Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

48. To ask the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment the Government's position on liquefied natural gas, LNG; if the Government's position has changed from the position outlined in the programme for Government that the Government does not support the importation of fracked gas and that "we do not believe that it make sense to develop LNG gas import terminals importing fracked gas"; the implications that the development of an LNG terminal would have on Ireland's climate targets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41632/24]

Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to ask the Minister what the Government's position on LNG is and whether the position has changed from the position outlined in the programme for Government that the Government does not support the importation of fracked gas and that "we do not believe that it make sense to develop LNG gas import terminals importing fracked gas." What are the implications the development of an LNG terminal of any sort would have on Ireland's climate targets and will the Minister make a statement on the matter?

Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government's policy has not changed. As set out in the Government's policy statement on the importation of fracked gas, the Government does not support the importation of fracked gas. Ireland is committed to halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and being carbon neutral by 2050. In future most of our energy needs will be met by renewable energy, which will be the anchor of our energy security. The only consideration by this Government of LNG facilities is in the context of energy security. The Government does not support the commercial import of LNG as the development of infrastructure for the commercial of import of LNG would be inconsistent with the decarbonisation strategy established under the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Act 2021.

The Government does not support the commercial import of LNG as the development of infrastructure for the commercial import of LNG would be inconsistent with the decarbonisation trajectory established under the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015, as amended.

The Government's policy on energy security is set out in Energy Security in Ireland to 2030 report which was approved and published in November 2023. The report determines that Ireland’s natural gas supplies and infrastructure are adequate to meet our demand projections. However, Ireland does not have adequate resilience in case of a major disruption to our sub-sea gas imports pipelines and does not currently meet minimum EU standards in this area. It is in this context only that a State-led gas facility was recommended in the report.

A State-led strategic gas emergency reserve, operating on a non-commercial basis for use only in the event of an emergency, would provide resilience to the gas system and mitigate against the major consequences for our society and our economy that would arise from a significant gas supply disruption in Ireland.

As a final element of the energy security review, Gas Networks Ireland is undertaking a detailed analysis of the strategic gas emergency reserve. In parallel, my Department is developing the appropriate policy and legislative measures to ensure the facility could provide the resilience to our energy system.

One of the issues on which further research and information is necessary relates to the timeline for introducing such a facility and the timelines within which gas demand may fall to reduce the risk. We know that in this decade, we are at risk and are exposed. Given the likelihood that delivery of a strategic gas reserve facility may not happen until early in the next decade, analysis is required as to whether the planned dramatic reduction in gas use, particularly in the electricity generation sector, means that an alternative way to meet the energy security risk might be better. For example, further electricity interconnectors with the UK or France or what is fast-evolving long-term storage capability. This further research is something I have called for and that the Department is looking at it before going back to the Government and Oireachtas with detailed analysis.

Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There seems to be a contradiction in the Minister's response in terms of considering alternatives to LNG and the amendments that were rushed through at the eleventh hour for the Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2023 last week. Is the Minister of the view that LNG that does not have fracked gas can be introduced? It strikes me as very difficult to separate the two issues at all. Does the Minister believe that, even theoretically, we could have LNG that is not from fracked gas?

Regarding the potential for LNG, how is it consistent with the criteria that were set down in the draft energy security review? These included that it needs to be State-led to avoid lock in; must not increase gas demand; must be temporary; must be for emergency use and, most important, must be in line with the climate Act. It strikes me that the amendments brought in the Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2023 are a Trojan horse for LNG in the State.

Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I believe it is possible for us - if we require a facility - to set conditions in a State-led facility for security only, that it would only be non-fracked gas that would be held. That is possible as one of the conditions that a State-led facility might be set out. There is no Trojan horse here. People have completely misunderstood that amendment. It was purely technical in nature. It had been a long time coming in making sure that as we change the foreshore licensing system towards a new planning system that there would not be discrepancies between onshore and offshore facilities. The amendment was purely technical in nature, to make sure that all the various elements of existing legislation aligned. It gave no signal whatsoever - or should not have been seen as a signal in any way - that we are changing policy in terms of the switch back towards a commercial LNG facility. That is absolutely clear. We stick with the statement set out in November 2023 that any facility could only be temporary, security and State-led and could not breach our climate limits. All those conditions set out in the energy security paper in November 2023 still stand.

Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am deeply concerned that if that is the Minister's assessment of the matter, it is entirely incorrect. Whoever steps in to Government buildings after the next election - particularly if it is Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael together - last week, driven through by Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Green Party, we wrote into legislation what is essentially the formula to deliver LNG. That is my deep concern and my political assessment.

In terms of the Minister's assessment of where things go from here and those alternatives to LNG that have been offered for potential consideration, what does the Minister think they are? There were some reports that maybe some of GNI's latest reports might say that LNG might not be necessary or a solution. What does the Minister envisage? He mentioned interconnection. What does it look like?

Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This has been a long, drawn-out process, because it is important to get it right. The original study started in 2021. We approached SEPA, a consultancy company which did a lot of detailed analysis to the end of this decade. Furthermore, when we had agreed our energy security paper, we commissioned GNI to look at various options such as onshore, offshore, gas caverns and so on. They came back to us saying that it likely would not be until the next decade that a facility would be available and that it would have certain characteristics. They favoured a floating storage regassifacition unit, FRSU, system, which was different from what we had originally thought, in terms of the amount of boil-off gas and some other technical aspects.

What has also changed in recent years is that we have seen the ability for interconnectors to dramatically improve and help us in energy security and emissions in the State. Given that there is the potential for new interconnectors to be connected to us, early in the next decade, that may provide a much better security option than having to have a gas backup facility. We have to do the detailed analysis as to what is the demand curve on gas - particularly including peak demand - and can we cover that in other ways.

What has also changed and needs further analysis is short-term and long-term battery storage. This has dramatically changed in the past two years, since this research started. It is that sort of analysis that I am looking to see, that we may not need any facility.