28. 3. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 80/5 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Recommendation to the Member States on developing 
the exploitation of renewable energy sources in the Community (*) 
(88/C 80/03) 
On 8 October 1987 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under 
Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the above-
mentioned proposal. 
The Section for Energy, Nuclear Questions and Research, which was responsible for preparing the 
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 15 January 1988. The Rapporteur was 
Mr Flum. 
At its 252nd Plenary Session (meeting of 27 January 1988) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion with no votes against and one abstention: 
The Economic and Social Commitee supports the Com­
mission's efforts to increase the proportion of energy 
supplied by renewable energy sources (2). 
The Committee thoroughly examined the new approach to 
energy policy in its Opinions on 
— the Community's guiding principles for the further 
development of new and renewable energy sources, 
— the 'VALOREN' regional programme, 
— consequences of the Chernobyl reactor disaster. 
These Opinions put forward practical proposals for the 
utilization of renewable energy sources. There does not 
appear to be any echo of these proposals in the draft 
Recommendation. 
1. Doubts as to the seriousness of renewable energy 
programmes must be dispelled. 
1.1. The procedure adopted for dealing with the draft 
Recommendation is unsatisfactory in that the Committee 
has been consulted on this important question at a late 
stage and thus subjected to undue time pressure. 
1.2. In the framework programme for 'non-nuclear 
energy' the budgetary resources have been reduced from 
175 to 122 million ECU, and the period covered extended 
from four to five years. The proportion to be met by 
renewable energy sources has been reduced from 54 % to 
35 % (see page 4: On 7). 
1.3. The draft Recommendation is not practical enough. 
In particular, it does not call for measures to exploit 
domestic energy potential, which are expected by the 
(!) OJ No C 279, 17. 10. 1987, p. 6. 
(2) i. e. all energy sources except fossil fuels and nuclear energy. In 
the present state of technology and in view of the economic 
prospects, the main sources concerned are: solar energy, 
geothermal energy, wind power, energy from biomass or 
waste, small hydro-electric schemes and wave power. Member States. It must be clearly stated that political will 
and the scope of initial financing are decisive for the scale of 
the resulting use of renewable energy sources. 
1.4. The frequently quoted target of 5 to 6 % of energy 
capacity can hardly be achieved by the year 2000 if the 
present political and infrastructure conditions continue to 
prevail, but it can be markedly exceeded if conditions are 
improved. Mentioning such figures without indicating the 
variables on which they depend could be misinterpreted as 
politicking. 
1.5. The commercially orientated evaluation of re­
newable energy sources distorts reality, since it ignores 
important socio-economic aspects, such as environmental 
considerations, whether waste can be recycled, low risk of 
damage and considerable regional employment effects in 
underdeveloped regions of the Community. 
1.6. Newly available forms of technology are especially 
well suited to the decentralized utilization of domestic 
energy capacity. As they are relatively simple the question 
of know-how protection hardly arises. Under these 
circumstances priority must be given to decentralized craft 
industries. The development of large centralized projects 
must not be allowed to circumvent this priority. 
1.7. The frequently heard statement of a will to help 
developing countries through renewable energy schemes 
only becomes credible if the existing characteristics of the 
user countries are taken into account, and if the matter is 
handled by cooperation instead of binding dependent 
relationships. 
2. Experience with earlier programmes on renewable 
energy sources shows there is scope for improvement. 
Attention is drawn to the ESC's work on shared-cost 
Research and Development programmes (•*). 
(•*) OJ No C207, 18.8. 1986. 
No C 80/6 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 3. 88 
The Commission's efforts to promote the development and 
use of renewable energy sources in the various Community 
and regional programmes are to be welcomed. However, 
practical experience in implementing the programmes has 
brought to light a number of problems which reduce 
efficiency and thereby hinder the replacement of hydro­
carbons and other high-risk energy sources. 
2.1. Enquiries made among those implementing Com­
munity programmes have shown that: 
— information on the availability of programmes is 
provided late or not at all, 
— the administrative effort needed to obtain approval of 
programmes is difficult to manage, especially for small 
firms, 
— to a large extent, funds are channelled to major 
theoretical studies and deliberately over-large plants, 
— the release of funds is often greatly delayed, which 
complicates the calculations of firms, 
— practically orientated arrangements for exchange of 
information on the results of individual projects have 
not yet been adequately worked out, 
— demonstration projects quickly come to nothing, 
because no subsequent maintenance or further use of 
plant has been planned; the negative impression created 
by such abandoned projects has catastrophic effects; 
this raises the questions of profit/loss monitoring and 
rational use of resources. 
2.2. In order to cope with these problems it is proposed 
that 'demonstration centres for new and renewable energy 
sources' be set up in the various countries and regions of the 
Community. These should reflect the principle that 
decentralized energy sources need decentralized manage­
ment. The tasks of demonstration centres would include: 
— collection of results of projects in the Community, 
evaluation of them by region, and carrying out 
adjustment projects, 
— provision of data and technical, commercial, and 
administrative assistance for private users and for small 
and medium-sized firms, 
— display of regionally applicable forms of technology, 
— subsequent maintenance of demonstration projects, 
— reporting to the Commission on the financial position, 
results and development of regional programmes; 
preparation of data for the Commission's data-bank. 
2.3. The implementation of particularly promising 
regional programmes, such as 'Valoren', is hindered by the failure to balance the interests of the agricultural and 
industrial regions of the Community on the one hand and 
the sun-drenched southern regions on the other. Those 
involved in agriculture, especially, should be aware that 
renewable non-polluting energy sources can provide a 
sound basis for ensuring the quality of agricultural 
produce. 
3. The following specific comments on the eleven 
recommendations in the Commission proposal (p. 19 of the 
document) should be carefully assessed. 
On 1 and 5 
The obstacles to the use of renewable energy sources should 
be specified: 
— doubts about serious political will should be dispelled, 
— legal and administrative provisions must be changed or 
enacted to open the markets, 
— technical standards are usually based on technical 
practice in specific countries — they have no legal force 
and must not be allowed to hinder alternative technical 
solutions in the Community. 
On 2 
In continuing the demonstration programmes, lessons 
should be drawn from previous experience (see point 2.1). 
On 3 and 8 
The technology of renewable energy sources should be 
spread through public advice and demonstration centres. 
Their tasks are described in point 2.2. Practical applic­
ability is essential here. 
On 4 
Cooperation and collaboration among various economic 
groups, such as small/medium-sized firms, and large firms 
needs to be improved. In awarding project contracts, 
account should be taken of the various fields of interest of 
these groups and the ways in which they can contribute to 
the optimal exploitation of renewable energy potential up 
to the year 2000 and in the longer term. 
On 6 
The framework conditions for transfer of electrical energy 
(e. g. privately generated electricity) to the public grid 
should be improved not only through agreements but also 
through legislation. 
28. 3. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 80/7 
On 7 
Financial support for 'feasibility studies' should be on a 
small scale, or not provided at all. Financial support should 
primarily be given to hardware projects which will add to 
energy production in the next few years. 
On 9 and 10 
The creation of a data-bank would be particularly welcome 
if the data are structured with a view to application rather 
than stored for their own sake. 
Done at Brussels, 27 January 1988. 
1. The revision of the multiannual research programme 
for the European Community in the field of biotechnology 
can be supported as drafted. 
This endorses the Opinion of the Committee on the current 
Biotechnology Action Programme (BAP) (1985 to 1989) (2). 
2. Biotechnology is an important area of research not 
only for reasons of agricultural and industrial competi­
tiveness but also in the interests of all citizens, to protect 
health and to improve the quality of life. 
3. Biotechnology is a suitable area in which the 
Commission should supplement national programmes of 
research and development by a Community programme in 
which Community funds are used. Objectives should On 11 
It is very important for measures to be consistent, 
duplication avoided and information exchanged. In 
addition, a comprehensive marketing study should be 
carried out, to explore fully the procedures and instruments 
needed for the optimal utilization of renewable energy 
sources. 
The Committee regards it as necessary to implement the 
above suggestions in a purposeful manner. The Commis­
sion is asked to report within a reasonable time on the way 
in which they have been taken into account. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Commitee 
Alfons MARGOT 
include the promotion of effective interaction between the 
centres of industrial and technological research in the 
Member States in areas of cross-fertilization, dissemination 
of information, training, risk evaluation, and certain fields 
of research and development. 
4. It is to be noted that the Commission is not putting 
forward a programme of biotechnology work to be carried 
out at the JRC, nor does the Commission consider that the 
field is suitable for concerted action programmes. 
5. Finance Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adopting a revised multiannual research and 
training programme for the European Community in the field of biotechnology 
(1985 to 1989) (]) 
(88/C 80/04) 
On 13 November 1987, the Council of the European Communities decided to consult the Economic 
and Social Committee, under Article 130 Q of the Treaty establishing the European Economic 
Community, on the above-mentioned proposal. 
The Section for Energy, Nuclear Questions and Research, which was responsible for preparing the 
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 15 January 1988. The Rapporteur was 
Mr de Normann. 
At its 252nd Plenary Session (meeting of 27 January 1988) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion with one abstention: 
(') OJ No C 15, 20. 1. 1988, p. 15. 
(2) OJ No C 25, 28. 1. 1985. 5.1. The Second Framework Programme for the period 
1988 to 1991 envisages an increase in the funds devoted to 
research, training and concertation in biotechnology.