Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 16 Jun 2015

Vol. 882 No. 3

Other Questions

Questions Nos. 106 to 108, inclusive, replied to with Written Answers.

Wind Energy Guidelines

Michael Moynihan

Question:

109. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he will provide an outline of the discussions he had with the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government on new planning guidelines for wind turbines; the scenarios examined for set-back distances between wind turbines and residential homes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22976/15]

In this question I ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources for an outline of the discussions he has had with the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government on the new planning guidelines.

The wind energy development guidelines provide guidance for planning authorities on planning for wind energy projects by ensuring consistency of approach in the identification of suitable locations for wind energy developments and the treatment of planning applications throughout the country for such developments and assisting developers and the wider public in considering wind energy development. The current guidelines have been in place since 2006.

In December 2013 the Department of Environment, Community and Local Government began a review of the existing guidelines. The review of the guidelines is set against the backdrop of the need to tackle global warming, reduce Ireland's reliance on fossil fuels and meet Ireland’s legally binding EU and international obligations, including in regard to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving air quality and the generation of renewable energy, as well as real and legitimate concerns about the impact of essential energy infrastructure on local communities. The review focuses on the specific issues of noise, proximity and shadow flicker. All other sections of the existing guidelines are to remain in place. Submissions were received from around 7,500 organisations and members of the public during the public consultation period.

This is a very technical area and the engagement between the two Departments is ongoing.

Technical studies have been obtained on various aspects of the issues involved, particularly noise, including separation distance, and detailed assessments of various options have been undertaken by the two Departments. Revisions to the guidelines following the conclusion of deliberations will be introduced by issuing the revised guidelines to planning authorities under section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended.

When are the guidelines likely to be issued? On wind energy, what is happening is that the technology has improved dramatically in terms of the height of wind turbines. In the case of current planning applications, wind turbines are approximately twice the size of those dating back to 2004 and 2005. There is considerable concern across the country and in any community I have been in about the impact of wind turbines on houses and the value of property, in addition to quality of life issues such as flicker and noise. The community in Rockchapel in north Cork is concerned about interference with the television transmission service. Something must be done as a matter of urgency. It causes frustration that while the discussions are ongoing with the Department, wind energy projects developers are applying for planning permission under the old guidelines in anticipation of a major change in the new guidelines and these projects will be developed when the new guidelines are in place. There is real urgency. Will the Minister indicate when the directives will be issued to planning authorities?

Work and analysis are ongoing in the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government in conjunction with my Department and the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland on the review of wind energy guidelines. No firm decisions have yet been taken, but it is hoped to finalise the review in the very near future. I understand the concerns the Deputy has raised about the perceived impact in terms of noise, shadow flicker and property prices. We must take carefully into account issues of concern raised by citizens and local communities. We must also examine the issue in the context of energy policy. We have an energy policy in place and adopted a national commitment, but there are also legally binding international requirements to migrate to renewable production of energy. Onshore wind generation has been the most cost effective means by which we can migrate to renewable energy production. That is also another aspect of the issue that we must take on board.

Does "the very near future" mean days, weeks, months or years?

I do not wish to mislead the Deputy or anybody in the House, nor would I, in suggesting it is days or weeks, but the matter is being actively considered by the two Departments with a view to publication of the guidelines by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. That will give the Deputy an understanding of the issue.

Question No. 110 replied to with Written Answers.

Hydraulic Fracturing

Mick Wallace

Question:

111. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his views on the fact that Leitrim County Council recently unanimously passed a motion of no confidence in a company-led consortium of researchers (details supplied) commissioned to carry out Environmental Protection Agency research into hydraulic fracturing, in view of this company’s track record on this method of extraction in the United States of America; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23133/15]

CDM Smith, a company that has led the fracking industry into Poland and Ukraine, is leading the EPA's research project on fracking. It is a little worrying that such a company would be given the job. The company's official line on natural gas is that "It is an abundant, reliable, clean and cost-effective fuel source." Surely, someone else should examine the matter?

I thank the Deputy for his question which relates to a motion passed by Leitrim County Council. While I have received communication from the county council, as outlined in the Deputy's question, I would comment as follows on the appointment of CDM Smith and the involvement of that company in the multi-agency trans-boundary programme of research commissioned by the EPA on the potential impacts on the environment and human health of unconventional gas exploration and extraction projects.

The programme is managed by the EPA and co-funded by the EPA, my Department and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency, with oversight from a broad-based steering committee that includes my Department.

As is normal in major and broad-ranging projects such as this, the project team involves a wide range of expert institutions and companies. CDM Smith is the lead consultant in the consortium engaged to carry out the programme of research, and the consortium includes the British Geological Survey, University College Dublin, Ulster University, Queens University Belfast, Amec Foster Wheeler and Philip Lee solicitors, each offering a particular specialism required by the project scope. The contract for the programme of research was awarded following a robust evaluation process in compliance with public procurement guidelines, where the tender submitted by the CDM Smith headed consortium was evaluated as being the strongest bid.

I am aware that there has been some recent focus on the fact that CDM Smith has provided expert advice to oil companies involved in the development of unconventional gas resources. CDM Smith has also provided advice to State bodies and regulatory agencies across its area of expertise. As the Deputy will appreciate, it is common that a broad range of parties will seek to draw on the specialist expertise available from a firm such as CDM Smith. The fact that disparate entities seek to draw on such expertise is generally seen as an indicator of a company's recognised experience.

Although I do not doubt CDM Smith's experience in the area and I understand why people would garner some information from it my point remains the same. The company is involved seriously at the coalface of fracking and would almost promote it. Recently, New York State changed its fracking moratorium into a full ban based on its department of health's review of the latest evidence. CDM Smith's response to this effort by state legislators to protect their drinking water, clean air, the global climate and the public health of their communities was one of condemnation. These people have a vested interest in telling us fracking is good for us. The Minister does not need to have fracking researched. There is enough research to prove to most ordinary people that fracking is bad for our health. A couple of months ago, a Minister said to me here that we were burying our heads in the sand if we ignored the energy potential from fracking. It might not be a bad idea if we did, given that our health would be much better.

I do not know who said that. It was not me.

It was someone from the Minister's party who had the job before him.

While I understand what the Deputy is saying, I respectfully disagree with him when he says there is no need to have the matter researched. We should have it researched here and have expert scientific evidence available to us in this jurisdiction. That is why the EPA has commissioned the study. The science is critical and there is a consortium of parties involved - I read out the list - including reputable, scientific institutions and universities. There is also legal advice and advice across the board so the Parliament and Government can have the best scientific evidence available to us. Evidence is evidence, not opinion. Evidence is about the science, and I would like to see the science as, I am sure, would the Deputy.

Some science experts are climate change deniers and are well-known and are perceived to be very knowledgeable. People can form opinions and very often, sadly, some people have a vested interest in the opinion they form, even if it is based on so-called expert research. Natural gas is a fossil fuel which produces heat-trap carbon dioxide when combusted as well as generating other global warming emissions. At every stage of the fracking process there are methane leaks, and methane is more than 30 times more effective at trapping heat than carbon dioxide. I am even more worried about the water table.

We already have enough problems with the water table which I believe are directly linked with the high rate of cancer in Ireland. The water table has been poisoned in many areas and the incidence of cancer is on the increase. The rate in Ireland is five times that in Italy. The water table presents a serious problem and fracking would only add to it.

We will have to part company on the science. Perhaps I am naive, but I think the science stands on its own. Scientific evidence is important to policy making. As a policy maker, the Minister of the day will make a decision based on the best available advice and evidence and will come to the House to account for it. It will be at least another year before the EPA's findings emerge. We should have confidence in ourselves, as a people, a Government and a Parliament to make the right decision. The scientific evidence will assist us in that regard. Like the Deputy, I keep abreast of the experience of fracking in other countries. I am aware of the changes introduced in New York. The correct process is to await the outcome of the EPA's study before determining whether there is a basis for making a decision. That is my position as Minister.

This issue is of more than academic interest to me because I live in the area most immediately threatened by fracking. Last week the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications discussed its progress report with representatives of the EPA. I have described CDM Smith as a cheerleader for the fracking industry. My major concern is that it is the lead company for the study. How can any reasonable person expect a report to be truly independent if the lead company producing it is a cheerleader for the fracking industry? It was a bad choice as the lead company. The EPA has indicated that it signed a conflict of interest declaration. I could sign 100 documents, but I would remain implacably opposed to fracking because I know of the damage it will do. Last Friday, when the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Simon Harris, attended the opening of the MacDiarmáda summer school at Seán MacDiarmáda's cottage, outside Kiltyclogher, County Leitrim, he looked out at the beautiful drumlin landscape of hills, valleys and rivers. Imagine that beautiful place covered with fracking pads. Irrespective of the health impacts, we will never be able to restore that environment if it is savaged in the cause of making money for hydraulic fracturers.

The Deputy has noted that CDM Smith Ireland Limited and its sub-consultants signed a conflict of interest declaration as part of the tender documentation. The declaration stated it had no conflict that would impair its ability to meet the requirements as specified, whether through personal interest, current or prospective contractual obligations or any other activity or association.

Energy Conservation

Michael Colreavy

Question:

112. Deputy Michael Colreavy asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if there will be a proposed increase in funding for retrofitting, as part of the energy White Paper. [23136/15]

The overarching objective of the Government's energy policy is to ensure secure and sustainable supplies of competitively priced energy to all consumers. My Department is working on a new energy policy White Paper which will set out Ireland’s energy policy up to 2030. I aim to publish the White Paper in October. In regard to its energy efficiency aspects, eliminating waste and the targeting of improved energy efficiency will be key to our transition to a sustainable energy future.

Through the better energy homes programme which provides grant support for householders who undertake energy efficiency improvements, 167,443 homes have undertaken energy efficiency retrofits, with a total Government investment of €174 million.

Additionally, under the Better Energy Warmer Homes programme, 115,223 homes in energy poverty have received free energy efficiency improvements with a total Government investment of almost €138 million. A further 9,644 homes have received energy efficiency upgrades under the Better Energy Areas and Communities Programme, with €46.8 million of Government funds invested. In total, almost one sixth of all homes in the country have received a Government-supported energy efficiency upgrade.

In March of this year, I announced an increase in the level of financial support available to householders under the Better Energy Warmer Homes scheme. The cash value of every grant available to householders was increased by between 25% and 50%. In addition, a bonus payment was introduced which sees householders receive a bonus payment if they complete three or more energy efficiency improvements. The minimum grant threshold was also abolished.

Resourcing of measures that will be set out in the energy policy White Paper will be considered in the context of the normal budgetary discussions with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and as the development of the White Paper is finalised over the coming months.

I thank the Minister for his reply. Retrofitting houses is certainly a good investment and any increase in the amount going towards it will certainly pay big dividends, not just for those whose houses are being retrofitted but also for society at large. It is guaranteed to reduce energy dependence.

The need for such work should be assessed, particularly in rural houses many of which have non-cavity walls. We should try to gauge the scale involved in order that we can measure the percentage needed to hit the target.

I had a question on the energy area earlier. The Minister said the White Paper will be produced in September but will it include a review of the effectiveness of the Commission for Energy Regulation? I have tried to ask the Minister that question many times but the Ceann Comhairle rules it out saying it is not the Minister's responsibility. However, it clearly is the Minister's responsibility to invigilate the CER and see if it is delivering.

We have almost 3,000 excess deaths each year due to fuel poverty, which affects many people. The retrofitting programme is helping but a significant number of people spend up to 10% of their income or more on fuel. Given that they are enduring fuel poverty, will the Minister re-examine the CER? In correspondence with the Minister I indicated that the mathematical model the CER uses for setting gas and other fuel prices needs to be looked at. As the Minister knows, it has been criticised in some economic journals. I have received voluminous correspondence from the CER, but a thorough invigilation of the commission should be at the heart of the Minister's White Paper.

Retrofitting should apply to some of the old local authority estates, both urban and rural. Deputy Colreavy mentioned non-cavity walls and some of those houses were built as mass concrete buildings 50 or 60 years ago. There is a major issue of heat loss, even with some of the newer local authority housing estates that were built 25 or 30 years ago. Any retrofitting programme should apply to those houses in the first instance because it would help to deal with fuel poverty, as Deputy Broughan mentioned. Such houses need to be fully retrofitted at this stage. I have seen graphs and figures from experts in this field, which show that if a house is properly retrofitted, heat loss can be reduced by one third or even a half. It will have a big impact on fuel consumption and, consequently, energy needs.

An extraordinary number of houses in the country have been built with 9 in. cavity walls. Such a cavity can carry damp across. The outside walls may be pebble-dashed, but it makes such a difference to those houses if a 30 mm baton is introduced on the inside, with insulation and a new slab over it.

It is possible to paint over the slab. If a builder does it properly it makes the house far more snug. A 9 in. cavity was not designed to keep out the moisture or cold, yet an extraordinary number of houses have been built with 9 in. cavities. They were still at it right up to the end of the 1980s.

Certainly Deputy Wallace's expertise is welcome and I have taken a note of what he has said. It is most helpful, as are the insights from other colleagues. As Deputy Colreavy said, it is right that we should have a sense, as best we can, of the extent of the issue. Deputy Moynihan also mentioned the point about older local authority schemes.

The Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland does a great deal of work in this area. As I mentioned earlier, I re-launched the Better Energy Warmer Homes initiative last March. The SEAI is progressing a number of innovations which could assist in respect of the point the Deputies have made. These include the idea of a better green energy star - a quality rating system; the proposal that we should engage more with local actors, such as credit unions and local authorities and so on, to promote community level action; that we should target an advertising campaign for solar, thermal, boiler and heating controls; that we should target public relations and radio promotions in areas of low coverage - Leinster is an area of low coverage, by the way; that we should target home owners who have done shallow retrofits or those with expired applications; that we should review a declaration of works; that we should carry out a survey of expired home owner grants, and so on. These practical innovations from the SEAI would address many of the issues that have been raised in the House.

I had not anticipated the question on the regulator. The regulator is an independent statutory body. If Deputy Broughan has any commentary or insights on the matter or on any aspect of our energy policy I would be happy to consider them in the context of the energy White Paper. We are getting close now, as Deputy Colreavy and Deputy Moynihan will know, because they have debated this issue in the House before. I would certainly be glad to hear any insights that the Deputies have in respect of any of these matters for the energy White Paper.

Questions No. 113 and 114 replied to with Written Answers.

Hydraulic Fracturing Policy

Mick Wallace

Question:

115. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources to set out his views on whether it is appropriate that the lead company, details supplied, employed to carry out the Environmental Protection Agency two-year study into hydraulic fracturing has been identified as pro-hydraulic fracturing by a number of environmental experts; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23135/15]

This is much like the last question. I will try to avoid repetition, but it will be difficult. I will reiterate my point. The people who say fracking is not dangerous stand to profit from it, more often than not. A serious amount of research says otherwise. I appeal to the Minister to think seriously before even dreaming of allowing fracking to commence in Ireland. It is a no-brainer.

There is no prospect of there being any developments in this area for quite some considerable time. The Environmental Protection Agency commissioned study is under way. It will not report before the middle of 2016. I would have thought that at that stage we would require a significant period either for me or whoever has the honour of being in this position as Minister to review and consider the matter then, as well as debate it in the House. In that sense I should reassure the Deputy.

As we have said already, the research programme is managed by the EPA. It is co-funded by the EPA, my Department and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency. There is oversight from a broad-based steering committee that includes my Department.

The consortium I mentioned earlier includes the British Geological Survey, University College Dublin, Ulster University, Queen's University Belfast, AMEC, Foster Wheeler and Philip Lee Solicitors. They all have expertise that they bring to the table. It will be open to those bodies to collaborate and work together on the research and evidence. Ultimately, it will be for the EPA to ensure a report is produced. In the circumstances, I believe we should allow that work to conclude. We should have confidence that it will be robust. We can evaluate the work in due course when it comes through, but not before the middle of 2016 at the earliest.

We have a big problem in politics in how we make decisions, because we work from one election to the next. On top of that, we have an extra-large problem when it comes to addressing climate change in that none of us sees it as directing us in the near future. We do not feel it will affect us in the near future and that is a problem for us.

It is an attitude that has hampered progress. The Minister pointed out that he might not be in this role in the next Government. However, he has an opportunity now to leave his mark. The country is screaming out for someone to take up a position, which the Minister can do, of saying it is about time we took climate change seriously. If he has read Naomi Klein's book, This Changes Everything, the Minister will know its contents are frightening. The Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Bill the Government is introducing is a pittance and does not address the problems we are facing in the long term. Sadly, too much of our decision-making is short-termist. We struggle to make plans for the long term whenever doing so will cost money.

I largely agree with the Deputy's comments. The problem from the point of view of political discourse is that with an issue like climate change, people too often regard it as something to be dealt with by someone else, somewhere else and at some other time. In fact, it is an issue that affects all of us, and it is already impacting our planet and must be addressed.

To direct the Deputy to an indication of my bona fides on the matter, I delivered an interim presentation on 3 June on the White Paper on climate change. My speech is on the Department's website and, as I recall, I also tweeted it. I might tweet it again this afternoon. I ask the Deputy to take a look at that speech, in which I referred to some of the issues he has raised. As I said, addressing climate change is the greatest project of our time. There is no bigger issue.

It is a huge disappointment that the Government has refused to include targets for the period from 2030 to 2050 in the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Bill. The Scottish Parliament has introduced targets that are double ours after 2020. The Minister says he is seriously interested in this issue. I certainly will have a look at the speech to which he referred. Does he seriously maintain that the climate change Bill that is about to go through the House is good enough to deal with the challenges we face?

The EPA report on fracking does not include consideration of an issue that will have to be taken into consideration by the political system, namely, the negotiations on the transatlantic trade and investment partnership, TTIP, and the investor-state dispute settlement, ISDS, system. Particularly under the ISDS system, energy companies will undoubtedly threaten governments. If they are not given consent even to explore, they will certainly look for the money back and may even charge governments for the potential profits they will claim they might have been able to make had permission been granted. That is a factor which must be taken into account by the political system. The EPA cannot do so because the matter is not within its brief.

I will take on board Deputy Colreavy's insights in regard to TTIP and ISDS. To answer Deputy Wallace's question, I support the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly, in bringing forward the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Bill. That legislation constitutes progress. In fairness, however, notwithstanding its importance, it is only one element of what we need to do. The notion that putting targets into legislation would, by definition, make those targets happen is a little naive. The international targets up to 2020 are legally binding and it will be a real challenge for us to meet them. In the coming months, especially after the meeting in Paris in December, we will see the process kick in whereby individual member states are given targets for 2030. They will be very challenging and demanding targets and we are obliged to comply with them. That will require a collective effort by the whole country and the whole political system if the challenge of climate change is to be addressed properly.

National Broadband Plan Implementation

Michael Colreavy

Question:

116. Deputy Michael Colreavy asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the number of homes estimated to have no access to high-speed broadband. [23140/15]

Will the Minister indicate the number of houses that require retrofitting? I would also like to know the number of houses and businesses that do not have access to high-speed broadband. Where are we at in terms of establishing that level of need?

The national broadband plan aims to ensure every citizen and business, regardless of location, has access to a high quality, high speed broadband service. This will be achieved through a combination of commercial investments and a State-led intervention in areas where commercial services will not be provided. I will make the reply available to Deputies rather than read it all because time is short. As they will be aware, a mapping exercise is in place. As a matter of fact, every single home and premises can be accessed and identified on the map which is interactive. Of course, it does not have a facility to count all of them, which is the issue the Deputy is raising, but we think there is something in the order of 2.3 million addresses in Ireland, approximately 1.6 million of which are expected to be served, in terms of the indications the commercial sector has given, with high speed broadband being provided by commercial companies in the next 18 months. That is the commitment which has been given by the commercial sector. I understand high speed services are available to approximately 1.2 million addresses. As the Deputy knows and as I mentioned earlier, eircom recently made a further announcement on an investment to cover a further 300,000 addresses. I can tell the Deputy that my Department is rigorously examining the assurances from eircom and other operators in respect of their plans. This is a requirement to be met by all operators. While we take seriously what the commercial sector states to us, we do not take it at face value. We look carefully at what it is stating to us in order that we can ensure the private sector will do what is commercially viable and the intervention required to be made by the State will only be made in those areas where the commercial sector will not go. We want to minimise the cost to the Exchequer and the system of the broadband plan. As I mentioned earlier to Deputy Michael Moynihan, the plan is progressing very well. We will have a full intervention strategy going to the Government in July. I hope we will be in the pre-notification process in respect of State aid rules to get to the procurement process by the end of the year.

I do not think we can rely exclusively on private companies to give us the information we need. I suggested five or six weeks ago that it would make sense to have an online system in order that, if people could not access high speed broadband, they could log the issue and the Department would have the information and a rolling count. It would be a simple, inexpensive solution to the problem. Of course, the private companies have a role to play, but members of the public are the ones who know whether they need and have access to high speed broadband. Has anything been done to develop this suggestion?

As I understand it, the Deputy is proposing a database to monitor the availability of broadband services. It would not, in the first instance, be the responsibility of the Department. ComReg also has certain statutory duties and a role pursuant to legislation. My focus is on spreading access to high speed broadband across the country, in particular rural areas where the commercial sector ultimately will not go. I am concentrating on ensuring every home and premises in the country will have access to broadband. I am not sure setting up a database would be the best use of constrained resources in the Department, but I will take on board what the Deputy has said. It is important that we have information when we pursue these policy options.

Top
Share