Vol. 350 No. 1
asked the Minister for Energy if, in view of the assertion in the ESRI report on energy crops that a more refined estimate of productivity potential in the Border region was not possible because of lack of experience in growing particular species, he will initiate a pilot scheme in the Cooley area of north Louth.
7.
asked the Minister for Energy if, in view of the poor take-up of EEC funds for private afforestation for either conventional forestry, or energy crops; he will consider setting up a non-Government agency, to promote afforestation.
8.
asked the Minister for Energy if he will consider starting a pilot scheme for the growing of energy crops in the bog of Ardee, County Louth.
9.
asked the Minister for Energy if he noted the comment of the National Economic and Social Council on the study "Irish Energy Policy" with reference to the narrow base of the current energy crops demonstration project; and if so, the action he proposes to take to correct the position.
10.
asked the Minister for Energy the amount of EEC funds to date allocated to this country for biomass production: and the amount taken up.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 10, inclusive, together.
In reply to these questions I will deal with short rotation forestry for energy purposes as it relates to my Department.
The available evidence suggests that forestry for energy purposes may have economic potential on land which is marginal for conventional agriculture. There are extensive areas of such land, but before promoting large scale afforestation for energy purposes, it is necessary to demonstrate in practice that energy crops are an economic proposition.
There are at present two projects underway, both with the object of testing the economic practicality of short rotation forestry.
The larger project is being conducted by Bord na Móna, the Forestry and Wildlife Service and the ESB, under the coordination of the National Board for Science and Technology. This project aims at planting various species of trees on 600 hectares, mainly of bogland. The cost was estimated in 1979 at £9.21 million, of which the EEC agreed to contribute up to £3.15 million. In the event, expenditure to date has been £3.36 million, of which the EEC have paid £1.28 million. The project is now in its fourth year. Growth to date is very disappointing and well below the projected economic level. Studies are being made to find the reasons for the poor performance.
The second demonstration project is being conducted by An Foras Talúntais, with assistance from the National Board for Science and Technology. This project aims at developing private plantations on the wet mineral soils of County Leitrim. Results to date have been mixed on this project also, although it is as yet too early to assess its long term prospects.
I am satisfied that these two projects cover a wide range of the tree and soil types most likely to offer good prospects for energy crop development. Until they are completed and assessed, I do not propose to establish any further forestry biomass projects, as it is not yet certain what commercial future exists for energy crops in Ireland.
With regard to private afforestation, £18 million was allocated over a ten year period. However, during the last two years a sum of £61,000 was taken up one year and £74,000 the following year. Does the Minister agree that this is a ridiculously low figure and will he give an indication of what measures he intends to take to remedy this?
The question of afforestation is a matter for the Department of Fisheries and Forestry.
Does the Minister agree that energy projects are very closely related to afforestation? The Minister says that the figures are disappointing, does that mean that the figures from the Department of Fisheries and Forestry are inaccurate?
This is not the responsibility of my Department.
Does the Minister agree that if we are to persevere with the growing of biomass as an alternative energy source the solid fuel burning generating stations should be retained to enable this to be tried out and to monitor its efficiency? Does he realise that the decision of the ESB to close these stations in Portarlington and Allenwood will deprive us of that opportunity?
There is another question to another Minister.
Am I to understand that the Minister does not wish to reply to that question?
I suggested that there is another question.
With respect, we are dealing with a project to burn trees to make electricity. I am saying we need somewhere to burn them. If the present attitude of the ESB is continued we will have nowhere to burn them. The Minister for Energy has a duty to answer the question which I put to him in all good faith.
The questions relate to energy crops. As I said in my reply, there are at present two projects under way, both with the object of testing the economic practicality of short rotation forestry for energy purposes. I indicated in my reply that to date the results have been disappointing. I must explain to the House that we are in the experimental stage only with regard to biomass production. Until such time as the results of these projects are fully assessed and their economic viability from an energy point of view fully understood, I cannot explain their relevance to the power stations.
Is the Minister aware that considerable research was carried out in the North on this subject? Has there been any exchange of information on this matter? The information he has given the House about the disappointing results to date does not tally with the information available in the North on this project?
The Deputy may take it that information in regard to other biomass projects elsewhere in Europe will be monitored in my Department. I have answered the questions asked and I have expressed a certain amount of disappointment. Perhaps we are starting on the wrong premise. Perhaps we should be experimenting by growing biomass on very good land to see what the results would be. As I have emphasised in my reply, we are in the experimental stage only and until the two projects are fully assessed we will not be able to approach the matter from a commercial point of view.
The Minister has not answered my question. I asked him was there an exchange of information between North and South.
I explained to the Deputy that my Department would have the information available from other member states and from Northern Ireland.
Could I ask the Minister of State what is the location of the first of the two projects he mentioned, the one of 600 hectares?
It is spread over about five areas in Bangor and Bellacorick and Oweninny in County Mayo and Clonsast and Boora in County Offaly, mostly on bog land.
On cutaway bog, I take it. Is it equally unsuccessful in all the locations?
Yes. There are three main reasons why we have not had the success we expected. One is the poor growth rate. That is the main reason. Expenditure on these projects has not reached the expected level because of the poor growth rate and a decision by the ESB to convert an existing boiler rather than to build a new one. There was a failure to develop a harvest machine. These are the reasons why expenditure on the biomass projects have not reached the estimates made some years ago.
Which boiler are the ESB converting to biomass burning?
I have not got that information available. I will get it for the Deputy.
Is it one of the ones Deputy Power is concerned about? I have a horrible feeling it is. Is it one of the ones that will be closed down shortly?
I do not think it is. I will get the information for the Deputy.
I will look forward to receiving it.
My question asked the Minister if in view of the poor take up of EEC funds for private afforestation for either conventional forestry or energy crops he will consider setting up a non-Government agency to promote afforestation. The Minister says he is not responsible. If he is not, he should at least consult with the Department of Forestry or transfer the question to another Minister. We are now told by the Minister about poor growth. Is he aware that we had two very costly studies carried out with EEC funds, both of which indicated the benefits which could be derived in the disadvantaged region of Leitrim-Cavan-Monaghan because it is a high growth area for forestry and biomass, especially biomass, and we are now told that is not the case.
The Deputy may not make a long statement just because it is prefaced by the words "is he aware". That will not work because it would reduce Question Time to a farce.
It is very misleading if we have not got the information.
I prefaced my answer with the words: In reply to these questions I will deal with short rotation forestry for energy purposes as it relates to my Department. If the Deputy has a question about afforestation he can put it down to the Minister for Forestry. In my reply I attempted to indicate the realities of the situation. While there may be reports indicating the contrary, the reality is as I have stated it.
This is a very serious matter. If organisations who are doing strategy reports in a region get information from Government Departments which is at variance with the facts——
The Deputy is making a speech. I will not allow speeches at Question Time.
I want to protest about this.
The Deputy will have to find another opportunity to make it on the information which he has.
