Visualizing the Spatial Distribution of Energy Insecurity in the United States

Abstract

Prior to 2020, little was known about how energy insecurity varies across U.S. states. The recent release of energy insecurity data from the Energy Information Administration facilitates the exploration of energy insecurity at the state level using the Residential Energy Consumption Survey. In this visualization, the authors use choropleth maps to show spatial variation in (1) forgoing basic necessities such as food or medicine to pay an energy bill and (2) keeping the home at an unhealthy temperature. Both are strategies used by households to prevent energy insecurity. The visualization highlights the state-level prevalence of each indicator.

Energy insecurity, defined as the inability to meet household energy needs, affects 37 million households in the United States (Hernández 2023). The recent release of state-level energy insecurity data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) facilitates the state-level exploration of energy insecurity (EIA 2022). ¹ Created using the R programming language, this visualization uses EIA’s Residential Energy Consumption Survey to show state-level variations in two key energy insecurity indicators: (1) gave up basic necessities such as food or medicine to pay an energy bill and (2) kept the home at unhealthy temperature.

Figure 1 shows a concentration of energy insecurity in the South and relatively low rates of energy insecurity in the Midwest. There are at least two reasons for these regional patterns. First, southern states have the highest concentration of poverty in the United States, a by-product of contemporary and historical discrimination (Baker 2020). Mississippi, the state with the lowest median income—$47,242 in 2020 (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2021)—has the highest share of residents forgoing basic necessities for energy at 33.1 percent. California, the state with the highest poverty rate after adjusting for the cost of living (Shrider and Creamer 2023), has the second highest proportion of households that experienced unhealthy indoor temperatures (13.8 percent), right behind West Virginia (14.4 percent). Second, for political and historical reasons, cold-weather states receive more energy assistance from the federal government than warm-weather states (Kaiser and Pulsipher 2006). In every state, forgoing basic necessities is more common than keeping the home at an unhealthy temperature. What is unclear from the Residential Energy Consumption Survey data is the extent to which keeping the home at an unhealthy temperature is a preventive coping measure deliberately taken to reduce the threat of energy insecurity or an unplanned consequence of energy insecurity.

Figure 1.

Energy insecurity indicators by state: 2020 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (reference period: January to December 2020).

Although widespread disconnection moratoriums implemented during the pandemic (Bednar and Reames 2023) should have theoretically reduced the threat of energy insecurity, households experiencing pandemic-related shocks may have been more likely than before to make economic trade-offs or compromise comfort to manage household expenses.

The maps in Figure 1 and our online interactive dashboard (https://energyinsecuritydashboard.shinyapps.io/shinyappDeploy/), which shows spatial differences over time and across different datasets and indicators, underscore the growing need for warm weather states, especially, to increase support for energy insecure households.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-srd-10.1177_23780231231205209 – Supplemental material for Visualizing the Spatial Distribution of Energy Insecurity in the United States

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-srd-10.1177_23780231231205209 for Visualizing the Spatial Distribution of Energy Insecurity in the United States by Jennifer Laird, Mateo Cello, Allen Mena and Diana Hernández in Socius