Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 15 June 2023
79. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications how does he assess the exclusion of 9 million tonnes of GHG abatement measures in the climate plan from the Environmental Protection Agency's recent projections for emissions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28680/23]
View answerThis issue came up earlier in priority questions. The Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, has recently reported that it cannot include in its modelling up to 9 million tonnes of GHG abatement measures in the Government climate action plan. As a result, it is predicting that we will fall significantly short of our target for 2030. I would be interested to hear the Minister comment on how we can realise those 9 million tonnes.
I will not repeat the written response I read earlier. More widely, we live in a time when people are naturally very concerned. Looking at what is happening in the global weather climate system at present, there is much real concern at the dramatic increase, outside any historic precedent, of the temperatures in the north Atlantic. The ongoing degradation of the Antarctic and Arctic ice sheets is cause for real fear and concern. It highlights the need for dramatic scaled-up action on climate. Sometimes we wonder if, God almighty, we are beyond salvation here, and if we will be able to meet these targets not just nationally but internationally.
Two or three things give me some sense of real purpose and hope. First, the renewable technologies that are the cornerstone of the energy solution, which is a key part of the problem, are starting to be developed and deployed at a scale and speed that we have not seen before, particularly the development of solar and wind power. Indeed, 90% of the new energy generation in the globe this year is going to be renewable. The scale of development of solar energy, in Ireland as well as elsewhere, is going beyond anything people expected. I think we may bust the modelling there, and go beyond what people have foreseen.
To give an example, Irish people are defying expectations in terms of what we can do on retrofitting our homes. The Deputy may have read an article in the Financial Times two weeks ago which cited the example of Ireland as best in case, best practice and the best example in Europe of the development of retrofitting. I was at a major International Energy Agency conference on energy efficiency last week. The chairs and chief executives of some of the biggest energy companies in Europe were on the platform and said Ireland was an example. I know there are areas where we are not fast enough but there are some where we are seeing real progress. I could continue but I want to make the point that we should be very careful that we do not fall into the trap of people giving up or being so terrified by what they see in the climate science of what is happening that we despair and do not double down to deliver what is working in many areas. We can and will do this. It is the way the world is going and we can and will be good at it.
I agree with the Minister. Some of the deployment of these technologies is proving very effective. The big bombshell in the report was on the land use front. The flexibility that had been available to us of 26 million tonnes has dropped to 9 million tonnes as a result of a reassessment of the impact of land use on emissions. Land use, even with the 8,000 ha of forestry planting and the rewetting of 80,000 acres, will only contribute in a tiny way to our emissions. This is a source of concern. We do not seem to have the policy tools in place to address land use. What is the Minister's assessment of the challenge in the land use area?
It is very challenging because it is very complex. In response to an earlier question I made the point that there is good news from Brussels today in that the European environment committee has voted through the nature restoration law. I expect that at the Council meeting next Tuesday, when we will be there representing the Irish position, it will also go through. It will then go through a trial-like process to be agreed by the end of the year. This is important. Any influence that Deputy Bruton has on his EPP colleagues for them to support it in the wider parliamentary plenary vote later this summer would be very much welcomed. Such European certainty will help us.
The reason land use is so complex is because it changes. Last year we learned the impact on land use emissions of forestry on peaty soils. This is one such example. On Monday at the break-out session on this issue at the national economic dialogue, there was widespread agreement from the farming representatives, environmental NGOs and others on what has happened in the NESC secretariat. It has been engaging in a process of listening. Agreeing principles on how we manage land use, protect the family farm and stop water pollution are examples of the right way to go. What the Government will do for the remaining 20 months in office is to engage in that level of listening and local bottom-up analysis as to how this can benefit rural Ireland. Land use has to be about restoring and strengthening rural communities. Out of this we will see support for the levels of diversification that will deliver on the targets.
Does the Minister agree that if we read the climate action plan we see tremendous uncertainty on land use? We are speaking about a likely target of 11 million tonnes of emissions in 2030 and a 66% reduction in prospect. This is the target the EU suggests. Where are the policy tools that could conceivably explain to communities how such a 66% reduction could be achieved? Are we creating the uncertainty the Minister rightly says fouls the atmosphere of debate? There are a lot of achievements but if we create great uncertainty in one area will we not undermine the capacity to see a realistic pathway? Does the Minister agree that we need to see early movement on carbon farming as a key element of this and on people getting rewarded for changes?
I agree with this. It is exactly in line with what I was saying. We cannot be punitive or point the finger. It has to be remunerated, supported and voluntary. I will give several more examples. An area where I see real progress is in the work done by Bord na Móna and others on State land where we are rewetting up to 30,000 ha. We will do this in the lifetime of the Government. Bord na Móna is using the same skills it developed over the years. It is happening and it is working. It goes beyond what anyone has been speaking about in the nature restoration law in terms of targets. It is a real possibility.
The other key policy lever is the implementation of the new forestry programme that was agreed by the Government. It has a €1.3 billion budget behind it. To show the complexity of this, and it is complex, our biggest challenge has been getting it through the European Commission and getting its support for it. It has conflicting objectives in terms of the birds and habitats directives. Unfortunately it is very complex. We need to act and deliver on the forestry programme and scale up forestry way beyond anything that has done before. This more than anything else requires local knowledge. Real skill will be involved in getting this right so we plant the right tree in the right place. We need to protect our other nature services and systems while, at the same time, we deliver new native and natural woods and the variety of woods that we will need. What is most important is to get agreement from the European Commission on state aid rules on the forestry programme so we step in the right direction.
