Caít Keane (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after “That Seanad Éireann” and substitute the following:“commends the Government for–-

- its commitment to delivering on energy policy priorities, including ongoing investment in energy infrastructure, ambitious targets for renewable energy, a substantive increase in energy efficiency and the continued opening up of gas and electricity markets to competition, with resultant benefits for business and domestic consumers;
- its commitment to the major investments in critical transmission and distribution infrastructure by the State energy companies which are designed to ensure security of energy supply, enhance the delivery of renewable energy and underpin economic growth; and
- its commitment to ensure infrastructure investment programmes are delivered in the most cost-efficient and timely way possible, on the basis of the best available knowledge and informed engagement on the impacts and costs of different engineering solutions, in the national interest, particularly in the current economic circumstances;

and
notes the policy statement on the strategic importance of transmission and other energy infrastructure approved by the Government on 17 July 2012 and acknowledges that--

- the planning process and legislation provides the framework for ensuring necessary standards are met in energy infrastructure roll-out and that comprehensive statutory and non-statutory consultation is built into the process;
- early, transparent engagement and consultation with local communities and stakeholders is key to building public confidence;
- the Government does not direct EirGrid to particular sites or routes or technologies but the Government does expect EirGrid, in making choices on such matters, to take account of all relevant national and international standards, to follow best practice and ensure value for money and to be informed by detailed consultation at local level;
- co-operation with local authorities has the potential for delivering landscape, biodiversity and civic amenity benefits and delivering long-lasting benefits to communities is an important way of achieving public acceptability for infrastructure; and
- the Government fully supports a community gain approach in the delivery of energy infrastructure and underlines the appropriateness of building community gain considerations into budgeting and planning stages of major infrastructure projects”.

I welcome the discussion because it is badly needed. We do not have enough discussion and research. There has been discussion in the past 20 years about placing underground poles and lights, including in the city. It was very costly to do this and that was always an argument against it. As spokesperson on the environment, one would like to see everything underground. In Ireland we say out of sight is out of mind. Underground might not be the best place, but we do not have that information because the definitive research has not been undertaken. Anything I have read has given arguments on both sides.

Many Members have spoken about the risks. The WHO states there are no health risks. We should consider all of the risks overground, including to machinery and people passing by. To evaluate appropriate regulation in Ireland we should compare it with regulation elsewhere in Europe to determine best practice. If we were starting now, we would not do what we did, but we are not starting now and do not want the lights to go off in the morning. We are where we are and must start from there.

We must also take the economic effects on the country into consideration. Ireland's health and safety compliance levels regarding electricity transmission infrastructure provided by EirGrid are at a low threshold compared to elsewhere in Europe.

However, in many EU states the safe distance to high voltage overhead lines is set eight times further away from dwellings than in Ireland. However, we have had these regulations from the 1920s onwards.

The case for underground cables has been made. I know many pressure groups, voluntary groups and community groups are agitating at the moment. They have to be complimented for taking the part of the community and for informing politicians as well. On the other hand, as legislators, we have to be informed from both sides, from the community groups but also in regard to what is feasible and in regard to examining the entire situation and assessing the benefits in terms of costs and overall safety.

Currently, EirGrid, as our independent electricity transmission operator, has a mix of overhead lines and some underground cables, so this is not a new science or technology, and it has over 100 transmission stations. I commend EirGrid for its recent development of energy infrastructure and its investment of €240 million in the west, something that was undoubtedly needed. There can be no doubt grid renewal is critical to meeting Ireland's electricity needs. The Minister is charged with that, as are legislators, in order to ensure we meet our energy needs. Whatever means this electricity is generated by, be it by wind or otherwise, it has to be transmitted through a 21st century modern and sustainable grid.

This raises the question of what constitutes a 21st century sustainable and modern grid. The T-pylon design is being accepted throughout England as opposed to the massive old pylons. If we look to the position of the EU, under the TEN-E programme the EU is encouraging member states to actively consider the development of co-linear projects combining multiple sources of electricity cables, fibre-optic, rail, road and canals in a single corridor. If we look at Ireland and ask what we have here that we could utilise, the canal system is in place, although it is not going in the right direction for the new Grid 3 proposal. However, there are many possibilities. This is the reasoning employed by Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands, which are moving rapidly towards grid renewal. Their development has been reliant on the introduction of underground cable, although Denmark is not in the situation in which Ireland finds itself at present, either economically or in terms of an over-reliance on overground cables, which we have at present.

For Ireland to approach legislating on this issue, we must take into account the technical and affordability issues, including feasibility. Environmental issues are of particular interest, which is why I said that if we were starting from here, we would put everything underground. Having said that, there are problems with undergrounding and not every area is suitable for it. While we know it will cost more, we do not know how much more as the study has not been done on this. We have the two sides of the debate but comprehensive multidisciplinary research must be done. If we tell people the lights are going to go off and that they must pay a few extra bob, they will say they do not want that. Does the Minister believe enough research has been done? I ask for a multidisciplinary research group to be set up to analyse the factors and consequences, and to try to put this issue to bed, if one likes, through science and research rather than just hearsay. This analysis must include commercial experience, international best practice, EU regulations, relevant technical expertise and representation from EirGrid. A suitable objective and independent forum like this has never existed, as a far I know. Rather than people going into community halls, shouting over and back, it is good for people to come together to have a learning experience, but who is to give that learning experience? We have to measure our cloth according to our means. We and the Minister are charged, as legislators, with ensuring the lights do not go off.