8. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications if his Department has carried out, commissioned, or consulted on any research into the likely climate impact of US LNG imported into Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17929/25]
Sentiment score: 0.01
25. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications his views on whether a commercial LNG facility along the lines of Shannon LNG is compatible with the State’s legally binding greenhouse gas emission reduction commitments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17927/25]
Sentiment score: 0.08
I asked the Minister previously if he was aware of the emissions impact that US LNG would have here, which is estimated to be at least 33% worse than coal. He initially ignored the question and then waffled on about it depending on various factors. I am asking again, more precisely, what research his Department has carried out, whether commissioned or consulted, into the likely climate impact of imported US LNG.
Sentiment score: -0.26
I was at a Dáil Business Committee meeting.
Sentiment score: 0.00
The Minister has a very simple question in front of him. For the benefit of anyone watching these proceedings from outside the House, he receives the question in advance and his civil servants write an answer. The question asked whether the Minister and the Department have carried out, commissioned or consulted any research into the likely climate impact of US energy imported into Ireland. The Minister did not answer that question at all. I can only assume, therefore, that the answer is "No", and that the Minister is planning to import a lot of US LNG fracked gas into Ireland without even considering the climate impact. There is a peer-reviewed paper by Professor Robert Howarth which makes the case very convincingly that it is at least 33% worse than coal. The reason for that is that methane, rather than carbon dioxide, makes up the majority of LNG emissions, and methane is 80 times more damaging to the climate over a 20-year period, which is the crucial timeframe for avoiding catastrophic climate collapse.
Sentiment score: -0.03
I do.
Sentiment score: 0.00
The message-----
Sentiment score: 0.00
Come on.
Sentiment score: 0.00
Yes, I have a fixation on climate change.
Sentiment score: 0.40
Climate change is going to destroy the lives of our children.
Sentiment score: -0.54
It is going to make----
Sentiment score: 0.00
-----the earth effectively largely uninhabitable for all but the richest. That is the trajectory we are on. I have a fixation on climate change, absolutely.
Sentiment score: 0.25
The Minister should have a fixation on climate change.
Sentiment score: 0.00
You should-----
Sentiment score: 0.00
Well, what do I have a fixation on?
Sentiment score: 0.27
What do I have a fixation on? If it was not climate change, what do I have a fixation on?
Sentiment score: 0.00
So-----
Sentiment score: 0.00
I have a fixation on climate change, and if the Minister's point is that I have a fixation on fossil fuels, yes, I do, because fossil fuels are what is driving the vast majority of climate change. He is proposing, as Minister for the environment, who has responsibility for climate action, to import the dirtiest fossil fuel possible. That is what he is proposing. He is saying now to not worry. He is not saying it is not going to be US fracked gas because he is correctly saying we cannot draw a distinction, which the previous Government tried to mislead people about by saying we could have LNG and to not worry because it would not be fracked gas. The Minister is admitting it could well be fracked gas, but he is not able to tell me that it is not going to be US fracked gas. I ask him to say on the record that this will not be US fracked gas. He knows that of course it is going to be US fracked gas. What else is it going to be? Incredibly, by not answering the question the Minister is telling me he has not conducted any studies in this regard. The Howarth paper was a key factor in the Biden Administration's decision to bring in a moratorium on new US LNG export facilities in January 2024. That was reversed by Trump, who is a climate denier. In changing the policy here to allow US fracked gas imports, the Government is aligning itself with Trump and climate denial. The Minister needs to deal with the reality of the science of what the impact of fracked gas is. This is the dirtiest fossil fuel possible and the Minister has not commissioned any research or any evidence to suggest that is not the case. He thinks it is fine, and that we are going to run through this five or six times per year in our so-called strategic reserve that is going to displace even other gas as the dirtiest fossil fuel.
Sentiment score: -0.02
I did support the climate Act. The Government is not implementing it.
Sentiment score: 0.20
Will the Minister correct the record in respect of the climate Act?
Sentiment score: 0.48
9. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications his views on the role of data centres and capacity payments in pushing up the cost of energy for households and privatising the energy system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17930/25]
Sentiment score: 0.17
It was recently reported that householders collectively paid approximately €454 million per year in capacity payments to data centres between 2007 and 2018. Since then, it has more than doubled to €1 billion per year. With 11 more data centres under construction and applications for 30 more, this massive subsidy from ordinary people to data centres is only going to grow. Is the Government going to do nothing to stop data centres from pushing up household energy costs?
Sentiment score: 0.11
That sounded like an admission that data centres are pushing up household energy prices. The Minister of State might confirm that the Government accepts that is happening. That means the crazy data centre policy of the Government to allow big tech to come here and dump as much of this 21st century toxic waste as it can is not only driving us further from our climate goals, where the extra energy used by data centres is more than the extra renewable energy we have added to the grid through wind power since 2017, but is also driving household energy bills even higher. This is madness in the short, medium and long terms. We are prioritising the profits of big tech corporations and the need for data centres, which provide very few jobs. They guzzle electricity and water. We are putting them before people's needs today and the need for a habitable planet.
Sentiment score: 0.15
On the question of jobs, the Minister of State might confirm how many jobs are directly in data centres. Would I be correct in saying that there are fewer than 3,000 jobs in data centres? For a sector that is going to be using 30% of our electricity by 2030, the waste of electricity and water, and the impact that has on housing construction and other issues, is quite incredible. We recently found out that by 2032, 9% of gas demand will be coming from just the 11 islanded data centres that are currently connected directly to the gas network. If the Government grants permission to the two dozen data centres that have applied for direct connection, that demand will quadruple to 36% of gas demand. We are burning fossil fuels directly to run data centres. We are looking at an increasingly privatised energy system where we pay through the nose for data centres to burn gas in onsite gas power plants. That is linked to the discussion we have already had about LNG. This is, of course, likely to be fuelled by fracked US LNG.
Sentiment score: -0.04
No, it is not. It is not at all.
Sentiment score: -0.15
Does the Minister of State know how much extra energy we are going to need?
Sentiment score: 0.27
12. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications when the climate action plan for 2025 will be published; the way in which the actions in it for this year can be implemented when it is four months into the year and it has not yet been published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17928/25]
Sentiment score: 0.01
I am sure I will be very satisfied with the Minister’s answer. We are in April, the fourth month of the year, and the Minister still has not published the climate action plan for 2025. Will the Minister tell me when it is going to be published? What has the Fianna Fáil-Fine Gael-Lowry Government taken out from the draft plan that was submitted last December, before it came into office? What are the big new actions in it that will close the massive gap with our emissions target?
Sentiment score: 0.13