谁是能源负担者

Federal Reserve Board, Washington, D.C.ISSN 1936-2854 (Print)ISSN 2767-3898 (Online) Energy Consumption and Inequality in the U.S.: Who are theEnergy Burdened? Octavio M. Aguilar and Cristina Fuentes-Albero 2025-026 Please cite this paper as:Aguilar, Octavio M., and Cristina Fuentes-Albero (2025).“Energy Consumption and In-equality in the U.S.:Who are the Energy Burdened?,” Finance and Economics Discus-sion Series 2025-026.Washington:Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System,https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2025.026. NOTE: Staff working papers in the Finance and Economics Discussion Series (FEDS) are preliminarymaterials circulated to stimulate discussion and critical comment.The analysis and conclusions set forthare those of the authors and do not indicate concurrence by other members of the research staff or theBoard of Governors. References in publications to the Finance and Economics Discussion Series (other thanacknowledgement) should be cleared with the author(s) to protect the tentative character of these papers. Energy Consumption and Inequality in the U.S.:Who are the Energy Burdened?* Octavio M. Aguilar‡Cristina Fuentes-Albero‡ April 1, 2025 Abstract Using a broad definition of energy consumption that includes both residential energy useand gasoline for transport, we identify 20% of households in the PSID as energy burdened (EB)based on a twice-the-median, income-based threshold. Logit analysis shows that being non-white, being single with dependents, receiving public assistance, having no post-secondaryeducation, and being unemployed increase the probability of being EB. We document four keyempirical facts: (1) EB/non-EB status is persistent; (2) EB households have significantly highermarginal propensities to consume and marginal propensities to consume energy comparedto non-EB households; (3) EB households experience lower expected energy consumptiongrowth despite having higher expected income growth relative to non-EB households; and (4)EB households face more volatile energy consumption and income than non-EB households.Lastly, we show that both consumption inequality and energy consumption inequality haverisen more moderately than income inequality over the 1999 to 2021 period.Inequality inresidential energy consumption increased until 2009, then declined, whereas inequality ingasoline consumption for transport has risen steadily, reaching a level 50% higher in 2021than in 1999. JEL CLASSIFICATION: E21, I32.KEYWORDS:ENERGY CONSUMPTION,ENERGY BURDEN,INEQUALITY 1INTRODUCTION The study of empirical patterns in consumption and income using micro-data is ubiqui-tous in the macroeconomic literature.1However, less attention has been devoted to theanalysis of energy consumption expenditures using micro-data under a macro approach.In this paper, we document four new empirical facts about energy consumption and en-ergy burden (EB) status in the U.S. using the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID). Inparticular, we show that(i)EB status is persistent;(ii)EB households have significantlylarger marginal propensities to consume for both energy and all goods;(iii)EB house-holds have lower expected energy consumption growth despite having higher expectedincome growth; and(iv)EB households face more volatile energy consumption and in-come. Since Boardman (1991), the literature on energy consumption and energy poverty has de-fined household energy consumption as expenditures on electricity, gas, and other fuelsfor domestic use (hereafter, residential energy).2In our PSID sample, U.S. householdsspend, on average, approximately 6% of their disposable income on residential energyand an additional 5% on energy for transport. Therefore, we argue that energy consump-tion should include not only the traditional residential energy component but also expen-ditures on energy for transport. Figure 1 presents expenditure shares in overall consumption by income decile in thePSID, based on survey waves from 1999 to 2021. As shown by the orange bars, the shareof residential energy expenditures in total consumption declines monotonically with in-come.3However, the share of expenditures on energy for transport, shown in lavender,remains relatively stable across income deciles—except for the top decile. This suggeststhe prevalence and potential significance of gasoline-related energy expenditures in as-sessing households’ energy vulnerability status.4 Using the broad definition of energy consumption described above, we classify house-holds as energy burdened (EB) if the share of energy expenditures to disposable income exceeds twice the median share in the sample. That is, we use a twice-the-median income-based indicator to conclude that 20% of U.S. households in our sample are classified asEB. The average energy burden—defined as the ratio of energy expenditures to dispos-able income—is 25% for EB households, compared to only 7% for non-energy-burdened(non-EB) households.Most EB households (81%) are concen