A new MIT study reveals that providing households with detailed energy usage data and coaching can dramatically reduce energy costs, potentially alleviating energy poverty for millions worldwide.
In a world where nearly 30% of U.S. households struggle to pay their energy bills and approximately 50 million people across the European Union face similar challenges, addressing energy poverty is a pressing issue. Researchers from MIT’s Senseable City Lab have unveiled a promising solution: empowering people with better data and personalized coaching to drive significant energy savings.
An experiment conducted in Amsterdam tested this approach, resulting in participating households slashing their energy bills by more than half. This substantial reduction progressed 75% of the families involved out of energy poverty.
“Our energy coaching project as a whole showed a 75% success rate at alleviating energy poverty,” co-author Joseph Llewellyn, a researcher with MIT’s Senseable City Lab, said in a news release.
The study’s context is critical: energy poverty means spending at least 8% of annual household income on energy.
For many, the burden is much heavier, according to co-author Fábio Duarte, an associate director of MIT’s Senseable City Lab.
“Energy poverty afflicts families all over the world. With empirical evidence on which policies work, governments could focus their efforts more effectively,” Duarte said in the news release.
Following engagement with city officials in Amsterdam, the researchers noted around 550,000 households in the Netherlands are in energy poverty, equating to 7% of the population.
These figures are mirrored across the EU and the United States, highlighting the global relevance of the study.
To carry out the experiment, two versions of an energy coaching intervention were implemented with 117 households.
One group received one report on their energy consumption along with coaching on increasing energy efficiency and modest improvements such as added insulation.
The other group received these components plus a smart device providing real-time energy usage updates.
Across both groups, households saw dramatic reductions in energy use. Electricity consumption dropped by 33%, gas by 42% and monthly energy bills plummeted by 53%, reducing the share of income spent on energy from 10.1% to 5.3%.
Simple yet impactful behavioral changes, such as heating only occupied rooms and unplugging unused devices, played a significant role in these results.
“The range of energy literacy was quite wide from one home to the next,” Llewellyn added.
Importantly, households with smart devices quickly altered their energy habits, using the devices for only three to four weeks following coaching visits.
“Our research shows that smart devices need to be accompanied by a close understanding of what drives families to change their behaviors,” added co-author Titus Venverloo, a research fellow at MIT.
The implications of these findings extend beyond individual households.
Local policymakers could replicate and adapt such interventions to provide sustainable energy solutions. Administering structural factors, including energy-efficient buildings and reduced energy costs, are also critical paths to explore.
Furthermore, Llewellyn is spearheading a new experiment with Amsterdam officials aimed at residential building retrofits, ensuring rent doesn’t increase concurrently with reduced energy bills.
For many low-income households, immediate investment in energy-efficient products is not feasible. Llewellyn pointed out that energy costs often rank low in priority compared to other household necessities.
“Energy is always going to be this invisible thing that hides behind the walls, and it’s not easy to change that,” he added.
The study, published in Nature Scientific Reports, opens new avenues for tackling energy poverty, providing both immediate and long-term benefits for millions facing this hidden yet substantial economic burden.