Vol. 840 No. 1
108. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he will provide an update on the review of EirGrid's Grid25 project; when this review will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19990/14]
I ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources to provide an update on the review of Eirgrid's Grid25 project, outline when the review will be published, and make a statement on the matter.
EirGrid’s Grid25 national transmission grid development programme is vital for future socioeconomic progress in Ireland, regional development and to ensure consumers have access to reliable, sustainable and affordable energy.
During the course of engagement by EirGrid in its recent public consultation processes a number of key concerns emerged. I have put in place a number of measures to deal with the immediate concerns related to the Grid West and Grid Link projects, while also addressing the generality of commentary on the need to improve stakeholder and community engagement on all future Grid25 projects. I have appointed an independent panel of experts, chaired by Mrs. Justice Catherine McGuinness, to examine the Grid West and Grid Link projects. The panel of experts will decide the terms of reference for comprehensive, route-specific studies of full underground and overhead options for both projects. The panel has been asked to ensure the studies are complete, impartial, objective and comparable and will submit a report to me on these matters in due course. The two studies will consider environmental impacts, technical efficacy and cost factors. The overhead and underground options will be published side by side in objective and comparable terms before consideration is given by EirGrid to the appropriate next steps for each of the projects. The panel has also been asked to consider what, if anything, it can do with regard to the North-South transmission line project. The panel has commenced its deliberations and I understand it expects to be in a position to announce the terms of reference for the Grid Link and Grid West transmission line projects soon.
EirGrid published an interim report on the emerging themes from the Grid Link project consultation on 28 January. A copy of this report is available on EirGrid's website. All of the submissions which EirGrid received on the project are being examined by the EirGrid project team. I understand once a thorough and detailed examination of all the submissions has been completed, a report will be published on the project website and EirGrid will respond to all correspondence as quickly as possible.
On the Minister's statement that the terms of reference will be announced soon, what is meant by "soon"? There is great concern among all of the communities affected by the EirGrid projects. An issue constantly raised is that of health. I am concerned that this issue was not referred to in the Minister's reply in relation to the terms of reference. It is vitally important that health be a key factor in deliberations on the overground and underground options for the projects. The Minister might also update the House on the North-South interconnector in terms of the reviews to be carried out.
I understand the panel met as recently as last Friday. According to what I hear, I for one will be surprised if it does not issue its report on the terms of reference before next Friday. That is my expectation but I do not speak for the panel.
With regard to health, the Deputy is correct that this matter has been a concern among residents and others during the recent public consultation phase. Responsibility in this regard does not repose in my Department. Health concerns about electromagnetic fields and non-ionising radiation are the responsibility of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. The Department is engaging or has engaged expert assistance to study international developments in matters concerning non-ionising radiation. This will serve as an update on the report that the Deputy will be familiar with, namely, Health Effects of Electromagnetic Fields, which was produced by the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources in 2007.
For the individuals and communities affected by these proposals, the matter needs to be clarified. The project is the responsibility of the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources while the health issue is the responsibility of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. This is a major project to be undertaken throughout the country. A considerable number of people will be affected by it either directly or indirectly. It behoves us all, therefore, to ensure that the Government as a whole examines it. The relevant sections in the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government should be working hand in glove with the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources to ensure all aspects are dealt with. When a report is issued, people in the community will say it does not address certain issues. The questions of aesthetics, environmental impact, property value depreciation and health must all be borne in mind. Unless they are all covered in any committee's report, it will not be welcomed or assessed by the affected communities.
The Minister might also address the North–South issue.
I can certainly assure the Deputy that the integrity of the process is being maintained by the expert panel under the chairmanship of the retired Honourable Mrs. Justice Catherine McGuinness and that it is taking its responsibilities very seriously. Otherwise, it would have opined before now.
I take the point that there must be optimum co-operation between my Department and the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government in respect of the non-ionising radiation fear. This must draw on expert evidence that is absolutely up to date in this area.
By contrast with Grid Link or Grid West, there is an immediate urgency about the North-South dimension in the context of an all-island electricity market and Northern Ireland's security of supply. It is a very small piece of interconnection infrastructure but it is of significant strategic importance. It extends for only 40 km approximately and runs from Meath to Tyrone. Its significance cannot be overstated. I cannot say anything further until I hear what former Supreme Court justice, Mrs. Catherine McGuinness has to say on the matter on behalf of her panel, but whatever she has to say will not detract from the fact of life that the infrastructure is urgent.
109. Deputy Michael Colreavy asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the reasons the exporting of wind energy from Ireland to Britain was shelved; the financial arrangements that were under negotiation; his views on whether this project will be reactivated; the impact this will have on Ireland's commitment to maximising our renewable energy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19988/14]
Last year, the UK Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, Mr. Ed Davey, MP, and I signed a memorandum of understanding on energy co-operation. The memorandum demonstrated our shared interest in developing the opportunity to export green electricity from Ireland to Britain. An agreed programme of work was put in place, with work-streams across several areas. A key objective was to realise the potential for investment, job creation and growth. The amount of energy to be procured by the United Kingdom and the mechanisms for sharing the resultant economic benefits, including an appropriate return to the Exchequer, were among the matters to be addressed ahead of signing any intergovernmental agreement.
Economic analysis conducted by my officials, with significant inputs from the ESRI and NewERA, indicates that under agreed policy and regulatory conditions, renewable energy trading can deliver significant economic benefits to Ireland and the United Kingdom and would also be attractive to commercial investors and developers. However, progressing to an intergovernmental agreement on renewable energy trading would require any agreement to be designed in a manner that would work for both countries. In that regard, the UK side is not yet in a position to take certain key decisions on the quantity of energy to be procured, the regulatory treatment of Irish assets, the structure of subsidies to Irish developers and the resultant financial flows.
Following further discussions since the summit between the Taoiseach and Prime Minister Cameron in early March, I am confirmed in the view that given the economic, policy and regulatory complexities involved and the outstanding decisions to be taken by the United Kingdom, delivery by 2020 of an intergovernmental agreement to facilitate energy export is not now a realistic proposition. While it has not been possible at this time to conclude an agreement, in the context of a European internal energy market, greater trade in energy between Britain and Ireland is inevitable in the post-2020 scenario. At national level, of course, the strong focus on our 2020 commitments is undiminished and consideration is being given to building on these commitments as we look towards 2030.
We introduced the Wind Turbine Regulation Bill to curtail the export of renewable energy while, as a nation, we are so reliant on fossil fuels. From reports, it seems the British Government was not willing to pay the price. People are uncertain, as the Dáil and I are uncertain, as to whether the negotiations are about securing our energy needs or making the economic part a little more attractive for the Irish Government. Does the Minister believe fresh negotiations are the objective and that they would produce a better price deal than the first one, whatever it was? Renewable energy generation has to be a driving force if we are to attain energy security, but this has to be done in conjunction with local communities, which clearly was not being done. It must also be done by looking at every available option open to the Government in terms of renewable energy, given that there are other energy sources such as wind energy, biomass, tidal energy and so on. Is the Minister looking at these alternative sources, as well as waiting for a resumption of negotiations on a memorandum of understanding?
The contemplated wind export project in the midlands was a discrete and ring-fenced project that had nothing at all to do with our capacity to meet our domestic needs. We are on track to have 40% of our electricity generated from renewables by 2020.
By any European standard, that is considered to be at the leading edge in terms of what any transmission system can accommodate. We remain satisfied that we will reach that target and all of the evidence shows that we will. It is not a case of being able to divert what might have happened in the midlands into an additional quantum of renewable energy generation on top of the 40%. A hugely complex technical study is under way to measure the capacity of the transmission system in terms of how much any transmission system can accommodate in terms of renewables. Therefore, that is not the concern. The projects were entirely separate.
An awful lot of work is ongoing in this area. It is also an area in which there is much uncertainty. Pending publication of the Government's Green Paper on renewable energy and the debate on the Wind Turbine Regulation Bill, would it not make sense to introduce certainty by having a moratorium on planning for major wind farms? The companies are still negotiating leases and people are still nervous and concerned. Until we are clear on what our strategy is and the financial arrangements are, would it not make sense for us to introduce a moratorium on planning applications for major wind farms?
At the outset the Deputy said reasonably that he was in favour of renewables to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels and accelerate the departure from a reliance on fossil fuels to renewables. He cannot say this, on the one hand, and, on the other, say he wants a moratorium on development of renewables. The planning system is immensely rigorous. Everybody has known for a number of years about our 2020 mandatory targets and we are confident that we can deliver on them. I am not sure whether there is a great deal of uncertainty. There is, undoubtedly, genuine concern, but there is a good deal of deliberate misrepresentation. I am sorry about this because trade is the lifeblood of the economy. This is a small economy which depends on trade and selling things to other member states and countries to earn a living. We must continue to build trade links and open new markets for products and services from this economy. That is the way we generate wealth and create jobs.
110. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources in view of the advances in the technology for generating electricity from biomass, if his Department has considered reviewing the renewable energy policy to focus on biomass rather than wind to achieve our renewable targets and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19989/14]
At the time when the renewable energy strategy was devised, wind energy generation was probably the easiest way to achieve the 2020 targets required to meet our EU commitments. However, technological developments in recent years have meant that the use of biomass has become very attractive, particularly convection. Has the Department considered reviewing the policy and refocusing it? While wind energy will always be an option, we could focus on the potential of biomass to help us to reach our targets.
I thank the Deputy for putting this question.
I can confirm that we are very much looking at the biomass policy and apart from a couple of final meetings between the Minister, myself and the Department, I expect to be in a position to publish the strategy document by the end of this month. As we are meeting those involved in the industry all of the time, we will be consulting them about a body on which they will be represented and to which they can make comments on the policy produced. I answer in the affirmative that we are very much looking at increasing the contribution of biomass.
The Renewable Energy Directive, published in 2009, set a legally binding target of 16% of our energy requirements from renewable resources by 2020. We are committed to meeting 40% of electricity demand from renewable sources by that time. In that regard, our policy interventions are designed to incentivise the market to deliver the necessary renewable generation capacity. The choice of technology is a commercial decision but the renewable energy feed-in tariff, or REFIT, is the primary means through which electricity from renewable sources is supported in Ireland. To date, wind energy has proved to be the most commercial technology in the Irish market and provisional figures for 2013 indicate that 16.4% of energy demand in the electricity sector was met from wind. Nevertheless, diversification of the renewable generation portfolio will be important for creating a sustainable, carbon-free electricity system. To that end, the Minister published the Offshore Renewable Energy Development Plan earlier this year to establish the framework within which we can realise that potential.
Biomass will continue to be used in electricity generation and is likely to have a significant role in the heat and transport sectors. We will be publishing our strategy shortly which will set out our proposals to optimise the contribution that energy from biomass can make to achieving our 2020 targets.
I thank the Minister of State for his response and welcome the fact that a strategy is due to be published. I look forward to seeing it and examining its proposals. It is very important to consider electricity generation from biomass in the strategy. There is a project under way in Yorkshire at the moment to convert the largest coal-fired generating plant in Europe to biomass, which is technologically feasible and will contribute hugely to a reduction in carbon emissions. We should be looking at an adventurous programme like that, perhaps targeting Moneypoint for conversion to biomass, which would achieve the target of 40% renewable energy practically overnight. I hope the strategy will reflect that and will examine how that could be implemented. There is also huge potential for the development of a supply chain for the biomass industry and biomass power generation, particularly in the context of the amount of cut-out bog owned by Bord na Móna. Rather than using that for wind turbines, it could actually generate an indigenous industry delivering biomass for power generation and for export.
A recent report produced by Rethink Pylons stated that converting Moneypoint from coal to biomass would meet our targets of 40% without the need to upgrade the grid or for further wind development. It argued that the conversion would cost €380 million, which is approximately 10% of the cost of upgrading the grid. The decision on the fuel type to be used would be a matter for the operator. However, there are a number of wider issues that would demand further consideration and deliberation. In summary, the amount of biomass needed to complete the conversion is 6.4 million tonnes on a continuous basis. Such an amount would not actually be available in Ireland and most of it would have to be imported. Such large scale levels of imports would call into question the environmental sustainability of such operations as well as raising transport and land-use issues. Any support for biomass at Moneypoint would require State aid approval. Were tariffs similar to those for biomass under REFIT 3 to apply, the cost of the public service obligation, PSO, would significantly exceed the cost of the 310 MW supported under the REFIT 3 scheme, without making any contribution to renewable heat targets.
As I said earlier, we will have an opportunity in a few weeks time to debate these issues more fully.
It is interesting that the plant in Yorkshire has signed contracts for the delivery of biomass from New England. It will be shipped there and transported inland to the plant. Moneypoint is on the coast, so one could ship biomass directly to that plant which would be significantly cheaper than what is happening in Yorkshire.
There is also the potential to develop our own indigenous industry to supply biomass, as well as developing export growth in that regard. It would provide sustainable jobs without damaging local communities, thus allaying concerns about the use of industrial wind turbines. I look forward to seeing the introduction of the strategy. If the refit needs to be redesigned or tweaked we should start that work now. This is a way of achieving our targets without the amount of pain in evidence across the country at the moment.
While the issues raised by the Deputy are not in my briefing document, I will be happy to obtain a briefing on the plant in the UK and share those data with him. I assure the Deputy that we want to increase the use of indigenous biomass on this island. I am happy to take on board the issues the Deputy has raised and will get an official response for him. When the plan is published we will have a full and proper debate on all the issues.
111. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the strategy his Department has to sustain the post office network here; if he has had discussions with the Department of Social Protection; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19991/14]
What strategy does the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources have to sustain the country's post office network? I know there is to be a whole-of-government report, but what negotiations and discussions has the Minister had with the Minister for Social Protection on the sustainability of post offices?
It is Government policy that An Post remains a strong and viable company in a position to provide a high quality, nationwide postal service and maintain a nationwide customer-focused network of post offices in the community. The professionalism of the postmasters and An Post has served the network well down through the years and I do not see any reason this should not continue to be the case in the years ahead.
I met with members of the Irish Postmasters' Union on 24 March and we had a useful and wide-ranging discussion on their concerns about the future of the post office network.
I have written to my Government colleagues, including the Department of Social Protection, to encourage them to consider what assistance their Departments might be able to give for the stimulation of new business for the post office network.
I had committed to taking the issue of the provision of additional public sector business to the Cabinet committee on social policy. The committee had its initial consideration of the paper put to it at its meeting on 28 April and agreed to my proposal for a whole-of-government review of the scope for putting additional public services in the post offices. This will be undertaken over the coming months with the aim of a final report, based on the responses made by Departments, being made to the Cabinet committee in September.
I see a strong future for the network by using its existing strengths to remain a significant player in the provision of Government, financial and other services. Securing the future viability of the post office network in the longer term will entail the network continuing to modernise, as it is doing, to provide the services that its customers require. Any such developments would need to be subject to competition and public procurement requirements as appropriate.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Is it not time that we looked at the fundamental governance of An Post and the memorandum establishing the company? The ESB has a public service obligation to maintain the electricity network to every community in the country. We talk about maintaining post offices and the fact that the post office network is vital to communities but apart from the network, post offices also have the public's trust. It is time that the memorandum of understanding establishing An Post was changed to state that it has to maintain post office networks the length and breadth of the country. As a commercial semi-State body, the emphasis of An Post would change dramatically if it was obliged by legislation or other statutory means to maintain the post office network. In that case, An Post would vigorously go after business to ensure that the network was maintained.
The other issue concerns State contracts including, most recently, the provision of driving licences.
It must be looked at to ensure that An Post can tender for such projects.
The problem is that An Post's mandate is that of a commercial State company. It is not always possible to reconcile that with a mandate to shore up the post office network. The post office network is a combination of private enterprises which are subject to EU competition and procurement law. Deputy Moynihan is correct that there is a dilemma here. The dilemma is best highlighted in the context of the point he raises about the social welfare contract, which is worth approximately €58 million to the postal network. The dilemma is how to migrate the contract to electronic transfer of funds and protect the incomes of postmasters.
While I understand fully why postmasters would want to protect their incomes, I also appreciate why there is an imperative from the point of view of the Department of Social Protection to make savings in the delivery of its services wherever possible. For example, the average income from the social welfare contract for postmasters, who might well have other business, was €37,000 per annum at the height of the boom in 2004. Last year, the average was €68,000 per annum. That is because the social welfare contract provides for a fee per transaction coupled with the explosion in unemployment since the economic crash. Clearly, incomes significantly increased on foot of the fee per transaction arrangement.
I have made the points Deputy Moynihan makes to An Post's senior management, who have pointed out to me that they had to take €70 million out of payroll costs and €30 million out of non-payroll costs in the same period that the incomes of postmasters increased significantly for the reasons I have outlined. We must reconcile the dilemma between seeking to protect the incomes of postmasters and the need for the Department of Social Protection to efficiently and most effectively deliver its service to its clients.
As a society, we must make up our minds as to whether we want to maintain the post office network as it is. We have seen how communities that lose their post offices very quickly lose other services. An Post is a semi-State body to the same extent as the ESB, which is obliged to provide a service in every community. We must look at An Post. I have looked genuinely at this matter in a whole raft of ways. We can add services. Post offices have financial services, the social welfare contract and other things, which is all very well and good for those offices which are up and running. However, we must get down and deep into the smaller communities which are losing post offices, including Freemount and Rathcoole in the recent past. We must change the memorandum of understanding to provide that An Post has a legal obligation to ensure that the network is maintained and go after the business then.
In fairness to An Post and postmasters, they have grown their businesses in recent years and continue to do so. If one looks at the withdrawal of banking services from many villages and towns, it appears that retail banking has gone out of fashion as far as the senior management and boards of banks are concerned. Post offices have stepped in. One of the things I have put to the Cabinet sub-committee is that the Irish Postmasters Union might productively explore an arrangement with the Irish League of Credit Unions to establish a basic or standard bank account.
I have had discussions with the Minister for Finance on this point and do not think we should exaggerate. The Government has no plans to close post offices. I have given the figures in the House before. Some 197 post offices were closed between 2006 and 2010. Since 2010, 17 have been closed. There is no intention on the part of the Government to wantonly close post offices, but there is a necessity for the House to have clarity on the role of An Post. I appreciate the immensely valuable role the post office network plays at village and community level, as the Deputy argues. The role of the postman or postwoman is far wider than just delivering the post. The mandate which has been given to An Post is that it is a commercial State company which brings with it certain realities at a time of e-substitution and when it has lost 30% of its core mail business in the past five years. These realities must be taken into account.
112. Deputy Michael Colreavy asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the areas that are covered by the roll-out of fibre optic broadband to rural areas of the country under the national broadband plan; the expected time frame; the alternatives for areas not covered by the scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20088/14]
When I talk to small businesses and people in their homes in the north west, one of the recurring complaints is that people do not have access to broadband or proper Internet speeds. I explain that the Minister and the Department are doing a lot of work, much of which is good. However, people say to me that broadband is as essential in rural areas as rural electrification was. They want to know specifically when it will happen and want the Minister to give a specific timescale.
I agree with the Deputy that it is unacceptable that in urban Ireland quality broadband connectivity competes with anything available in any city in Europe but large tracts of rural Ireland have access to a very basic service. The Government’s national broadband plan which I published in August aims to radically change the broadband landscape in Ireland by ensuring high speed broadband is available to all citizens and businesses. This will be achieved by providing a policy and regulatory framework that assists in accelerating and incentivising commercial investment and by a State-led intervention for areas where it is not commercial for the market to invest. On 25 April I signalled the Government's commitment to a major telecommunications network build-out to rural Ireland, with fibre as a foundation for future-proofed broadband services as part of the State's intervention under the national broadband plan. This commitment is a clear expression of the Government’s determination to address the connectivity challenge in rural Ireland in a meaningful and sustainable way.
Central to the strategy will be a fibre build-out to locations in every county identified as having no existing or planned enabling fibre network. The fibre build-out will be part of an end-to-end strategy that will address all parts of Ireland that cannot access commercial high speed broadband services. I have published a county by county list of towns and villages which have already been identified for a fibre build-out. The list contains over 1,000 rural communities and is available on my Department's website. This is an indicative list only and subject to the completion of the comprehensive mapping process under way. Intensive design work is ongoing in my Department with a view to publishing an end-to-end implementation strategy later this year, together with the outcome of the mapping process which will identify those areas that require intervention.
The proposed State intervention under the national broadband plan represents a significant infrastructural project. Delivery of the fibre network will require careful planning and take time. EU state aid clearance will be required for the intervention strategy once finalised.
It is expected that the detailed procurement process will take place in 2015, with a view to commencing construction of the fibre network at the end of that year.
The Minister says he understands people's frustration. I explained to him previously the frustration felt by a person who is running a home industry, but has to travel around in a car with an iPad to try to get reception. That is no way to run a business. It would be beneficial for the Department and for people seeking information if the Minister could tell us whether it would be possible for a web page to be set up or for an office to be set up at which people with extremely poor Internet access could register their telephone numbers and addresses for that information to be communicated to the Department. The Department could then provide these people with a response telling them by what date they will have access and the minimum speed of access they can expect to have by that date. Such an initiative would, at least, let them know real progress is being made and they would have a definite date by which they could plan to develop their business. Would that be possible?
Recently, the Deputy and other colleagues supported a Bill in the House that facilitates the ESB entering into a joint venture with a leading telecommunications operator to use its supply infrastructure to roll out fibre to parts of rural Ireland that could never have hoped to access it. This arrangement is being concluded and the preferred company selected following the submission of expressions of interest is Vodafone. The new venture will be a 50:50 joint venture between the ESB and Vodafone, the purpose of which is to alleviate at least some of Deputy Colreavy's heartache. I expect an announcement on this in the near future.
In fairness to the commercial sector, it must be acknowledged that this sector is putting €2 billion into investment into this area. For example, Eircom has put in an additional €400 million to ensure it exceeds provision to 1.4 million premises, as distinct from the 1.1 million premises pledged as recently as two years ago. Therefore, there is significant commercial investment, the separate ESB-joint venture and the mapping exercise in which we are engaged in order to get State aid approval for us to build out the fibre network.
I agree that much of the necessary work is going on and people are heartened by that. However, there is little certainty for people living outside of our towns and villages regarding when they can expect action will happen. Also, there is no communication protocol on this issue, even in regard to keeping the Department informed of the situation. Mention was made of the gap analysis. People are identifying the gaps that exist and they know where they are.
I would like to think the website does give that information. I have explained the process we must go through. There is no easy telephone solution for a small business in Dromahair that may have poor quality broadband. Without the network being available, there is no short-term solution. There are some parts of Ireland where, for topographical reasons, it is very difficult to deal with this phenomenon. That is the reason we are going for a fibre roll-out. Fibre is the Rolls Royce of connectivity. This end-to-end solution will facilitate even the most remote parts of the country, by virtue of the fact there may be alternative wireless solutions once the fibre is close by. I hope work will start on the ESB joint venture at the end of this year.
Following the mapping exercise, public procurement tendering and so on, I hope the European Union will permit us to start work on the direct State intervention, with whatever contractors are chosen, by the end of 2015.
