You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
Insurance often leaves homeowners with a devastating choice — to stay in the place where they lost so much, or to give up everything.

More people were displaced by wildfires between the start of this year and the end of July than in all of 2024. Globally, the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre puts the number around 496,000 wildfire displacements — more than half of which occurred in Los Angeles County during the Eaton and Palisades fires in January.
“Displacement,” of course, can mean many things, and often in the case of wildfires, “most people can return quickly” once the danger has passed, the IDMC writes. But many in Los Angeles County are now entering their 10th month of displacement — and still more may choose, or have chosen, never to return.
Though the former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan called this kind of internal displacement “the great tragedy of our time,” voluntarily deciding to move away after a wildfire in the United States is something of a luxury. There are only three states in the U.S. in which insured homeowners have the legal right to replace a wildfire-destroyed home by buying a new property instead of rebuilding; for many, mortgages anchor them to properties that are covered in rubble and toxic ash. Three-quarters of homeowners who believe they have adequate insurance discover only after a fire that they’re actually underinsured, meaning that their policies cover less than 75% of the cost of rebuilding.
While there is limited data about how people disperse after a wildfire, recent tragedies have shed light on those who’ve either cashed out, cut their losses, or remain displaced in what was intended to be temporary housing. In 2018, for example, the Camp Fire burned down almost the entire town of Paradise, California, and as of 2021, 80% of the local population still had not moved back. Nearby Chico became “the epicenter for Paradise’s long-term relocation,” Abrahm Lustgarten writes in his book about climate migration, On the Move: The Overheating Earth and the Uprooting of America, though “smaller numbers of people moved farther,” with survivors ultimately resettling across all 50 states. Cheryl Maynard, a Camp Fire survivor I spoke to for this piece, even told me she’d heard about Paradise residents making it as far as Ukraine.
In some cases, though, this dispersal can lead to a stigma against those who either chose to leave or decide against returning. In Lahaina, the fact that native Hawaiians are being forced to find housing elsewhere is viewed as a form of “climate gentrification.” Even in Los Angeles, “many survivors have been quietly selling due to the many obstacles they face,” Joy Chen, the co-founder and CEO of the Eaton Fire Survivors Network, told me in an email. “Nearly all are reluctant to speak publicly. Locally, there’s been a lot of backlash to those who sell, and the folks I’ve spoken with just want to move on without drawing attention.”
Every story is different and personal, however — from being forced into temporary housing turned permanent to the reluctance of starting over. In an effort to better understand why people move away after a fire, I spoke to four California wildfire victims about their relocations and what they plan to do next. Their stories have been condensed and edited below.
Pasadena, California — Eaton Fire, 2025
I grew up in Pasadena. It was a nice community where you could ride your bike outside and there were other kids on the street — you could all get together, hang out, and get up to no good. It was an all-American town. I stayed, and I built my family there.
This was the third house I’d owned in Pasadena. I got married at 27, and when I was 30, we upgraded to a bigger house because we wanted to have kids. We bought a 1,700-square-foot house and we were really happy there, but at some point, we decided we needed something a little bigger. So we bought a house in 1990 that abuts the Eaton Canyon, about 300 yards from the Edison Tower where the January fire started. There is a wrought-iron fence in our backyard, and it goes straight down into the national forest. My husband and I were young and stupid, and we didn’t have any money, so we bought the worst house on a nice street. It was a real fixer-upper.
In 1993, a fire came through and burned right up to our backyard. We had only minutes to get out. When we came back and the house was still standing, we couldn’t believe our luck. So we moved back in; we got out our mops and brooms, and we cleaned it up. Five years later, my husband was dead of cancer. I don’t know if the toxins caused my husband’s death, but I don’t know that they didn’t. And I was left with a 6-year-old and a 12-year-old to raise by myself.
On the day of the Eaton Fire, my [second] husband and I were sitting and eating dinner when, at about 6:15 p.m., the TV went out. I said, “It must be Spectrum again.” We didn’t think much of it. Then we heard a loudspeaker, but we live right above the Eaton Canyon Nature Center, and they’re always rousing people at dark, saying, “The park is closed.” So that’s what I thought it was. But then there was a loud pounding on the front door, and it was my neighbor who’d just pulled into his driveway from work and saw a small fire directly underneath the tower across the canyon. The wind was blowing 70 or 80 miles an hour at the time, and he apparently rushed into his house and screamed for his wife to call 911 and to get the kids and the dog. And then he ran over and started knocking on doors.
We walked outside and there was the fire. I go, “Oh no, I know this drill.” Just then, a whole bunch of fire trucks pulled in, and I think that’s the only reason [the house] survived — because we were the first place burning, and the infrastructure wasn’t stressed yet. There are about eight to 10 houses in our cul-de-sac, and we had four huge fire trucks and probably 40 firefighters. I went back into the house, and I had a list from the last fire of the things I should take; I’d printed it up and taped it inside a closet door, but there was not going to be any time for that. We grabbed our hard drive, laptop, and three dogs, and got into our cars.
By then, it was black outside, with golf ball-sized embers flying by your head. It was like the videos of the fall of Saigon; it was the same damn way. Once I got out of the cul-de-sac, it was complete chaos. Nobody was obeying traffic lights or signs. My son had called — he lives in Monrovia, which is about 20 minutes away — and he was saying, “I saw the fire, I’m gonna come.” And I said, “There’s no time, forget it.” I finally made it to his house, and my husband was already there. And we have been there for seven months now.
The house in Pasadena is absolutely in the same condition as it was on January 7, when we left. It hasn’t been touched; it’s just full of all this toxic stuff that you can’t really see. State Farm’s adjuster came by with a little Kleenex box, and he wiped my hallway and said, “Oh, it’s not that bad. You just need a cleaning lady.” But we spent $6,400 to find out it’s full of lead, arsenic, and nickel. Seven months later, we still don’t have enough money to even start the cleanup. The original estimate, before we knew about the heavy metal contamination, was for $120,000. When we found out about the contamination, we got another estimate, and it’s up to $350,000 because everything has to be trashed. All the upholstered goods have to go. The hardwood floor has to go, because it’s grooved and distressed, and you can’t get the lead out of that. The carpets have to go. The window treatments have to go.
Fortunately, I get along with my son and daughter-in-law, but they’re a young couple and they’re relatively newly married, and they just bought that house in October. Then we move in with our three dogs, and it’s only a 1,000-square-foot house. I said, “We need to find someplace to rent. We can’t stay here.”
I talked to my financial planner, and he said, “We worked with people in Paradise after the Camp Fire, and people identical to you, with no fire damage but just smoke damage, they weren’t back in their house for one or two years.” And I said, “You’ve got to be out of your mind.” But it’s true, because you’re fighting with insurance the whole time. State Farm is still only okaying month-to-month rentals, and try to find a place to rent month-to-month with three dogs. So I asked my financial planner, “Is there any way we can buy another house right now?” And he crunched the numbers and said, “Everything’s got to be financed, but we can get a conventional loan and finance a mortgage, and then we can borrow against your portfolio for the down payment. You can survive for about two years that way before it gets financially untenable.”
So we put in an offer. We bought a house. We aren’t officially living there yet because it’s really dirty. We’re here every day, cleaning everything. But we’ll be in Monrovia, about seven or eight blocks from my son’s house, and the house wasn’t in the plume of the fire.
I worry that [the insurance company is] not going to give us enough money to clean up our house appropriately. I’m just not going to feel safe there anymore. My kids are, of course, advocating that we not go back. As my son says — because he’s so charming — he says, “Mom, you’re old now. You got out of two fires. Your luck has run out. The first one, you had a 10-minute warning. The second one, you had a six-minute warning. I don’t think you should push it.”
But it’s home, right? My whole life is there. Neighbors I’ve known for 35 years. I had saved up my nickels and dimes for about three decades to make it my Barbie’s dream house. I don’t know how much money we’re going to have to put into the house to get it into shape where we can either go back or sell it. But how could I sell it without making sure it’s clean? Somebody else is going to live there. What if they have little kids?
Kenwood, California — Tubbs Fire, 2017
Larry: Kenwood is beautiful wine country. We had been looking for a home where we could spend time with our family on weekends and in the summertime, and that’s why we bought the house. We lived there for about 12 years before we started renting it as an Airbnb on weekends, or sometimes for a week at a time. On the night of the fire, the last tenant had just moved out. Though the Kenwood house was our primary residence, we were luckily not living there at the time, so our most valuable possessions weren’t there, either.
We were awakened at 3:30 in the morning by a friend who had heard there was a fire up near Kenwood. We went to the TV, turned it on, and watched it. Coverage focused on the area around the Kaiser hospital, but we knew it was in our area because we’d heard from a neighbor who was running for his life and who said our house was on fire and there was no way there’d be anything left.
We didn’t get up there until two and a half weeks later. They’d completely closed the area off to get rid of all the dangerous brush. It was hard going back.
Jackie: In the beginning, we thought about rebuilding. It felt like we were fighting back. Like, “Just put the house right back where it was!”
Larry: We immediately got in touch with a contractor who could clean up the place. He went through the bureaucracy to get the okay to clean it all up. We got an architect. We were ready to rebuild.
Jackie: Then I looked at our lives and said, “Do I really want to start picking out doorknobs again? To go through two years of hassle trying to rebuild?”
Larry: At that time, we were in our late 70s. We just figured, This is just ridiculous. This is going to be such a heartache.
We were really careful and diligent, though. There are people out there who will deal with the insurance process for you, but they take 30% of the proceeds. You don’t want to do that, but some people don’t think they have the time or the intelligence to go through it all. We went through the whole thing, start to finish, and it took us two years and eight months before we were done. We had this house here in Marin County that we were renting, so we didn't have to worry about moving anywhere, and so we were able to go through the process slowly. It’s very emotional, but a few days after the fire, you’ve got to sit down and do your homework.
After we received the money for the trees and shrubs and the loss of the house, we still had the land, so we put it up for sale. A young couple — speculators — bought it, and they built a home in their style, and then they put it up for sale.
Jackie: The real problem is — like the new people who bought the house — they don’t know what Kenwood was like before. We were surrounded by the Trione-Annadel State Park, and when we looked out, we could see miles of trees. Now, when you look out, you see trees, but they’re all burnt. Every time we go up there, it just looks burnt to me.
Paradise, California — Camp Fire, 2018
I lived in the Paradise area for eight years. I’d lived in Magalia, which is just a few miles to the north of Paradise, but it was very cold — much colder than I was used to. So I sold my three-bedroom home and moved down to what they called the Banana Belt. We actually received some sunlight through the trees.
On the day of the fire, I had a friend visiting me from out of town. The day before, I had received a phone call from PG&E — a live person, not a recording! — saying that if there were high winds, they would be turning off the power. That morning, I got up and it looked kind of cloudy, but there was no smoke. My friend needed a prescription from CVS, and I told her, “You probably should call them.” But she was stubborn and looked at me like, I’ll do it when I want to. So we hung around for a little bit, and then I heard her calling CVS on her own terms. The guy there told her, “Lady, what are you doing here? The whole town is leaving. I’m locking up and I’m getting out of here.”
We thought, “Okay, we’d better leave.” I’d helped out in the condos there; I was on the safety committee, and we could evacuate 40 people in about 35 minutes. But they’d canceled the committee, so we didn’t have it on the day of the fire. I didn’t know if people were going to make it out or not. We had one person with no legs, married to a deaf lady, and I worried about them so much.
So I’m starting to panic. I took a quilt on the floor that I was trying to make for my son that had taken me forever — just a tie quilt, a $10 value. I took a picture of him in a frame that he and his girlfriend had given me. I took two salt and pepper shakers, one from each grandma. I left my china and my silver. I left a 100-year-old quilt, because it wasn’t in my line of sight. I left my mom’s wedding dress and my wedding dress.
Outside, the trees were burning behind the garages. One lady was in her garage next door, and I thought, “Oh my gosh, these people are inside there.” We stopped and asked if they needed help, and they said no, they had people coming. I should have made them get in my car. The condo manager drove around the parking lot a few times, honking his horn, but you couldn’t hear it because of the wind.
My friend said she was going to drive. I was holding onto my dog, who’s terrified of fire and things exploding. I told my friend, “Don’t go along the canyon because I don’t like it; it’s a drop off.” Well, the fire jumped over my car — like a rainbow — and went into the other median. I said to her, “Man, that was cool!” My dad raised me that way.
What my friend did then was, she went over into the wrong lane, and she went down against the upcoming traffic. At that point, they’d cut it off and made it that way. I was very blessed that we did not get trapped. She was doing about 70 going down that road and following a police officer. I said, “You’re going to get pulled over.” She said, “I don’t think he’s worried about me right now.”
At the bottom of the hill, another police officer directed us into a grocery store parking lot. It was packed with cars and people and dogs and animals, and we all got out and turned around and stared up at the mountain. There was just smoke and people coming down, people crying.
I went to my son’s in-laws with my friend, and on the third day, I found out that my condo was gone. So I booked a flight to where my family lived, and I’ve never been back. I went back to Chico a year later to pick up some things — I had a friend meet me there and we had lunch — but I never went back up the hill. There were so many people in the Facebook group [for fire victims] that were struggling mentally and emotionally because they were living in the burn scar, and there was no way I wanted to go up and see it. I’d talked to a tow truck driver before I left — I ran into one going into a store, and he was working up there hauling all the cars away — and I said, “How is it?” He said, “It’s bad. It’s bad.”
Recovery has been really complicated. A lady started the Facebook group after reading PG&E’s 2019 bankruptcy court documents, and she told people to vote against the plan. The $13.5 billion Fire Victims Trust was going to pay the 70,000 survivors of the Butte, North Bay, and Camp Fires — all sparked by PG&E — half in cash, half in the company’s stock. But it was approved by more than 85% of survivors. How do you get 70,000 people to agree on anything?
The day they signed the deal, PG&E’s stock was only worth $9 a share — so it was only worth $11 billion — and we had to wait for it to get to, like, $14 a share for us to break even at $13 billion. And we couldn’t sell until after shareholders were able to sell, which knocked the value of the stock down. All this was so complicated, and Wall Street manipulated the whole thing. We have been fighting to get the remaining 30% of the recovery settlement that we still have not received from PG&E. We got some preliminary payments, but most people can’t afford to stay in Paradise. Many people have a distaste because of being victimized, politicized, and not treated fairly.
There’s no hospital anymore; there’s not the medical facilities like they used to be. What are you going to do if you’re 75 and used to [a Kaiser Permanente hospital] down the street? You have to end up going to the Bay Area. Other people left because there is fire after fire in the state, and we couldn’t handle it for health reasons — the smoke, the PTSD. I’ve talked to many people who said, “There’s a fire outside my house, three miles away, and I can see smoke! Oh my gosh, I’m going to die!” Every once in a while, when the power goes out, I freak out. And imagine living in Paradise, where they have all those fires around them.
It’s been hard. Financially, I had been set up. My highest payment in Paradise was my [home owner’s association] fee — they’d just raised it to $320, and we were really complaining about that. Now I’m paying rent of $1,500-something a month, and with utilities, it’s like $1,900.
I worry about my future. I shouldn’t — I know God’s going to take care of me — but some days I do.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
On Exxon’s Venezuela flipflop, SpaceX’s fears, and a nuclear deal spree
Current conditions: U.S. government forecasters project just one to three major storms in the Atlantic this hurricane season • The Meade Lake Complex, a wildfire that scorched 92,000 acres in southwest Kansas, is now largely contained • Temperatures in Vientiane, the sprawling capital of Laos, are nearing 100 degrees Fahrenheit amid a week of lightning storms.
A years-long megadrought. Reduced snowpack in the northern mountains. Rising water demand from southwestern farms and cities whose groundwater is depleting. It is no wonder the water levels in Lake Mead are getting low. Now the Trump administration is giving the Hoover Dam money for a makeover to make do in the increasingly parched new normal. The Great Depression-era megaproject in the Colorado River’s Black Canyon boasts the largest reservoir capacity among hydroelectric dams. But the facility’s actual output of electricity — already outpaced by six other dams in the U.S. — is set to plunge to a new low if drought-parched Lake Meade’s elevation drops below 1,035 feet, the level at which bubbles start to form damage the turbines. At that point, the dam’s output could drop from its lowest standard generating capacity of 1,302 megawatts to a meager 382 megawatts. Last night, federal data showed the water level perilously close to that boundary, at 1,052 feet. The Bureau of Reclamation’s $52 million injection will pay for the replacement of as many as three older turbines with new, so-called wide-head turbines, which are designed to operate efficiently at levels below 1,035 feet. Once installed, the agency expects to restore at least 160 megawatts of hydropower capacity. “This action ensures Hoover Dam remains a cornerstone of American energy production for decades to come,” Andrea Travnicek, the Interior Department’s assistant secretary for water and science, said in a statement.
Like geothermal, hydropower is a form of renewable energy that President Donald Trump appreciates, given its 24/7 output. Last month, the Department of Energy’s recently reorganized Hydropower and Hydrokinetic Office announced that it would allow nearly $430 million in payments to American hydropower facilities to move forward after stalling the funding for 293 projects at 212 facilities. Last year, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission proposed streamlining the process for relicensing existing dams and giving the facilities a categorical exclusion from the National Environmental Policy Act. The Energy Department also withdrew from a Biden-era agreement to breach dams in the Pacific Northwest in a bid to restore the movement of salmon through the Columbia River.
Shortly after the U.S. capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Máduro in January, Exxon Mobil CEO Darren Woods told CNBC the South American nation would need to embark on a serious transition to democracy before the largest U.S. energy company could invest in production in a country the firm exited two decades ago amid the socialist government’s crackdown. Five months later, he may be changing his tune. On Thursday, The New York Times reported that Exxon Mobil was in talks to acquire rights to start drilling for oil in Venezuela. If finalized, such a deal would mark what the newspaper called “a victory for President Trump, who has declared the country’s vast natural wealth open to American businesses.”
It’s not just Elon Musk’s xAI data centers that brace for the data center backlash that Heatmap’s Jael Holzman clocked last fall as the thing “swallowing American politics.” In its S-1 filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission ahead of one of the country’s most anticipated stock market debuts this year, SpaceX warned that mounting public skepticism over AI could harm the growth of America’s leading private space firm. “If AI technologies are perceived to be significantly disruptive to society, it could lead to governmental or regulatory restrictions or prohibitions on their use, societal concerns or unrest, or both, any of which could materially and adversely affect our ability to develop, deploy, or commercialize AI technologies and execute our business strategy,” the company disclosed in the filing, a detail highlighted in a post on X by Transformer editor Shakeel Hashim. “Our implementation of AI technologies, including through our AI segment’s systems, could result in legal liability, regulatory action, operational disruption, brand, reputational or competitive harm, or other adverse impacts.”
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
Yesterday, I told you that corporate energy buyers last year inked deals for more nuclear power than wind energy. But if you needed more proof that, as Heatmap’s Katie Brigham called last summer, “the nuclear dealmaking boom is real,” just look at this week:
Separately, this week saw two projects take big steps forward:
It’s been the year of Chinese automotives. Ford’s chief executive admits he can’t get enough of his Xiaomi SU7. Chinese auto exports are booming. And now Beijing’s ultimate automotive champion, BYD, is accelerating talks to enter Formula 1. On Thursday, the Financial Times reported that the company had met with former Red Bull Racing chief Christian Horner in Cannes. “Following talks between Stella Li, executive vice-president at BYD, and Horner last week, BYD intends to hold further meetings with senior figures involved in F1 and at the FIA, the governing body,” the newspaper reported.
China’s hydrogen boom continues. The country’s electrolyzers are quickly going the way of batteries and solar panels by securing global export deals that reflect their efficiency and competitive prices. On Thursday, Hydrogen Insight reported that Chinese manufacturer Sungrow Hydrogen inked a deal to supply a 2-megawatt alkaline electrolyzer to a Spanish cement facility. That same day, another Chinese manufacturer, Hygreen Energy, announced an agreement to supply a 1.3-megawatt system to a green hydrogen project in Nova Scotia.
With both temperatures and electricity prices rising, many who are using less energy are still paying more, according to data from the Electricity Price Hub.
In 135 years of record-keeping, Tampa, Florida, has never been hotter than it was last July.
Though often humid, the city on the bay is typically breezy, even in summer. But on July 27, it broke 100 degrees Fahrenheit on the thermometer for the first time ever; two days later, it hit its highest-ever heat index, 119 degrees. The family of Hezekiah Walters, the 14-year-old who died of heat stroke during football practice in Tampa in 2019, urged neighbors at a local CPR certification event to take the heat warnings seriously. Local HVAC companies complained about the volume of calls. Area hospitals struggled to keep their rooms and clinics comfortable. Experts later said the record temperatures were made five times more likely by climate change.
But according to data from Heatmap and MIT’s Electricity Price Hub, Tampa Electric customers used 14% less electricity in July 2025 than they did in the same month of 2020, which was Tampa’s previous hottest July on record — about 216 kilowatt-hours per household less, roughly the equivalent of running a central AC a couple hours fewer per day for an entire month. Tellingly, Tampa Electric raised rates over that period by 84%, with the average bill growing from $111 to $190 per month.
Though there are many instances in many places around the country where usage has dropped as rates rose, the correlation doesn’t necessarily mean people were rationing their electricity. Climate-related factors like anomalously cool summers can lower summer bills, while energy efficiency upgrades can also result in changes to residential consumption. Southern California Edison customers, for example, used 24% less electricity in 2025 than they did in 2020, at least in part due to the widespread adoption of rooftop solar.
Thanks to recent efforts by the Energy Information Agency to track energy insecurity and utility disconnections, however, we can start to tease out deficiency from efficiency. By cross-referencing that data with rate and usage statistics from the Electricity Price Hub, we find a handful of places like Tampa, where people have seemingly reduced their electricity usage because they couldn’t afford the added cost, even during a deadly heatwave. (Tampa Electric did not return our request for comment.)
The EIA’s tracking program, known as the Residential Energy Consumption Survey, tells a clear story: Across the country, people are struggling to absorb the rising costs of electricity. In 2020, nearly one in four Americans reported some form of energy insecurity, meaning they were either unable to afford to use heating or cooling equipment, pay their energy bills, or pay for other necessities due to energy costs. By 2024, the most recent data available, that number had risen to a third — and two-thirds of households with incomes under $10,000. In 2024 alone, utilities sent 94.9 million final shutoff notices to residential electricity customers.
Since 2020, 98% of the more than 400 utilities in the Heatmap-MIT dataset have raised their rates — more than half of them by greater than 20%; about one in 10 utilities have raised their rates by 50% or more. And 219 of those utilities raised rates even as usage in their service area fell, meaning that as customers used less, they still paid more.
“I don’t feel like [the rates have] ever been all that affordable, but they have steadily increased more and more and more,” Janelle Ghiorso, a PG&E customer in California who recently filed for bankruptcy due to the debt she incurred from her electricity bills, told me. She added: “When do I get relief? When I’m dead?”
The people hit hardest by rate increases tend to be those already struggling the most. For example, about 30% of Kentucky residents reported going without heat or AC, leaving their homes at unsafe temperatures, or cutting back on food or medicine to pay energy bills, per the EIA’s 2020 RECS report. Since then, Kentucky Power has raised rates in the eastern part of the state by 45%, adding about $64 to the average monthly bill in a service area where the median monthly household income can be less than $4,000.
The Department of Energy’s Low-income Energy Affordability Data, which measures energy affordability patterns, actually obscures some of this burden. It reports that for all of Kentucky, annual electricity costs account for about 2% of the state’s median household income, which is about average for the nation. But in Kentucky Power’s Appalachian service area specifically, many households live under 200% of the poverty level, and $15 of every $100 someone earns might go toward their energy costs, Chris Woolery, the residential energy coordinator at Mountain Association, a nonprofit economic development group that serves the region, told me. “The situation is just dire for many folks,” he said.
Kentucky Power is aware of this; its low-income assistance charge has grown by 110% since 2020, the Heatmap-MIT data shows. Woolery also noted that the utility agreed to voluntary protections against disconnections, such as a 24-hour moratorium during extreme weather, in a rate case settlement with the Kentucky Public Service Commission. The commission rejected the proposal, but the utility kept the protections anyway, Woolery told me.
Customers in other areas are not so lucky.
In states like Oklahoma, where one in three households reported energy insecurity in 2020, rates rose about 30% from 2020 to 2025, according to our data. Per the EIA survey, Oklahoma’s monthly disconnection rate is more than three times the national average. Oklahoma doesn’t have the highest electricity rates in the country — far from it. But median incomes there are low enough that even moderate rate increases leave some with hard choices.
Interestingly, in bottom-income-quartile states, where median household incomes are below $81,337, only about 30% of utilities show a pattern of rising bills and falling electricity usage, which would suggest energy rationing. The other 70% of utilities show the opposite effect: usage is rising despite electricity rates becoming a bigger burden of customers’ incomes. In Kentucky Power’s service area, for example, bills may be up $64 a month, but usage remained essentially flat.
“Think of it this way: The electric company goes to the front of the line,” Mark Wolfe, the executive director of the National Energy Assistance Directors Association, a policy group for administrators of the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, told me of how households triage their bills. If you need to buy something from the grocery store, the drug store, or pay your electricity bill, then “the utility goes to the front of the line because they can shut off your power, which causes lots of other problems.”
Wolfe added, “Plus, if you’re really in dire straits, you can go to the food bank. You can’t go to the ‘other’ utility company.”
Even as resource-strapped households put a higher share of their income toward electricity, they’re also least able to afford energy efficiency upgrades like newer appliances, smart thermostats, or solar panels. The pattern is prevalent in places with extreme climates, such as Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, where turning off the AC in the middle of summer could mean death. It shows up most starkly among the most extreme rate examples in our data set, like the utilities serving remote Alaska villages — despite astronomical electricity prices, usage hasn’t fluctuated much because its customers are already using it as little as they can afford. The elderly and other individuals living on fixed incomes are also often unable to cut their electricity usage beyond what little they’re already using.
In middle-income states like Florida, roughly 60% of the utilities in our dataset show rising bills and falling electricity use — more than twice the rate we see in the lowest-income states. While the poorest Americans have already reduced their electricity use to the bare minimum and are cutting groceries and medicine in order to keep the heat and AC on, in places like Tampa, where the median income is $96,480, the electricity rate shocks have caused even middle- and even high-earning households to start worrying about their bills. According to a new survey released Tuesday by Ipsos and the energy policy nonprofit PowerLines, 74% of respondents with household incomes over $100,000 said they are worried about their utility bills increasing.
“People are seeing their utility bill as one of the few things that changes so much month to month, that is so unpredictable, and that they don’t have any control over,” Charles Hua, the founder and executive director of PowerLines, told me.
Wolfe, the executive director at NEADA, agreed, saying that for the first time, the association has begun hearing from families with incomes above the threshold who need assistance. “An extra $100 a month for a family, but they’re middle class — that shouldn’t push them over the edge,” at least in theory, Wolfe said. But for those with no flexibility in their budgets, anything additional or unpredictable “pushes them close to the edge — from going from middle class to lower middle class — and I think that’s why this affordability crisis is becoming such an issue.”
We can also see this phenomenon in the explosion of line items on utility bills going toward funding assistance programs. Appalachian Power Co.’s low-income surcharge, for instance, is up 3,200% for customers in Virginia; Puget Sound Energy’s low-income program is up 970% for customers in Washington; and PacifiCorp Oregon’s low-income cost-recovery charge, up 879%.
The EIA data, too, bears this out: Florida had one of the highest rates of people reporting they were “unable to use air conditioning equipment” due to costs in the RECS data, and in 2024, there were 186,202 disconnections in the state in July alone — every one of which would have meant people no longer had the power to run their ACs. (FPL and Duke Energy Florida also show usage declines as rates rose, although neither raised rates as much as Tampa.)
The data also shows places where higher-income earners have aggressively pursued efficiency upgrades to lower their usage. In the LA Department of Water and Power service area in California, usage is down more than 11% overall between 2020 and 2025, one of the biggest drops in our dataset. But the lower usage is more evenly distributed month to month, indicating that things like solar adoption and efficiency programs are likely behind the drop, rather than cost pressures. (Rates there still rose more than 28%, or about $15 per month.)
Even doing everything right wasn’t enough to save customers in the end — households that cut their electricity use still saw their bills rise by an average of $20 a month, our data shows.
Perhaps most concerning, though, is the relentless upward trajectory. PowerLines reports that utilities have submitted $9.4 billion in new requests in the first quarter of 2026 alone. Heatmap and MIT’s numbers show that 79% of utilities raised rates in 2025, and 55% have raised them again already this year.
But the advocates I talked to stressed that utilities have more agency than they get credit for. Take Kentucky Power, for example, with its voluntary disconnection protections. “It just shows that you don’t necessarily have to make disconnections to be financially solvent,” Woolery of the Mountain Association pointed out. Or take Ouachita Electric in Arkansas, which passed a 4.5% rate decrease after investing in efficiency upgrades in consumers’ homes through a pay-as-you-save model.
But that’s the rare exception. For most customers, relief is not obviously on the way. Signs increasingly point to the imminent onset of a super El Niño, which could bring punishing, climate-change-intensified heat waves across the United States. The July 2025 record in Tampa will almost certainly not stand; someday, it’ll be the second-hottest summer, or the third. In a few decades, it might even look cool.
And still there will be bills to pay.
Rob talks with UCLA law professor Ann Carlson about her fascinating new book, Smog and Sunshine.
We live in a time of unheralded environmental victories. Dolphins and whales swim in New York and San Francisco harbors. Lead has been eliminated globally in gasoline for cars and trucks. And Southern California has cleaned up its air.
That last one is more important than you might think. On today’s episode of Shift Key, Rob is joined by Ann Carlson, a professor of environmental law at UCLA and the former acting head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. She's also the author of a new book, Smog and Sunshine: The Surprising Story of How Los Angeles Cleaned Up Its Air, which was released last month by the University of California Press.
Ann and Rob discuss why cleaning up LA’s air was so important to cleaning up the world’s air. They chat about why LA initially misdiagnosed the causes of its terrible air pollution, how it got them right, and what we can learn from the city’s eventual inspiring success.
Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap News.
Subscribe to “Shift Key” and find this episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, or wherever you get your podcasts.
You can also add the show’s RSS feed to your podcast app to follow us directly.
Here is an excerpt from their conversation:
Ann Carlson: We should talk more about the Clean Air Act itself because it’s a pretty extraordinary piece of legislation — hard to imagine something like that passing today.
Robinson Meyer: As you are a professor of environmental law, I can’t think of a better topic to talk about. So one, there’s a few nuances that are important. The first is that California is early to air pollution law, so it’s beginning to explore how to regulate cars by the time that the Clean Air Act passes. But the second is this distinction that you’ve begun to draw in this conversation between technology following versus technology forcing regulation, where California had adopted technology following regulation, and that made it kind of captive to the car companies.
Can you talk a little bit about why the Clean Air Act is different and why it was different? And did people understand maybe how different it was when they were writing it?
Carlson: I think they did understand how different it was. And what they did was, instead of focusing on whether technology was available or what was possible to demand of auto companies based on that technology, they focused on public health. And the basic overarching idea in the Clean Air Act is, we are going to set standards that protect public health. We’re not going to worry about cost. We’re not going to worry about technological availability. We’re going to tell manufacturers, for example, you cut pollutants by 90% by 1975 and 1976, depending on the pollutant. We understand there’s no technology. Go out and invent it. That’s the technology-forcing part of the statute.
Of course, the auto manufacturers say they can’t do it. Lee Iacocca famously says that Ford will stop manufacturing vehicles if the Clean Air Act passes. Ford continues to manufacture vehicles to this day. He, of course, was engaged in hyperbole, but that gives you some sense for just how intense the opposition was and how kind of panicked the manufacturers were. But that technology-forcing statute, again, combined with California’s authority to regulate, set off this arms race to really figure out how do we cut pollutants dramatically.
You can find a full transcript of the episode here.
Mentioned:
Ann Carlson’s new book: Smog and Sunshine: The Surprising Story of How Los Angeles Cleaned Up Its Air
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by ...
Heatmap Pro brings all of our research, reporting, and insights down to the local level. The software platform tracks all local opposition to clean energy and data centers, forecasts community sentiment, and guides data-driven engagement campaigns. Book a demo today to see the premier intelligence platform for project permitting and community engagement.
Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.