We document very low take‐up of an energy efficiency program that is widely believed to be privately beneficial. Program participants receive a substantial home “weatherization” retrofit; all installation and equipment costs are covered by the program. Less than one percent of presumptively eligible households take up the program in the control group. This rate increased only modestly after we took extraordinary efforts to inform households ‐ via multiple channels ‐ about the sizable benefits and zero monetary costs. These findings are consistent with high non‐monetary costs associated with program participation and/or energy efficiency investments.

More Research From These Scholars

BFI Working Paper Sep 11, 2017

New Evidence on the Impact of Sustained Exposure to Air Pollution on Life Expectancy from China’s Huai River Policy

Michael Greenstone, Avraham Ebenstein, Maoyong Fan, Guojun He, Maigeng Zhou
Topics:  Energy & Environment, Health care
BFI Working Paper Jan 1, 2015

Will Adaptation to Climate Change be Slow and Costly? Evidence from High Temperatures and Mortality, 1900-2004

Michael Greenstone, Alan Barreca, Karen Clay, Olivier Deschenes, Joseph Shapiro
Topics:  Energy & Environment, Health care
BFI Working Paper Jun 1, 2015

Do Energy Efficiency Investments Deliver? Evidence from the Weatherization Assistance Program

Michael Greenstone, Meredith Fowlie, Catherine Wolfram
Topics:  Energy & Environment, Health care