Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 2 June 2004
9 Mr. Morgan asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government his views on the findings of the EPA report entitled Ireland’s Environment 2004 which found that greenhouse gas emissions for this State are 29% above 1990 levels; if the Government believes this State will be able to reduce levels to 13% above 1990 levels by 2008 to comply with the Kyoto Protocol; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16571/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra12 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he will report on the progress of the implementation of the national climate change strategy. [16572/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 12 together.
Among the positive signals for the environment, the EPA report, Ireland's Environment 2004, outlined a modest reduction in the emission of greenhouse gases. Emissions are down from 31% above 1990 levels in 2001 to 29% above in 2002, which is the first reduction in a decade. Ireland is pursuing a challenging programme to limit the growth in greenhouse gas emissions through the vigorous implementation of the Government's national climate change strategy. The strategy sets out a systematic programme to meet our Kyoto obligations by 2012. I initiated a review of the implementation of the strategy to ensure more focused and intensive implementation. This process is ongoing and incorporates an update of greenhouse gas emissions projections with a particular emphasis on cross-cutting economic instruments to achieve Ireland's Kyoto targets. These instruments include emissions trading and other flexible mechanisms which have continued to be developed at national, EU and international levels since the strategy was formulated.
The Government is ensuring that Irish industry and the power generation sector can participate fully in EU emissions trading starting in January 2005. In this context, the EPA has submitted the national allocation plan to the European Commission for approval. The installations included in emissions trading produce approximately one third of Irish greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions trading will enable these sectors to meet their reduction obligations in the most economically efficient manner through access to least-cost emissions reduction opportunities across the EU and more widely.
The study underpinning the development of the national allocation plan identified the overall national distance to target in the Kyoto period 2008 to 2012 at 9.2 million tonnes CO2 equivalent per annum. Achieving reductions of 4.3 million tonnes CO2 equivalent will be the responsibility of the emissions trading sector leaving reductions of 4.9 million tonnes CO2 equivalent to be achieved within the rest of the economy. I am satisfied that 1.2 million tonnes CO2 equivalent can be achieved within the sector of the economy outside emissions trading at or below a cost of €10 per tonne of CO2. The Government has indicated its intention to purchase 3.7 million allowances on the international market.
I am currently advancing the review of the overall national climate change strategy to take account of the foregoing decisions and I intend to publish the outcome in due course. I am satisfied that full implementation of the revised strategy over the remainder of the decade will ensure that our Kyoto obligations will be fully met in the 2008 to 2012 period. This will occur in the context of the arrangements for emissions trading together with any additional measures which may be identified in the review.
According to the Government's calculations in drawing up the national climate change strategy published in 2000, greenhouse gas emissions would be 23% above the 1990 level in 2004 if none of the recommended actions was taken. As greenhouse gas emissions are 29% above the 1990 level, does the Minister agree that the national climate change strategy is in tatters? It is worthless. The figures are completely askew and the situation is much worse than the Government projected even if the "do nothing" approach had been adopted. Is the Minister saying the State will simply buy its way out of compliance with the Kyoto Protocol while not even attempting to reduce emissions? Does the Minister agree that this irresponsible approach amounts to the State failing to play its part in the global fight to prevent climate change?
I thank the Deputy for putting down his question as this is an important albeit complex issue. I do not accept the Deputy's summation. He fails to say that the level of economic activity is way beyond what was anticipated when the figures were originally put in place. If one factors in the level of economic activity on which the 23% figure was based and compares it to the activity which is causing emission levels of 29% above the 1990 level, one will see that there is not an obvious correlation. The figure should be much higher. We are doing a great deal.
What are we doing?
We are doing an enormous amount. If the Deputy wishes me to spell it out for him, I will.
We are doing nothing.
The energy efficiency methodologies being used in the building trade are at the top end in European terms and will deliver substantial reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. The emissions trading regime which is legitimate for Ireland and other countries to participate in is another mechanism which can be used.
It is dumping responsibility on poorer countries.
Equally, our movement away from an over-dependency on heavy fossil fuels is crucial. Changes are being made by businesses in all areas of the economy not simply by companies in the energy sector which are switching from heavy fuel oils to gas. While this is not the perfect scenario, it represents a significant improvement. The targeted number of wind energy systems has been exceeded in terms of planning system approvals. We will get them in place.
They are not allowed to connect to the grid.
Denmark produces over 30% of its energy needs from wind which means we can and should do the same. This should not be an adversarial issue. It is something we are all trying to grapple with sensibly.
We have to be adversarial.
Ireland would not have been invited to chair the OECD forum in Paris on this issue, in which all countries participated, if we did not have credibility. We have credibility and we have a challenge. The figures are not hidden internationally and everyone knows what Ireland's challenges are. We must face them. We do not have a nuclear industry, which is what masks the issue in other countries that benefit from very low carbon emissions. I do not want nuclear energy and I am sure nobody else in this House does either.
Some of the Minister's colleagues appear to.
We should balance that against the serious challenges on the other side. I am not trying to minimise the seriousness of what we face. A strategy has been put in place which is fully operational in Ireland. For the first time the figures show that we are seeing the decoupling of economic activity and emissions. We must ensure that between 2008 to 2012 we hit our target of 13% above the 1990 levels. If everybody does what he or she is supposed to, we will.
Does the Minister agree that while Ireland is incurring a great deal of pain for very little gain on this issue, the United States of America is giving us two fingers in failing to adhere to the Kyoto Protocol? What discussions has the Minister had with US authorities in his capacity as President of the Council of Environment Ministers in Europe to convince them to discontinue their role as environmental vandals and to adhere to the Kyoto Protocol?
I met and had discussions in Paris with Michael Leavitt, the newly appointed director of the EPA in the US who was appointed by President Bush. I also met the EPA representatives in the UN following on from that meeting. I agree with the Deputy that it would be better for the world and all of us if America were to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, but sadly under the present Administration that is unlikely to happen.
It would be foolish, however, for Ireland on that basis to do nothing because it is quite clear that more and more American states are now looking to the future and setting targets more difficult than Kyoto. We should ask ourselves why. I have been trying to say to Irish agricultural interests, to unions and to IBEC that we must end this debate quickly. We are trying to negotiate on the impact next week. We should be much cleverer in this country in looking at the potential opportunities in the medium to longer term. There are enormous opportunities in employment and in research and development with potentially huge benefits to the environment.
As the Deputy has previously acknowledged, Ireland's reputation environmentally is far better than that of many countries which are trying to rise to a certain level. That does not mean we should be complacent. We need a much wider debate in this country which is less adversarial in the immediate impact. We need to look to our serious medium to longer-term opportunities, and see where the opportunities lie for Ireland. There are enormous opportunities for agriculture and industry in this country, and for the creation and sustaining of very many jobs, if we handle this correctly.
Pursuing the question raised by Deputy Allen, an EU-United States summit will take place at the end of this month in Ireland. Will the Minister say if the failure of the United States to sign up to the Kyoto Protocol is on the agenda for that summit?
The Irish Presidency has got great recognition for being the first Presidency to put the environmental pillar on the agenda at Heads of State level.
The answer is "No".
Is it?
When the Taoiseach was speaking very recently from Guadalajara, he——
What is the answer?
I have not got the agenda in order to give the answer.
The Minister should know the answer.
Ireland's position on the environment, in leading the EU in its Presidency, is clear. The environmental issue has been and remains on the agenda. It is very much part of the Irish EU Presidency agenda. On that basis it will certainly form part of the discussion.
As the sitting President of the Council of Environment Ministers, the Minister must be in a position to tell us if this important issue of Kyoto will be discussed when the current President of the EU and the President of the United States meet in one of the Irish castles at the end of this month. If the Minister does not know, then clearly that will not happen. This meeting is one of the great billed events of the coming summer, and one would have thought that if it is to have any meaning, an issue of this importance, with the United States so much out of line with the rest of the world regarding climate change and the Kyoto commitment, should be discussed. I find it astonishing that it is not even on the agenda for the meeting.
I hope the Minister will say it is on the agenda. We will wait and see. Does the Minister realise that his utterance about economic growth being the reason we could not comply with Kyoto is itself an admission of Government failure in decoupling economic growth from greenhouse gas emissions, which are generally worse in Ireland than in other European countries? Since the Minister has indicated that we need to move to a leaner economic activity base, one which is much more energy efficient, would his Department and Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, help pursue that by bringing up housing insulation standards to end-1997 standards, as advocated by Energy Action, which would result in a saving of 7% of total national energy consumption, according to Energy Action? Would the Minister agree that this should be done with existing housing stock, whatever about the new 70,000 houses being built annually, and that since the existing housing stock is in need of serious attention, he should lead on that matter?
The Green Party clearly does not want economic growth and creation in this country.
The Minister has no basis for saying that.
I am sick and tired of listening to the Green Party constantly undermining investment in this country, which has increased the numbers in employment from almost 1.1 million people to 1.8 million. That is what has the Irish economy where it is today.
The Minister is embarrassed by his failures.
It is the worst in Europe.
That is why we are able to achieve what we are achieving. At the same time we know we have economic decoupling from emissions taking place. We are no worse or better than many other countries grappling with this very serious issue. We do not deny that.
The Minister is embarrassed by his failure. He should stick with the question.
The Green Party approaches the debate in a simplistic, almost immature way. The Deputy bears no resemblance to his colleague with whom I sit in European Council meetings and who represents the Green movement in Europe, which has a philosophy fundamentally different from that of the Deputy. I do not know how the party in Ireland calls itself a Green party.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
