10.2190/B7C1-6L52-TYKP-KCGR B7C16L52TYKPKCGR 2 Impact of Electricity Utility Rate Reform in Oakland and Livingston Counties, Michigan 27 36 20020509 20020509 20020509 20020509 B7C16L52TYKPKCGR.pdf http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=B7C16L52TYKPKCGR 1 James H. Johnson Bradley T. Cullen Lawrence M. Sommers Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles Department of Geography, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque Department of Geography, Michigan State University, East Lansing Disadvantaged households are more adversely affected by rising energy costs than the rest of the population. Lifeline rates have been proposed or enacted in a number of states, including Michigan, to ease the burden of electric price hikes on the poor. Inherent in the Michigan legislation is the proposition that electricity usage is positively associated with income and family status. This analysis of data from a sample of 1100 households in Oakland and Livingston Counties, Michigan, revealed that socio-economic and demographic variables are poor predictors of household electricity usage. Appliance mix and size of dwelling units appear to be better indicators of electricity usage. In fact, the Michigan legislation, as presently structured, will improve the economic well-being of many middle-class and affluent households, and further exacerbate the plight of a significant number of low-income households. E. Cose (ed.), <i>Energy and Social Equity: Some Social Concerns</i>, Joint Center for Political Studies, Washington, D. C., 1979. National Advisory Council on Economic Opportunity, <i>Eleventh Report</i>, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1979. How to Help the Poor Buy Heat, <i>The New York Times</i>, p. A-16, August 1979. Does Your State Have Lifeline?, <i>The Power-Line, 4</i>, p. 6, 1976. F. P. Morrisey, The Changing Structure of Utility Rates, <i>Public Utilities Fortnightly, 97</i>, pp. 15-19, 1976. Department of Energy, <i>National Electric Rate Book</i>, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1978. Rate Structure Glossary, <i>The Power-Line, 5</i>, p. 5, 1977. U. S. Congress, House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, <i>Electric Utility Reform and Regulatory Improvements</i>, 94th Congress, 2nd Session, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1976. C. T. Everett and J. R. Malko, Measuring the Impact of Residential Gas and Electric Rates, <i>Public Utilities Fortnightly, 100</i>, pp. 20-24, 1977. R. H. Frank, Lifeline Proposals and Economic Efficiency Requirements, <i>Public Utilities Fortnightly, 99</i>, pp. 11-15, 1977. J. W. Howe, Lifeline Rates - Benefits for Whom?, <i>Public Utilities Fortnightly, 97</i>, pp. 22-25, 1976. G. Burgess and M. Paglin, Lifeline Electric Rates as an Income Transfer Device, <i>Land Economics, 57</i>, pp. 41-47, 1981. B. M. Morrison, <i>Socio-Physical Factors Affecting Energy Consumption in Single Family Dwellings: An Empirical Test of a Human Ecosystem Model</i>, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1977. S. Z. Klausner, Household Organization and Use of Electricity, <i>Energy Policy in the United States: Social and Behavioral Dimensions</i>, S. Warkov (ed.), Praeger Publishers, New York, pp. 45-59, 1978. A. J. Dahl, California Lifeline Policy, <i>Public Utilities Fortnightly, 102</i>, pp. 13-22, 1978. Detroit Edison Company, <i>1978 Appliance Saturation Survey</i>, Detroit, Michigan, 1978. A. J. Barr, et al., <i>A User's Guide to SAS</i>, SAS Institute, Raleigh, North Carolina, pp. 251-252, 1976. L. J. Henderson, Jr., Energy Policy and Social Equity, R. Lawrence (ed.), <i>New Dimensions to Energy Policy</i>, Lexington Books, p. 149, 1979. L. McCelland and S. W. Cook, Promoting Energy Conservation in Master-Metered Apartments Through Group Financial Incentives, <i>Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10</i>, pp. 20-31, 1980. B. Stokes, Helping Ourselves, <i>The Futurist, 15</i>, pp. 44-51, 1981.