We are meeting representatives of Wind Energy Ireland for an engagement on the opportunities and challenges associated with the delivery of wind energy infrastructure in Ireland. From Wind Energy Ireland, I am pleased to welcome Noel Cunniffe, chief executive officer, Dave Linehan, director of policy and research, Brian Keville, chair of the Wind Energy Ireland planning committee, and Justin Moran, director of external affairs.

Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

I remind members that they will each be afforded a six-minute speaking slot for questions and answers, with a second chance to contribute at the end if they wish. I also highlight to the members that we do have a firm finish time of 6 p.m., when another committee is coming into this room, that is if we are still here. We will see how the meeting goes.

I now invite Mr. Cunniffe to make his opening statement.

I thank the committee for the opportunity. The Cathaoirleach has already introduced my colleagues. Wind Energy Ireland represents the Irish wind energy industry. We are the collective voice of more than 200 companies working to make Ireland an energy-independent electrostate, powered by affordable, clean, Irish energy. I will set out how Irish wind farms are achieving this today, before identifying some key issues we hope the committee will prioritise.

Wind energy is Ireland’s main source of renewable electricity. Last year, Irish wind farms provided a third of the country’s electricity. Total generation from all renewable sources came to 40.9%, only marginally behind fossil fuels. This year, renewable generation exceeded fossil fuels in February, March and April, the first time we have done so for three months in a row, and we have also just seen the best May on record for renewables, as can be seen in our submitted document in the graph provided by Green Collective.

Our wind farms strengthen Irish energy security. Every hour, Ireland spends €1 million to import fossil fuels and our members are determined to keep that money at home, supporting Irish businesses, growing our economy, creating jobs and investing in rural and coastal Ireland. In the past four years, Irish wind farms cut spending on imported fossil fuels and carbon credits on the island of Ireland by €6.7 billion. In 2025 alone, just for the Republic of Ireland, wind farms displaced €840 million worth of gas imports, enough to heat every household in the country. Our wind farms protect and support Irish electricity consumers.

Research published last year by Baringa demonstrates that since 2000, renewable electricity has – conservatively – saved consumers nearly €1 billion in their electricity bills. Between 2020 and 2023 alone, at the height of the previous fossil fuel crisis, renewable electricity cut bills by an average of €320 per person. Those are net figures. The research assessed the savings delivered by wind and solar farms and set that against the costs including various support schemes, dispatch balancing costs, system services and the cost of integrating renewables. Every single Irish electricity consumer is better off today because our members – supported by successive Governments – built wind and solar farms.

In that context, committee members can legitimately ask why prices are still so high. A report from the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, in April confirmed again that the chief reason Ireland’s electricity prices are so high is because we rely so much on gas imports. It also discovered that countries which cut their dependence on gas the fastest, after the previous fossil fuel crisis caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, saw the quickest benefit in falling prices.

This underlines points the ESRI has previously made to Oireachtas committees when pointing out that, without wind farms, Irish electricity consumers would be facing even higher prices. As Dr. Muireann Lynch told the Oireachtas Committee on Budgetary Oversight last year:

More renewables put downward pressure on prices. Wholesale prices come down as you get more renewables. We can predict that using models, and we can see it in the data for Ireland and other countries.

Irish wind farms produce clean electricity, cutting the carbon emissions which are driving the global climate emergency. As the SEAI's figures show, from 2005 to 2024, carbon emissions from the electricity sector have more than halved despite significant rising demand. Irish renewable energy has avoided more than 47 million tonnes of CO2 between 2000 and 2023, equal to the lifetime emissions of 1.1 million mid-sized cars. The benefit of wind farms to Ireland is indisputable and I am heartened to see strong cross-party support for renewable energy from Oireachtas Members.

In terms of key issues our industry is facing, what we need now is to build on our success, and to accelerate the delivery of clean, affordable and secure power for Irish families and businesses. Firstly, we must speed up the delivery of Ireland's most affordable source of new electricity, which is onshore wind farms. To do this, I ask for the committee's support for the following key actions: speed up the planning process by investing additional resources in critical national and local agencies, while fully implementing RED III and the Planning and Development Act 2024, underpinned by robust, evidence-based, new wind energy development guidelines and regional renewable energy strategies; implement a strong hybrid connection policy that enables renewable energy to be co-located with storage to maximise use of available power; create and deliver an ambitious dispatch down action plan to tackle wasted renewable energy; support re-powering and life extension of existing projects to ensure we make the best use of our existing wind farms; and maintain a sustainable route to market, such as the renewable electricity support scheme, to run annual auctions up to 2030.

We know we have the land available to achieve this. A report published last year by planning consultancy MKO identified roughly 1,300 square kilometres on which new wind farms could be built, which is less than 2% of the Republic of Ireland. Conservative estimates suggest this could produce nearly 6,000 MW of additional onshore wind energy beyond our 2030 target. We are calling on the Government to set new targets for onshore wind energy of 11,000 MW by 2035 and 15,000 MW by 2040. We ask for the committee's support.

Looking beyond our shores, offshore wind energy can provide greater energy independence and economic prosperity. Last month, we launched our Offshore Wind Action Plan 2026. It sets out clear and practical recommendations to support the delivery of offshore wind projects through 18 targeted actions. I draw the committee's particular attention to five key recommendations on which we would appreciate members' support. An Coimisiún Pleanála must be supported to deliver on its commitment to offshore wind planning decision timelines, including getting the first decision out in September 2026. The Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, EirGrid and industry must finalise all grid agreements and specifications for the existing east coast projects so they can connect to the grid. Clarity is needed on Ireland's future offshore wind pipeline, including on which sites will be available and when. The Government must publish the national ports policy and, where a credible business case is made, facilitate State investment in ports to build Irish offshore wind farms. The Government should advance plans for coastal green energy parks that use offshore wind energy to attract new industries and create jobs.

On a broader point, Ireland and Europe need to take the challenge of disinformation about clean energy much more seriously. There is a growing body of evidence showing that false and misleading claims about renewable energy are amplified online and are having real-world consequences. Earlier this year, WindEurope and CASM Technology published a major study examining anti-wind narratives across Europe. They found a large and well-organised ecosystem generating tens of thousands of social media posts that spread misleading claims about the health, environmental and economic impacts of wind energy. We are fortunate in Ireland that despite these disinformation efforts, support for wind energy is strong. According to the most recent polling, support for wind farms varies, with percentages ranging from the high 70s to the low 80s, with opposition to wind farms well under 10%. When research is restricted just to people living close to existing wind farms, a 2023 study commissioned by the SEAI found that 65% of people living within one kilometre of a wind farm believe Ireland needs more wind farms, not fewer. We must all work together to improve public information, support independent fact-checking and communicate more clearly the benefits associated with energy independence.

I will close with what we believe this committee should consider its single greatest energy infrastructure priority. In 2025, around 11% of wind power in Ireland was lost because our existing grid is simply not strong enough to carry all the renewable electricity that our wind farms produce. This year, to the end of April, we have lost just over 12%, which means we are already on track to break last year's record, as members can see in the graph we have provided from EirGrid. Every time a wind turbine or solar panel is shut down because the grid cannot take the electricity, it means higher bills and more carbon emissions. Effectively, the members' constituents are paying more money for dirtier energy. This is why the recommendation I identified earlier regarding a dispatch down action plan is so important.

Despite the efforts of our colleagues in EirGrid and ESB Networks, our electricity grid is struggling to meet the demands of society today, let alone future demands from the electrification of our economy. The overwhelming majority of Ireland's high-voltage electricity transmission system was built in the 1970s and 1980s. Effectively, we are trying to run and grow a 21st century digital economy with an electricity grid built for the 1990s. Parts of that grid have been upgraded, new equipment was installed and projects to upgrade the grid are under way. We have seen successes in reinforcing the grid in the south west of the country and the €19 billion of grid investment announced in price review six, PR6, is extremely welcome. Now we need to ensure that the additional funding is used because this is not just about money, it is about clear, cross-party, political support from Government Buildings on Merrion Street to every doorstep in Ireland. It is about building a grid to which we can connect homes, businesses and factories, a grid which supports a thriving and resilient 21st century Irish economy. Efforts to reinforce the electricity grid in the 2010s and to complete the North-South interconnector on time did not fail through a lack of funding; they failed through a lack of support. Building that support, and maintaining and growing it, should be a key priority for this committee.

We have the resources and the technology to become energy independent but we have a choice to make. We can choose a future where we continue to be dependent on an international fossil fuel market that has staggered from crisis to crisis for 50 years, where we pay more for dirtier and less efficient energy, and where money flows out of our country instead of being invested at home. Alternatively, we can choose a future where we can depend on our own clean, affordable and secure electricity and become an Irish electro-state that is resilient and strong. We know that if we make the right choice for ourselves and for our children, we will build an Ireland that is energy independent with cleaner air, tens of thousands of new jobs, a leader in the response to the global climate emergency and a better country in which to grow old and raise our families. That is the choice we face.

I thank Mr. Cunniffe for his opening statement. I will call members in the following sequence: Deputy Tony McCormack, Senator Ollie Crowe, Deputies Joe Neville, Louis O'Hara, Conor Sheehan, John Clendennen and Peadar Tóibín, and Senator Joanne Collins.

I have one small question before I call the opening speaker. The witnesses were very good to send us the abridged financial statements for Wind Energy Ireland. I know who they represent but who owns the company? Who are the shareholders? Is it a shareholder by guarantee company?

It is a company limited by guarantee, CLG. We have an elected board of directors.

Will you explain a CLG to the non-technical accounting people?

Effectively we are a not-for-profit organisation that is supported by 200 companies. There are governance processes and a company constitution. We hold elections-----

Is there share capital?

No.

That is all I wanted to know. I want people to have a fix on the type of organisation Wind Energy Ireland is. I call Deputy McCormack.

I welcome the witnesses and thank them for the opening statement. It is clear from the evidence presented and from what Mr. Cunniffe said that Ireland has significant opportunities in renewable energy but also major challenges with grid infrastructure, planning and delivery. As policymakers, our role is to understand what actions are needed to accelerate progress while ensuring the benefits are felt by consumers, businesses and communities across the country. With that in mind, I will ask a few questions.

If, in the morning, Wind Energy Ireland was asked to give the Government recommendations, what three actions would have the greatest impact on accelerating renewable energy infrastructure while reducing costs? How do we ensure the economic benefits of renewable energy, such as jobs, investment, community funding and supply chain opportunities, are felt in rural Ireland and not concentrated in Dublin or in a small number of regions?

I have raised recently with the Minister the issue of near-neighbour payments being taxable. The witnesses will know there are a lot of wind farms in County Offaly and a lot of people on the ground in Offaly who would be eligible for near-neighbour payments.

Do the witnesses agree it is not right they should have to pay tax on these payments? In fairness, they are only small payments anyway but it is actually a payment to put up with the wind farms that are close to them.

The last issue I want to bring up is affordability. Every day I am hearing from people that their bills for electricity are very high. The witnesses are making the point that this is because of the price of gas. That is reasonable enough. Why is the price of wind energy in auctions in Ireland so high? Surely if getting wind onto the system will help bring down electricity prices, then getting cheaper wind onto the system would help even more. What can be done to bring down prices for renewables?

I thank the Deputy. I will respond to the question around the three things and I will then pass on to my colleagues Mr. Moran for the near neighbour payments question and rural Ireland and Mr. Linehan on the affordability of wind farms and auctions.

If there were three things in the morning that we would recommend the Government and country do to reduce energy bills, they could be summarised as investment in our electricity grid, which is overwhelmingly the largest thing we need to do to bring down bills in Ireland. Yes, there will be an increased cost in the grid component of the people of Ireland's electricity bills but we will definitely see a reduced cost in other elements like the wholesale price of electricity. One of the biggest barriers we have at the moment is we are not able to use all of the renewable energy generated at the times it is generated. In many situations that is because the grid simply is not there to carry it from where it is generated to where it wants to be used. In those situations we need to turn on the older, more inefficient, dirtier, fossil fuel plants to make up that back up and that increases the price of bills. If we invest in the grid, it will bring down the price.

The second thing would be to speed up the planning system by investing in resources and the right structures there. There are about 3 GW of onshore wind projects in planning today. If there was certainty on when they were coming out, that would be hugely beneficial to be able to forward plan and bring them online. Similarly, with offshore wind energy, five of the phase 1 projects are in planning at the moment. As I mentioned in my opening statement, we are anticipating the first decision for the first of those projects will be out in September. The second should be out at the end of November. Hitting those timelines is absolutely vital.

The third thing I would recommend is, if we jump forward three, four or five years, we are going to have more wind and more solar on our system, so we need to be able to store that energy and use it at times when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining. Investing in long-duration energy storage technologies, like the one announced earlier this week in County Carlow and the few others in development across Ireland, will help to store renewable energy and that affordable power and then use it when renewable energy is naturally available. That would absolutely bring down prices. I will pass to Mr. Moran for the other questions.

I am conscious of the time. I will take the near neighbour payment question first. I strongly support what the Deputy said. Near neighbour payments are between €1,000 and €1,500 depending on the projects. It is not huge money and there are also not huge numbers of people who would be in receipt of those payments because near neighbour payments are generally provided to people within 1 km and, in some cases, 2 km. The Exchequer would not miss it. I would also go further and ask that the issue of means-testing and those payments be considered. That has also come up from near neighbours who have been told they are entitled to these payments. We believe they should get it and share in the benefits from delivery of the infrastructure but they are worried about how it might affect their eligibility for medical cards, non-contributory pensions and things like that. It would be really helpful for that to be addressed.

In terms of the jobs and investment, one of the issues, which goes back to the grid to an extent, is that we have companies out there looking for renewable electricity. That is what they want to get. It is not just data centres. It is semiconductors, pharma and tech. In parts of this country, particularly in the north-west, where we have projects with full planning permission but, because there is no grid, it is conceivable we may never build them. We would say reinforce the grid but also ask how do we get investment into those locations? The Government has done a lot of good work about an offshore wind industrial plan. Seeing something like that for onshore wind would be really helpful. The Deputy's home county of Offaly has really shown how this can be done in terms of the green energy parks where we are seeing not just the benefit of those jobs and investment, but something like 30% of the commercial rates income in the county comes from wind farms. In about nine counties, that is above 10%. It is a major contributor to those local economies. It keeps libraries open. It helps to repair roads. That is important as well.

I will answer the question on auction prices.

Last item, yes.

The first thing to say is that in the past five years we have had five successful auctions. The price in those auctions thus far has reflected the cost of developing onshore wind in this country. That is a combination of things, including a long lead time. We are talking eight to ten years, typically, to develop from start to construction and energisation of an onshore wind farm. We would like to accelerate that because the planning risk, the elongated planning process, the grid connection costs and the time it takes to get a grid connection and a project connected is factored into bid prices and, ultimately, auction results. In terms of the auction results in the past five years, they have typically been 100% competitive with the fossil fuel alternative. If we look at the wholesale price in consumer pockets over the past five years, they have exceeded the price that renewables have been clearing in auctions.

We would like to see the price in auctions come down. We are currently undertaking research with a company called Baringa to look how we can depress the price in auctions. We will publish that research in the second half of this year. A lot of the stuff will be what Mr. Cunniffe has mentioned, such as long-duration energy storage and a predictable and efficient planning system, which gives certainty to projects as they are moving through the process. There are lots of different levers that can be taken for auctions and we would welcome those. We will publish that analysis in the coming months.

I thank Mr. Cunniffe for the presentation and I welcome the witnesses. I have just a couple of points regarding the recommendations for onshore wind energy. It was mentioned that less than 2% of the country is suitable for onshore wind. Could they explain how they came up with that figure and what it means for our renewable energy targets?

I will pass that to Mr. Keville, who chairs Wind Energy Ireland's planning committee and was central to that piece of work.

The 2% figure came from a piece of research my company undertook for Wind Energy Ireland over the past year and a half. It essentially looked at the entire country as a blank canvass and considered all the reasons one could not build a wind farm. What are the limitations, restrictions and constraints? That is everything from houses to designated nature protection areas, archaeology and water courses. We layered all of those constraints in a geographical mapping process and established that there was a theoretical viable area of about 1.86% of the country that was outside of all those constraints and, therefore, potentially viable for onshore wind. That equated to an area of around 1,300 sq. km. We then looked at what the recently permitted wind farm projects were delivering in terms of MW per square kilometre and we derived a range from that analysis from the 13 or 14 most recently permitted projects.

We also considered project attrition, which is essentially the various other hurdles that projects have to jump in terms of land assembly, where a site might be perfectly suitable but the landowner just does not want to accommodate it or in other cases, as was mentioned earlier, a project might go the entire way through the planning process successfully but just does not have the grid infrastructure in the likes of the north-west to be able to connect.. There are other obstacles that give rise to what we determine to be project attrition. When all of that exercise was undertaken, the analysis concluded that somewhere between 6 GW and 9 GW of additional capacity could be delivered in the areas where a wind farm was not already built, proposed or permitted.

Regarding the question on targets, the current target for onshore wind is 9 GW by 2030. Theoretically, it would be possible to actually double that figure or, at least, increase it by another 50% if we are working on the lower range that the analysis established could be feasible.

I thank Mr. Keville for that. Witnesses also spoke about re-powering and the need for life extensions. Could they elaborate on that?

The life extensions refer to wind farm developments that have received and been granted planning permission for a finite period such as 20, 25 or maybe 30 years in some cases.

Repowering refers to the replacement of older turbines with newer ones. The issue around lifetime extensions is that the turbines might be perfectly operational and might be still doing the job that they were intended to do on day one 25 or even 30 years later, but right here, right now, those projects have to go back through the planning process, even if they just want to operate for another five years, and they have to go back through an environmental impact assessment process in order to secure planning permission for an extended period. If they were generating the same amount of energy on day one as they are 25 years later, there are obviously huge advantages, including cost advantages, to allowing those projects just to continue to operate. In terms of repowering, there is obviously an advantage and an opportunity to utilise the most modern technology. Typically, repowering, as we have seen it delivered in other countries, results in a significant reduction in the number of turbines by installing a much smaller number of larger turbines to replace the previously installed large number of small turbines. That delivers significant opportunities in terms of utilising the grid infrastructure, which has a much longer design life than the wind farms themselves, and repurposing the roads and the other infrastructure that will have been delivered on site in order to deliver also lower cost energy for the next 25 or 35 years if the project was repowered.

If I may, Chair, a great example of that repowering is the ongoing process that is happening in Ireland's first wind farm, in Bellacorick, County Mayo, which was 6 MW in size. They are currently replacing over 20 turbines that were built in the 1990s with a single modern turbine that is delivering the exact same power output.

Very good.

Finally, on the point about pushing ahead with the RED III directive and the new Planning and Development Act, both of those were brought in to help to speed up infrastructure. Can the witnesses tell me if those items are helping here, and if not, why not? Is it that they are not being implemented or is it suggested that there is a lack of resources, or what is the real-----

There have been some challenges with the implementation, for sure. I will go to Mr. Keville again because I know the planning committee has been dealing with this.

Sure. The overarching intent of the third renewable energy directive is essentially more renewables faster. To date, since the regulations that implemented that directive in Ireland were introduced last August, we have not seen that. Certain aspects of it have been implemented. Other aspects of the regulations have been deferred twice now. As a very practical example, my company lodges and prepares planning applications for our clients for wind farm developments. I know that we can lodge those planning applications now up until their most recently extended deadline of 1 November this year, but sitting here today, I do not know when we will be able to lodge the next planning applications for wind farms beyond 1 November because we still have not seen guidance that is awaited and still do not have clarity in terms of some of the new processes that are provided for in those new regulations but have not been clarified for us practitioners.

A Chathaoirligh, I am conscious of the time but I will mention as a very concrete example of that the completeness checks which were introduced in RED III. In principle, they are a very good idea. Before RED III, if I was submitting a planning application, I would put in the application and the planning authority would get it and might realise I had done a bad job. I might have left things out or omitted material I should have provided. It then would go back to me, it would make a further information request and there would be a whole period of time lost getting that information. RED III brought in a system whereby now, when I submit to the planning authority, there is a completeness check. Somebody takes my application and checks whether everything is there that needs to be there for the planning authority to deal with the application. The problem is that different local authorities are applying this system really differently. Some have rejected applications, often for quite trivial reasons. We did a survey in March of this year looking at each local authority. We found that one local authority had received eight applications and had carried out eight completeness checks and that all passed - a 100% pass rate. Two other local authorities received ten and 11 applications, respectively, with an 80% to 90% failure rate. There is this huge variation across local authorities. The really good idea here is that somebody should check to make sure the developer has done their job and submitted all the material. However, because the local authorities are not being given the resources and the proper guidance on exactly how you run a completeness check, you end up with a wide variation of how the local authorities respond to it.

Before I call Deputy Neville, I ask you to indulge me for one second. How many wind farms have applied for the time extension and have not been granted it? Has that happened?

It has. I do not know the exact number. I would say in or around a dozen at this stage have had their lifetimes extended, their operational life-----

No, I am asking about those which have not been extended. Are you with me?

We might undertake to come back to you on that, a Chathaoirligh.

How many have been refused?

We have that information. We might follow up with you.

By the way, any information we request that you do not have today we will ask you to send on in writing.

Yes, perfect.

If it is a big issue, fine, but if it is a theoretical issue that has not occurred, that is-----

I do not believe it is a theoretical issue.

Okay. You will send us the information.

Lastly, as regards this check, An Coimisiún Pleanála can send out a checklist. May I just make an observation to you? I think the obligation should be on the applicant to know the process and get everything right. You should not be relying on a taxpayer-funded State agency to coach you on how to put in an application and what documents are needed. The industry should know that. I would be concerned about the impartiality of various planning authorities when they effectively coach people and tell them, "We want one, two, three, four and here are the 46 things you did not cover." They have nearly embedded themselves in the planning process. That is a point I see completely differently from where you are coming from. You should know your business without asking the council or An Coimisiún Pleanála whether you have got everything here. It is an observation. You can respond if you like, but do you see where I am coming from?

I do, but the regulations that were introduced last August actually introduced a requirement for what is known as mandatory scoping, so it is now mandatory for an applicant to ask either An Coimisiún Pleanála or the local authority what they deem should-----

Before or after they lodge?

Before they lodge.

But I am talking about after they lodge and there is further information. It looks like there is a list of 46 items that should have been included.

The intention around the completeness check and statutory timeframes is that there are no further opportunities for either the commission or the local authorities to request further information. That is the intention behind trying to scope the application before it is lodged and then undergoing the completeness check to which Mr. Moran referred.

But then is it an opportunity to make observations arising from objections that might come from members of the public?

Members of the public will still have the opportunity to-----

No, I am talking about the applicant responding to submissions from members of the public. You would often see a local authority ask them to respond to the submissions that have been received. Does that opportunity exist?

Given that we are not in that new process yet, I do not know right here, right now.

Has it arisen yet?

It has not arisen yet because projects have not yet been applied for with them that have undergone the mandatory EIA scoping.

I ask you to send us an information note as you see it and we will ask the CCMA, on behalf of local authorities, and An Coimisiún Pleanála to outline their views on it. I am not talking about any particular application but, rather, how they see this new process working. I was shocked by one I saw. I felt it was as if An Coimisiún Pleanála was nearly writing the application for the applicant it pointed out to them so many things that were missing. Is there a process in this? I see lots of planning applications deemed invalid because of key omissions. Does that process exist here? If it is so bad that there are 46 questions required to make it complete, why would they not just send it back and say it is invalid?

There is a validation process as part of every planning application and, yes, planning applications, including for wind farms, can be deemed to be invalid.

Send us an information note-----

Yes, we absolutely can.

-----and we will do the same from our side.

I call Deputy Neville. Sorry about that, Deputy.

You are the boss. Who are we to complain?

I thank the witnesses for coming in. I want to ask a few basic questions. First, as regards renewables, say, last year, or maybe even this year, what is Wind Energy Ireland's target for the percentage of total energy that would be wind energy? Obviously, we have renewables, so I would like two numbers: renewables and wind energy as a percentage of the overall energy used in the country.

The renewable percentage was 40.9% last year, and wind energy made up about 33% of that.

What is the plan for this year?

We will likely have an increase on that. That seems likely after the first couple of months that we have had. In February, March and April, renewable energy outpaced fossil fuels for the first time ever for three months in a row. May seems to have been a record month for renewable energy from the indicative data we have, so I would say we are on track for probably mid-40% in terms of renewable energy, if not higher.

Wind would obviously be probably 36% or 37%.

Wind would be very close to 40%.

It is more likely to be wind than solar.

I think solar makes up roughly 4% of the total on average.

The target is 60% by 2030.

It is 80% renewable electricity by 2030.

Are we going to get there?

We do not believe that we are on track for that to happen. When that target was set, there was an assumption that certain targets would have been met for onshore wind, offshore wind and solar energy. For offshore wind, as we have set out in our offshore wind action plan, we do not believe that the 5 GW target for offshore wind energy will be hit until some point in the mid-2030s.

Geographically, where is the issue with offshore wind?

The five offshore wind projects I mentioned earlier are all in planning along the east coast, extending from Louth down to Arklow.

They are the ones going to planning. What about the ones that are not in planning but could or should be. What about the west coast?

At the moment, a mapping exercise is being carried out by the State to identify future offshore wind energy sites around Ireland's coast lines. That will be complete by the end of 2027 and will set out future sites that can be developed out to 2040.

Have we ever done auctions on the west coast?

There was one project that participated in the very first renewable energy auction just off the coast of Galway, but that project was subsequently withdrawn.

There is no potential or option on the west coast. Is the west coast too difficult?

In order for any project to progress through the system, it needs to go through what is called a DMAP - designated maritime area plan - process and then it needs to submit its planning application. The State manages which sites can be identified. No site has yet been identified on the west coast. It is very likely that one will be by the end of 2027, so we will know an awful lot more. The west coast holds massive opportunity for Ireland when it comes to offshore wind energy. We have some of the windiest resources on the planet off our west coast, so certainly in the late 2030s and definitely into the 2040s, we will have offshore wind energy there.

Is Mr. Cunniffe happy that the east coast projects are all on track?

If we can hit the timelines that have been set by ACP and if it meets those timelines so if by this time next year, I am invited back before this committee and four out of the five projects are in planning, that will be a clear sign that we are getting on track for offshore wind energy. That would mean that the first project could be delivering energy by about 2030. Most of them will be delivering energy in the early 2030s.

Who is developing those five sites?

There is a variety of developers, ranging from the ESB, a company called Parkwind in the north, Statkraft, RWE and Fred. Olsen Renewables-----

Are most of those companies from outside Ireland?

A lot of them would be outside Ireland, with the exception of the ESB. The reason is the scale of investment required for offshore wind energy. These are massive capital projects. Each one of those projects would cost €7 billion and require skills that are developed. It is the same people in markets right around the world.

One thing I am conscious of is dispatch down. What exactly is happening there? Is it where we turn off energy?

At the moment, we are losing 11% or 12% of our wind and solar energy every single year because typically either the grid cannot take it or there are system security reasons that mean we must keep thermal plants online.

In that case, the renewables figure of 33% could be higher.

It could definitely be higher.

Renewables are generating more than 33% of our electricity. We are just not utilising it all.

That is correct. Last year, that figure of 33% would have been about 37% or 38% if we had actually utilised all of the renewable energy generated.

That is interesting. What is an acceptable level of dispatch down? Did Mr. Cunniffe say it was 10% or 12%?

That is where we are at the moment.

What is an acceptable level? Where could we get to?

The dispatch down levels we have seen throughout the past decade would have been within acceptable standards for developers. They could certainly develop business cases from that. That was in the region of 5% to 7%.

Who could fix that problem?

This is why we are calling for a dispatch down action plan. There are several activities.

Who can do it?

EirGrid, ESB Networks and the CRU. There are multiple parties that need to be involved in fixing dispatch down because there is a wide range of solutions. There is no silver bullet for this.

The Celtic interconnector has been delayed. I know it is outside the scope of Wind Energy Ireland but what are the potential impacts on wind energy?

The Celtic interconnector is a really important project for Ireland. It will help reduce our energy prices and increase our energy security. I read that it is delayed until the end of 2028. For us, the Celtic interconnector provides an opportunity to export power from Ireland at times when we have very high wind energy and perhaps not the demand in Ireland to utilise all of it. There is definitely an opportunity there for Ireland to export during those times.

This means we are going to lose out on exports. It is tied in with dispatch down. We are creating energy, we cannot use it and now we cannot export it, so that is a double loss.

In terms of the delay to the Celtic interconnector for two years, it is, yes.

That is the impact for the wind energy industry.

It is. There are other interconnectors to Britain that facilitate imports and exports.

I will take the opposite approach. I might fire a few comments and questions at Mr. Cunniffe and then give him time to respond to them all. I will focus on energy affordability because obviously we have a real crisis in energy affordability. Hundreds of thousands of households are in arrears on their bills. Renewables such as wind energy are repeatedly described as the cheapest form of electricity generation but obviously consumers here still face some of the highest electricity costs in the EU. We have not seen a reduction in prices as generation has increased. I know Mr. Cunniffe mentioned the reliance on gas imports as one of the main reasons for that. Could he speak in more detail about why consumers have not seen a reduction in prices as generation of wind and other renewables has increased across the system? Will he comment on the main cost drivers, once the grid upgrades have been made and the constraints, curtailment and balancing costs are all taken into account? What specific improvements or measures would Wind Energy Ireland like to see to bring down the cost of energy and household bills? To what extent are data centres putting pressure on the need to build out more connections and grid infrastructure? Is that also having a knock-on impact on household bills?

As the Deputy correctly pointed out, the price for electricity in Ireland is too high at the moment. A lot of that is due to us having such a reliance on gas imports over which we have no control. With renewable energy, they participate in auctions. Renewable energy delivers a fixed price that is guaranteed for, say, 15 or 20 years. It is the highest price but also the lowest price that projects will receive. The price of gas fluctuates massively. In 2022, gas prices would have gone from below €100 per megawatt hour to over €400 per megawatt hour. That scale of increase is what drove up the wholesale element of consumer bills. Wholesale prices right now make up about 40% of people's bills, so they are the largest contributor.

In terms of what we can do to bring that down, if one wants to bring down wholesale energy prices, the best thing to do is bring on more renewable energy because that drives down wholesale prices. Every month, we produce a dashboard that shows that on the days when we have the most renewable energy available, wholesale prices are typically about half those found on the days when renewable energy is not available and we need to rely on those imported fossil fuels.

This brings me to the point I made earlier around long duration storage being something the country needs to start investing in. The wind does not blow every day and the sun does not shine every day but there are times when we have too much wind energy and too much sun, and it is turned down. That is the dispatch down issue. If can store that energy and then utilise it during those times, that will maintain or keep wholesale prices at a lower level.

Investment in Ireland's electricity grid will be critical for that. There has been a €19 billion allowance provided to EirGrid and ESB Networks for grid investment over the next five years. That funding restriction is now gone but we need to see that grid delivered. Too much of the grid that exists today was built 40 to 60 years ago, so we need a modernised grid. That will help to bring down prices.

In terms of other devices that could be brought onto the grid, we will hear more about smart network technologies to get more out of the existing grid.

There are new technologies that could be brought on, which will help us to remove fossil fuels off the system that are currently there for security of supply.

On the Deputy's question around data centres, data centres have been in the news an awful lot recently, as everyone will have seen, with different reports coming out - some good and some bad. Ireland's electricity demand has increased in recent years as a result of data centres but if we look at the long term, every single study I have seen on Ireland's electricity grid going out to 2050 shows roughly a tripling of Ireland's electricity demand for a variety of reasons. This is predominantly due to our economy electrifying with more electric vehicles and more heat pumps coming in and industry starting to electrify so it can decarbonise. That tripling of demand is planned and has been planned for a long time, therefore we should be capable of developing out a system that can deliver that growth. Whether that growth happens due to electrification or specifically due to industrial growth, the issue is still there. It will happen and we need to be able to manage it as a country.

Mr. Cunniffe mentioned the ESRI report in the opening statement. The Irish Fiscal Advisory Council published its annual report a couple of days ago and one of its findings was exactly as the Deputy identified, where it is expecting to see energy prices rise in 2026. It then goes on to say that if we had developed renewables faster that problem would not be as bad. We would not be seeing the price rises that we are seeing. That is another independent agency other than just us that is making the same point.

I thank the witnesses. I have a number of questions. Some of them are related specifically to my own area of Shannon Foynes Port and I will come to those later. A figure of approximately 13% of energy being wasted, essentially, was given. Regarding the €18.9 billion infrastructure investment into the grid, how does Wind Energy Ireland envisage this being rolled out? Do the witnesses think this will adequately deal with the fact that between 11% and 13% of wind-generated energy is lost every year due to inadequate grid capacity?

The €18.9 billion that I referenced was a regulatory allowance provided by the CRU to EirGrid and ESB Networks for a plan it has already set out and intends to deliver between now and 2030. A lot of that plan is infrastructure projects around Ireland. There is a huge investment in the Dublin region to help manage a growing demand and a growing industrial population in the area. It will definitely help to reduce dispatch down so that we can better utilise renewable energy and get it to the homes, businesses, towns and cities around Ireland that are looking for it. It will absolutely help. We just need to make sure that plan is delivered upon now that the investment barrier has been removed.

To add briefly to that, the Deputy correctly pointed out just how critical that dispatch down action plan is in reducing those percentage numbers in the coming years. As Mr. Cunniffe pointed out, the physical infrastructure and that investment into it will be critical to that. It is also about a lot of the operational measures that EirGrid and ESB Networks can take in the coming years in terms of the types of technology on the grid. We referred in the opening statement to things like long duration energy storage and hybrid connections where you effectively can co-locate wind or solar batteries and then can use the technology better to try to pull those numbers down. More grid needs to be built but the grid also needs to be operated smarter over the coming years to tackle those numbers.

That segues nicely into another question I had. Do the witnesses think the infrastructure task force and the sectoral action plans that are going to come in relation to individual Departments will work in terms of reforming? We do not really do parallel consenting well. We have a very cumbersome and somewhat nativist planning system in this country, which has, in my view anyway, been collectively responsible. That, the consenting and the inadequate investment has just created a perfect storm of inertia in infrastructure development. Will the witnesses comment on that?

The infrastructure task force has done a really great job on the report it pulled together and we strongly endorse a lot of the recommendations in it. It definitely has the ability to speed up the delivery of grid infrastructure and lots of other infrastructure around Ireland.

Out of those recommendations, what for Mr. Cunniffe would be the most important? Would it be around the consenting or legal reform?

Consenting, in particular. The recommendations of the accelerating infrastructure task force typically are applied to State projects. Wind farms or anything like that do not fall under it, but the grid infrastructure that would be developed by EirGrid and ESB Networks will fall under it. Making sure that is delivered is going to be vital. A key part of making projects deliverable is going to be both public and political support for projects. A lot of projects on the grid that were in various stages of development over the past ten to 15 years were subsequently cancelled because of a lack of public support. The grid operators learned a lot about their community engagement and stakeholder engagement through that process. When the next wave of projects come out it is vital that they are built.

I mention taking into account action 29 from the Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan. That is all about how the Government comes together, the various different Departments and State agencies, to make the case for infrastructure. It is not just grid, but grid is obviously the one we would be focused on. One of the challenges when you are talking to a community or to people about a project, is that what they really need to know is need. They need to know why we are doing this. They also need to be assured they are being listened to when they are raising concerns. We talk about planning law and grid law but sometimes that communications part can get lost, so I draw the committee's attention to that action.

That is a really important point because we as politicians need to change how we communicate with people and communities around infrastructure in general and around the fact that investment and additionality are all positive things. They are not problems; they are solutions.

I will talk about Shannon Foynes Port in particular. The submission was made to the Maritime Area Regulatory Authority, MARA, in June 2025. Obviously, that has to come back and then it has to go to An Coimisiún Pleanála. There is a lot of frustration in the mid-west that the development of the potential of Shannon Foynes Port, Foynes Island and the deepwater terminal is all taking so long. It seems like something we have been hearing about for decades nearly at this stage yet there has been very little in the way of tangible process. Will the witnesses comment on that?

The Shannon Foynes Port Company would be very active members of our own organisation. It is something we have been supporting it on for years in trying to get investment in ports around Ireland. We have been on the record for years now stating that no port in Ireland currently, apart from Belfast, can construct an offshore wind farm. If we look at the economic benefit that offshore wind farms can deliver in terms of jobs and development around the communities in the area, if you do not have a port you lose 30% to 40% of that. Getting Ireland's ports ready is vital. A big thing that will determine the future of Shannon Foynes Port is going to be that national DMAP process, where it will identify sites off the west and the south coasts where it can play a role in helping with its delivery. Ensuring that project gets the right consents and conditions from MARA and then ultimately from An Coimisiún Pleanála will be vital. It is about making sure it has an investment case so that it can get the funding from the State. We referenced the national ports policy. Currently, this policy prohibits investment in the ports around the State. That will be going out for consultation very soon. We hope it will open up opportunities for State investment, where a credible business case is made, to make sure the right construction happens to deliver these ports in order that offshore wind farms can be built.

I will make one final point. A lot of my frustration has been around the delays around getting the DMAP process done. The application was made to MARA last June. Will the witnesses comment on why that is taking so long?

The DMAP process is the national mapping process I referenced earlier to identify sites. I imagine what the Deputy is referring to might be a maritime area consent, MAC, which the port applied for.

Yes, sorry. That is exactly what I am referring to.

MARA is definitely the party best placed to answer this. It was only recently established. In our experience it has speeded up delivery timelines for MACs and maritime usage licences in recent months. I cannot comment on the specific case. I imagine that is something Shannon Foynes should take up with MARA.

As a representative for Offaly, it has almost become the energy capital of the country, moving from brown to green in recent years. We are 2% of the land mass yet we are one of the top producers of renewable energy. Recently, we officially opened Derrinlough wind farm, a 126 MW and €150 million development, with a €12 million community benefit fund and multiples of that in commercial rates. We are seeing at first hand the material difference these developments can make. Technology is moving at such a pace, when we see the likes of the Vindeby project in the early nineties and what that produced in terms of gigawatts. Baltic 2 will produce that in a month. The real pace of change here is exceptional. This is infrastructure but I do want to put something on the record in relation to community benefit funds. In Offaly we have €50 million in the pipeline over the next number of years. We are going to have sports clubs wearing designer gear if we are not careful about the allocation of these funds, whether it be near neighbours, local community groups or legacies in relation to capital projects. I would ask the organisations present and their members to seriously consider that to ensure we get value for our money into the long term from those funds.

On regional strategies, Offaly has been to the fore, as I already outlined. We are now looking at regional and county targets. Should there be recognition for a county like Offaly that has done the heavy lifting, or should we start at zero, the same as every other county?

I might ask Mr. Keville to cover that, but just to note that Offaly has done a phenomenal job in recent times.

I am under pressure for time, although I appreciate the compliments.

In terms of what the different counties have delivered, and Offaly has made a significant contribution to date, as a country we have to look at where the potential exists to accommodate onshore wind and any type of renewables. Certain counties will have done a lot, and that might be all they can do. There might be no more potential left. Other counties might also have done an awful lot but there might be further potential to be harnessed. As a country, we need to be harnessing low-cost, renewable wind energy wherever it arises and wherever there is a viable project that can pass the test of the planning process and all the environmental assessments that go with it.

If I could have a yes or no answer, rather than starting at zero, the work done to date by a county like Offaly should be recognised in those targets.

I think it should be part of our process. When they are setting those targets, they should be looking at what has been built already. There are counties that have built a significant amount and others that have not had the opportunity to build in yet.

So it should be recognised.

It should be part of the process, yet.

Okay. A lot of credence has been given today to DMAP, county development plans, and zonal and spatial planning. In Offaly we have drafted a county development plan over a number of different terms. We have gone about it in a conscientious, trustworthy and fair way. We have designated 28% of the county as suitable for wind while 72% is not suitable for wind. Would it be fair, trustworthy or conscientious if one of Wind Energy Ireland's members was to come forward with a planning application outside of that 28% of land zoned appropriately for wind development?

We have seen over the last number of years that national policy has evolved a lot quicker than local policy. Some local policies are 15 years old, for example.

I want to keep it specific to Offaly, considering how progressive we have been in the whole area of wind development.

It really comes down to the process that Offaly went through. With the regional renewable energy strategies coming, the allocation of the national targets and a new methodology we understand is being used-----

Considering Wind Energy Ireland is the representative body for wind development in the country, would the witnesses expect the likes of me as a public representative to support a project in an area outside the 28%?

When our members are looking at any county, whether it is Offaly or any other county, the first thing they look at is the county development plan and which areas are zoned suitable for wind farms.

A total of 28% is zoned appropriate for wind.

I do appreciate that. In other counties - I am not saying this Offaly - we have instances where they have zoned significant areas, but when we apply project level constraints, there is actually nothing there that we can build in.

The reason I am trying to keep it to Offaly is because we have been pioneers in this space and a lot of counties can learn from it. We have to learn from the good as much as from the bad. If one of Wind Energy Ireland's members were to look at an area outside the 28%, would it encourage or recommend that? Would it see it as fair, trustworthy or conscientious towards the people in that area?

What has to be recognised is that, even though 28% might be classified as suitable, it might not all be developable.

Considering a 2 GW pipeline of energy development and generation, would you consider it to be fair, trustworthy and conscientious for one of your members to make an application or to consider outside of that 28% zoned spatial area, when there is a pipeline of 2 GW of energy generation?

I do not know what the specific project is.

I am not talking about a specific project, just in general.

I am honestly not sure. I think a lot of things are time-dependent. Very often you might have five to six years of work done on a project before you apply for planning permission. We have seen lots of situations-----

The moral of the story is that where counties are doing heavy lifting and being ambitious, do not exploit it. That would be my point. Where counties have done very little, by all means we need the spatial planning and the development. Go about it in a way that brings communities with you. That would be my recommendation.

To finish up, on job opportunities and green energy parks, there are many people in my county who would believe there is no real economic output yet material or tangible from the likes of renewable energy development. I firmly believe that we have a strong pipeline and many encouraging opportunities are being considered. Offshore does have an industrial strategy in respect of economic development and job creation. Why do we not have that in respect of onshore?

That is something we have been pushing for for quite some time now. The Deputy is exactly right. The Department of enterprise is currently updating its industrial strategy for offshore wind to broaden it into a green industrial growth strategy. That takes into account onshore wind, solar and other forms of energy situations. Green energy perks are going to be essential around Ireland. As I mentioned earlier, dispatch down is a massive problem. One of the best ways to solve that is by putting the demand right beside the generation. It creates huge opportunities for new industries, particularly to be located rurally in coastal communities. I think Offaly is a great example of that.

You got your compliment in in the end, thank you.

On the wind guidelines, are we likely to see them in the next 50 years?

We have been asking for the wind energy guidelines for as long as anybody. It is something our industry has been calling for, to remove any uncertainties that have been there. We have seen multiple iterations of them almost come through. We understand the timeline is currently to see something this year. That is in the hands of the Departments of housing and energy, I think.

I am a big fan of sustainable energy, for reasons of climate change but also for energy security, which is more important now than it has ever been. However, there are problems in the Irish market. First, the market is a mess. We are net importers of energy at the moment, which is quite shocking, and the price is completely out of order. On the percentage prices, it was stated that wholesale was around 40%. I am looking at figures here from a lecturer in engineering, Dr. Niall Burke. The data is from the CRU interim report. It puts the wholesale cost last year at about 32%, not a million miles away. Interestingly, it puts energy transmission and distribution at 43%. That includes the network itself, but also the system and market management, imperfections, capacity, wholesale market charges and so on. That is actually growing at the moment. It seems to be that there is a big dysfunction there. The distribution of this electricity is now costing more than the wholesale cost of its production. The whole idea of dispatch down is becoming problematic. There is a law of diminishing returns applying to each turbine that is added to the system. Each one now has a bigger likelihood of a dispatch down. Dispatch down is not free to the State. There is a charge to me and all the citizens. The wind turbine companies are paid when you are dispatching down, is that not correct?

No, it is not. I am glad the Deputy brought that up, because it is often a misconception. The payment for dispatch down payments is extremely specific, depending on the State-supported contract you have, the contract for the electricity grid, and the type of dispatch down it is. The figures reported in the press of the overall value of dispatch down are often in the hundreds of millions of euro. The information we have from EirGrid is that the actual payments to generators for dispatch down are a fraction of that.

What fraction? Is there a specific answer to how much it is costing?

In 2024, it cost roughly €20 million. That is out of an energy market or bills of €10 billion.

Does that include any kind of constraint or curtailment costs?

Specifically paid to wind firms, yes. For completeness, there is a live EU court case where those figures may change and those percentages may go up over time as the EU is trying to incentivise more renewables and derisk them. The overwhelming majority of constrained payments the Deputy is referencing in that chart are actually paid to thermal, fossil fuel generators to turn on when we turn off the wind energy. If they are not scheduled in the market, they get payments. That is where the vast majority of those payments come from.

I am not familiar with the post the Deputy outlined initially in terms of the breakdown of costs but the CRU published its interim review of the electricity market in April, and I have the figures here. The energy costs are 44.35%-----

The wholesale energy costs?

The wholesale energy costs. What they look at is the domestic customer core bill components, energy costs of €828. It lists transmission, distribution, supply and VAT. I am happy to share these figures with the Deputy. They appear to be different from the figures he has.

The way it is broken down here is wholesale energy costs, energy transmission, distribution, retail supply costs and margin, and taxes and charges on top of that, which is 14.9% in its own right, which is quite nuts.

The constraints and imperfection charges the Deputy is referring to are a symptom of a grid that is not capable of moving the energy around. Again, if-----

It does make the point, though, that there is a diminishing return from each additional turbine that we add.

I do not believe-----

In general.

I do not believe that is the case, and I will set out why. It is very important, depending on where that is, that could be located right beside a demand-----

In general, if the dispatch down is increasing each year-----

But the dispatch down is not the same for every wind turbine in Ireland. The wind turbines, for example, in Kerry and Cork, are dispatched down much less than those in Donegal, for example, as a result of the fact the network has been invested in in Kerry and Cork. Where we have seen network investment, they typically have lower dispatch down-----

Which we could share with the Deputy.

We will ask you to send it in.

We are very happy to share.

In terms of PSO, all these costs we are seeing in electricity are creeping up as well, and they are supposed to be dealing with the renewable energy component of the market.

The PSO levy is specifically to pay renewable electricity support schemes or REFIT projects which cost roughly 1% on the bill. Over recent years it has been zero, or even for one year it was paid back to consumers. As I mentioned earlier, the way current auctions are structured, it is a fixed price. Whenever the market price is higher than that, generators actually pay back to the customer. Whenever it is lower than that, they get top up in a subsidy, and that is what the PSO levy is. The reason the PSO levy is a charge to customers this year is due to a back calculation from previous years. If we were just looking at this year by itself, there would be no charge to electricity consumers to support renewable energy.

There is a wind farm to be built in the Erris Gaeltacht, and the planning application went out in English,and then a month later in Irish. The residents of the Gaeltacht in Erris have a month less to deal with the planning application. Irish is the first language of the country. This community is a vibrant, Irish-speaking community. It is unfair that Irish speakers will be given a month less to deal with the planning application. Could Wind Energy Ireland help in relation to that?

If the Deputy can share the specific case with me-----

The name of the company is RWE Renewables Ireland, and it is the Muingmore Wind Farm.

What is the county or location?

Erris in County Mayo.

We can take that back.

I appreciate that.

I am based in County Limerick, where more than 50% of our land has been approved for wind energy. I want to say it is probably closer to 70%. We have a couple of wind farms. We have two, one of which is with An Coimisiún Pleanála and the other which has probably gone through judicial review, or is in the process of going through it. The residents in the area are 100% against these wind farms going in for a couple of reasons. The fact that people are waiting 20 years for guidelines means they reckon the height of these turbines are definitely not what the guidelines are going to show and they are too high. There are 158 m high ones, like the ones along by Roscrea. These are going to be going quite close to schools and houses. People have an issue with the fact that the HSE issued a report in 2019 to say that there was an issue with wind turbines, and then very quickly pulled the report. People think there is something going on and that there an issue when it comes to the noise and the flicker.

Who benefits the most from wind energy? I do not see the cost of energy going down for customers but I see developers getting grants of up to €50 million to put turbines in. When the turbines are turned off, they still get paid because of the curtailment or constraint costs. That is the issue I would like an answer to. Who is benefiting the most when it comes to wind energy?

I am in County Limerick, so I am all for Shannon Foynes Port getting its DMAP done. I have been fighting and calling for it for a long time and it irritated me when I heard the national DMAP was starting on the east coast, because there is a plan for the port and I know that if it goes on too long, it will miss out on the EU funding stream and have to wait another couple of years until that opens up again. It is going to be a pity if it does not move quickly enough around to the Foynes side, because their plans are well in place and have been for a long time.

I will do my best to answer the Senator’s questions, and my colleagues might want to come in.

On who benefits the most from wind energy, as mad as it sounds, if we did not have renewable energy, our electricity bills would be much higher today than they are. As I mentioned earlier, on the wholesale price, it is 30 to 40%, depending on the exact year. On the days when we have the most renewable energy available, prices at the wholesale level are half those on the days when we have to rely entirely on imported fossil fuels. The people of Ireland are benefiting from lower electricity bills as a result of wind farms. As was in my opening statement, there are some facts and figures to back that up. We believe on an annual basis, per person, it is in the region of €70 to €80. That was before the Iranian energy crisis, so it is likely to be even higher this year.

As to the Deputy’s point about grants to build wind farms, those companies get a State contract by competing in a competitive process. The way that auction process works, only the most cost-efficient projects win at wind and solar. That is over 20 years, so it is almost like a mortgage. It is a guaranteed payment to be able to then construct a wind farm and pay the several million euro - €10 million, €20 million or €30 million - to build the wind farm depending on its size. It is not a grant to build a wind farm. I wanted to note that.

On the national DMAP point, many of the projects on the east coast have been in development for 15 to 20 years. They went through a previous process prior to the DMAPs, and then a DMAP was done on the south coast. I absolutely share the Senator’s passion for wind energy on the west coast. It is something I really want to see, being from the west myself. It is a huge opportunity for the people in that area.

When the timeline was set out for the national DMAP process, it was set out to be delivered by the end of 2027. A lot of people did not believe that it would be hit because it was not being resourced sufficiently, but the latest that we have is that it is still on track. As long as that gets delivered, I absolutely believe that there is an opportunity for the Shannon Estuary region to play a huge role in the 2030s to deliver offshore wind energy.

On the HSE point, I thought that the HSE guide was from 2017, but I could be wrong and the Senator could be right with 2019.

I could be wrong with my date.

My understanding was that the HSE's guidance was live until very recently, and it asserted that there was no impact on human health from the development of wind energy. That guidance has been withdrawn. The HSE is currently carrying out a review and will come back at some point with updated guidance.

Just to note, we obviously represent the people who build and operate the wind farms. We also represent the people who work in them. We all have friends who are not just near wind farms but on wind farms and actually in the nacelle in the turbine when the blades are spinning. I have family living within 1 km of an existing wind turbine, so we would not be doing that if we thought there was a health and safety risk or an issue here.

It goes back to a point made in the opening statements. When people hear that new infrastructure is coming in - much like the Senator, I suspect, I sat at kitchen tables talking to people who had concerns about wind farms - the initial response can often be quite negative and fearful. There is a responsibility on us, perhaps one we have not always lived up to, to do a better job of engaging with people, responding to those questions and providing that information to tackle disinformation and misinformation. We need to deliver these projects, but we need to work with communities to do that.

At a granular level, it comes down to each company or developer that is putting in a wind farm. The consultation process is probably the most important part of getting these wind farms going. I know that the consultation processes for a lot of the ones in County Limerick were carried out in the neighbouring county because they were so close to the border, and they were done at a time that may not have suited many people. It felt like the consultations were done a little bit sneakily. Now, we will get that with a lot of things and the consultations might not necessarily have been done that way on purpose, but people's perceptions can sometimes be the biggest barrier to getting projects up and running. If we can get offshore wind development going, we will not have to deal with the planning issues for onshore wind farms where communities are objecting, there are judicial reviews and developments take years to come around.

I agree with the witnesses, in that I would love to see the guidelines being published. If the guidelines were out, it would take a lot of the wind out of sails because we would at least know what we were dealing with and what experts had decided was actually okay to put in. A lot of it is the perception that nobody really knows yet.

We completely agree with that.

May I add one final brief comment? The Senator asked about the benefits, and we talked a lot about the financial benefits. It is something that is covered in the opening statement, but let us not forget that there has been a 50% reduction in emissions from the electricity sector in the past 20 years.

Yes, I saw that.

That is cleaner air and a healthier environment for our families. As a sector, that is something we are immensely proud to have delivered.

I know that I am way over my time, but may I ask one last question? How much of the wind energy that is produced goes to domestic customers? Do the witnesses have that figure?

Due to the way electricity physically works, it is not possible to calculate that. It is estimated that 33% of Ireland's electricity comes from wind every year, so it would be roughly about that.

That is perfect. I thank the witnesses for their time.

I thank the Senator. I have one last quick question. The issue of guidelines was mentioned twice today. Are regulations better and clearer from a statutory point of view? Guidelines are guidelines. When I hear that something is a guideline, it is not a rule. A regulation is more specific. Will the witnesses comment on that?

When the guidelines come out, they will be published as a national planning statement.

Will Mr. Moran say that again?

When the guidelines come out, they will be published as a national planning statement. They will then be used by An Coimisiún Pleanála to adjudicate on whether a project gets planning permission.

That is as opposed to planning regulations, which are statutory instruments. The guidelines will not be a statutory instrument.

Under the new Planning and Development Act, what were previously guidelines will now be national planning statements.

It was a section 28, and it will now be a national planning statement.

I thank the witnesses for assisting the committee. A lot of members had a lot of questions. I thank the witnesses for their quick and good responses. Any information that we sought that the witnesses want to send on, will they please do so as soon as possible? If they need any clarifications, they can check with the clerk of the committee.

As there is no other business, the committee now stands adjourned until 17 June 2026.