The objective of this study is to describe the energy-efficiency programs being operated by utilities for low-income customers. The study focuses, in particular, on programs that install major residential weatherization measures free-of-charge to low-income households. A survey was mailed to a targeted list of 600 utility program managers. Follow-up telephone calls were made to key non- respondents, and a random sample of other non-respondents also was contacted. Completed surveys were received from 180 utilities, 95 of which provided information on one or more of their 1992 low-income energy-efficiency programs for a total of 132 individual programs. These 132 utility programs spent a total of $140.6 million in 1992. This represents 27% of the total program resources available to weatherize the dwellings of low-income households in that year. Both the total funding and the number of programs has grown by 29% since 1989. A majority of the 132 programs are concentrated in a few regions of the country (California, the Pacific Northwest, the Upper Midwest, and the Northeast). Although a majority of the programs are funded by electric utilities, gas utilities have a significantly greater average expenditure per participant ($864 vs. $307 per participant). The most common primary goal of low-income energy-efficiency programs operating in 1992 was {open_quotes}to make energy services more affordable to low-income customers{close_quotes}. Only 44% of the programs were operated primarily to provide a cost-effective energy resource. Based on a review of household and measure selection criteria, equity and not the efficiency of resource acquisition appears to dominate the design of these programs.

This report assesses the benefits of energy efficiency to the Minnesota state economy, its environment, and its citizens. Energy efficiency and its effects are difficult to measure directly. This analysis estimates energy efficiency through its effects on energy consumption and economic productivity (i.e., a form of energy intensity-the energy consumed per unit of output) while controlling for price, sectoral composition, and other factors. Furthermore, this study is limited to improvements in the use of energy in the industrial, commercial, and residential sectors and does not include, for example, the transportation sector. Conceivably, improvements in energy usage in the industrial, commercial, and residential sectors could yield a number of benefits, including economic gains, improved productivity, improved quality of service, higher reliability, reduced pollution, and lower costs to consumers. This report addresses three of these benefits: Effects on the gross state product of energy efficiency improvements in the commercial and industrial sectors; Effects on air emissions of the improved utilization of energy in the commercial and industrial sectors; Effects on households, particularly low-income households, of improvements in residential energy efficiency.

Examines the prospects for advancing U.S. energy efficiency through technology improvements and regulatory changes in the utility sector and related Federal and State initiatives. Photos, charts and tables.