I very much appreciate the opportunity provided by this Adjournment debate. It is very important that the Government clarifies exactly what its position is on this issue. During Leaders' Questions yesterday, the Taoiseach was asked specifically about what his reaction would be to the reported decision by the ESB not to convert its Moneypoint Station to gas. The Taoiseach seemed confident that it would be converted to gas, that the strategy as set out in 2000 was ongoing and that all was well with the world.
When it comes to our national climate strategy, I am sure that the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, who am I glad to see here tonight to take the debate, knows that all is not well with the world. If Moneypoint is not converted to gas, as was set out as one of the main recommendations in the national climate change strategy, we will have even further difficulty in meeting the targets for carbon dioxide reductions that we are already way above. It is very important that, rather than letting the Taoiseach continue with the misunderstanding that all is well, the Government starts to be very clear on what its position is and what our options are. I look forward to hearing what the Minister's view on this subject is.
It is strange to take one particular power station as being representative of the whole issue, but Moneypoint is one of the single most important factors in regard to our climate change strategy.
The Minister will know Moneypoint emits roughly 900 MW of power, slightly less than one quarter of our overall electricity generation capacity. He will also know its emission of 500 million tonnes per year is more than one quarter of the total CO2 emitted from the whole energy generation sector and that the plan to convert it to gas bringing a 3.5 million tonnes reduction per annum in CO2 emissions was the largest by a factor of three or four of the policies or proposals to reduce CO2 emissions. CO2 is our most significant greenhouse gas.
It is a complicated issue when one gets down to the details. I will not pretend there are simple solutions, nor will I demand that the Government immediately converts it to gas because there are difficulties involved. There are security of supply difficulties in our electricity generation system. If we moved completely to gas for all our power generation, we would be vulnerable at the end of a long pipeline from Siberia from which future gas resources will have to come. When I say future resources, I am talking about ten years time. When we talk about electricity generation and investment in these areas, I would argue that we have to think in terms of a 50 year timeframe and not just a ten year one. We have to think strategically on this issue.
We also have to think quickly because by June next year, we will be in the final period before we can get a derogation or decide to continue to run Moneypoint as a coal burning station for 20,000 hours after the 2008 time limit when the reductions in emissions have to occur. If we want to apply for that derogation and to continue to run the plant for a period of time afterwards, we must do so by June next year, so the Government has to make a decision quickly.
If, as reported in The Irish Times, it is to continue as a coal burning station and to be modified to take out NO2 and SO2, nitrous oxide and sulphur dioxide, the plant must be converted by 2008 to meet that directive. To achieve that, the lead time for the conversion of the plant is approximately four or five years. We must make the investment decision by early or mid next year. It seems clear from the reports in The Irish Times that the ESB is moving towards the conversion of the plant to take out NO2 and SO2 rather than CO2 – in fact, the technology does not seem to be available to take CO2 out of a coal burning power station. The power plant is not suitable to be converted to gas fired. It seems the ESB is moving in that direction. If it is, the Minister's climate change strategy needs to be radically reviewed very quickly. We are already in deep trouble in a range of other areas in which we are exceeding our emissions. In addition to that, we will lose another 3.5 million tonne reduction for which we were hoping.
It is important that rather than put the decision back to June of next year, the Government starts to treat this climate change issue seriously and to comment on whether it will be willing to invest in some of the alternatives required. There are alternatives in terms of power generation. We could invest in gas and in alternative new stations. Our preferred solution is massive investment in renewable energy sources which we are only developing at a fraction of what is possible. The Government needs to move beyond the Taoiseach's seeming obliviousness to the issue and to the serious nature of the problem.
