4.7 Article

Energy efficiency and energy justice for US low-income households: An analysis of multifaceted challenges and potential

期刊

ENERGY POLICY
卷 128, 期 -, 页码 763-774

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2019.01.020

关键词

Energy justice; Energy efficiency; Low income; Demand response; Flexibility; Residential Energy Consumption Survey

资金

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) [CNS 1541117]
  2. Engineering Research Center Program of the NSF
  3. Department of Energy under NSF [EEC-1041877]
  4. CURENT Industry Partnership Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Energy poverty intertwines with the issues of energy inequality and energy justice, presenting a particular challenge for low-income households (LIHs). This study explores energy justice in the U.S. through the lens of several interconnected questions: Do energy assistance programs have adequate participation rates? How accessible are energy efficiency (EE) appliances? Are there different energy practices across income groups? How does time schedule of energy practices differ across income groups, and how is it connected to energy demand flexibility? Based on two representative data sets, this study finds that affordability and accessibility remain serious problems for LIHs. LIHs have lower participation rates in many EE programs and own fewer EE appliances and smart grid technologies. Additionally, thermostat control strategies are different across income levels. LIHs tend to set one fixed temperature, even when they own a programmable thermostat, which is less energy efficient. LIHs engage in more energy practices throughout the daytime than their counterparts and show the least pronounced morning and evening peaks, indicating a relatively inflexible schedule and barriers to accepting demand response programs. This study concludes with policy implications for making energy more affordable, accessible, flexible, and better for the environment, while being fair to those often underserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据