A recent study from Binghamton University has brought to light a significant and often overlooked form of racial inequity: the higher energy costs disproportionately shouldered by Black households across the United States.
Published in the journal Energy Research & Social Science, the groundbreaking national analysis reveals that Black Americans consistently spend a greater share of their income on essential utilities like heating and electricity compared to their white counterparts.
This finding challenges the common assumption that energy burden—the percentage of household income spent on energy—is solely a matter of poverty.
The study’s lead author, George Homsy, a professor at Binghamton University, emphasizes that while lower income certainly contributes to a higher energy burden for any household, there are deeper, systemic factors at play that specifically impact Black communities.
The average U.S. household spends about 3.2% of its income on energy. However, for households in majority-Black census tracts, that number jumps to an average of 5.1%. This gap, Homsy notes, is not a simple coincidence.
“We often say that African Americans suffer more, but we often blame it just on income. And the reality is, there is something more there,” said Homsy. “It’s not just because they tend to be poor. There is something that’s putting them at a disadvantage. I think what happened is it happens to be where they live.”
The primary driver of this disparity is the age and condition of housing in which Black households are more likely to reside.
Due to a history of discriminatory housing policies and practices, such as redlining, Black communities were often funneled into neighborhoods with older, less energy-efficient homes.
These properties frequently suffer from poor insulation, outdated heating and cooling systems, and old appliances. All of these factors drive up energy consumption and, consequently, monthly bills.
For renters, who make up a large portion of these communities, the problem is compounded. The “split incentive” problem, where landlords lack the financial motivation to invest in energy-efficient upgrades when tenants are the ones paying the utility bills, leaves residents with few options. Even homeowners may lack the capital to make costly energy-saving improvements.
The consequences of this “energy burden” are severe and far-reaching. When a large portion of a family’s budget is consumed by utility bills, difficult trade-offs must be made.
For many, this means sacrificing other basic necessities. Sacrifices such as nutritious food, medicine, or transportation, to keep the lights on and the heat running, are experienced. This financial strain can have a ripple effect on health and well-being. High energy costs are also linked to an increased risk of health issues like respiratory problems and mental health challenges.
The study serves as a critical call to action. Addressing the energy burden on Black households requires more than just income-based assistance programs.
It demands a systemic approach that includes targeted investments in weatherization and energy-efficiency upgrades for older housing stock, particularly in historically marginalized communities.
Policies that require landlords to disclose energy usage to prospective tenants or meet minimum efficiency standards could also assist. By tackling these issues, policymakers can work toward a more equitable energy system.