Vol. 1043 No. 1
77. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications if he will provide details on the practice of virement within his Department; and provide specific detail of instances where funding was transferred from one fund to another in his Department, in each year since he took office. [41530/23]
Politics 101 in Ireland is to launch a multimillion euro budget for a sector in society that is significantly suffering, accompanied with plenty of media and loads of photographs, and then make the application process for that money so tied up in red tape and bureaucracy that it is almost impossible for community groups or citizens who are in trouble to draw down the money. Funds are then siphoned from such projects and put into a pet project of the Government. This is, unfortunately, what is happening under the Department of the Minister, Deputy Ryan. Money that is earmarked for just transitions and the agricultural sector, which is suffering, are being siphoned off for pet projects of Green Party Ministers. Will the Minister of State ensure those who really need funding and are suffering in terms of just transition actually get the funding they need?
Annual Exchequer funding provided by my Department is allocated to various programmes and subheads in the Revised Estimates and approved by Dáil Éireann. For practical reasons, as set out in public financial procedures, there are two arrangements to vary the allocations between subheads. These are the passing of a technical Supplementary Estimate by Dáil Éireann or a process called virement, which is usually used for lower value transfers and requires the prior approval of the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform.
The total amount transferred in my Department through the virement process in the three years 2020 to 2022 was €3 million in capital and €2.5 million in current funding. These virements represent 0.15% of my Department's total budget allocation over the three-year period. In all cases, prior approval was obtained from the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform before proceeding with the transfer of funds. The detailed information requested regarding funds vired between different subheads in my Department will be provided to the Deputy directly.
Information Aontú received from the Department in December shows that the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications took €1.5 million that was intended to ensure there was a just transition and used it to support the climate finance activities of the United Nations instead. While those figures may seem small fry to the Minister of State, in reality they are massive figures for those who are suffering, in particular those in the midlands and other regional and rural areas around the country.
In the same month, the Minister took a €500,000 underspend from the communities retrofit scheme and put it into a media campaign called Reduce Your Use. It is clear to me that money which has been assigned for good purposes to help people is being redirected and siphoned off for pet projects that do not help to address the significant needs in communities around the country. Does the Minister of State not believe that has to change?
I consider that a very serious, misleading and ludicrous accusation. To say that money is being siphoned from one project to a pet project is ridiculous. Some 99.85% of the budget was spent according to how it was primarily allocated. Some 0.15% of the budget was moved between different subheads. This is a small movement of money which happens when, for administrative reasons, money cannot be spent for whatever reason on any particular project.
In order to transfer money from one budget to another, the Minister for Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform has to be contacted and approve the transfer. The Deputy is going far too far in suggesting that there is some kind of malice at play here. I really think it is beneath him to come out with that kind of thing.
Again, the Minister of State has to take this seriously. I have given him two financially factual elements of money being redirected by his Department. I will give him another one. Brexit Adjustment Reserve, BAR, funding was given by the European Union to mitigate the impacts of Brexit. It was for farmers and fishermen and fisherwomen across the country who have been decimated by Brexit and the policies of the Government with regards to rural and regional Ireland. The Government made an application for €150 million of that funding to be redirected to other uses. The use it focused on was the roll-out of climate measures.
BAR funding was designed to help people in agriculture who are in real difficulty, many of whom earn salaries lower than the average industrial wage. The Government created a system where money was not drawn down and then found another use for it which was not its initial desired use by the European Union. That is big money. It is factually true to call it ludicrous. To dismiss it dismisses the real needs of real farming communities around the country, which is not unusual in terms of the Green Party. I am sure the Acting Chairman would agree with me, if he had the chance.
Absolutely, but you would want-----
I thank the Deputy. He referred to a sum of €150 million being transferred. The total amount of money transferred over three years was just over €5 million. I am not sure where the figure of €150 million is coming from. I wonder if he is looking at a different table. We are talking about-----
The Government-----
No across the room talk. I am sorry. Do not try that old trick that has been tried too often in this House, where you drag in the question and the answer and we have a conversation. The Minister to reply. That is it.
We are talking about 0.15% of the budget. We are not talking about €150 million. The total amount of money over three years is €5.5 million. It is being transferred for administrative reasons where it was not possible to complete all of the expenditure on one subhead of a project and, therefore, was moved to another subhead. I have seen the Deputy use this technique with other Departments. He has found a trick. He says, "Oh, you moved money from these guys and gave it to these guys" and he sees some malice there. I can see right through that. That is just rank populism. Everybody can see that.
Is €5 million from farmers rank populism?
I am sorry-----
I am sorry to have to listen to it.
The Deputy is abusing the House and he knows that.
Not at all.
We will move on. We must back track as we have found the necessary authorisation for Question No. 73.
73. Deputy Seán Haughey asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications if there has been an increase in applications to the domestic solar PV programme since the 0% VAT on the supply and installation of solar panels was introduced. [41861/23]
The introduction of 0% VAT on the supply and installation of solar panels was a very constructive move that encouraged people to install domestic solar PV panels. Will the Minister outline the additional demand and the costs associated with that? Is the Department in a position to meet the increased demand?
The month of May 2023 saw the highest number of solar PV applications since the launch of the scheme, with 2,862 new applications accepted. This was a 55% increase on the previous month and a 104% increase on May 2022. There has been sustained high demand on the scheme since then, with August 2023 having a 54% increase over August 2022. This follows the amendment to the Finance Bill 2023 to apply a 0% VAT rate for the "supply and installation of solar panels on domestic premises" effective from 15 May 2023. The domestic solar PV grant scheme under the microgeneration support scheme is administered by the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI. The scheme came into operation in February 2022 and built on the success of the previous pilot version of the grant scheme.
Since 2018, the SEAI has supported the installation of domestic solar PV systems for more than 31,789 homes, with demand for the domestic solar PV grant increasing significantly throughout 2022. As part of the transition between schemes, the minimum BER C3 requirement was removed and the eligibility of the homes was changed from those built prior to 2011 to those built prior to 2021. As of the end of August 2023, 12,887 homes have been supported at a total cost of €30.2 million. The total numbers for 2022 have already been surpassed, with the high level of demand expected to continue for the remainder of 2023 and into 2024. This indicates that the scheme is working extremely well and that citizens are recognising the benefits of investing in solar PV.
The figures are very encouraging - an increase in applications of 104%. We know that in 2022, there were 16,800 applications, of which just over 10,000 were supported, generating 46.5 MW of power. With an increase of 104%, How quickly is the Department able to turn around applications? Last year, 10,000 out of 16,800 applications were approved. How many applications is the Department approving and how quickly is it able to approve them? Will it be able to meet the level of demand? Is the funding in place to allow the Department to do that or will it have to seek further funding? Most significantly, because the interest is there and the Department needs to maintain goodwill, is the Department able to turn around those applications quickly enough to allow people to turn from applicants to those receiving grants?
One good thing about solar PV is that it is very quick to deploy. It only takes a couple of days to install it and it does not take a lot of experience or training to put up the panels. Obviously, you need a registered electrical contractor to connect it to your system but it is a rapidly deployable technology, which is why 30,000 homes have already received it.
It is not just the 0% VAT rate that causes people to get it. It is also because of the planning permission exemption, the grant you can get and the fact you can sell your power back to the grid. We have no problem with demand. Demand is massively increasing all the time and, so far, we are managing with supply and people are able to get solar panels.
The Department of Education has a project to put a solar panel on every school. A solar revolution is taking place across the country. This is an area of great success for the Government and something that is very visible because it can be seen around the country.
There are very significant challenges and hugely ambitious targets to meet a target of a 51% reduction in overall greenhouse gas emissions for 2030. This is a very constructive and helpful measure in that regard. As the Minister of State noted, being able to sell on the electricity produced, the €200 tax exemption and various other things are all encouraging. Is the Department planning any further improvements in the scheme in the budget? For example, there is a very successful scheme that insulates the homes of more vulnerable people, for example, windows, insulation and draught excluding but it does not involve the installation of solar panels. Is the Department looking at this as an option? Is it looking at further improvements in the scheme based on the level of interest it is seeing?
I believe there is already a solar scheme for the medically vulnerable. I do not have the details of the progress of that but it is already being deployed. There will be more solar schemes in the budget and the Deputy is welcome to make any suggestions. The budget has not yet been announced. The schemes will continue to be supported. The public sector is leading by example. I have been working closely with the HSE and expect that it will have solar panels on every one of its buildings. It is the largest sector in the public service with the largest estate and has a requirement for power throughout the year, unlike schools, which are shut in the summer. Solar power is a complement to other forms of renewable generation. On a still day when the wind is not blowing, it is good to have a basket of different electricity sources, which provides resilience for our power system. Earlier this year, I saw the SEAI reported that the amount of solar energy being generated each month was doubling from month to month, so we are seeing a significant contribution to the level of the individual power station to our grid from solar. It is making a significant contribution.
74. Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications his plans to provide funding to increase the number of traffic-sited air pollution monitors in towns and cities, particularly on high-traffic streets, to gather data to help raise awareness of the harm of car fumes and the need for modal shift to active and public transport, and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41651/23]
I wish to ask the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications about his plans to provide funding to increase the number of traffic-sited air pollution monitors in towns and cities, particularly on high-traffic streets, to gather data to help raise awareness of the harm of car fumes and the need for modal shift to active and public transport, and if he will make a statement on the matter.
National air quality monitoring stations are operated, maintained and monitored by the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, under the ambient air quality monitoring programme. My Department has provided funding for a significant upgrade to the network in recent years and the number of monitoring stations has increased from 29 in 2017 to 114 today. The expansion will be complete when the remaining stations are connected in 2023, which will bring the final number of stations to 116.
All stations collect air quality data for a range of pollutants to provide information to the public and for assessment against European legal limit values and World Health Organization guideline values. The EPA produces an annual report on air quality in Ireland that provides an overview of our air quality and key issues that impact on it. Details of the locations of all monitoring stations currently in operation along with real-time and historic data from each station can be found at the website, www.airquality.ie.
The LIFE EMERALD project, which commenced in 2021, will use the information from our monitoring network to develop a modelled air quality map of the whole country, filling in the gaps between the current stations. As such, no additional permanent stations will be required, with funding being focused instead on measures required to reduce the drivers of pollution, including those contained in the report of the urban transport-related air pollution working group, which was established to consider the key actions required to reduce transport-related pollution in our urban areas.
Notwithstanding the Minister of State's answer and the good work that is being done in the roll-out of air quality monitoring stations across the country, we are looking at a total of 116, which is not a lot given the number of urban areas we have.
The latest EPA report highlighted localised concerns around air quality and I do not believe the monitoring system we have now is really picking up the real situation that is there. It needs to be looked at. The Minister of State mentioned the urban transport related working group. I am not sure how it can make recommendations or decisions unless it has very good monitoring. As the Minister of State knows, this is a very serious public health issue. Bad air quality increases the risk of neurodegenerative diseases like dementia and Alzheimer's disease, and exposure to car fumes reduces the lung function in children and causes childhood asthma. Pollution from traffic also increases the risk of stroke as well. This is an extremely serious issue and our monitoring needs to be appropriate and show us what is really happening in our towns and cities.
We need to acknowledge that Ireland has a higher incidence of respiratory illness than other countries in Europe. The European Environment Agency has reported we have 1,300 premature deaths a year from breathing illnesses and we all know of people with COPD and relatives of ours who have had traumatic deaths as a result of air quality. It is hidden. We dealt with the visible air quality problems of smog and indoor smoke in pubs, but now we are dealing with PM 2.5, which is an invisible form of pollutant and it is harder to get people motivated around something they cannot see. The new solid fuel regulations will have a dramatic effect on the number of people who are dying prematurely. I want to see local authorities being properly trained, financed, and staffed to be able to carry out their enforcement function around air quality. It is localised. There are reports of problems with smoke and with the smell of burning plastic and so on on the streets around Ireland and it is up to the local authorities to enforce the law on that.
Excellent work is being done in the area of smoky fuels by this Government. We really are turning a corner there but we are not looking closely enough at the air quality issue due to traffic. The analysis in the EPA report simply is not there and it needs to be there to instill confidence in the population that this is being monitored properly. That does not come from the EPA report with respect to traffic air quality. It is a very serious issue. We need to apply as much rigour to the traffic air quality issue as we have done to that of smoky fuels. Will the Minister of State take these concerns back and look at this in more detail? I do not believe it is appropriate that we would cease the roll-out of air quality monitoring as it relates to traffic at this point. There is a lot more work to do.
I refer the Deputy to the report of the urban transport related air pollution working group to see what its analysis of transport-related emissions are. There is a particular problem around schools to do with idling and the fact there are young children with growing brains hanging around outside schools while a lot of vehicles pollute those areas. I will be meeting with the EPA shortly and will raise the Deputy's concerns around air quality from traffic, its monitoring in urban areas, and what can be done about it.
75. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications on what date he or his office received, in any format, the review of security of energy supply, the reason, or reasons, for the delay in his publication of the review of security of energy supply; if he misled Dáil Éireann in June 2023 with comments on his commitment to publish the review; if he will explain why these commitments were not met; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41873/23]
My question is regarding the review of the security of energy supply. Will the Minister of State provide timelines to the House on when the review was provided to his office or to the Department and explain why there was a delay in publishing the review?
My Department is currently finalising the energy security package which will address the energy security challenges facing Ireland. This package is focused on the period to 2030, but in the broader context of transitioning Ireland to net-zero emissions by 2050. The Government’s policy objectives are to ensure energy is affordable, sustainable and secure, as well as in line with Ireland’s climate targets and statutory carbon budgets. Underpinned by these objectives, the energy security of supply review considered the risks to both natural gas, electricity and oil supplies, and a range of mitigation measures, including the need for additional capacity of indigenous renewable energy but also energy imports, energy storage, fuel diversification, demand-side response and renewable gases such as hydrogen. The governance structures supporting the energy system, including oversight and accountability reforms, were also considered.
Six key pillars of analysis underpinned the overall response and recommendations and these will be presented in the forthcoming energy security package. These include the review of the security of energy supply of Ireland’s electricity and natural gas networks; the studies by Cambridge Economic Policy Associates, CEPA, to support this; and the 450+ consultation responses to this analysis; the independent review of the security of electricity supply, which is the McCarthy report; the conclusions of the national energy security framework, NESF; the Government-hosted summit on energy independence in July 2023; the climate action plan, CAP; and ongoing policy analysis on oil security of supply. I have continued to engage with my Department officials over the summer to finalise the package and I have committed to bringing my energy security recommendations to Government for consideration in the coming weeks.
I thank the Minister of State for the response. I am flabbergasted that there has not been more detail as to why there was such a delay. The Minister, Deputy Ryan, stood here in June and gave a commitment to the House that the review would be published much sooner. It is a pity he is not here himself this morning and I am not sure of the reason for that. Yet, here we are heading into October and we have not seen the review yet. This is a long-running saga. There is a strong feeling in my constituency that this delay is linked to the Shannon LNG application recently decided on by An Bord Pleanála. As the Minister of State knows, there was a strong reference in that to the delay of the publication of this particular review. I reiterate that it is a pity the Minister is not here to answer for himself but I put the question to the Minister of State. When was the first draft of this review received by any officials in the Department?
The Minister, Deputy Ryan, is not here because he is representing Ireland in Paris by chairing a meeting of the international energy agency on critical raw materials.
This is a complex piece of work. It is a long-term strategy on how to protect Ireland's security of supply, not just of gas but also of electricity and oil. Therefore, a lot of work is required to get it right. The Minister, Deputy Ryan, said in June that he expected the review would be published by the following month. That was his expectation at the time and I am sure he is disappointed it took longer, but it is important it is done right. It will be provided very shortly and will provide us with clear guidelines into the future. There is a real future for the Tarbert terminal. It has a very good connection to the grid. It is in the Shannon Estuary. It will be the centre of future long-term sustainable energy and will provide economic activity and jobs in the region.
You can understand the scepticism of some people when they hear that response. They hear that the Minister told the House in June that he expected to be able to publish the review within the coming months and here we are heading into October and there is no sign of it. This was critical and played an integral part in the decision of An Bord Pleanála to refuse planning for Shannon LNG. The State has been opened up to potential litigation because of the process here. It does not sit well with me. This entire process requires examination. Since he assumed office in June 2020, I would like to know how many other planning applications the Minister has intervened in. It is important the House is informed of that. We know the Minister intervened in the Shannon LNG application. How many other applications did he intervene in? Does the Minister of State feels the State is now potentially at risk of litigation as a result of this process, due to the delays in the publication of this review and the integral part it has played in the outcome of that planning application?
All the correct procedures were followed. As the Deputy is aware, the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications is a prescribed body for making submissions on planning applications and it is natural on such a large planning application that the Department made a submission. The decision for An Bord Pleanála was straightforward and it followed the correct rules. I do not think there is any room for legal challenge and I do not expect there to be a challenge to what happened. If there is, I expect that challenge to fail.
There really is a great opportunity for north Kerry and the whole region to achieve a long-term and successful energy future with economic activity based on renewable energy and storage. That will happen in the area. It will not happen by looking back to fossil fuels. That is not the way it is going to work.
78. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications to confirm that the Irish Government will support the establishment of a loss and damage fund at COP28 in November that is obligatory, compensatory, grant based and non-debt-creating, and is funded by the wealthiest states and corporations that have increased greenhouse gases in our atmosphere; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41790/23]
Will the Minister of State confirm that the Irish Government will support the establishment of an obligatory, compensatory and grant-based loss and damage fund at COP28 that does not include market-based mechanisms like the Global Shield? Crucially, will the Government push for it to be available to all countries in the global south impacted by climate change and for contributions to be the sole responsibility of the governments and corporations of the global north, which have historic responsibility for the climate crisis?
Loss and damage is a key priority of Ireland's climate diplomacy. For the last year, Ireland has been working on the transitional committee for loss and damage to develop strong recommendations on the new funding arrangements. Ireland is committed to delivering a strong outcome on loss and damage at COP28, including the operationalisation of new funding arrangements for assisting vulnerable developing countries to respond to the impacts of climate change. The scale of finance needs for loss and damage is huge and we need contributions from all government parties that are in a position to contribute, as well as the private sector and philanthropies. It is a key priority for Ireland that innovative approaches such as capturing revenue from fossil fuel intensive activities be fully explored. It is envisioned within the transitional committee that grants will be an important component of the new fund and debt sustainability must be a key consideration given the difficult situation of many developing countries in terms of their debt profile in the context of climate disasters. Ireland’s main priority in this process is to deliver for the most vulnerable countries, recognising that countries that have contributed the least to global emissions are often the countries most affected by the impacts of climate change.
That is a bit of a worrying response. I am sure the Minister of State understands why. It all sounds very good - the Government says it is committed to loss and damage and doing good work and so on - but the Minister of State did not answer the question and the language contained in the answer, which I presume was prepared by civil servants, points towards the Irish Government not pushing for this fund to be 100% grant-based or for it to be available for all countries in the global south impacted by climate change and not just those described as "the most vulnerable countries". What is happening is nothing more than a cynical game of divide and rule that seeks to sow divisions among the countries of the global south in order to delay for as long as possible the establishment of a loss and damage fund because the longer it takes to set it up, the lower the contributions from rich countries and the wealthy corporations responsible for this crisis will be. We know that 100 western corporations produced 71% of global greenhouse gases since 1988. They have to be made pay for that in a way that benefits all of those affected, which is people in the global south.
Ireland has been involved in previous loss and damage operations and will do the same again this time. We are considered to be a high-ambition country and one that puts social justice at the core of what it pushes for. There will be grants. We will be pushing for that angle. We will also try to ensure that the countries that need the money get it. We have to recognise that in order to achieve decarbonisation, we need a fundamental transformation of our economies. This will require participation not only from governments but also from the private sector where that is available. We are not going to lock that out. This is going to take action from all sides. We have a good track record in this area. We would be considered one of the better performing countries. We will continue in that vein in the future.
If we are a high-ambition country, will the Minister of State answer my question positively and give a commitment that Ireland will push for loss and damage to be available for all of the countries in the global south impacted by climate change? Some of the worst impacts of the climate crisis and some of the worst poverty exist side by side in countries such as India and South Africa but northern governments, including in the European Union, are insisting not only that these countries will get nothing from a loss and damage fund, but also that they will have to contribute to it. This is despite the fact that they have no historic responsibility for the climate crisis and are the victims of it in the same way as they were the victims of western colonialism. If Deputy Smyth, who is a Green Party Minister of State, wants us to be a high-ambition country, will he not insist that all developing countries be included as beneficiaries of the loss and damage fund and advocate for new taxes on the big corporate polluters in order to pay these justified reparations to the people of the global south? We should hit those responsible, not working classes in the global north.
It is a question of the extent to which we target the funding. Should we target the funding towards those who need it most or should we make it more universal, spreading it more thinly among a larger number of countries? Clearly, somebody has to draw a line at some point and decide which countries are developing countries and which are countries that require finance. Ireland's financing for loss and damage has historically been primarily grant based. It has been channelled through numerous bilateral and civil society mechanisms as well as through multilateral funds such as the Green Climate Fund and the Global Environment Facility. I do not believe that will change in the future. It is primarily a grant-based system and it is likely to remain that way.
79. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications to report on his most recent engagements with An Post management; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41156/23]
I thank the Minister of State for being here. This question relates to any recent meetings he has had with An Post and any proposals or plans that body has to make changes and improvements into the future. I will also be bringing up the issue of publicity post in my supplementary questions.
I have engaged with the management of An Post on five occasions since I was appointed late last year. In addition to regular engagement between my office and An Post, the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, last spoke formally to the CEO of An Post on Wednesday, 5 July at a meeting held in Leinster House. There is frequent and ongoing engagement with An Post management and staff at official level on all matters of mutual interest. This includes regular scheduled quarterly meetings and governance meetings, in addition to ad hoc engagement on issues arising.
The Government is committed to a sustainable An Post and post office network as a key component of economic and social infrastructure throughout Ireland. Meaningful engagement between the company’s management and Department officials is crucial as the company moves to put itself back on a stable financial footing after the combined impacts of Brexit and the pandemic. This engagement also helps An Post to develop strategies to grow its business against a backdrop of e-substitution of mail and the growth of a cashless society.
I thank the Minister of State. As I said, I am interested in the issue of publicity post. It is something I have raised with An Post. I am sure the Minister of State is aware that there are 272 separate delivery zones across the country. I am not sure when they were put in place but they seem quite archaic and arbitrary. Some of them cross county bounds and some businesses tell me they find them quite difficult to use. I have suggested to An Post that it should make them smaller, more targeted and more focused so that they could be used in a better way. Has the Minister of State discussed this with An Post in his discussions with the company and, if not, will he do so?
I appreciate the Deputy raising this matter. We briefly discussed it this week and, following that discussion, my office has engaged with An Post on the issue of publicity post. An Post informs me that it offers a publicity post service that allows businesses, charities and other organisations to have material delivered with the regular post. As the Deputy said, the service is split into 272 separate delivery areas, which can be used to deliver leaflets to a specific area to better target geographical areas. It has told me that there are no current plans to change these areas but that they are under constant review. It has also said that if there are anomalies, it is happy to look at them on a case-by-case basis. If there are areas in which there are discrepancies, the Deputy can pass details on to my office or to An Post, which is happy to engage on the matter, so that we can get him a more detailed response on any anomalies that may exist.
Does the Minister of State know when these particular postal areas were put in place? I have seen various dates like 1917, and so on, being mentioned. If the Minister of State looks at any map, he can see that in many instances these areas are arbitrary and unwieldy. There does not seem to be any rationale behind them. They cross county bounds. As an answer to the Minister of State's response, I could suggest that the whole country is an anomaly in this respect. I ask the Minister of State to encourage An Post to review the entire issue. When I brought this issue up with An Post in the past, I was told that it was reviewing the matter and that there were plans to make changes, but nothing happened. Businesses tell me that it is a very awkward arrangement. It should not be beyond the bounds of possibility now to make the change I am suggesting. If the areas could be made smaller and more focused, businesses and others, including politicians, could use the An Post service in a more focused and direct way. I ask the Minister of State to go back to An Post to have that conversation with it and perhaps encourage it to make this change. An Post is otherwise doing great work across a whole range of other areas, but this is the one area in which it is falling down.
I thank the Deputy and I appreciate what he has said. There are clearly discrepancies with respect to the feedback which has been given to him. We have engaged with An Post overnight and this morning. It is something I will raise with the company when I meet it again at the next formal engagement. I will try to get some of the history and backdrop to the publicity post service and the separate delivery areas which are there. Now that we have discussed the matter in the Chamber, I ask the Deputy to send me some specific examples of the discrepancies and anomalies which exist, as such details would be useful. This is not something upon which I have received regular feedback, to be honest, apart from what the Deputy has raised but I do not dispute the issue he has raised. I will be happy to raise it further with An Post.
80. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications what engagement he or his Department have had with a company (details supplied) with regard to plans for the building of three new data centres in Dublin; if he or his Department has raised energy security concerns in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41745/23]
I have a very specific question. What engagement, if any, has the Minister of State's Department had with the company which intends to build three more data centres in Dublin? Equally importantly, what issues, if any, have been raised by his Department on energy security concerns given the plans for the three data centres, and the cumulative effect of these centres and all of the other centres?
Under the Climate Action Plan 2023, the Government has committed to a new demand-side strategy for electricity and gas being put in place. The Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, commenced work in this area by publishing a call for evidence and consultation paper in June 2023. The closing date has now passed. The CRU is currently analysing all responses received. In addition to formal consultation, officials in my Department regularly engage with relevant stakeholders, particularly in the context of the energy demand strategy currently being conducted by the CRU. I have been informed by the CRU that it expects that the demand-side strategy will be delivered by the first quarter of 2024, with the aim of 20% to 30% of electricity demand to be flexible by 2030, thereby facilitating active participation by citizens and businesses in the energy market.
Large energy users, LEUs, will be expected to make up a higher proportional contribution to the target as they are making up a high proportion of the increase in electricity demand. A review of the gas and electricity connection policies for new LEUs is being carried out to ensure any new connections are not causing energy security challenges and are in line with our sectoral emission ceilings. Demand-side flexibility will be crucial to fully utilise the ambitious renewable generation that is being developed. LEUs are important stakeholders in our decarbonisation and renewable energy ambitions. My officials regularly engage with them as part of a wider collaboration between industry, system operators, regulators and the Government. It is only by working together that we can achieve our climate goals and optimise the use of renewable generation here in Ireland.
It is important to note that connections to the electricity grid are dealt with by EirGrid on a case-by-case basis, in line with the assessment criteria set out by the CRU in November 2021 and available capacity. I am informed by EirGrid that the particular data centres mentioned in the question are part of the ramp-up of an existing EirGrid connection agreement that predates the November 2021 data centre connection policy decision by the CRU. The addition of this new demand is therefore expected and has already been taken into consideration in the expected growth figures in the generation capacity statement.
I thank the Minister of State. There is no official record of the number of data centres in Ireland. We are reliant on consulting companies, such as Bitpower, which reported in June 2023 that there are 82 data centres operating in Ireland - this is an increase of seven in one year - and that 77 of them are in the Dublin region. Bitpower estimates that 14 centres are under construction with planning approval for 40 more centres as part of 22 projects. Imagine that we are relying on Bitpower to tell us this. The Government strategy that was there when I come into the Dáil was a thumbs-up for the data centres. When that was reviewed, it was two thumbs-up for the data centres, without an analysis. EirGrid said in 2022 that it would not provide any more new grid connections to data centres in the Dublin area. I believe the Minister of State is confirming now that the three centres being proposed by the company predate that decision. Some 30% of our electricity will go to data centres by 2030.
We had a data centre policy in 2018 which did not refer to security of supply, to the climate challenge or to emissions. The new data centre policy, as issued in 2022, does refer to such matters. It is important that any new data centres that are built are contributing to security of supply and helping us to meet our climate targets. That is not impossible to do. In order to build a data centre, one needs planning permission and a grid connection, so one has two hurdles to meet. Getting planning permission for a data centre does not mean one can build it. There are conditions attached to planning permissions. Sometimes those conditions are based on the data centre policy, as issued in 2022, which requires, for example, that all new data centres are provided and are matched with additional renewable energy generation capacity which was not going to be available on the grid before that data centre project was proposed. These data centres have to provide their own 100% renewable energy and have to provide backup in the event of a security of supply problem. That backup can be drawn on in times of need. In that way, our new data centre policy allows for improved security of supply while also providing financial security to the 200,000 people in Ireland in sectors which depend directly upon data centres.
I realise we need data centres, but do we need the number that we are allowing to take place? Where is that reflected in Government policy? The thumbs-up approach in 2018 was disgraceful. The slight changes made since then are welcome. We are going to have 30% of our electricity going to data centres. There is a 65-acre site owned by the company in question, Amazon. Ireland uses some 30% of its energy in these centres compared to 3% of such use in Europe . Where is the policy on what is sustainable and on how much of the electricity will be diverted from households? In 2022, data centres used as much electricity as urban households. I do not know what quantity that is but that is the case according to a Central Statistics Office document. At what stage will we have a proper analysis of what is sustainable with regard to our commitments for emissions and for a sustainable future?
I thank the Deputy for her comments. I am glad to hear she acknowledges that we need data centres. I heard the same from Sinn Féin when Senator Boylan said that we absolutely need data centres. There is an understanding that we are not just going to shut down all of the data centres or prevent them from being here.
The Deputy's question is on the quantity of data centres which we can have or which is appropriate for the size of our country. Clearly, we are specialising in this country in the pharmaceutical and tech sectors. They are providing more than €20 billion a year in corporate taxes which fund our health programme, our education programme and so on. That is just in corporate taxes alone. Huge quantities of money are also coming from that sector in the form of income taxes and VAT.
The question is to what extent we can build data centres while at the same time maintaining our security of supply and meeting our climate targets. The new data centre policy said that one cannot build a data centre without building a sufficient additional quantity of renewable energy, so that it is powered 100% by renewable energy which would not have been on the grid otherwise. One must have a grid connection. The CRU and EirGrid are responsible for ensuring that grid connection does not interrupt our security of supply.
Back-up power must also be provided. I am glad to see that back-up power in many data centres is being provided with biofuel. Even on the rare occasions when the back-up power is needed it does not produce additional emissions. Our new data centre policy is very appropriate and it is working. It contributes towards security of supply and helps us to meet our climate targets.
82. Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications further to parliamentary Question No. 146 of 25 July 2023, to provide an update on the progress of the publication of review of the SEAI study into Carlinn Hall, Dundalk; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41755/23]
This is not the first time this week that I have spoken to the Minister of State about Carlinn Hall. We have a feasibility study by the SEAI into a shallow geothermal heat source solution for the communal district heating system. During the summer I received a reply to a parliamentary question that stated the report was drafted and there were recommendations for short-, medium- and long-term actions. I would like an update on where this is. We really need to provide these people with a solution.
I compliment Deputy Ó Murchú on doggedly pursuing this issue on a number of occasions in the House and outside it. Progress is being made. Generally, schemes such as those at Carlinn Hall are localised, involving apartment complexes or residential housing estates. In the Government's plans for district heating, based on international best practice, we are focusing on larger-scale projects, supplying heat to a range of buildings that can include public, commercial and residential across an entire district, for example using the heat from the waste to energy plant in Poolbeg in the docklands and beyond.
Given the reliance on gas in communal schemes, the cost to households increased significantly last year. To support such households, the Government put in place multi-billion euro support packages, including the energy credit delivered by the Department. In terms of these communal schemes, at the request of the district heating steering group, a research project was initiated to assess the viability of retrofitting an existing communal heating system with a shallow geothermal energy source. An independent consultancy was commissioned by the SEAI to undertake this research. The report has now been drafted. It contains recommendations on heat network efficiency and options for low carbon heat alternatives, including costs of installation and operation. The report will be published in early October. It is important to note that the scheme in question is privately owned and managed and decisions to implement any of the recommendations would be a matter for the relevant parties to consider.
In fairness I was asking for a timeline and I have got one for publication. We are speaking about early October. In a previous parliamentary question I asked whether we needed to do work to ensure there was an SEAI grant system for management companies and companies such as Frontline Energy and others involved in this communal heating system. This is from the point of view of delivering when we finally do have a feasible product that could offer a real, decent, sustainable heating source rather than gas, which caused all of the difficulties the Minister of State spoke about. I am told this is the case and I want to make sure that it is. We need this to be published in October and the sooner the better. Then we need to make sure that it is enacted. People have waited a long time and we do not know what exactly will be the case with gas prices. Beyond this we want sustainability and this is the Achilles heel of district heating.
A community heat system such as this provides heating and hot water for an entire development, typically an apartment block or an apartment complex. It means there is one component to be switched out so that all of those apartments can be decarbonised. The reality is that this is a great opportunity. It is much easier to switch out one large heating system than to go into 100 boilers where every apartment has its own heating system. I feel it should be targeted. I have not yet seen the draft of the SEAI report and I am looking forward to doing so. It will provide a choice of options for various types of renewable energy heating that could be put in place. It is such that it will provide good value for money for a switch. It will be liable for Government support in the same way that individual systems are liable for support. I will work with the SEAI to develop a scheme to support the replacement of these communal heating systems running on fossil fuel with new systems that run on renewable energy.
This is all very positive. I will be holding the Minister of State to his word on this. It is absolutely vital that when this is published we look at the best means. I accept there will have to be a large amount of consultation between the landlords, residents and all of the specific stakeholders involved in Carlinn Hall and any other applicable communal heating systems. We really need to make sure there is facilitation to provide them with grant schemes that are easily applicable and can provide the support that will be needed. We all get the idea that we are probably talking about going to a third party company to deliver this in some way, shape or form. It needs to be sustainable and it needs to be cost effective given what people have been through.
The SEAI has a history of supporting community grant schemes. It has good outreach operations. It has been a successful and popular programme. It is more efficient than the administration involved in individual grant schemes. There is the administration of one large scheme. There is a large benefit for it. It contributes to a community getting switched over with buy-in from many people at the same time. This type of scheme is very welcome. Anything we can do to push community energy, and move away from renewable energy upgrades being individual or corporate and towards something that is a community action, is welcome. I will help the SEAI in any way to set up the scheme when I get the report.
81. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications the extent to which progress towards emission targets are being met in such a way as to achieve the desired result without damage to the economy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41803/23]
This question seeks to ensure that we do not panic about achieving emission targets on the basis that we have made considerable progress in recent years. If one looks at the transport system, in particular the buses of 20 years ago that moved away from the bus stops in a cloud of smoke, that has all been eliminated. Will the Minister of State comment on this?
To ensure that Ireland's future economic development is on a sustainable footing we have taken a number of ambitious measures, including the adoption of the 2021 Climate Act, carbon budgets and sectoral emissions ceilings. The ceilings and budgets underpin Ireland's ambitious commitments to tackle climate breakdown, while also increasing our energy security, and putting us in a strong position to introduce net zero agriculture and business models. This provides us with excellent opportunities to encourage and incentivise innovation, while also developing new job opportunities in the green economy.
The latest Environment Protection Agency, EPA, reports show that in 2022 Ireland's emissions fell by 1.9% compared to 2021. This is to be welcomed. During the same period Ireland's economy performed strongly, with employment growing 2.7% to record levels and a real GNI growth of 6.7%. This fall in overall emissions at a time of sustained economic growth demonstrates that Ireland can reverse the trajectory of its emissions while continuing to support job creation, economic growth and socioeconomic development.
The EPA's emissions projections show that under its "with additional measures" scenario, Ireland will only reduce its emissions by 29%, falling short of its 51% target. However, the EPA acknowledges that if all of the unmodelled policies and measures in CAP 23 and the as yet unallocated emissions savings are included, the reduction in emissions could equate to 42%. With these additions and continuing increased climate ambition in forthcoming climate action plans, we are setting a pathway to meet 51% by 2030 and reach net zero no later than 2050.
The preparation of the latest climate action plan included a call for expert evidence, through which industry experts offered evidence-based submissions on the plan. Their insights are helping to ensure that our climate action is pursued in a way that delivers opportunities for Irish business.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply. It will give encouragement to all those of us seeking to achieve the targets and make a positive contribution, including agriculture and industry. It is very important to acknowledge this to the various sectors.
I thank Deputy Durkan. The core point is that Ireland is reducing its emissions at the same time as it is growing its economy. We are not the only country to do this. Britain went through approximately a decade when it was reducing emissions while at the same time growing its economy.
I am not sure if that is still the case, but it is certainly possible. We should never assume that in order to improve the environment or cut emissions, we have to do economic damage in some way or reduce growth. Our economy is succeeding, and it is doing so while becoming cleaner.
