As many as three quarters of participating households emerged from energy poverty (when more than 8% of the household income is spent on energy costs) as a result of this approach.
The study, led by researcher Joseph Llewellyn*, was conducted by MIT's Senseable City Lab in collaboration with AMS Institute and was published earlier this week in Nature Scientific Reports. The results are impressive: participating households reduced their electricity consumption by an average of 33% and their gas consumption by 42%. This led to an average cost saving of 104 euros per month, a 53% reduction. The percentage of income spent on energy dropped from 10.1 to 5.3!
More than 550,000 households in the Netherlands and about 35,000 households in Amsterdam face energy poverty. Despite the urgency, there is currently a lack of sufficient targeted policies to address this problem. The City of Amsterdam aims to get all households off natural gas by 2050 as part of the energy transition. So, to avoid leaving vulnerable households behind in this transition, the municipality can support them in reducing their energy-related emissions and costs. This will prevent them from being disproportionately burdened with higher energy costs. This research also appears at an important time because participants expressed concern about their financial future, partly due to the removal of temporary social benefits such as energy subsidies.
Direct solutions to energy poverty
The researchers visited 167 households across the city. During the home visits, several energy-saving changes were made, focusing on both technical improvements and behavioural changes. Radiator foil and draught strips were installed to reduce heat loss and draughts, while water-saving showerheads helped reduce gas consumption.
Smart technology was also installed in some instances, such as a real-time display that provides insight into current energy consumption and encourages residents to make immediate adjustments, for example by turning down the thermostat or turning off appliances. Residents were also given practical advice on energy-saving behaviour, such as taking shorter showers and heating living spaces more efficiently. This combination of technical adjustments and awareness raised immediate savings and increased control over energy use.
This map highlights the impact of energy coaching interventions. Before, 40 of 73 homes were energy-poor (colored yellow); after, only 10 remained (colored blue). These 10 homes had social benefits or spent over 20% of their income on energy.
A personal energy coach makes all the difference
While the adjustments mentioned above were found to significantly contribute to energy savings, for many families the benefits were not really apparent until they received guidance from an energy coach.
“The level of energy literacy varied quite a bit from house to house. And if I went somewhere as an energy coach, it was never to moralise about energy use. I never said, ‘Oh, you use way too much.’ I worked with residents to find solutions that specifically suited their situation”
Joe Llewellyn
Research Fellow
Figure 2: This graph shows the clear increase in energy-saving behaviour after energy coach interventions.
The hidden challenge of energy costs
Families can invest themselves in products such as better insulation for windows or more fuel-efficient heating components. But for low-income households, this is often difficult: the money is hard to find. According to Llewellyn, this is mainly because energy costs are often ‘invisible’ and seem less important than, say, food and clothing for the family.
‘For a household that cannot spare 100 euros, these are big costs. Energy is often the last thing people think about when paying for other basic needs. It is something you don’t see; it's hidden behind walls. It’s difficult to change that,” Lleweyn adds.
A smart display showing current energy consumption of a home
What's the next step?
With concrete practical examples of effective policies like this, (local) governments can target their efforts more effectively and efficiently.
‘This research is valuable for the municipality. It provides insights for better energy poverty policies and, through the home visits, has directly helped reduce residents' energy bills,’ says Annoesjka Nienhuis, programme manager for Innovation and Sustainability at the municipality of Amsterdam (area development Zuidoost).
“This research is valuable for the municipality. It provides insights for better energy poverty policies and, through the home visits, has directly helped reduce residents' energy bills”
Annoesjka Nienhuis
Program Manager for Innovation and Sustainability at the Municipality of Amsterdam (area development Zuidoost).
As the researchers acknowledge, working with consumers to reduce their energy consumption is only one way to help people escape energy poverty. Other ‘structural’ factors that can help are lower energy prices and more energy-efficient buildings.
Fortunately, the current report has prompted a new experiment that Llewellyn is developing with Amsterdam officials to explore the benefits of retrofitting residential buildings to reduce energy costs. A key focus is how local policymakers can fund these measures without landlords simply passing the costs on to tenants, so that the savings actually benefit residents.
‘We don't want a household to save money on energy bills if that also means the rent goes up, because then we have moved the cost from one item to another,’ says Llewellyn.
This work was part of the Energy Lab South East and conducted in close collaboration with the City of Amsterdam, with the Zuidoost area in particular shaping the research closely. In a permanent collaboration, AMS Institute has teamed up with the City of Amsterdam, TU Delft, and HvA, to bring science to practice for a social energy transition in South East. This research is a strong example of what this Lab stands for. Learn more on openresearch.amsterdam.
* Co-authors: Titus Venverloo, research fellow at the MIT Senseable City Lab and AMS; Fábio Duarte, also principal investigator at MIT's Senseable City Lab; Carlo Ratti, director of the Senseable City Lab; Cecilia Katzeff; Fredrik Johansson; and Daniel Pargman of the KTH Royal Institute of Technology.
