4.7 Article

The intersection of energy and justice: Modeling the spatial, racial/ethnic and socioeconomic patterns of urban residential heating consumption and efficiency in Detroit, Michigan

期刊

ENERGY AND BUILDINGS
卷 143, 期 -, 页码 25-34

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.03.028

关键词

Fuel poverty; Energy justice; Energy consumption; Energy efficiency; Spatial analysis; Space heating; Residential buildings

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Residential energy conservation and efficiency programs are strategic interventions to reduce consumption and increase affordability. However, the inability to identify and distinguish between high energy consumers and highly energy inefficient households has led to ineffective program targeting. Additionally, little is known about the spatial, racial and socioeconomic patterns of urban residential energy consumption and efficiency. Publicly available data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration and the U.S. Census Bureau are used with bottom-up modeling and small-area estimation techniques to predict mean annual heating consumption and energy use intensity (EUI), an energy efficiency proxy, at the census block group level in Detroit (Wayne County), Michigan. Using geographic information systems, results illustrate spatial disparities in energy consumption and EUI. Bivariate analysis show no statistical relationship between race/ethnicity and energy consumption; however, EUI is correlated with racial/ethnic makeup; percent White (-0.28), African American (0.24) and Hispanic (0.16). Income and housing tenure reveal inverse relationships with consumption and efficiency. Though areas with higher median incomes and homeownership exhibited higher consumption (0.28 and 0.56, respectively), they had lower EUIs (-0.48 and -0.38, respectively). This study provides evidence supporting approaches for conservation and energy efficiency program targeting that recognizes the significance of race, ethnicity, place and class. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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