Vol. 402 No. 9
12 Mr. McCartan asked the Minister for Energy if he will outline the latest position regarding the proposed gas pipeline between Britain and Ireland; if the route of the pipeline has been agreed; when work will commence; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
15 Miss Flaherty asked the Minister for Energy the progress which has been made to date in planning the establishment of gas and electricity connectors; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 12 and 15 together.
Planning for the proposed gas interconnector pipeline is at an advanced stage. Subsea surveys have been recently carried out and the results are now being analysed in order to determine the best route or routes. The final choice of route will also depend on the choice of supplier. Decisions on these matters will be taken when we have reached agreement for a gas supply.
Preliminary engineering will commence early in 1991. Purchase of materials will commence in mid-1991 and construction should commence in 1993. The current target is for first deliveries of gas to be received in time for the winter of 1993-94. An interconnection working group, which reported to the then Minister for Energy in 1988, found that an electricity interconnector with the UK would be economically viable and deserved further consideration.
Our first priority is, however, the successful implementation of the gas interconnector. Not only will this meet our gas market requirements, it will, of course, ensure that increased electricity generation from imported gas can be provided. While the question of direct electricity interconnection will be kept under review, it does not now arise as an immediate priority. In any event, it would be difficult to make effective progress on the off-take of electricity from the UK grid until the new institutional arrangements for electricity in Britain are put into place.
It is difficult to understand how the Minister can be so precise in his plans and dates right up to 1993 when he said that the choice of route and supplier had not yet been decided. I understood that the choice of supplier had already been decided and that the route had also been more or less decided. I cannot understand how the Minister can say that no route or supplier has been decided on but can say how it will all happen. Does he understand the vital importance of this, particularly for the area north of the Dublin-Galway line? Does he understand the effect the supply of an interconnector for natural gas would have on the environment, particularly as far as the ESB are concerned? Why has there been a hold up in choosing a route and a supplier?
I assure the Deputy I am giving top priority to this project. I have devoted substantial departmental resources to it in order to bring it to fruition in the shortest possible time. My Department have employed the best experts to assist us in the planning of this major project and this is proceeding satisfactorily. All the matters the Deputy referred to are the subject of ongoing studies which will be taken into consideration when final decisions are made. What I have quoted in the timespan I have given the Deputy in regard to the various projects is from the critical path we have laid out for the achievement of this project.
The Deputy is not right in his assumption that a supplier has been decided on. That decision has yet to be made. Sea surveys have been completed. The route to be used has not been finally decided. An enormous amount of study has to be undertaken on these matters before final decisions are taken, and they must marry. Three different routes were surveyed so there are three options. There are a small number of potential suppliers with whom we are in constant negotiation with regard to price, quantity and other matters.
All these studies are advancing and the time will come when I will have to decide whether the project is viable. That time cannot be arrived at until we know as accurately as we can estimate the costs, who the suppliers are, the length of the contract and so on. The decision with regard to viability and proceeding with the project, which will be a Government decision, will have to be made around the end of March. The Deputy's concept of how these things are planned is wrong. I have given as much information as possible. The project is proceeding satisfactorily to date. It is a major project and one of the biggest undertaken by my Department in a long time. We are anxious to ensure we get it right.
In view of the Minister's party's commitment to value for money and open government, would he tell us the costs and benefits that are the foundation of his work on this project? There has been some dispute about costs, bearing in mind the previous estimate of £70 million by An Bord Gáis. Would he agree to do that as it would help us to ensure that there were no cost overruns and that the taxpayer was getting good value?
This is a commercial operation and we must treat most of the matter under consideration with normal commercial confidentiality.
There is no competition. It is a monopoly.
In response to questions from the press and from the Deputy as regards the timespan, I have been helpful and open in giving information. Any figure which has been mentioned to date is only an estimate. There are no hard figures and there will not be any before March. I have never said that the cost is a set figure. It is wrong for the Deputy to refer, as he does in his regular press statements, to an enormous escalation in the cost of this project. Different estimates have been given at different times. There is no set figure. It is foolish to base assumptions on a figure which was only given in order to be helpful. There is no point adding to that until we know the real costs. At the end of March or in early April I will be able to tell the House what we estimate the figure will be. At that stage we will be seeking contracts but if there is confidential information I will not be in a position to disclose it.
I am glad the Minister is giving this top priority but he seems to be slow in reaching conclusions. Has he any plans to include Galway in the proposed route for the next gas pipeline?
That is a separate question.
It is a good question. Perhaps it might be helpful to the Minister.
Resume your seat.
I am pleased that progress on the electricity interconnector is very slow. Would the Minister not agree, in view of the fact that electricity generated at Sellafield is included in the British national grid, that it would be much better to abandon this project altogether as it clearly conflicts with our stand in trying to close Sellafield?
The Deputy is bringing in another matter.
Our priority at present is the gas interconnector.
Will the ESB be able to take a direct supply from the supplier or must they purchase through An Bord Gáis?
The pipeline will be owned and operated by An Bord Gáis. They will be the producer of gas for the country and will sell gas to the ESB.
