Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I second the motion and commend Senator Keogan for bringing it forward. Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. The Minister is welcome. We all want the same thing in the sense that we want to protect our environment and reduce our carbon emissions, and we want to do right by the world and by future generations and the less fortunate and more vulnerable people of our world. However, it is vital that, in doing this, we do not dismiss the dangers of Ireland's energy insecurity. That is why I am supporting this motion today. It has the aim of working towards ensuring energy security in order to stop people from suffering.

The motion asks the hard question of the Government in asking whether it is considering all of the options. Senator Keogan has argued in favour of nuclear power. I asked the Minister on a previous occasion in the Seanad whether we needed to consider this, and he said it is something we would have to talk about, to paraphrase him. That seems to me abundantly clear in the light of the situation in the world we are now living in, given the increased demand for electricity in our country, which is going to go up and up, with the demand coming from data centres and pressure on sources of energy internationally, not least caused by the war in Ukraine and the impact that is going to have on gas prices, the moral problem of importing gas from destructive regimes, and so on. We have to try to square the circle.

The question that will arise is whether we are being realistic in the way we talk about relying on wind as our main energy source, especially given what I have said about the capacity of data centres to consume up to 40% of our energy. Wind energy, let it be said, is an important source. Every bit of progress we hear about wind energy is good news and we are all emotionally and intellectually attracted to it. However, relying on it to meet most of our energy needs, or carrying on as though that is what we are doing, is not acceptable. At the moment, it seems Ireland is pursuing irreconcilable goals because we are increasing demand and we are facing into an increased demand for electricity, on the one hand, while hoping it can be done with the current energy supply, on the other. We are not in a position to guarantee an electricity supply from renewable sources.

The Irish Academy of Engineering, in its note entitled “Europe's Energy Crisis – Implications for Ireland”, states that Ireland is in a far more precarious situation regarding its reliance on gas as Europe is moving away from Russian imports. It points out that sometimes wind generates no electricity at all. It gives the example of 25 March 2022 at 10.15 a.m., when the demand for electricity on this island was 5,124 MW and wind generation for more than 5,000 MW of installed wind generation capacity came to 10 MW, or less than 0.2% of total electricity. During a 24-hour period on that same day, prior to 7 p.m., renewables provided less than 3% of Ireland's energy. Therefore, when we talk about expanding our wind generation by 5,000 MW, it does not matter from the point of view of system adequacy because, under any scenario, there will be times in 2030 when wind generation, regardless of installed wind generation capacity, will meet less than 1% of instantaneous electricity demand, and there will be days when it meets less than 5% of demand over a period of 24 hours.

Of course, the conclusion from all of this is not that we should scrap wind entirely. It is that we face full on the facts as they are, not as we would like them to be. How can the Government expect to generate 80% from renewable energy sources when the wind is not blowing? We will be subject to the whims of the weather. It is not just in Ireland, but this place is full of politicians who never express a view on anything until they find out what way the wind is blowing. On this occasion, it is a case of recognising that, very often, the wind is not blowing at all. That is what we have to take seriously and that is what has to drive our thinking at least some of the time.

The Irish Academy of Engineering points out that Government policy seeks the development of 5,000 MW of offshore wind generation by 2030 but the development of such wind generation is slow. Investors are being cautious. Building the wind fields offshore has a higher cost compared to building onshore, as we know. This high cost is another issue which will lead to escalating energy prices and is already doing so, squeezing the most vulnerable members of our population, as mentioned by Senator Keogan.

Let us focus for a moment on that suffering. St. Vincent de Paul, in collaboration with RedC, found that 19% of people had cut back on heating and electricity due to cost, including 42% of families of those with an illness or disability, and with 36% of lone parents finding themselves in a similar situation. I am not telling the Minister anything he does not know or anything with which he does not sympathise. However, it is important, as we look at and talk about our solutions to our energy crisis, that we take seriously the impact of the choices that we make.

I am aware the Minister may be thinking about the nuclear option and the possibility of nuclear power, at least from what he said previously in the Seanad. Yet, in its proposed amendment to the motion today, the Government's side states clearly: “nuclear powered electricity generation plants are prohibited in Ireland; the Government has no plans to revisit the prohibition on, or explore the development of, nuclear powered electricity generation in Ireland”. I sometimes wonder whether the Government afraid to show the public it is willing to think about controversial things or does it have to wait until there is an editorial from The Irish Timesbefore it dares to say the obvious to people, which is that we must talk about this. I am not suggesting automatically that the solution is nuclear. However, I am saying that we need to talk about the fact great progress has been made in terms of relative safety and we need to talk about the potential of small modular nuclear reactors, one of which is the equivalent of 100 wind turbines. We need to, by all means, talk about other options, such as hydrogen and so on, but to say we have no plans to revisit it suggests we are not even thinking of the subject.I do not think that is serious given the problems we face, and the increased problems we will face because of the war in Ukraine with instability in the world, the reality of energy shortages and consequences for the poor. Yes, let us work on renewables but let us face the reality, which is that we cannot get there on renewables in the short term. We need to rethink and hit the reset button on our opposition to liquified natural gas terminals. We need to press the reset button on our silence.

I will finish by saying that up to the time she retired, Angela Merkel had a fantastic reputation but in light of what has happened in Ukraine, her reputation is suffering. The knee-jerk way in which Germany turned its back on nuclear power will affect her reputation as a wise head into the future as well. Therefore, let us have courage about opening up the discussion that needs to be had.