas, GHG, emissions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1498/21]

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The so-called Climate Action and Low-Carbon Development (Amendment) Bill 2020, or at least the first version of it, amounted to vague promises but no plan for real action. One important area that raises concern is the statement that "the means of achieving a climate neutral economy ... may evolve over time through innovation, evolving scientific consensus and emerging technologies". This amounts to kicking the can down the road and hoping for some technological fix to solve our problems. Will that be removed from the Bill?

Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will not read out the prepared response, as it is very similar to that which I read out in response to Deputy Smith's question earlier. I will come to key point at issue if I understand the Deputy's question correctly, that is, whether we know exactly what the technologies are that are going to deliver the scale of the decarbonisation we want. We do not know this yet. This may even form part of a response to the previous question. The management of the electricity grid will continue to evolve in a way that is not yet clear. We will develop new interconnection and grid technology. The super grid concept that has been discussed will allow us to shift power in different directions. It is new and innovative technology that will enable is to balance a grid. It is just one example of an area that I am confident will be central to meeting our objectives. While the technology is not yet here, I believe it will be developed. Over the past 20 to 30 years, solar and wind technology have evolved in a way that nobody could have predicted. We have seen the development of electric vehicle, EV, technology in a way that nobody would have expected ten years ago.

The broad parameters of where we are going will involve the electrification of everything. The balancing of the management of variable power and demand will be at the centre of a new industrial revolution. There will be some other technologies, as I mentioned earlier, such as green hydrogen, and it is not yet clear how they will be used, but I have a very strong expectation that they will be central. Across a variety of different areas, I can indicate where I believe that there will be significant technological innovation. We should lead it, because by learning by doing, we will develop an economic advantage that we can share with other countries throughout the world. It is right to be honest and upfront and to invest in that innovation with confidence, because what we have seen over the past ten to 20 years is that this delivers a better system. Low carbon will be better and will win.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have no problem with, or objection to, using technology in respect of electrification, better battery storage and better and more efficient renewable energy. The question relates to what is being spoken about here and whether this can be used for relying on technological sequestration solutions - the idea of carbon capture. It is the idea that in the future, a person will invent something we can use to suck all of the carbon out of the air, and basically we do not have to worry about it. The Minister knows that that is a ploy used by fossil fuel companies, much like that used by cigarette companies historically. They did not stop selling cigarettes when all the public health evidence emerged. They came up with new marketing spin and added filters. They tried to make it seem like their cigarettes were safe. The talk of carbon capture and technological solutions for the future is about avoiding taking the action that is necessary to take now, and putting it on the long finger. Does the Minister agree that we cannot rely on technological sequestration solutions arising in the future?

Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree with the Deputy that we should not be blinded by techno optimism. A variety of the technological solutions that we have heard mentioned are highly problematic, and we should not go next or near them. For example, people talk about putting particulates in the upper atmosphere. That would have major knock-on consequences for other aspects of our complex life systems and we should not go next or near it. There is false optimism that we will be able to suck carbon out of the air. We should be very wary about false promises. However, that does not mean that we should not avail of certain technologies when they are proven and as they develop. Carbon capture and storage is one of those that is in existence. There are environmental issues around it and one must be very careful with it. Primarily, storage within existing geological structures and the use of gas fields, and so on, is more likely. We do not have may such storage locations in our country. It may involve us shipping carbon to other jurisdictions because they may have better locations for it. However, it is not a magic bullet. It is only one of the elements on which we should rely. I keep going back to that figure. For example, if it is possible, using carbon capture and storage along with other technologies for us to decarbonise heavy industries such as cement production, we should not rule it out.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If this is the Bill that is going to be published, and I would like to know when we are going to see the next version of it, then the Minister is going to provide a big escape clause for those who have to take action now, by implying that there will be big technological solutions in respect of carbon capture in the future. It is most problematic. The main carbon capture that we know of relates to forests and grass. They are things that we know and understand today. We cannot rely on these kind of miracle fixes for climate change as a way of avoiding what is necessary, which is a radical, eco-socialist green new deal that improves people's lives at the same time as completely transforming the nature of our economy and taking on fossil fuel capitalism. It involves taking the big oil companies and business polluters into public ownership so that we can plan to cut emissions as part of a rapid, just transition to a zero-carbon economy by 2030. Anything else is just kicking the can down the road and not following the signs, which are absolutely clear, in respect of what needs to be done.

Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is absolutely right. The first real technology we turn to is rewetting our bogs and managing that. Nature-based solutions are going to be at the centre of our response to climate change, for example, in how we manage our bogs, what type of farming we do and storing carbon in our pasture land and forestry. In the process, we will improve water quality and reduce ammonia, nitrogen and other pollutants. That it the first priority. The second priority is in changing our everyday transport system and our homes.

It is not about one big technological solution. We need to look at everything. We must not put all on the focus on the farmers and make them the major problem, which they are not. In fact, they are part of the solution. Another thing we should not do is just go down the market solutions route where it is all about what one buys or what one does with one's car or home. It should be about a system change for the better. Included in that is industrial system change and how industrial emissions are managed.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputies who tabled Questions Nos. 47 to 49, inclusive, are not in the Chamber, we will move on to Question No. 50 in the name of Deputy O'Rourke.