The ESB has told the Government the electricity sector cannot meet stringent emissions targets due to come into place by 2010 because it would be too costly and could reduce supply.
The company in a submission seen by The Irish Times tells the Department of the Environment that a proposed ceiling on nitrogen oxide would impose "unacceptably high costs" on the ESB and the sector generally.
It says while it intends to assist the Government in attempts to reduce emissions, there are no short-term measures available to reduce certain emissions, like nitrogen oxide.
Under an EU directive each member state must meet certain targets for nitrogen oxide and sulphur dioxide emissions from 2010 onwards. The Minister for the Environment, Mr Cullen, has asked for submissions from companies and bodies on how the targets can be met.
The ESB's submission emphasises that meeting the sulphur dioxide targets is achievable, but keeping below the nitrogen oxide ceiling would not be possible "unless extraordinary measures are adopted and unacceptably high costs incurred".
"Projections indicate that nitrogen oxide emissions cannot be reduced to comply with the national ceiling from 2010 without excessive costs."
The company acknowledges that nitrogen oxide levels overall must be reduced and it says the ESB is studying the option of installing "catalytic-reduction" technology to reduce emissions at the giant Moneypoint coal-fired station in Co Clare.
However, it stresses there are no "short-term" measures available to power-station operators to cut nitrogen oxide emissions. "As abatement measures take years to implement, there is nothing an operator can do in the interim to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions apart from reducing output."
It says the size and "changed nature" of the Irish electricity system makes the setting of a fixed cap or "concrete ceiling" for emissions unsuitable. It says such a cap could result in reduced electricity output and even the disconnection of customers.
The document explains that power stations, in an attempt to stay below a fixed nitrogen oxide ceiling, might chose to shut down their plants for a period of time in order to avoid penalties. The document also strongly rejects the idea of using taxation to reduce emissions.
In relation to taxation it says this policy might work if power stations had a range of options to choose from. It says taxing generators would be counter-productive.
For example the tax levels required to force abatement measures at Moneypoint "would be very high and cause unnecessary harm to the general economy, as they would be directly reflected in electricity and prices," says the document.
