Assessing the impact of energy coaching with smart technology interventions to alleviate energy poverty

Joseph Llewellyn; Titus Venverloo; Fabio Duarte; Carlo Ratti; Cecilia Katzeff; Fredrik Johansson; Daniel Pargman

doi:10.1038/s41598-024-80773-9

Assessing the impact of energy coaching with smart technology interventions to alleviate energy poverty

Sci Rep. 2025 Jan 13;15(1):969. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-80773-9.

Authors

Joseph Llewellyn^{1

2

3}, Titus Venverloo^{4

5}, Fabio Duarte⁶, Carlo Ratti⁴, Cecilia Katzeff⁷, Fredrik Johansson⁷, Daniel Pargman⁸

Affiliations

¹ Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering Department, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Teknikringen 10b, Stockholm, 114 28, Sweden. josephll@kth.se.
² Senseable City Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 9-216 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA. josephll@kth.se.
³ Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Metropolitan Solutions, Gebouw 027W, Kattenburgerstraat 5, Amsterdam, 1018 JA, Netherlands. josephll@kth.se.
⁴ Senseable City Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 9-216 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA.
⁵ Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Metropolitan Solutions, Gebouw 027W, Kattenburgerstraat 5, Amsterdam, 1018 JA, Netherlands.
⁶ Senseable City Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 9-216 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA. fduarte@mit.edu.
⁷ Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering Department, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Teknikringen 10b, Stockholm, 114 28, Sweden.
⁸ Media Technology and Interaction Design, School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Lindstedtsv. 3-5, Stockholm, 100 44, Sweden.

Abstract

Energy poverty affects 550,000 homes in the Netherlands yet policy interventions to alleviate this issue are rare. Therefore, we test two energy coaching interventions in Amsterdam: a static information group (n = 67) which received energy efficient products and one energy-use report, and a smart information group (n = 50), which also had a display providing real-time feedback on energy-use. Results across both groups, show a 75% success rate for alleviating energy poverty. On average homes reduced monthly electricity consumption by 62 kWh (33%), gas by 41 m³ (42%), bills by €104 (53%) and percentage of income spent on energy from 10.1% to 5.3%.

Keywords: income; Energy poverty; consumption; efficiency; intervention; smart-technology.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Conservation of Energy Resources* / economics
Conservation of Energy Resources* / methods
Electricity
Housing / economics
Humans
Mentoring* / methods
Netherlands
Poverty* / prevention & control