Changing Energy Costs: Drivers and PAtterns

The first panel of this workshop provided an overview of energy affordability in the United States, highlighting the research perspective on historic and projected trends and on-the-ground experiences of energy affordability impacts. Opening remarks from Ryan Wiser (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory), Geoffrey Blanford (Electric Power Research Institute), H.G. Chissell (Advanced Energy Group), and Suzanne Ogle (SGA Natural Gas Association) were followed by a panel discussion moderated by Susan Tierney (Analysis Group), member of the workshop planning committee. Panelists' opening remarks and discussion highlighted the supply and demand drivers of changing energy costs reflected in natural gas and electric bills.^4,5

Drivers and Patterns of National Energy Costs

For one-third of American households, energy prices are a structural challenge, Wiser stated (EIA 2024). Chissell added that energy prices and the cost of living will continue to rise unless solutions are developed to mitigate climate change and extreme weather. Energy cost drivers include commodity price volatility and procurement lag; infrastructure replacement and modernization cycles; extreme weather resilience investments; permitting, workforce, and supply chain delays; and demand growth reshaping energy system planning, Ogle outlined. These challenges, in addition to forecasted data center load growth, are contributing to the growing sense of volatility and vulnerability associated with energy costs, Chissell added.

In 2024, households across the nation spent an average of $5,530 annually on energy (including electricity, natural gas, and gasoline), Blanford said. However, he continued, costs vary across states and regions due to high energy demand and high fuel prices (e.g., New England), low energy demand and low energy prices (e.g., Utah), and low energy demand and

NOTE: Household expenditures displayed are utility bill electricity (blue), distributed solar (yellow), utility bill natural gas (orange), propane and fuel oil (dark brown), and gasoline (light brown).

SOURCE: Presented by Geoffrey Blanford on February 25, 2026, from EPRI (2025).

high fuel prices (e.g., California) (EIA n.d.). Wiser outlined that for states in which electricity prices outrun inflation, drivers include transmission and distribution (T&D) costs, clean energy policy, natural gas price volatility, and large load growth (e.g., Pennsylvania–New Jersey–Maryland Interconnection).

By 2030, energy use per household is projected to begin to decline through 2050, Blanford stated (see Figure 1). Energy efficiency improvements in end uses, including buildings, and in the electrification of the energy system, in particular the transportation sector, are expected to cause this decrease of the household energy wallet (EPRI 2025). Current increases in electricity prices, Blanford said, should not overshadow the forecasted structural effects that electrification will have on total household energy expenditures in the longer term.

When asked about the correlation between electricity price and load growth, Wiser noted that increased load growth does not always lead to increased prices. For example, North Dakota, Nebraska, and New Mexico each saw at least a 20 percent increase in load growth in recent years but have managed to keep electricity prices low (Forrester et al. 2024; Wiser et al. 2025). Blanford highlighted the flexibility of large load operations as an additional factor, noting that flexibility could be a way to avoid capacity increases and reduce price impact. The direction of impact is dictated by how well new load optimizes the existing system and the cost allocation of energy distribution, Wiser summarized.

Considerations for a Complex Solution Space

Tierney prompted panelists to identify and discuss actions that could be taken to address energy affordability, stipulating that no simple solutions exist. Blanford noted that available data suggest energy affordability is a finance challenge that can be addressed in part by increased capital investments in more efficient energy equipment. Another method is rethinking rate design to support residential electrification and new large loads, he added. Chissell underscored the importance of considering the role of those who can pay while also considering how investments can be reinvested in communities. He added that utilities can view affordability through an optimization lens and find ways to enhance the best value and unique qualities of the gas and electric systems. Affordability is a systems design problem, not just a price problem, Ogle observed, and energy affordability discussions can be connected with operational realities, which ultimately shape the customer experience.

Large load tariffs increasingly have been negotiated with hyperscalers⁶ to ensure that the residential customer base is protected when new load is added, Wiser stated.⁷ Hyperscalers are unique in that they have a high willingness to pay for instantaneous and reliable power, he continued. However, Ogle noted that while hyperscalers are willing, permitting challenges often hinder their ability to pay to support new loads. Blanford added that hyperscalers will often choose locations based on the availability of water, land, and fiber and the type of permitting structures, all of which support coming online faster. Wiser agreed, concluding that "speed to power" considerations—not necessarily "price of power" considerations—are a large driver of location decisions.

When asked for an operational definition of "affordability" to support the development of programs and incentives, Blanford suggested that the definition would measure burden relative to income and include a notion of reliability and stability. Chissell advised that while net income is important, the ability to cover acute living costs and invest in a healthier future is critical as well. Affordability policy has to survive real-world constraints, Ogle added, including extreme weather, workforce and supply chain issues, and regional differences. Acknowledging that no singular "right" metric exists for affordability, Wiser suggested that utility bill assistance programs be designed in the near term to resolve long-term affordability challenges and be implemented in regions with the most need. Tierney summarized that energy affordability is complicated, and its multidimensional nature could benefit from people continuing to bring good insights, knowledge, and place-based solutions to the problem space.

Residential Consumer Perspective on Changing Energy Costs

Changing energy costs affect household budgets directly, motivating the consideration of dimensions of energy affordability across regions and income levels. Keynote presentations from Destenie Nock (Carnegie Mellon University) and Sanya Carley (University of Pennsylvania) were followed by a fireside chat, moderated by Evan Michelson (Alfred P. Sloan Foundation), which elevated opportunities to

NOTE: Blue dots represent the high-income group. Black dots represent the low-income group.

SOURCE: Modified from the presentation by Destenie Nock on February 25, 2026; created with data from Cong et al. (2022) and Huang et al. (2023).

address energy affordability through redesigned definitions, metrics, and policies.

No Off Switch: Energy Affordability in a System Without Consumer Agency

Energy affordability challenges are rooted in a lack of agency experienced by households, Nock stated. Energy-related decisions differ from tradeoffs associated with groceries or medicine because people have no choice between different energy brands or quality levels that best fit a household budget. Energy tradeoffs can include households choosing between running heating and cooling systems and going without a comfortable temperature just to reduce energy bills. As shown in Figure 2, for example, low-income households delay cooling, typically waiting to turn on air conditioning (AC) units until the outdoor temperature is 7 degrees warmer than the temperature at which high-income households turn on the AC. In the winter, however, due to landlord intervention to prevent frozen pipes, low-income households had heating turned on at an outdoor temperature 10 degrees warmer than the temperature at which high-income households turn on their heat.

Residential Energy Insecurity and Affordability

In 2024, approximately 3 million households had their electricity or natural gas turned off due to the nonpayment of a utility bill, Carley stated (Energy Justice Lab 2024). However, this number is likely a drastic underestimate given the low percentage of utilities that publicly report their data, she added. Households that most often get their energy disconnected include the following: households of color, households with children under age five, households with electronic medical devices, and households with poor housing conditions (Konisky et al. 2022; Memmott et al. 2021; Memmott et al. 2024). In a survey of energy-insecure households,⁸ 55 percent of respondents admitted to engaging in coping strategies, which include accruing debt (27 percent); engaging in risky temperature behavior (26 percent); and going without other necessities, such as food or medical care (17 percent) (Carley et al. 2022). Systemic and structural barriers prevent households from accessing cost-saving assistance and technologies, Carley summarized. Only a small portion of energy-insecure households seek government support (11 percent) or utility assistance (6 percent) (Carley et al. 2022).

Redefining and Addressing Energy Affordability

Michelson prompted Carley and Nock to contemplate how the definition of energy affordability could be updated based on their research findings. Nock said that the definition could be tied to the benefits received from energy. She added that "energy affordability" could be reframed to consider what it takes for a household to be healthy from an energy standpoint, suggesting that a definition move beyond income-based measures to better understand multiple facets.⁹ However, affordability is incredibly complex, Carley cautioned, and being overly precise with the definition of energy affordability and related metrics risks missing the household-level experience of paying energy bills. She advised that energy affordability discussions ask, "How do we not break American households?"

When asked how energy system modelers can incorporate energy affordability into the narrative, Nock suggested that modelers stop assuming that a household's required energy consumption has remained flat over time. Households are required to use more energy to operate in modern society, she continued, and in the future, household energy consumption may increase further to support electrified heating, cooling, and cooking. Many of the energy affordability challenges are structural, and addressing them will reduce the overall cost of the energy system, Carley observed.

When asked how to align utility and landlord incentives with efforts to reduce energy insecurity, Nock noted that weatherization programs¹⁰ provide financial incentives to improve houses, including through energy efficient technology that ultimately saves households money. Carley proposed several possible interventions including customer protection policies (e.g., bill assistance, disconnection protections, and debt relief), preventative support (e.g., energy efficiency programs, smart gadgets, and customer-owned or community-shared distributed generation), and long-term measures (e.g., temperature and seasonal moratoria, notification requirements, and more caveats for heat protection) (see Figure 3).

When asked by Michelson about the extent to which the adoption of smart technologies improved energy affordability, Nock stated that while smart thermostats provide fine-tuned data about which households need assistance, the technologies often result in minor behavioral changes related to household energy use (Graff and Nock 2026). In theory, Carley added, the adoption of smart technologies sets

SOURCE: Presented by Sanya Carley on February 25, 2026. Used with permission from Sanya Carley.

households up to save money on energy costs; however, the upfront costs to install these technologies are a barrier for households, and these technologies make it easier for utilities to disconnect households.

Michelson asked about the role of the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) in addressing energy insecurity. Referring to a study she co-authored, Nock noted that a household that receives LIHEAP benefits does not significantly change the way it uses energy owing either to assistance not matching need (i.e., the household continues using limited energy because the LIHEAP benefits are not sufficient) or to a negative perception about relying on LIHEAP benefits (i.e., "welfare stigma") (Hunter-Hill et al. 2025). Most LIHEAP funds are used to support heating crises in winter months, Nock continued, which is a trend that needs to be addressed as the number of heatwaves increases (Carrión and Hernández 2024; Nishi et al. 2023). Carley stated that another suite of protection programs is needed. She proposed adding seasonal protections and modernizing the cost allocation mechanism so that more support is available during heatwaves and for warm-weather states.

When asked how to measure the success of affordability programs, Carley advised that being overly prescriptive about what success looks like could go against the intention of assistance programs. Energy affordability interventions that make it easier for households to use enough energy and to be protected from disconnections are most impactful, Nock added. Energy affordability challenges cannot be solved via a universal pathway, Carley stated, because they cannot be attributed to only one cause. Solutions to energy affordability challenges extend beyond protections and bill assistance, Carley said, and all sectors can get involved—not just utilities.

Industrial, Commercial, and Municipal Perspectives on Changing Energy Costs

Heavy industry, commercial businesses, and municipalities are also affected by changes in energy costs. Opening remarks from Clifford Ho (SB Energy), Camille Lopez (Black Owners of Solar Services), and D. Wayne Blaylock (Dow) explored how energy affordability influences the short- and long-term investments made by industrial, commercial, and municipal customers. The panel discussion, moderated by Latonia Batiste (WSP USA, retired), member of the workshop planning committee, highlighted the types of proactive strategies used by industrial, commercial, and municipal sectors to adapt to changing energy landscapes.

Responses to Energy Affordability

From the industrial perspective, "energy affordability" is a combination of energy cost considerations, volatility of market prices, and supply chain variability and reliability, Ho explained. Energy affordability risks, he continued, can be mitigated through efficient energy use and processes, siting considerations, energy flexibility, long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs),¹¹ and integrated infrastructure (see Figure 4). For example, the operating expenses of an artificial intelligence (AI) data center can be decreased through efficient manufacturing processes, feedstocks, and materials.

SOURCE: Modified from the presentation by Clifford Ho on February 25, 2026.

Blaylock stated that in response to rapid demand growth, utilities and industry are considering restarting nuclear initiatives, delaying coal plant retirements, and implementing "bring your own power behind the meter" concepts.¹² Because hospitals are high energy users, requiring more energy per square foot than commercial buildings, they are good case studies for how to achieve uninterrupted power for reliable operation and how to support long-term cost-saving, Lopez added.

For the industrial sector, energy competitiveness acts as a bridge between affordability, sustainability, and reliability, Blaylock said. For example, the energy competitiveness of natural gas over coal—driven by a 50 percent price reduction in natural gas from 2000 to 2025—has resulted in significant investments in the chemical industry, expanded industrial manufacturing, and replacement of coal with natural gas for industrial energy use (EIA 2026). In the short term, industries can add load and make supply flexible (i.e., use demand forecasting to optimize supply and demand matching) to manage current and future price volatility, Ho outlined; in the long term, industries can site new loads where prices are stable. Blaylock forecasted that future price drivers could include gas demand for power as electrification increases, the size and pace of liquified natural gas exports, and innovations in affordable resources extraction.

Tools to Mitigate Energy Affordability Challenges

Batiste prompted panelists to consider the tools that reduce risk and improve the energy affordability landscape for the commercial, industrial, and municipal sectors. Lopez said that the commercial sector is exploring long-term cost-saving strategies in response to increasing sustainability and energy resilience priorities. For example, hospitals are considering resilience hubs¹³ to provide reliable electricity during extreme weather emergencies and power outages. When asked if all facility types could be assigned electricity rates equally, Blaylock cautioned that choosing rates for different industries arbitrarily could be a risky policy approach and suggested instead that the cost-to-serve could be considered. Lopez suggested that policy be designed flexibly such that rates are applied in an effective manner from a public cost perspective, noting that municipalities pay lower rates for this reason. An analysis of high energy use across commercial facilities can be conducted and then used to develop an energy reduction plan, Lopez advised.

When asked about industry preference to connect to the grid versus using a behind-the-meter approach, Ho said that a combination of grid plus behind-the-meter batteries and control systems will be important. He added that integrated infrastructure can optimize energy supply and demand for load and grid flexibility. For example, he said, geographic and temporal shifting could be utilized for large loads, when appropriate. The grid can be a source of reliability for some behind-the-meter users, Blaylock stated, and the co-location of industries with behind-the-meter energy and grid-connected industrial clients is ideal. When asked about the degree to which integrated infrastructure can increase tail risks¹⁴ to the grid, Ho stated that these risks might occur with a sudden drop out of load or supply. These risks, he continued, can be mitigated through co-optimized and integrated infrastructure, which can meet changes in supply or demand for large loads on the grid flexibly rather than with a sudden load injection.

Mitigating Energy Cost Impacts—Policy and Technology Options

Recent state and federal actions have focused on mitigating the impact of energy affordability challenges on American households and businesses. Opening remarks from Charles Hua (PowerLines), Melissa Lavinson (Commonwealth of Massachusetts), Paula Glover (Alliance to Save Energy), Devin Hartman (R Street Institute), and Suzanne Glatz (Glatz Energy Consulting) were followed by a panel discussion, moderated by Carlos Martín (Resources for the Future), which highlighted potential policy and technology solutions to address energy affordability challenges.

Actions to Address Energy Affordability and Large Load Growth

Several panelists identified that energy costs can be mitigated at federal, state, and regional levels with accurate load forecasting, especially regarding the impact new large

loads will have on the grid. Martín highlighted recent state-level energy affordability actions: Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro's extension of the existing price collar, which prevents unnecessary price increases for energy (see Office of the Governor 2026), and New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill's executive orders to freeze rate increases and expand in-state power generation (e.g., solar and battery storage and long-term nuclear power) to lower electric bills (see NJ Exec. Order No. 1, 2026, and NJ Exec. Order No. 2, 2026). Lavinson added that Massachusetts uses a holistic approach to understand energy cost drivers, which includes legislation for comprehensive siting and permitting reform; comprehensive review of rates and rate design to stabilize bills; and actions to address gas distribution costs and add more energy online (Commonwealth of Massachusetts 2025). Hua mentioned Indiana's performance-based incentive mechanism for electricity utilities, which provides a financial reward or penalty based on customer affordability for each rate year (see Indiana HB 1002, 124th General Assembly, 2nd Session, 2026).

Glatz proposed managing the changing energy landscapes by ensuring that states have appropriate authority to act, including by encouraging flexibility (e.g., incentivizing hyperscalers to fund rooftop solar or efficiency programs so other customers can be flexible). Hartman acknowledged some difficulty at the state level to build new infrastructure owing to outmoded permitting and regulatory practices. These challenges limit supply as demand is increasing from emerging customer bases (e.g., hyperscalers), he said, but some state and congressional actions are attempting to address these barriers (see, e.g., Florida SB 484, 2026, and S.Con.Res.30, 119th Congress, 2nd Session, 2025–2026). While this has been the first election cycle in which utility bills and electricity prices are relevant on a national scale, Hua said, no simple one-size-fits-all approach exists for mitigation. Successful solutions will be geographic- and population-dependent, he added.

Energy Affordability Impacts on Utility Bills

Residential electricity and gas costs are the fastest drivers of inflation, Hua said; this is reflected in utility bills, making inflation more tangible for residential consumers. On the utility consumer side, he reported that distribution spending made up 44 percent of total utility capital expenditures in 2023, which is a 50 percent increase from 2019 (PowerLines 2026). Lavinson agreed that T&D infrastructure investments are significant drivers of energy costs, followed by energy supply costs and then by programs that enable energy efficiency and distributed resources. Technical reforms that optimize the current system could address this, Hartman stated, in addition to improved cost allocation and proactive planning. Energy efficiency alone is not enough to address energy affordability impacts to households, Glover noted, highlighting the need for better management and flexibility of large load growth, which includes smart thermostats, battery storage, and electric vehicle chargers.

A member of the audience proposed a model of electricity billing in which a customer pays a set amount monthly for access to the grid, similar to how payments are made to access the internet. In response, Glatz said that rate structures need to recognize that base-level costs persist even as efficiency is improved. Modernizing rate design is vital, Hua added, noting that the current system does not take advantage of technologies such as advanced meters. Glover cautioned that while rate design is important, affordability from a residential customer perspective has to consider how investments in homes are made. 80 million American households are struggling to pay their utility bills, Hua stated (PowerLines 2026). Durable policy needs to put the human back in discussions, he suggested.

Addressing Future Impacts

Load growth forecasts have made massive jumps to the point where some regions in the United States are projected to have insufficient energy in the market in the coming years, Glatz stated. For example, PJM reported that its resource capacity is approximately 6,600 megawatts under the committed supply for 2027–2028 (PJM 2025). The United States needs to expand the grid to meet rising population growth and electrification, Hua said, and a significant need remains for more effective coordination among regulators since every state has different political economies and grid planning approaches. Cost-conscious policy actions include accurate load forecasting in addition to economical T&D, efficient markets, low entry and exit barriers, and a market-based policy pivot toward meeting emissions goals, Hartman outlined. Lavinson identified future Massachusetts policy innovations including comprehensive distribution system and load planning to mitigate peak demand, new energy procurement processes, flexible interconnection and smart

SOURCE: Modified from the presentation by Susan Tierney on February 25, 2026.

energy management systems, and speed-to-power for commercial and industrial customers.

Martín asked the panelists to comment on the most efficient and effective "bring your own energy" (BYOE) policy options. Glatz highlighted that data centers can be built in two to three years, but building generation and transmission infrastructure can take more than seven years; hyperscalers have the capital to enable faster generation build-out (Silverman et al. 2025). She suggested that states revisit how tariffs are imposed on large customers to ensure that revenue is available to cover infrastructure build-out without a massive cost shift to other customers. This is especially important given the low confidence in whether these loads will exist in the future, she added. Hartman said that the political constraints of BYOE are real and additive to the considerations about maintaining a social license to operate. For example, commercial and industrial customers engaging in retail competition creates a lower cost than a single cost-of-service provider, which avoids socializing the risk of investments on utilities' broader rate base. Hua added that BYOE is not something expected of every customer in the system, and clear objectives are needed regarding what is being solved through this concept. Glover agreed, noting that while BYOE is an interesting idea, it does not eliminate the fact that some communities do not want data centers.

When prompted to think about technology policy options, Hartman stated policy needs to address the root cause of market failure, which he identified as knowledge spillovers for research, development, and deployment (RD&D). Glover added that durable action needs to value energy efficiency, suggesting that AI-enabled grid planning tools help utilities find hidden capacity and prompt customers to reduce or shift loads at moments that matter most. Investing in weatherization, strong building codes, and appliance standards can save families money without requiring them to become energy experts, she continued, and investing in RD&D for energy efficiency technologies can reduce household energy costs. Energy policy is an investment that benefits everybody, Glatz stated, even if the benefits do not happen immediately.

Workshop Summary

Julia Haggerty (Montana State University), chair of the workshop planning committee, prompted workshop moderators to share what they learned from the workshop and what was missing from discussions. Table 1 illustrates Tierney's categorization of key messages heard throughout the workshop presentations and discussions based on the cost of the energy system and the customer experience. She summarized that with respect to energy use in the built environment, we are in a world of increasing costs,

and customers are being impacted by the larger economic situation.

Michelson described potential opportunities and interventions that can address energy affordability, including those that address the frictions that arise at the intersection of how people interact with utilities. Determining how to combine novel interventions and move from practical operational changes on a small scale to larger system-level changes is important, he said. For the industrial, commercial, and municipal sectors, energy affordability is about designing systems that manage risk, maintain reliability, and distribute costs, Batiste summarized. These sectors respond strategically to energy affordability, she continued, and decisions impact household bills, regulatory design, and long-term affordability pathways. Martín said that the workshop highlighted the range of policy options that can address energy affordability as well as opportunities for change and reform. While the final combination of individual policies and interventions remains unknown, he observed, ambition to reform the energy system into something that is more affordable persists.

Informing Energy Affordability Action

Haggerty closed the panel discussion by asking each panelist to remark on what could be done in the next five years to address energy affordability. Batiste stressed that work can be done at the community level. Place-based and interdisciplinary research can be conducted, Michelson added, including research on how to connect communities with one another, how to share learning across geographies, and how to experiment with different energy affordability solutions. Tierney agreed and noted that work is being done to bring research and insights to solutions that support the provision of the basic services needed to improve the quality of life of individuals living in the United States. The nation needs to take advantage of the current policy moment, using it to address challenges and build something better for the longer term, Martín stated.

The topic of energy affordability is an enduring issue in the public mind, Comello said, and energy affordability pressures are emerging from structural transformation. These pressures have distributional impacts across income levels, customer classes, and regions, he continued. Solutions to energy affordability challenges can address the aging grid, extreme weather events, and the electrification of the economy while making the United States competitive on the international stage, Comello added. (See Box 1 for a synthesis of the overarching energy affordability themes elevated at the workshop.) This workshop has significant momentum, he observed, and a large community willing to find answers to the questions raised at this event.

This workshop's discussions laid the foundation for future informed, comprehensive discussions that consider energy affordability issues holistically, Haggerty summarized. She highlighted the need for a more inclusive space for utility rate design and technoeconomic modeling conversations to occur with communities in support of policy reform as well as the need for new language and concepts for discussing a floor for energy services. Haggerty concluded,

I'll leave [this workshop] really continuing to think about . . . a set of concepts, and language to describe [it], that is accessible and really communicates how integral basic energy services are, and the idea that demand is dynamic and evolves over time as our relationship [with] technology changes. . . . One of our ambitions really needs to be about a broader language and shared social understanding that everybody should have access to some basic level of energy services.

References

Carley, S., M. Graff, D.M. Konisky, and T. Memmott. 2022. "Behavioral and Financial Coping Strategies among Energy-Insecure Households." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119(36):e2205356119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2205356119.

Carrión, D., and D. Hernández. 2024. "Heatwaves and Hardships: Shortcomings and Solutions for Enhancing the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program to Mitigate Extreme Heat and Energy Insecurity." The Electricity Journal 37(7–10):107440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tej.2024.107440.

Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 2025. Energy Affordability, Independence & Innovation Act–Overview. Healey–Driscoll Administration. https://www.mass.gov/doc/energy-affordability-independence-innovation-act-policy-overview/download.

Community Housing Partners Corporation. n.d. "Weatherization." https://www.communityhousingpartners.org/energy-solutions/weatherization/ (accessed April 16, 2026).

Cong, S., D. Nock, Y.L. Qiu, and B. Xing. 2022. "Unveiling Hidden Energy Poverty Using the Energy Equity Gap." Nature

Communications 13:2456. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-30146-5.

DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). n.d. "Whole-House Weatherization." https://www.energy.gov/cmei/scep/wap/whole-house-weatherization (accessed April 16, 2026).

DOE. 2023. "Financing Navigator: Power Purchase Agreement." Better Buildings & Better Plants Initiative. https://betterbuildingssolutioncenter.energy.gov/financing-navigator/option/power-purchase-agreement.

EIA (U.S. Energy Information Administration). n.d. "About SEDS." EIA State Profiles and Energy Estimates. https://www.eia.gov/state/seds/ (accessed March 17, 2026).

EIA. 2024. "Household Energy Insecurity (HC11.1)." Data from Residential Energy Consumption Survey. https://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2024/hc/pdf/HC11.1_2024.pdf.

EIA. 2026. "Natural Gas: Data." https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/rngwhhdA.htm.

Energy Justice Lab. 2024. "Residential Electric Utility Disconnections Across the U.S." Fact Sheet. https://acrobat.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:5f5941ed-aebf-3cba-8ca5-b7f604bd1134.

EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute). 2025. The Energy Wallet: U.S. and State-Level Household Energy Expenditures, Past, Present, and Future. https://energywallet.epri.com/en/introduction.html.

Forrester, S., A. Satchwell, G. Barbose, E. Cappers, C. Miller, and A. Alberg. 2024. Retail Electricity Price and Cost Trends: 2024 Update. DE-AC02-05CH11231. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. https://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/2025-01/retail_price_and_cost_trends_2024_update_final_v3.pdf.

Graff, M., and D. Nock. 2026. "The Role of Thermostats and Human Behaviour in Residential Temperature Settings in the USA." Nature Energy 11:400–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-025-01948-w.

Hernández, D., Q. Krasniqi, and A. Peek. 2023. "Energy Insecurity in the United States." Fact Sheet. Columbia University Center on Global Energy Policy. https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Energy-insecurity-fact-sheet-FINAL-adjusted-10.19.23.pdf.

Huang, L., D. Nock, S. Cong, and Y. Qiu. 2023. "Inequalities across Cooling and Heating in Households: Energy Equity Gaps." Energy Policy 182:113748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113748.

Hunter-Hill, J., D. Nock, and H. Laasme. 2025. "Heterogeneous Impact of Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program on Energy Consumption Behavior." iScience 28(9):113306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2025.113306.

Konisky, D.M., S. Carley, M. Graff, and T. Memmott. 2022. "The Persistence of Household Energy Insecurity during the COVID-19 Pandemic." Environmental Research Letters 17(10):104017. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac90d7.

Memmott, T., S. Carley, M. Graff, and D.M. Konisky. 2021. "Sociodemographic Disparities in Energy Insecurity among Low-Income Households before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic." Nature Energy 6:186–93. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-020-00763-9.

Memmott, T., D.M. Konisky, and S. Carley. 2024. "Assessing Demographic Vulnerability and Weather Impacts on Utility Disconnections in California." Nature Communications 15:9548. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-53913-y.

NERC (North American Electric Reliability Corporation). 2024. Probabilistic Planning for Tail Risks: PAWG White Paper. https://www.nerc.com/globalassets/our-work/reports/white-papers/pawg_white-paper_planning_for_the_tails_march_2024.pdf.

Nishi, A., D. Hernández, and M.B. Gerrard. 2023. Energy Insecurity Mitigation: The Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program and Other Low-Income Relief Programs in the US. https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/4196.

Nock, D. 2024. Defining Energy Affordability. Massachusetts Interagency Rates Working Group. https://www.mass.gov/doc/defining-energy-affordability/download.

Office of the Governor. 2026. "Response to PJM's Request for Feedback on Extending the Price Collar to Save Consumers Money." January 30. https://www.pa.gov/content/dam/copapwp-pagov/en/governor/documents/01.30.26%20Gov%20Shapiro%20letter%20PJM%20price%20cap%20response.pdf.

Perez, Y. 2024. "What's All the Hub About? How Community Resilience Hubs Can Bridge Gaps in Social Connection, Wellness, and Transportation." Greenlining Institute Blog, January 30. https://greenlining.org/2024/whats-all-the-hub-about-how-community-resilience-hubs-can-bridge-gaps-in-social-connection-wellness-and-transportation/.

PJM. 2025. "PJM Auction Procures 134,479 MW of Generation Resources." PJM News Release. https://www.pjm.com/-/media/DotCom/about-pjm/newsroom/2025-releases/20251217-pjm-auction-procures-134479-mw-of-generation-resources.pdf.

PowerLines. 2026. Utility Bills Are Rising: 2025 Review. https://powerlines.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/0126_PowerLines_Rising-Utility-Bills-Q4-Update-FINAL.pdf.

Redhat. 2022. "What Is a Hyperscaler?" Redhat.com Blog, December 20. https://www.redhat.com/en/topics/cloud-computing/what-is-a-hyperscaler.

Ross, S. 2024. "What Does a Power Purchase Agreement Mean in the Utilities Sector?" Investopedia Blog, August 19. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/071415/what-does-power-purchase-agreement-ppa-mean-utilities-sector.asp.

Silverman, A., S. Glatz, and M. Lahvis. 2025. A State Playbook for Managing Data Center-Driven Load Growth. Johns Hopkins University, Ralph O'Conner Sustainable Energy Institute. https://energyinstitute.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Johns-Hopkins_Datacenters-Playbook_FINAL.pdf.

Smart Electric Power Alliance and North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center. 2026. DELTa: Database of Emerging Large Load Tariffs. https://sepapower.org/large-load-tariffs-database/.

USDN (Urban Sustainability Directors Network). n.d. "Resilience Hubs: Shifting Power to Communities and Increasing Community Capacity." https://www.usdn.org/resilience-hubs.html (accessed April 16, 2026).

Wiser, R.H., E. O'Shaughnessy, G.L. Barbose, P. Cappers, and W. Gorman. 2025. "Factors Influencing Recent Trends in Retail Electricity Prices in the United States." The Electricity Journal 38(4):107516. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tej.2025.107516.

Yang, D. 2026. "Risks in a Changing U.S. Power Grid." University of Pennsylvania Kleinman Center for Energy Policy Blog, March 10. https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/commentary/blog/risks-in-a-changing-u-s-power-grid/.