Transforming Energy Behaviors of Households: Evidence from Low-Income Energy Education Programs

Panel: Human and Social Dimensions of Energy Use: Trends and their Implications

Authors:
David Carroll, APPRISE
Jacqueline Berger, APPRISE

Abstract

One way to reduce energy consumption in the residential sector is to increase the adoption of energy-saving behaviors. While there is clear evidence that households are willing and able to make behavioral changes, particularly in response to energy price increases, there is no general population program model for behavior change that has been shown to effectively motivate households to make long-run changes in energy behaviors.

Over the last twenty years, there has been considerable investment by low-income usage reduction programs in energy education procedures, tools, and technology. Some programs have been successful in reducing energy usage and/or increasing reports of energy-saving behaviors. Other programs have fallen short of their goals.

In this paper, we review program evaluation research from some of the most innovative approaches and consider which program models offer opportunities for future initiatives with both low-income households and for broader market initiatives. Our review of the literature finds that, for low-income households, direct interaction between an experienced educator and the client is a model that results in behavior change and energy savings. We also find that multicontact approaches are effective. To date, programs that have made use of technology to disaggregate client energy use and identify the best energy saving opportunities have not been successful in motivating clients to change their energy-using behaviors.

The success of higher-cost in-home energy education program models may be useful to consider as Home Performance with ENERGY STAR programs are implemented and expanded throughout the country. At the same time, given the experience with low-income programs, program implementers would do well to subject technology-based program designs to considerable testing to ensure that the barriers experienced in low-income programs can be effectively overcome.

One problem this paper reveals is that most energy education programs have not been designed in such a way that the direct impacts of the energy education component can be measured. Rather, they are most often implemented in conjunction with other program services and with no attention to the independent measurement of program impacts. To get better information on the potential for energy education programs, program implementers will have to pay more attention to measurement issues.