Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, to the House. If he does not mind, I will use the opportunity to speak more on the general issue of energy, to which he referred several times, rather than on the specific legislation.

However, I would like to raise one point that he made. I was listening to him with half an ear, trying to do two things at once, but I believe he spoke of increasing the borrowing capacity of Bord na Móna so that it might become involved in such things as biomass and wood pellet production. However, he also mentioned landfill, which caused me to do a double take. I have examined the Bill since re-entering the Chamber some moments ago. I cannot find any reference to landfill in it, yet the Minister mentioned it in his speech. If the midlands are to become a landfill site, we had better know his plans, and I ask that he address that in his response.

The debate has seen interesting issues raised, but I would like to focus more broadly. I agree with Senator Kenneally on nuclear power, something to which I am obviously opposed, for reasons outlined here several times by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche. These figures may not be correct, but it boiled down to the numbers 10,000, 1,000 and 100. The first is the half-life of the isotopes of waste uranium produced; the others were other relevant danger periods. I wish to make a serious point, which is why we need a debate on the possibilities. I come from the standpoint of wishing to rule out nuclear energy, but I would like a debate on one aspect, which I have not heard discussed by anyone in Ireland.

We are opposed to nuclear energy because of the dangers to the environment and humanity. Some 25 years after the disaster at Chernobyl, the plant is still unstable and beyond our control. We do not know what is happening under the sarcophagus built around it. I do not want to sound too technical, since I am in no way adept in this matter and speak as a layperson. Chernobyl and all existing nuclear power stations depend on nuclear fission, a term heard many times. Nuclear fission is effectively where one takes unstable uranium isotopes and allows them to collide with one another in a controlled environment. Millions or trillions of tiny explosions create the energy, but the danger lies in the process being uncontrollable. It also creates waste that lasts more or less for ever. That is why we all live in terror of it and oppose it.

Another version of nuclear energy is known as nuclear fusion. The difference is that instead of the isotopes banging off each other, one fuses them together in a controlled, stable environment using stable isotopes. That creates energy and waste with approximately 1% of the danger of nuclear fission. The relevant half-life is approximately a hundredth of that in nuclear fission. That must be examined, since it deals with many of the greatest terrors regarding nuclear energy.

It is already happening in the world, following global attempts to develop it. Eventually, France won the tender to advance it, and it is now happening there. Scientists expect to produce energy from nuclear fusion within the next 20 years. It is also being worked on in the English midlands, where energy has been already produced. All that remains is to perfect it, and I would like to hear more on the subject. I suspect that ultimately I will oppose it as much as I do conventional nuclear power, but I would like to approach the matter with an open mind, hear the discussion and consider the comparisons so that we are not polarised.

The other technology I would consider is wind power, which has been dealt with several times. However, there are two aspects that we must consider. Such power is not reliable, since the wind does not always blow. However, there is wind somewhere in Ireland 90% of the time, a figure that is even higher in winter. We must have all the wind power linked together. Airtricity has made an extraordinary and progressive proposal to the European and global community, namely, to erect a series of wind farms from northern Scandinavia to the Mediterranean, harnessing any weather systems moving in. That would be connected with the European grid, something from which we can all gain. I would like that to happen to provide an alternative method of generation.

The most common element on the planet, hydrogen, also happens to be one of the most efficient and practical gases. It can be used as a liquid or a gas, and it can be transported in cylinders, by gas pipes and by various other means. The place in which it is most commonly found is water; it is the "H" in H2O. Energy is created by separating the hydrogen from the oxygen in water, and that energy is pure hydrogen. When one burns and uses pure hydrogen, the waste is pure water. It is the most complete eco-friendly system of energy usage.

The expertise already exists to allow for such extraction for the purposes of producing power. I understand BMW, for example, will have the prototype of a hydrogen car on the market next year. The problem, however, is that hydrogen extraction is currently inefficient because the energy cost of extraction is more or less equivalent to the hydrogen energy produced. It is not commercially viable, but that will change. The Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources should give grants for doctorate level research on hydrogen extraction.

The Department should also insist that every new house should include a solar panel. There is no simpler way of saving on energy costs. Spain has recently introduced regulations in this regard and we should do likewise.

I spoke in this House some two years ago about micro hydro-electricity systems. I am pleased the Government is looking into this issue. When I was in school, we were told that the potential for hydro-electricity in Ireland had almost reached its peak. Developments in this area, however, mean it is now possible to develop local or domestic electricity from the smallest rivers. In Britain and Northern Ireland, for example, a producer who generatess either wind electricity or hydro-electricity in his or her local area can feed it back into the grid, although they receive only a tiny payment for their contribution. There is significant resistance to such a development here. Any producer who creates excess energy for community use should receive some recognition. This is an area in which we can make practical progress in the context of our commitments under the Kyoto Protocol and the Government's energy policy.

The incubational centres attached to the institutes of technology and universities should be encouraged to engage in top-level research into hydrogen extraction from water and the development of micro hydro-electricity power units and efficient wind power units. Developments in the latter in recent times, for example, mean they have moved away from wind sails to a system where wind is trapped internally. Much progress can be made in these areas, some of it involving science, design and engineering. Much of it, however, is common sense.

The last time I checked, which was some six months ago, wood pellets could only be bought outside the State. That is appalling. What is Coillte doing? We are producing all types of wood products, but those persons who are given grants to install wood pellet burners are obliged to purchase the pellets from Northern Ireland or Wales. It would make sense to put out a tender for the production of wood pellets, and this should be done in consultation with Coillte. It is a question of growing and using easily renewable wood resources, pine in particular. This is a practical step that could be taken immediately.

We could do much in the practical ways I have outlined to raise awareness in regard to energy usage. The provision of solar panels in every new home and support for top-level research and development in the incubation units of third levels institutions are issues the Department should consider as soon as possible. The expertise is there to facilitate developments in engineering that will ensure progress in regard to wind power and micro hydro-electricity units. I recognise the Minister of State's intention in this Bill but there is much more we can do in this area.