The gap between the projected “most-efficient investments” and “observed investments” in energy efficiency is referred to as the “energy efficiency gap”. It’s a big puzzle: these investments have a high rate of return, so why are consumers leaving money on the table? And if society ought to account for the negative externalities that private individuals ignore, one would think society perceives an even higher rate of return from energy efficiency than consumers, creating a case for public investment in energy efficiency.
(We haven’t really discussed externalities in this class yet, but hopefully you all remember the concept from microecon. If not, do a quick google or ask a classmate.)
The Federal Weatherization Assistance Program is a large residential energy assistance program in the US. The program installed energy efficiency upgrades in low-income consumers’ homes. Though it wasn’t framed this way when it was created in 1976, some describe the WAP and programs like it as “closing the energy efficiency gap”. Our goal today is to discuss the program and learn things about economically efficient environmental investments. This prompt is to help guide your discussion.
For your discussions, you’re to draw on anything/everything we’ve covered in this class so far (and things you may know from outside this class). Below are some questions and quotes which may help frame your discussion. After about 30-40 minutes of discussion in breakout rooms we’ll come back to the main room and discuss as a class.
What were the specific findings from the Fowlie et al. WAP study?
What were some of the mechanisms that might have led to those results?