6.1.

out of the five priorities set out in the EU Energy Security and Solidarity Action Plan, energy efficiency is only fourth in order of importance;

6.2.

no proposal has been tabled to introduce a binding legislative instrument specifically designed to help attain the 20 % energy efficiency improvement objective. However, a clearer link should be established with the objectives and instruments stemming from the Directive on energy end-use efficiency and energy services (2006/32/EC). This is a practical tool for taking a first step towards the 20 % objective;

6.3.

based on the forecasts outlined in the appendix to the second strategic review, it would appear that the European Commission is counting in part on events that are beyond its control (a rise in the oil price) to achieve its 20 % energy efficiency target. This demonstrates both a lack of political will and an under-investment in energy efficiency. Such an attitude is all the more regrettable given that the expected benefits of investment in energy efficiency could make it a powerful instrument for both economic recovery and the creation of jobs, both of which are crucial in the context of the current crisis;

6.4.

the energy efficiency proposals outlined in the second strategic review do not include any specific measures for industry despite the sector's high levels of energy consumption. With respect to the security of supply, it is important to stress the potential of those methods which combine industrial activity with energy production (waste heat recovery, cooling, energy generation, co- and polygeneration, etc);

6.5.

welcomes the recognition that transport has to play a critical role in achieving energy objectives. However, considering the European transport sector's high dependency on oil, it regrets that the second strategic energy review does not put forward any strategy for this sector. Yet this sector alone is responsible for more than 30 % of the EU's total final energy consumption. Moreover, it is a sector which is directly affected by the problem of the security of supply, since it is almost exclusively dependent on oil, over 80 % of which is imported into the European Union. The Committee therefore urges the European Commission to bring forward transport efficiency proposals in parallel with the Energy Efficiency Package. There is a vast untapped potential here as regards reducing greenhouse gas emissions and measures in the area of rail-borne transport and other modes of public transport, energy-efficient vehicles, car sharing, eco-driving, getting more people to cycle etc.;

(a)

reaffirms its support for the Covenant of Mayors and recalls its outlook opinion on the energy question which emphasised, among other things, that ‘local action is key to meeting the 20 % energy efficiency targets. The crucial role of regions and cities in delivering these objectives is already clearly recognised by the European Commission and the European Parliament’ (1);

(b)

spatial planning at local level is a key tool for pursuing a comprehensive approach aimed at building a society which is climate-friendly and energy-efficient. This involves the location of infrastructure, jobs, businesses and housing in a way which reduces transport needs and fosters energy-efficient transport and the more widespread use of district heating and wind and geothermal energy;

(c)

there is great scope for energy savings on a general level in the public sector, the potential of which has not yet been realised. With the aid of properly designed subsidies and incentives it would be possible to increase energy efficiency, reduce energy costs and boost employment;

(d)

welcomes the plans to launch a new Sustainable Energy Financing Initiative and urges that a significant proportion of its resources be allocated to financing projects at local and regional level; energy efficiency must be a priority;

(e)

highlights the importance of the work undertaken by the local and regional energy agencies across the EU. These institutions are strategic partners for Europe's energy policy and the EU should give greater support to and take greater account of their action;

(f)

it calls for the creation of a working group bringing together the Commission and the representatives of local and regional authorities and their networks with a view to outlining a new vision for energy efficiency, based on a ‘bottom-up’ approach;

(a)

cost estimates should be drawn up for such ‘priority’ projects prior to their formal adoption in order to enable a fair comparison with other initiatives. Such projects are likely to use up a significant part of the available budgets;

(b)

some of the six projects proposed have been given greater priority than others as specific provision for their implementation has already been made (the drafting of communications and an action plan, including funding); conversely, the implementation timetable remains much more vague in the case of the other projects;

(c)

interconnection is essential to allow the spread of risk and to enhance solidarity between Member States. Further agrees that to guarantee both gas and electricity supply to all EU citizens, major changes to internal EU energy infrastructure is necessary. Stresses that the development of renewable energy sources and of decentralised energy production will also require changes to Europe's energy infrastructure. Any decision on investing in European energy infrastructure will have to take account of the Union's objectives in this area. Without commenting on the substance of the proposed six energy infrastructure projects, anticipates that the detailed financing needs which will be identified in 2009-2010 will be massive and urges that some priority can also be given to energy efficiency projects and reducing international travel impacts in future EU budgets;

(a)

renewable energy must play a central role, in line with the 20-20-20 objectives and taking into account the related economic, social and environmental benefits. It draws attention to its opinion on the Promotion of Renewable Energy  (2). Moreover:

(b)

nuclear energy is dependent on fuel which is largely imported and may not therefore be considered to be ‘indigenous’. That being said, the use of nuclear energy does have an ‘indigenous’ effect on local authorities, particularly the risks related to this form of energy and the management of nuclear waste. Accordingly, the Committee welcomes the plans for a revised proposal for a Directive setting up a Community framework for nuclear safety and also recommends that this document cover the sustainable management of nuclear waste and its costs;

(c)

coal is also increasingly an imported fuel; both its transport and its combustion, which produces residues, are posing considerable problems in emissions terms. Its continued use, therefore, must be underpinned by highly efficient low-emission plants;

(d)

calls on the European Commission to maintain the highest possible environmental standards when assessing the opportunities for using unconventional indigenous fossil fuel reserves (such as those mentioned in Point 2.5, lines 7-8 of the Second Strategic Review) and to take account of all external factors relating to the use of these reserves when assessing their profitability;

(e)

considers that support should encourage research and development to harness clean, renewable maritime energies such as from wave, tide and ocean currents given that marine energies are not yet commercially deployed but where the EU has the potential to achieve competitive advantage as well as environmental leadership;

—

promoting the EU's objectives in the field of energy and climate change;

—

in social terms (growing difficulties facing the public in terms of domestic heating costs). It also notes that the context of the current crisis will widen the existing socio-economic gap between those individuals who are able to finance energy related renovation work and thus lower their energy bills and the growing number of citizens who, unable to pay for the cost of renovation work, will be faced with increasingly higher bills;

—

in economic terms and for job and wealth creation at local level;

—

the management of their own buildings;

—

by dint of their competences in the area of town planning and the issue of planning permission the use of heat-insulating building materials and steps to ensure high quality building and redevelopment work;

—

by collecting and recycling secondary raw materials to defray the costs of exploiting energy resources more effectively (for electricity and heat);

—

their close proximity to the public.

—

the proposals to progressively lower or remove the 1 000 m2 threshold. And it welcomes the maintenance of the 250 m2 threshold in Art. 12(1) (recast);

—

the improvements made to the system of energy performance certificates (particularly the requirement to include such certificates in all advertising and literature related to the letting or sale of property);

—

welcomes the Directive's proposal to make all subsidies for the construction or renovation of buildings conditional on compliance with minimum energy performance requirements. This link should be established as soon as possible but it would be better that such link is left to be established at the specific national and local programmes;

—

suggests that serious thought should be given to creating a mechanism that would establish a time during the lifetime of buildings when they would have to meet compulsory energy efficiency standards. The aim of this type of system would be to encourage a swift improvement in the quality of existing buildings by requiring an updating of their energy efficiency at a specific time.;

—

an obligation for all Member States to take the necessary measures to adequately assess and meet the needs in this domain in particular to provide appropriate funding to ensure that qualified staff is available;

—

an obligation for the National Energy Efficiency Action Plans to include a reference to this issue;

(a)

welcomes the fact that the Economic Recovery Plan launched by the Commission in December 2008 recognises investment in energy efficiency as an opportunity for the European economy;

(b)

greatly deplores, however, the fact that in March 2009 the compromise proposal approved by the European Council on the ‘financing of infrastructure projects presented by the Commission under the European economic recovery plan’ does not provide for investment in projects aiming to improve energy efficiency.

However, projects such as, for example, the Energy Smart Buildings Campaign, drawn up by the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC) on the basis of actual experiences in the renewable energy sector, require only a level of investment limited to the scale of the recovery plan (EUR 300 million), and would have a major impact in terms of energy, environmental and job creation (estimated 150 000 new jobs), which would very quickly generate economic activity (with results expected from 2010 onwards) and would have a very important multiplier effect (each EUR invested in the campaign would generate up to EUR 33 of investment in more energy-efficient buildings).

The Energy Smart Buildings Campaign is based on the linkage of three promotion campaigns for energy-smart buildings, which are targeted at: 1) owners; 2) structures with a multiplier effect and; 3) professionals (including training activities);

(c)

stresses the importance of providing swifter access to the Structural Funds for energy efficiency investment in buildings. In this context, it

(d)

supports the European Commission's initiative which would allow the permanent application of reduced VAT rates in the housing sector, including in the case of renovation work (6);

(e)

supports the European Commission's efforts, in partnership with the EIB and EBRD, to develop financial instruments geared towards improving energy efficiency. It notes that one of the most important issues when creating such financial instruments is to make them accessible to local and regional authorities with a view to supporting them in their role as key actors in the implementation of the Directive on the Energy Performance of Buildings.

(f)

emphasises the need for dedicated EU and national funds to be coordinated.