Vol. 439 No. 1
5 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications, in view of the decision in the 1994 Budget not to allocate funding to renewable energy, the way in which he proposes to ensure that the target of 75 megawatts of electricity generated from renewable sources by the year 1997 is to be reached, as previously announced by the Government.
11 Mr. Molloy asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications his views on whether the installation of the wind farm at Bellacorick, County Mayo, was successful; and, if so, if he will encourage the erection of similar wind farms on other sites of the western seaboard of Ireland where the wind regime is most favourable.
17 Mr. Cox asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications the proposals, if any, he has to increase the production and use of alternative energy in this country; whether he will request the ESB to pay a guaranteed minimum sum to alternative energy producers in order to make the production of alternative energy viable as has happened in Germany; and if he will set a target for the installation of at least 200 megawatts over the next five years.
56 Ms McManus asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications the action, if any, he is taking to advance the significant new initiative announced in October 1993 regarding the development of renewable energy; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
57 Ms McManus asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications if, in view of the announcement of a significant new initiative in relation to the development of renewable energy such as wind power, small hydro schemes and biomass by his Minister of State, the plans, if any, he has in relation to this new initiative; where projects are to be located; and the type of monitoring which will be carried out to assess the effectiveness of this alternative energy technology.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5, 11, 17, 56 and 57 together.
Our Government is fully committed to the promotion of appropriate forms of renewable energy and has requested the ESB, in consultation with our Department, to prepare a competition to contract for supplies of up to an additional 75 MW of installed capacity from alternatives sources by 1997. Details of this competition are in the final stages of preparation and I expect to be able to announce them fairly soon.
I expect the further development of wind energy to be a significant part of this initiative. Such development will be encouraged by the success of the Bellacorick wind project in County Mayo, where 21 turbines with a combined capacity of 6.45 MW were installed in late 1992. This project has exceeded expectations and produced 15.6 million units of electricity in its first year of operation. The location of new projects will, however, be a matter for individual developers. I can also confirm that it is proposed to monitor the performance of the successful projects with a view, inter alia, to developing future strategy in this important area. I believe that it would be premature at this stage to set further targets, pending a detailed review of the results of the forthcoming competition.
I am happy with the present targets. The Minister of State used the words "alternative sources". Did he mean renewable energy, because nuclear power could be considered as an alternative source? I thought the issue of Carnsore Point had been dealt with.
I thought our position was crystal clear.
The Deputy just wants to see if the Minister of State knows the difference.
The Deputy should know the answer to that.
The question relates to renewable energy and I assume that this is what the Minister of State means when he refers to alternative sources, but I would like to know this for certain. Is the Minister of State aware that Ireland is lagging behind other countries with less potential when it comes to wind and wave power? Does he propose to encourage the private sector or, indeed, individuals to supply electricity from renewable sources by increasing the unit cost payable in line with the unit cost payable to the ESB to suppliers who use fossil fuels, most of which are imported? The figures make interesting reading. If the Minister of State examines them he will find that the unit cost payable to suppliers who use renewable sources is lower than the unit cost payable to suppliers who use fossil fuels.
The questioning is becoming over long.
I am surprised the Deputy has doubts. We are talking about renewable sources.
The Minister of State mentioned alternative sources.
The Deputy also said that Ireland is lagging behind. Renewable sources account for 2 per cent of our energy supplies. This is also the position in Germany. Therefore, to say we are lagging behind——
Denmark is similar to Ireland.
Perhaps, but we are committed to and proceeding with this policy. We intend to ensure that it is successful.
Restore the Irish language, reunite the country.
I see that Deputy O'Malley is getting great enjoyment out of this. Perhaps he should reflect on his own performance and see how successful he was.
He spent a few years with the Minister of State's party.
That is your loss. It must be acknowledged that alternative energy technologies are not yet competitive with traditional sources for electicity generation. Nevertheless, it is desirable to develop these technologies with a view to job creation as well as diversifying our sources and maximising indigenous resources in a way that contributes to environmental improvement. The costs thus arising will however have to be reasonable and met by the ESB.
I have not yet been given the answer I am seeking. I asked the Minister of State to compare the unit cost payable to suppliers of energy from wind power, for example, with the unit cost payable to suppliers of energy from turf fired stations by the ESB. The Minister of State should consider levelling the playing pitch to ensure that suppliers of energy from renewable sources are paid an equal amount. This is not the position at present. The Minister of State says he is committed to present policy but we have yet to see this put into practice.
Let us have finality in this matter.
As the Deputy is well aware, we provide energy from a number of sources. There is a cost unit for each of these. We must have some barometer of costs. We are going to invite people to submit proposals in a competition which will be announced shortly. Any proposals submitted will be evaluated. We will then be in a position to decide on what the unit cost should be.
Let us now come——
Will it be the same as that for fossil fuels?
Order, let us now come to deal with other questions.
I want to say to the Deputy——
The Chair is on its feet, Minister.
I have not been given an answer.
The Deputy will resume his seat forthwith. I am proceeding now to other questions. Question No. 6.
On a point of order, may I point out that the reply to Question No. 5, which was a priority question, began after 2.50 p.m.? Under the amended Orders it then became an ordinary question. The difficulty that arises——
I appreciate the Deputy's point.
——is that the Minister of State took four other questions with it. If the Chair persists in treating it as a priority question other Deputies will be cut out.
I accept the Deputy's point. I called Question No. 5, admittedly on the borderline, but at the same time I feel the House has dealt adequately with it. Question No. 6, please.
The point Deputy O'Malley has made is in keeping with the spirit of what was agreed at the Committee on Procedures and Privileges. If priority questions overrun into the time for ordinary questions all Members may ask supplementaries.
That was the purpose. If Deputy O'Malley desires to put a question on that basis I will be glad to hear it.
It was 2.52 p.m. when the reply started.
We will not quibble about a minute or two.
The Minister was asked in Question No. 17 in the name of Deputy Cox——
How is he?
——whether he would introduce the system they have in Germany whereby the central electricity board is forced to pay a guaranteed minimum sum to producers of renewable energy. That led to an upsurge of renewable energy in Germany which would not otherwise have taken place. The payment there is 15 pfennigs per unit, equivalent to about 6p, which would make the production of renewable energy viable in this country which it is not at the moment.
Why is the Minister confining the target to 75 megawatts from renewable sources? This is very modest given that our existing installed capacity is in excess of 2,500 megawatts.
We are inviting a competition and giving maximum opportunity for every area of sourcing of alternative energy to put forward proposals. Until we have the exact proposals based on the conditions laid down analysed scientifically and otherwise we cannot arrive at a final conclusion. We want to ensure that we strike the right balance between input, unit costs, environmental impact, etc.
There are two different federal programmes in Germany. The target to be met by 1995 is 250 megawatts of installed wind energy capacity, and 2,250 photo-voltic installations of between one and five kilowatts each. The situation there is not comparable with here. The demand is much greater. Our percentage is similar for renewables but we cannot compare them.
Price is important.
We await the submissions.
What about the price?
If we are going to get a guarantee before we start, there is no point in having a competition.
