A collaboration between the University of Washington Center for Environmental Health Equity, Alaska Public Interest Research Group, Native Movement, and Cook Inletkeeper.
Alaskans – especially low-income, rural, and Indigenous communities – face some of the highest energy burdens in the U.S., spending a disproportionate share of their income on energy costs. These high costs pose a threat to financial stability, health, and cultural practices. The report identifies major disparities and outlines targeted, community-driven solutions to reduce these burdens and promote energy sovereignty.
Energy burden is the percentage of household income spent on electricity, gas, and home heating. This metric helps identify those individuals most affected by unaffordable energy costs. The US Department of Health and Human Services categorizes energy burden into the following:
- Low: < 3%
- Medium: 3-6%
- High: 6-10%
- Severe: > 10%
Key Report Findings
- Disproportionate Energy Costs
- Statewide average energy burden: 4.3% of household income vs. 2.7% in the Lower 48.
- 14.7% of Alaska’s census tracts have high or severe energy burdens; 8.5% are severely burdened, ten times higher than the next most burdened state.
- Regional Inequities
- Southwest Alaska: Median burden of 12.0% (severe).
- Northern Alaska: Median burden of 8.3% (high).
- Anchorage/Mat-Su: Much lower median burden of 2.3% (low).
Factors: Extreme weather, transportation costs, lack of road access, small ratepayer bases, and reliance on costly barge-in and fly-in diesel.
- Income-Based Disparities
- Households at 0–30% of Area Median Income (AMI) face a median energy burden of 22.9%.
- In 90% of census tracts, the lowest-income households are severely burdened.
- Households in poverty (<200% Federal Poverty Level or FPL) face a 10.1% median burden compared to 2.9% for those not in poverty.
- Housing Tenure Matters
- Renters and owners have the same median burden (3.3%), but renters face higher maximum burdens – up to 51.5%, indicating renters are more likely to experience the most extreme burdens.
- Renters also have limited agency in making their homes more energy efficient.
Major Consequences of High Energy Burden
Health and Well-Being – High energy burdens affect physical and mental health. Residents in inefficient homes face higher risks from asthma and exposure to harmful gases. Forced trade-offs between paying energy bills and essentials like food or medicine can cause stress, anxiety, and depression.
Cultural and Community Impacts – High energy costs limit participation in traditional subsistence activities like fishing and trapping, impacting cultural preservation, food security, and cultural ties.
Economic Ramifications – Energy-burdened households are more likely to remain in prolonged poverty. High costs can lead to debt and limit investments in education or job training, reinforcing financial instability.
Recommended Strategies to Reduce Energy Burden
- More Weatherization and Efficiency Programs: These programs provide immediate cost relief through home improvements, such as insulation and efficient appliances. Previous efficiency programs saved participating households an average of 30% on heating costs.
- Expand Power Cost Equalization (PCE) Program: Established to offset high electricity costs in rural Alaska, PCE equalizes power costs to those in larger metropolitan areas. It benefits over 84,000 Alaskans, but excludes community institutions like schools and Tribal buildings.
- Support Tribal Independent Power Producers (IPP): In a Tribal IPP, Tribes own and operate renewable energy projects, selling surplus power to utilities. This model promotes economic resiliency, provides diversified energy supply, insulates communities from fuel price volatility, and fosters self-determination and revenue generation.
Case Study: Aniak
The experience of Aniak, Alaska, where residents faced a drastic 400% energy bill increase, provides a case study illustrating the challenges of high energy burdens and the impact of community-driven response. Community leader Wayne Morgan’s insights highlight the link between energy sovereignty, cultural practices (subsistence), economic self-determination, and the need for legislative advocacy and Tribal utility development.
Learn more, and act
Read more about how the US Senate’s upcoming decisions about energy tax credits could affect Alaskans’ energy burdens in this recent blog post.
Tell Alaska’s Senators about the importance of protecting energy incentives that can help Alaska solve its energy burden challenges. Contact them now: