Three Agnation for Weatherization Zine Project

Martin Schweitzer. Nonenergy gains from the weatherization assistance program: A review of recent literature. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (US), ORNL/CON-484, 2002.
The United States Department of Energy-funded Martin Schweitzer's publication of this report in 2002. Martin has authored other books, including An Evaluation of State Energy Program Accomplishments: 2002 Program Year (2005). This article is meant to give a summary of various findings on non-energy benefits that lead to the weatherizing of low-income homes. In the article, Martin focuses on Brown et al. (1993) work on the nonenergy benefits attributed to Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP). Here he breaks down these benefits into three major divisions that are the ratepayer, societal and the household benefits. These benefits go further to be divided into other subcategories such as payment-related benefits and service provision benefits. This article is very beneficial in the weatherization zine project since it offers a summary of various contributions made in this field by numerous scholars. It goes further to calculate monetized nonenergy benefit estimate and compares it with some previous years.

Fowlie, Meredith, Michael Greenstone, and Catherine Wolfram. Do energy efficiency investments deliver? Evidence from the weatherization assistance program. No. w21331. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2015.

Meredith Fowlie is a scholar from the University of California in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics. Michael Greenstone from the University of Chicago serves in the department of Economics whereas Catherine Wolfram from the University of California serves at Haas School of Business. In this 2015 publication issued in 2015, these scholars talk about energy efficiency (EE) policies, and the critical role they play in emissions reductions. They go further to focus on an experimental evaluation of the most substantial national residential EE program conducted on over 29,000 homes. The results portrayed that savings were about 2.5 more compared to the actual savings. They conclude that the end of the demand for energy higher efficiency comes because of the increased number of uses. The article, however, fails to provide evidence of high indoor temperatures in weatherized homes. It serves as an excellent reference in this project since it focuses on the benefits associated with energy efficiency investments.

Jaffe, L., et al. Weatherization Assistance Program monitoring. No. DOE/CH/10383-2. B and M Technological Services, Inc., Waltham, MA (United States), 1990.

Jaffe L., Krysiak M., Naibirwa C., and Crooke D. published this article in 1990. All these authors are renowned for their involvement in development matters and examining various projects of importance to the economy. The focus of the article is exploring how Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) was monitored. The authors start by introducing the B M Technological Services, Inc. (B M), a body that was given the mandate to oversee the Fiscal Year 1988 in three states that is Wisconsin, Ohio, and Indiana. The monitoring team’s findings were presented in the Final Report. However, by this time a lot of improvement was necessary among the subgrantees. The subgrantee operations would be improved with the help of various state offices. However, the article provides report information from three states and generalizes the rest. This article is very crucial in weatherization project since it portrays various recommendations that have been implemented and helps trace the required changes to improve WAP.