9. 6. 81 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 138/33 
Opinion on the document entitled 'In favour of an energy-efficient society' (No 4 in the 
1980 series of studies on energy topics) 
The text referred to the Committee has not yet been published in the Official Journal of 
the European Communities. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 24 January 1981 the Commission referred the abovementioned document to the 
Economic and Social Committee in accordance with Article 198 of the Treaty 
establishing the European Economic Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 
185th plenary session held in Brussels on 25 and 26 February 1981. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the Treaty setting up the European 
Economic Community, and in particular Article 198 
thereof, 
Having regard to the request made by the 
Commission of the European Communities on 
24 January 1980 for an opinion on the report 
entitled: 'In favour of an energy-efficient 
society^1), 
Having regard to its decision of 31 January 1980, 
entrusting the drafting of the opinion to a sub­
committee, 
Having regard to the discussions at its 185th plenary 
session held on 26 and 27 February 1981 (meeting of 
27 February 1981) and the oral report made by the 
rapporteur, Mr von der Decken, 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
with 77 votes in favour and 25 abstentions: 
1. Preliminary remark 
1.1. In 1978 the Commission of the European 
Communities asked a panel of 12 independent 
experts, under the chairmanship of Mr Jean Saint-
Geours, to 'identify the means of achieving society's economic, social and environmental goals without 
large increases in primary energy demand, paying 
special attention to investment, employment, and the 
need to determine sustainable patterns of economic 
growth'. The panel's report was published in June 
1979 under the title 'In favour of an energy-efficient 
society'. 
1.2. The report can be divided into five parts: 
(1) The panel's task (Chapter 1). 
(2) Analyses 
— introduction and justification of the use of 
the term 'dis-association' (Chapter 2); 
— aims: the upper limit of dissociation 
(Chapter 3); 
— the technological potential of energy saving 
(Chapter 4); 
— the most important economic factors: energy 
prices and investments (Chapter 5); 
— the general economic situation (Chapter 6); 
— institutional questions (Chapter 7); 
— social, cultural and individual values 
(Chapter 8). 
(3) Scenarios applied (Chapter 9). 
(4) Recommended strategies (Chapter 10). 
(!) No 4 in the 1980 series of studies on energy topics. (5) Recommendations (Chapter 11). 
No C 138/34 Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 6. 81 
1.3. The Saint-Geours report is one of a series of 
documents in which the long-term development of 
energy consumption and the need for a dissociation 
of energy consumption from economic growth are 
amongst the issues considered. The report must also 
be taken together with a number of other studies 
which have been carried out by the Commission and 
other research bodies, such as the FAST work 
programme in the field of social development and the 
effects of new technologies. 
1.4. The Commission has promoted a number of 
studies, currently in progress, which represent a 
continuation or a broader and deeper consideration 
of some of the important issues raised in the Saint-
Geours report. These studies concern the following 
subjects: 
— investment and employment (study being carried 
out by a working party chaired by Mr Saint-
Geours) ; 
— energy pricing and energy taxation (fact-finding 
study being carried out by the Conference 
Board). 
The Commission is also carrying out studies into the 
following fields: 
— the progress made in energy-saving programmes 
in the individual Member States; 
— the possibility of speeding-up investments in 
energy projects in the Member States and the role 
of the Community; 
— the directions to be taken in future EC projects 
concerning research into and development and 
demonstration of new energy technologies. 
2. General comments 
2.1. In view of the current energy problems which 
everyone recognizes, and bearing in mind the 
importance of adequate energy supplies for the 
future development of the Community, the 
Committee welcomes the fact that the Commission 
has instructed the working party under the 
chairmanship of Mr Saint-Geours to carry out an 
investigation into the ways in which the economic, 
social and environmental objectives of the 
Community can be achieved in the long term with the 
smallest possible increase in the consumption of 
primary energy. In addition to more intensive 
utilization of known energy sources and the 
development of new energy sources, particular 
importance will be placed on the more rational use of 
energy as a means of solving the present energy 
problems. The Committee firmly believes that it is 
necessary to hold intensive and informed discussions 
on all possibilities of reducing energy consumption. 
The report under discussion makes an important 
contribution to these discussions. 2.2. The Committee recognizes that the whole 
energy question is extremely complex, concerning as 
it does not only technical matters but also all aspects 
of economic and social life. The decisive influence of 
the energy question on all fields of life is obvious. 
2.3. If, in the paragraphs below, the Committee is 
critical of facts and views put forward in the report, 
this should not be regarded primarily as criticism of 
the report or its authors but rather as a continuation 
of the necessary discussion on the energy question. 
The Committee has therefore not considered it to be 
its task to take a stand on each of the extremely large 
number of points raised in the report. The decision 
on what points to comment on in the opinion was 
rather based on whether or not the Committee 
considered itself to be in a position to make a 
particular contribution to the discussion. 
3. Comments on the aims of the investigation 
3.1. For its part the panel under the chairmanship 
of Mr Saint-Geours considered that the aim of its 
work was to investigate the possibilities of a 
dissociation of economic growth and energy 
consumption. The panel set itself three detailed 
objectives, namely: 
— to explain 'the factors affecting energy-efficient 
growth, and the problems which arise for the 
economy, and for economic and social policy', 
— to identify 'the methodological improvements 
required for in-depth quantitative studies on 
dissociation', 
— to outline 'the basic guidelines and political 
recommendations for developing interrelated 
actions in the whole of the Community'. 
3.2. When making a critical study and assessment 
of the Saint-Geours report one should not lose sight 
of the tasks and objectives of the panel. One should 
also always bear in mind that the report does not set 
out to draw up a blueprint for a comprehensive 
energy policy to tackle the current problems. The 
report is rather an examination of the possibilities of 
dissociating energy consumption from economic 
growth and the side effects of this process. 
Consideration of the complex problems involved in 
the future supply of energy for the Community was 
not one of the tasks of the panel. The Committee 
would, however, explicitly stress the fact that, in the 
context of a rational energy policy, energy-saving 
measures, measures to broaden the sources of energy 
supply and measures to reduce dependence on oil all 
have to be considered together. 
9. 6. 81 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 138/35 
4. Comments on the concept of 'dissociation' 
4.1. The Saint-Geours panel defined the subject of 
its work as the 'dissociation' of economic growth and 
energy consumption. The idea here is not to try to 
make these two factors completely independent of 
each other but rather to bring about a favourable 
change in their coefficient which was in the past 
taken as being a constant. 
4.2. In its opinion on new lines of action by the 
European Community in the field of energy saving 
(CES 89/80) the Committee has already commented 
on the fundamental problem of determining a ratio 
between the macro-economic figures representing 
changes in GNP and changes in overall primary 
energy consumption, drawing quantitative 
conclusions and, in particular, deriving quantitative 
objectives. The Committee would stress once again 
the view put forward in the abovementioned opinion 
and would draw attention to the comments made on 
this matter in the report under consideration 
(Chapter 1.2). In that opinion the Committee stated 
(in point 5.2.2): 'In particular, the correlation 
between economic growth in the Community and the 
increase in energy consumption is far from being acceptable as a major parameter of an energy policy.' 
It went on to point out (in point 5.3.2): 'Thus a ratio 
of 0.7 ... (as an objective) ... cannot be regarded as 
anything other than an indication of a trend and in 
that sense may have an appreciable political 
significance.' 
4.3. When these matters are being discussed it is 
frequently the case, as in the Saint-Geours report, 
that the two terms 'dissociation' and 'energy saving' 
are used together. In such cases 'energy saving' is 
sometimes regarded as part of the process of 
'dissociation', whilst at other times these two 
concepts stand together as completely independent 
processes which are regarded as having a cumulative 
effect. In order to avoid misunderstandings and 
misinterpretations, the Committee considers that it is 
very important that the terms be clearly defined. The 
diagram below has been drawn up in an attempt to 
clarify the two terms; the term 'energy saving' has 
also been sub-divided in order to make the definition 
more precise. The question of the substitution of one 
energy form for another is extremely important but it 
must be considered separately from the concept of 
dissociation, although a feedback effect on energy 
saving cannot be discounted. 
Dissociation 
by means of 
restructuring 
by means of by means of 
by means of 
by means of 
by means of 
energy saving-by means of voluntary or imposed 
changes in people's ways of 
life, for example, involving 
a partial renunciation of 
increased degree of 
utilization a shift to less energy-intensive 
manufacturing industries 
a shift from manufacturing industries 
to service industries 
transfer of energy-intensive 
production to outside the EC 
utility 
comfort 
consumption 
thoughtless behaviour 
increased efficiency 
avoidance of energy losses 
use of waste heat 
Substitution in respect of oil 
in respect of other non-renewable energy 
sources 
The diagram illustrates that dissociation can be 
achieved by, on the one hand, restructuring and, on 
the other hand, energy saving. 
4.4. Some examples of restructuring may be quoted. 
Firstly, energy-intensive production processes could 
be transferred to countries outside the Community. 
This would help the Community to achieve 
dissociation but it would, of course, not have this effect world-wide. Secondly, there could be a shift in 
overall economic activity in the Community from the 
manufacture of goods to the provision of services, on 
the assumption that service industries use relatively 
less energy than manufacturing industries. 
4.5. The contribution towards dissociation which 
can theoretically be achieved by restructuring the 
economy, that is to say by cutting back economic 
No C 138/36 Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 6. 81 
activity in the energy-intensive sectors, may well be 
considerable. The Committee does, however, 
consider that in practice there are narrow limits to 
any significant reduction in production in energy-
intensive sectors (e.g. by transferring energy-
intensive industries to outside the EC) over and 
above the progress which has been made so far in this 
field. Furthermore, an expansion of the service sector 
would be advisable and controllable only to a limited 
extent. 
4.6. The Committee thus notes that the objective of 
the dissociation is achieved to a large extent by 
means of energy savings, that is to say that 
dissociation and energy saving are not independent 
factors. In any event it is misleading to mention both 
concepts as though they were independent objectives 
which could have a cumulative effect, as the Report 
does (e.g. point 3.1.4, third paragraph). 
5. General comments on the energy-saving 
potentials 
5.1. The diagram in point 4.3 sets out the 
possibilities for saving energy. This can be achieved 
by voluntary or imposed changes in people's ways of 
life, on the one hand, and an increased degree of 
utilization on the other hand. 
5.2. It may be possible to reappraise our current 
conceptions of utility, comfort and consumption by 
making changes in our ways of life. In future people 
could change their behaviour and in part give up 
certain currently conceived advantages, comforts 
and types of consumption in favour of other types of 
consumption and values. This could undoubtedly 
bring about considerable savings in energy. A not 
insignificant quantity of energy is lost through 
allowing ourselves the luxury of thoughtless 
behaviour. 
This first part of the energy-saving potential depends 
upon the social, cultural and personal values of the 
whole population. Technological measures would 
only have a relatively small and indirect influence 
here, as opposed to a specific policy of informing and 
educating the public and also a corresponding price 
and tax policy. It must, however, be recognized that a 
reduction in energy consumption brought about by 
changing people's ways of life may have damaging 
effects on economic growth. 
5.3. Energy savings through a higher degree of 
utilization (see diagram in point 4.2) can be achieved 
by increasing the efficiency of the various machines 
and technological processes, by avoiding energy 
losses (e.g. by insulation) and by the use of waste heat 
(the combined production of heat and electricity). 
This part of the operation can be designated the 
'technological energy-saving potential'. 5.4. The report sets out in Annexes 6 and 7 a 
number of figures for energy-saving potential based 
on a large number of studies. It must, however, be 
recognized that we are dealing here with potential 
figures and the listing of these figures does not in any 
way indicate the extent to which use of these 
potentials is desirable or possible. 
5.5. The Committee considers that, given the 
current situation, we should endeavour to realize the 
energy-saving potential. On the other hand, a 
realistic energy policy must take account of the extent 
to which it is appropriate, justifiable and desirable, 
on political, economic and social grounds, to utilize 
energy-saving potentials. 
5.6. The Committee realizes that such a 
differentiation is a terribly difficult task in view of its 
complex nature and one which is far beyond the 
capacity of the panel of experts under the 
chairmanship of Mr Saint-Geours. The Committee 
agrees with the report that the task can only be 
tackled properly once considerably more knowledge 
is available and further studies and work have been 
carried out. To quote some examples, there is a need 
for systematic studies into the relationship between 
expenditure on investment and energy savings and 
the effects of energy-saving measures on employment 
and the environment. Only after such studies have 
been made will it be possible to set a proper limit to 
the utilization of the energy-saving potential. There is 
also a need to take into account structural and social 
aspects, such as the question of obligatory 
connections in the event of an intensification of the 
combined production of heat and electricity. 
6. Alternative sources of energy 
6.1. The Committee attaches very great importance 
in the solution of energy problems to the use of 
alternative energy sources for those which are in 
short supply and are expensive. Examples are the 
substitution of coal and nuclear power for oil or, in 
the long term, the substitution of renewable energy 
sources for oil. Attention should, however, be drawn 
at this point to the fact that such substitution will not 
necessarily help also to bring about dissociation or a 
reduction in energy consumption. For example, 
increasing the production of synthetic hydrocarbons 
from coal which would lead to an increase in primary 
energy consumption. 
6.2. The Community's dependence on imported 
energy supplies will become a matter of supreme 
importance in the future. That is to say that the 
Community's own oil production and the 
substitution of alternative energy sources, such as 
coal and nuclear energy, for oil will be of the utmost 
significance. This in itself will not, however, enable 
9. 6. 81 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 138/37 
the Community to achieve dissociation or savings in 
energy consumption. 
6.3. In the long term the substitution of renewable 
for non-renewable energy sources will play a role. In 
all Member States tremendous efforts are currently 
being made to develop techniques for using 
regenerative energy sources. These efforts should be 
further intensified. The Committee feels it is 
important, however, to make a realistic assessment of 
the contribution by these energy sources, bearing in 
mind the time needed to develop the techniques and 
to introduce them onto the market. This applies in 
particular to the processes of biotechnology and 
genetic engineering referred to in point 3.2.6 of the 
Saint-Geours report, which will require considerable 
expenditure on R & D and lengthy development 
periods before they can be exploited industrially. For 
these reasons it can scarcely be expected that these 
techniques will make any significant contribution to 
energy supplies in the near future. Furthermore, 
biomass production on a large scale requires the 
availability of large areas of agricultural land and 
would thereby compete with food production. 
7. The economic and institutional aspects of 
dissociation 
7.1. The Committee agrees with the view that the 
degree to which dissociation, or to put it better, 
energy saving, can be achieved, is influenced to a 
decisive extent by economic and institutional factors, 
such as the necessary investment costs or the 
behaviour of consumers. The Committee does, 
however, think it too optimistic to state in such a 
categorical way in point 3.2.7.2 that the investment 
required to achieve substantial energy savings is 
relatively low. It would point out that investment 
rises disproportionately to energy savings. It would 
further point out that it is only possible to determine 
the amount of energy saving which makes economic 
sense through a comparison with the costs of 
expanding the energy supply. 
7.2. The Committee holds the view that further 
investigations, particularly into the amount of 
investment needed in the various fields and the 
amount of energy savings which would thereby be 
gained, are necessary to make it possible to assess to 
what extent the theoretically available potential as 
regards the rational use of energy can be realized. 
8. Technological energy-saving potential 
8.1. The Committee agrees with the analysis of the 
technological potential for energy saving in the 
following fields: — transport, 
— households and other consumers, 
— industry and agriculture, 
and in energy conversion and the transport of energy 
set out in Chapter 4 of the report, even though it 
would have been desirable to have made a clearer 
distinction between dissociation by means of energy 
saving and dissociation by means of economic 
restructuring (in line with the definition given in 
Chapter 6 of the report). 
8.2. Before measures are taken to change economic 
structures, i.e. by cutting down, relatively, on energy-
intensive industries, as a means of achieving 
dissociation, the Committee considers that it is 
necessary to investigate the effects which such 
measures would have on employment, 
competitiveness and energy requirements. 
8.3. Contrary to what is stated in point 4.4 of the 
report, the Committee considers that it is precisely 
with regard to energy conversion that comparatively 
comprehensive information about the attainable 
degree of efficiency does exist. 
9. Energy prices and investments — the two most 
important economic factors operating in favour of 
a higher degree of dissociation (Chapter 5 of the 
report) 
9.1. The Committee agrees with the view that 
energy prices are important factors in energy 
consumption and the division of the market between 
the individual energy sources. The energy market in 
the Community is, however, certainly no model of a 
free market economy as defined in economic theory. 
The energy market is characterized by some elements 
of free competition but largely by technical 
monopolies (e.g. in the distribution of electricity and 
gas), oligopolies (e.g. in the distribution of oil) and 
state intervention (e.g. through taxes and 
subsidies). 
9.2. The report rightly draws attention to the 
complex problem of state intervention in the energy 
pricing system and it is clearly stated that state 
regulation of energy prices does not necessarily 
promote energy savings, as energy price policy may 
well be influenced by other political objectives, such 
as the revitalization of the economy or the reduction 
of unemployment, or by fiscal objectives. 
9.3. State intervention in the system of energy 
pricing has lead, for example, to a situation whereby 
taxes account for about 50% of the retail price of 
petrol. In view of this the Committee doubts whether 
it is realistic to seek to achieve the goal set out in 
point 5.1.7, namely 'a system in which energy prices 
No C 138/38 Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 6. 81 
could properly reflect at least the true replacement 
costs of the supply industry ...'. It is also likely to be 
extremely difficult to ascertain the genuine 
replacement costs. 
9.4. The Committee agrees with the general 
conclusions regarding investments overall and their 
effects on energy consumption and with the 
observations on the strategic importance of 
investments in the energy sector and investments 
designed to achieve a better utilization of energy. In 
view of the currently relatively small role played by 
investments in energy in the overall net domestic 
product (only 1 -65% in the EC in the period 1978 to 
1980), the Committee does not see any fundamental 
difficulties for the economy in meeting higher 
requirements as regards investments in energy 
projects in the future. 
10. Labour as a factor of production 
10.1. In a number of places in the report (e.g. points 
4.3.9, 5.1.8, 6.2.2 and 11.1.3) it is proposed that there 
should be a thorough investigation into whether it 
would be possible to slow down the rate of 
substitution of energy for labour by considerably 
reducing taxes on labour and social security 
contributions. 
10.2. In view of the current serious employment 
problems, the Committee urges further study of this 
aspect, which can contribute to both full employment 
and energy conservations. 
10.2.1. However, the review must be objective and 
take due account of people's desire for physical and 
mental work which gives increasing satisfaction. 
Similarly, the substitution of human labour for 
energy should not be pursued thoughtlessly, or 
without regard to international competitiveness. 
10.2.2. Finally, there should be a wide-ranging 
review of the tax and social-security components of 
labour costs, which are imposed by the — disparative 
— legislation of the Member States. This review must 
be geared to the need to ensure that taxation and 
social-security contributions do not distort the terms 
of competition. 
11. The general economic situation 
11.1. The Committee is fundamentally in 
agreement with the analysis set out in Chapter 6 of 
the report. 
11.2. At first sight, however, points 6.2.1 and 6.2.2 
appear to contradict each other. In 6.2.1 it is stated 
that it is impossible for the Community to curb the 
increase in productivity if it is to continue to be 
competitive, and, as a result, there will be employment problems in the short term. Care must 
therefore be taken to ensure that the strategy of 
creating new jobs and substituting labour for energy 
(point 6.2.2) does not lead to a reduction in 
productivity. 
12. Institutional questions (Chapter 7) 
12.1. The development of the present energy system 
is clearly dependent upon the interaction of factors 
such as technology and the organization of society. It 
is, however, difficult to understand the assertion 
made in the report that 'this organization of the 
energy system helped to establish close links between 
energy consumption and energy growth'. The private 
sector has made a fundamental contribution to the 
expansion of energy consumption. What is more, 
there is nothing to indicate that the present system is 
so inflexible that it could not be adapted to meet the 
new situation or that it would be impossible in an 
alternative decentralized system to produce energy 
more efficiently or more cheaply by using any 
available energy sources. 
12.2. The Committee recognizes that the financial 
system is not always optimally equipped for energy-
saving investments. Although in recent years there 
has been a considerable increase in the loans made 
available (also in the private sector) by banks, the 
Committee would support the suggestion made in the 
report that the conditions be created for greater 
involvement of financial institutions in energy 
saving. 
13. The importance of individual, social and cultural 
values (Chapter 8) 
13.1. The Committee recognizes that energy 
requirements also depend to a very large extent on 
the behaviour of individuals, which in turn is 
determined by social, cultural and individual values. 
The Committee would, however, hesitate to make 
comments in detail on this chapter as the links are 
very complex and there has as yet been too little 
investigation of these links. 
13.2. In the Committee's view, however, the 
statement in point 8.2 that peoples' 'work ... has its 
purpose and finality in production activities' is 
hardly in line with current psychological knowledge 
as regards human needs, and it cannot be used in 
support of the social model set out in point 8.5. There 
are still many people in Europe who do not possess 
the basic necessities of life and many people outside 
Europe are in still greater need. Furthermore, a 
society which were to give quality absolute priority 
over quantity would run the risk of promoting an 
elitist cult if it disregarded the legitimate needs of 
people who are not even in a position to choose 
between quality and quantity. 
9. 6. 81 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 138/39 
14. Global scenarios (Chapter 9) 
The number of scenarios which have been worked 
out over the last few years has brought about an 
exaggeration of their value. Such scenarios can 
neither deliberately nor unintentionally provide 
accurate projections in respect of future conditions 
or possible future conditions. In point 9.4 of the 
Saint-Geours report observations are made on a 
special scenario drawn up by Colombo and 
Bernadini based on a form of society which is very 
far-removed from that which has evolved in Europe 
over the last few centuries. The mistaken impression 
could very easily be gained that this scenario is a 
possible future objective for Europe. In the 
Committee's view it is important to note that such an 
objective could not be accepted before the matter had 
been subjected to thorough discussion, including 
political discussion. 
15. Recommended strategies (Chapter 10) 
15.1. The Committee agrees with the points made in 
this chapter but it would like to draw attention to a 
number of important issues. 
15.2. The Committee agrees, in particular, with the 
view that problems such as employment and 
protection of the environment are just as important 
as the energy problem. 
15.3. The Committee shares the view that a 
precondition for real progress towards more rational 
consumption of energy is that there should be 
suitable economic growth, even if this leads to the 
paradox that the long-term strategy brings about an 
increase in energy demand in the short term and 
could bring about a crisis because of the 
Community's high degree of dependence on 
imports. 
15.4. The Committee would draw attention to the 
fundamental statement made in point 10.3. This 
statement represents an impressive summary of the 
overall economic arguments. 
16. Recommendations (Chapter 11) 
16.1. Although the Committee agrees with the 
majority of the recommendations made in Chapter 
11, it would none the less like to comment on a 
number of points. 
Done at Brussels, 26 February 1981. 16.2. In point 11.2 it is stated that 'a vigorous 
programme of political action is needed'. This 
programme must gain the approval and 
understanding of the public in the Member States. 
The report does not, however, indicate how a start is 
to be made on bringing such a comprehensive 
political programme into being. The establishment of 
common standards, the introduction of research and 
development programmes and the creation of a 
European data bank are hardly sufficient in 
themselves. The Committee therefore calls upon the 
Commission and the Member States to work out and 
introduce as quickly as possible the basic elements of 
a Community energy policy and to implement this 
policy without delay. 
16.3. The Committee welcomes the call for the 
establishment of common standards. Consideration 
must, however, also be given to how much money has 
to be spent on monitoring the observance of these 
standards. 
16.4. The Committee would draw attention to the 
remarks made on energy prices and investments in 
point 9 above. 
16.5. In the last paragraph of point 11.2.5 of the 
report it is proposed that 'energy conservation 
measures (by whatever means) should be publicly 
financed at least up to the point where the returns 
(energy saved per unit cost) are as good as the 
marginal cost of supplies'. The Committee does not 
consider that this marginal cost can be determined 
with sufficient certainty to enable it to be used as a 
yardstick for the provision of public funds. The 
financing of energy conservation measures is clearly 
a long-term measure, and in order to determine the 
marginal cost it will be necessary to have prior 
knowledge of energy price trends over long 
periods. 
16.6. The Committee agrees that some energy-
saving projects may represent a good business 
proposition but it would warn against excessive 
expectations. 
16.7. The Committee can only give its approval to 
section 11.3 of the report if this enables new and more 
profound knowledge to be acquired in a well-
founded way so that in future the neccessary 
decisions may be taken on a more sound basis, as 
indeed they should be. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Tomas ROSEINGRAVE 
No C 138/40 Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 6. 81 
ANNEX 
to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
Rejected amendments 
The following amendments, tabled in accordance with the Rules of Procedure, were rejected 
during the debates: 
Page 36, point 6.1: 
Amend to read: 
'The Committee considers that greater diversification of existing energy sources and — in the 
longer term — the development of renewable energy sources can do much to resolve the 
energy problems. Attention should, however, be drawn to the fact that such diversification and 
development will not 
Result of the voting 
For: 32, Against: 39, Abstentions: 4 
Page 37, point 6.3: 
In the third line, replace 'tremendous' by 'admittedly inadequate'. 
Replace the third sentence by: 
'These energy sources still differ greatly as regards phase of development and utilizability. The 
use of (low-temperature) solar heat, wind turbines, water power and other renewable sources 
can already be expanded. As a result of the problems involved in the increasing use of coal and 
nuclear energy, technological development of these renewable energy sources must be 
stimulated. The Committee's expectations regarding other renewable energy sources are not so 
high. This applies in particular 
Result of the voting 
For: 33, Against: 53, Abstentions: 9 
Page 37, point 7.1: 
Amend the last sentence to read: 
'It would further point out that the amount of energy saving that makes economic sense can be 
determined through a comparison with the costs of expanding the energy supply, apart from 
environmental and raw-material-management considerations.' 
Result of the voting 
For: 34, Against: 52, Abstentions: 5 
Page 37, point 8.2: 
Add: 
'Nevertheless, such a restructuring will have to be taken vigorously in hand if it is found that 
the rising energy prices are going to cause economic difficulties for a certain sector or sub-
sector.' 
Result of the voting 
For: 7, Against: 60, Abstentions: 14 
9. 6. 81 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 138/41 
Page 38, point 13.2: 
Delete the first sentence: 
'In the Committee's view, however, the statement in point 8.2 that peoples' "work ... has its 
purpose and finality in production activities" is hardly in line with current psychological 
knowledge as regards human needs, and it cannot be used in support of the social model set 
out in point 8.5.' 
Reasons 
In point 13.1 it is pointed out that 'the links are very complex and there has yet been too little 
investigation of these links'. In the following point 13.7, however, an unqualified stand is taken 
against the views outlined in Chapter 8 of the Saint-Geours report by 'rejecting' the social model set 
out in point 8.5. 
This rejection is inconsistent with the comment made in point 13.1. 
Result of the voting 
For: 32, Against: 46, Abstentions: 13 
Page 39, point 16.6: 
Amend to read: 
'The Committee agrees that many energy-saving projects may represent a good business 
proposition and are also very necessary with a view to the future, but thinks that the sacrifices 
that will be required in the financial and economic sphere must not be underestimated.' 
Result of the voting 
For: 25, Against: 51, Abstentions: 14 
The following passages in the Committee's draft opinion were replaced by amendments approved 
during the debates: 
Page 38, point 12.2: 
'In the Committee's view the criticism that the financial system is not ready to support 
investments in energy-saving projects (point 7.3.2.5 of the report) is not in line with the facts. 
In the last few years in particular there has been a considerable increase in the funds made 
available for energy-saving measures (also in the private field) by the banking system.' 
Result of the vote 
Unanimous. 
Page 38, point 13.2, final sentence: 
'A society which gives quality absolute priority over quantity runs the risk of promoting an 
elitist cult if it disregards the legitimate needs of people who are not even in a position to 
choose beetween quality and quantity.'