Development (Strategic Gas Reserve) Bill 2026: Committee and Remaining Stages Seanad Éireann — 2026-07-16 ============================================================ Timmy Dooley (FF), Clare I am grateful for the opportunity to address the House on this Stage. I thank Senators Stephenson, Higgins, Cosgrove and Collins for their contributions. In fairness, having listened to them outlining the background to their amendments, I can fully understand where they are coming from. I share their concerns about the climate and take their points about the really negative impact of fossil fuels and the burning of them on our climate, and the impact that they are having domestically, across the rest of Europe and in countries where we see starvation as a result of the abuse of this source of energy. This is a last-ditch measure that we have had to introduce to put ourselves in a position to have security of supply in the event of a rupture in one of our connections to the North Sea supplies through the UK. On Senator Stephenson's point about the very significant cost, she is correct that the gas will be used by private companies. Private companies use gas and in the event of a rupture, they would be in the same position as every other gas user. Gas users include hospitals, schools and large centres of employment that require gas. That is what it is about. It is not as if we are doing something just for the benefit of corporates' balance sheets; it is about ensuring the economy can ride out an event. Such an event is unlikely, I hope, but it is possible. What is really important is that, from a Government perspective, as was the case with the previous two Governments, we regard gas and oil as transition fuels. We have a very clear agenda for powering our economy from renewable sources. Yes, we have fallen behind on the deployment of offshore wind turbines. Yes, we were the leaders at a stage, but we have a very strong pipeline in place. There are about 5 GW going through the planning process at the minute, at various different stages, as part of what are referred to as the phase 1 projects. Those are developer-led projects. Sites have been identified and have to go through a significant amount of clearance. This is under way. We hope that about 5 GW will be energised by 2031 or 2032. We expect by 2030 that much of this construction will be under way. The State pivoted through initiatives of the previous Government to take a plan-led approach to developing offshore renewables. We are undertaking a national designated maritime area plan, which is effectively a plan to identify suitable sites around our coastline for offshore renewables. We will have this completed by the end of 2027 and this is aimed at having an additional 15 GW of electricity on the grid by 2040. We are very clear on the direction of travel. The component referred to in the Bill is purely about getting us there. We know, it is accepted, and I take the point on trying to reduce insofar as we can the use of gas and encouraging insofar as we can large energy users to reduce their dependence on fossil fuels, even in that interim. Longer term, a recent report from the ESB would indicate that to get to net zero by 2050 will not be done on just wind or solar alone but will require batteries. Even in addition to batteries, it will require some liquid fuel. The one that has the best chance to emerge will be hydrogen. We are developing a hydrogen strategy in the Department. We are planning ahead but we must also be clear about the here and now and what we do today, tomorrow and next year in the event of a rupture to the gas supply. This was not as acute until more recent years, and particularly as a result of the renewed assault by the Russians into Ukraine and its usage of the grey fleet we know it uses, on occasion menacingly hovering in waters close enough to our EEZ, and sometimes within it with no clear intent. It would be foolhardy of us not to put in place the capacity in the event of a rupture to the gas supply to get us through those difficult days. I accept the motivation of the amendments but the Bill is about getting through the planning phase. There will be another Bill towards the end of the next term, which will consider the operations of the facility when it is constructed. In the discussion we are having now, I want to fully explain where we are going on it, and it is at that stage we will engage on how we deal with an emergency and what the operation of it will be. Our discussions then might be more fruitful in terms of that legislation. I will not accept the amendments and we will have a conversation again on the legislation when it is published and I will happily come back and go through it in detail. This applies to a lot of the amendments today because this is just about making the appropriate changes to allow for the appropriate assessment to be done to get through the decision the Minister will take on the planning and the construction works that have to take place around it. Another point raised was regarding in what event it might be used or whether it could lead to greater usage of gas. This is not at all the intention. The intention is to have it as a strategic reserve. Technologies are advancing and Senator Higgins mentioned the idea of flaring and boiling off. Technology is improving. I am no expert on this but I have read a little about it and it can be done in a closed loop way. Previous technologies required a boil-off every number of weeks or months. We have moved beyond that but I will clarify it when we are back in discussions on the next occasion. --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-07-16/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-08-27T06:52:17+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-07-16