Category: Map of the Month

By Will Bryan

Housing in the Southeast is aging, and the cost of living in it is getting more expensive. As we noted last month, around 40% of housing in the region was built before 1980, when the nation’s first minimum standards for energy efficiency were implemented. For residents of older homes, occupancy can come with an unexpected tax: the high costs of deferred maintenance and inefficiencies, not to mention the health and safety impacts of living in substandard housing. 

These burdens are not distributed equally. In this month’s map of the month, we assess the quality of housing in Savannah, Georgia using the metric of energy use intensity (EUI), a measure of energy use per square foot. EUI is a helpful proxy for housing quality and efficiency. Higher EUIs signal leaky buildings with heavy heating and cooling loads, while low EUIs indicate more efficient spaces. By modeling heating EUI at the census block group in Savannah, Georgia – a city where the housing stock is older than the state and regional average – we show where efficiency gaps are the widest and shed light on which communities are shouldering the impacts of our aging housing.  

As the map shows, EUI varies considerably across the City of Savannah. The most efficient households in the city use more than 4.5 times less energy per square foot than the least efficient households in the city, which translates into considerable monthly cost savings.  

The highest EUIs are concentrated on the outskirts of the historic district. While the housing here is nearly as old as that in the city’s core, these neighborhoods have had fewer resources available for retrofits and upgrades. The result is that it is less likely that homes in these areas have been retrofitted and they are more likely to experience the impacts of deferred maintenance. 

In Savannah, these issues are shaped by the legacies of the South’s long history of residential segregation. As the chart below indicates, block groups in the city with the highest EUIs all have majority Black populations, while census block groups with the lowest EUIs are all majority white. Additionally, homes in areas with low EUIs tend to be newer than the typical home, benefiting from modern construction techniques and minimum standards for building efficiency. This showcases the ways that segregation, a lack of housing choice, and unequal access to capital over the past century continue to circumscribe who has access to healthy and efficient housing today.

Code: The model energy code edition that a state has officially adopted — IECC for residential buildings or ASHRAE Standard 90.1 for commercial buildings. 

Strength: The actual rigor of that code after state amendments — shown as the equivalent edition it matches and the percent change in efficiency compared to the unamended base. 

Impact (Δ%): The efficiency impact of amendments on the strength of the code — negative values mean the code was weakened, positive values mean it was strengthened. 

Code Adoption 

Modern building energy codes were born from the 1970s energy crisis, when the U.S. first recognized the need to make buildings part of the nation’s energy solution. Congress passed the Energy Conservation and Production Act of 1975, prompting ASHRAE to release Standard 90-1975, which was the first model energy standard for both residential and commercial buildings. What began as a response to oil shortages evolved into a national framework for improving efficiency, lowering energy bills, and creating healthier indoor environments. 

Today, two model codes define energy performance in new construction: the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), developed by the International Code Council (ICC), which applies to most low-rise residential buildings; and ASHRAE Standard 90.1, maintained by ASHRAE’s Standing Standards Project Committee 90.1, which governs commercial and multifamily buildings four stories and higher. Both are updated every three years through consensus-based processes that integrate advances in materials, technology, and design. 

States adopt these model codes to establish consistent, verifiably effective standards for energy-efficient building design and construction. Using a national model allows jurisdictions to align with proven energy and cost savings while reducing the administrative burden of writing their own code from scratch. Each adoption cycle marks an opportunity to bring new buildings closer to the long-term goals of efficiency, affordability, and resilience. 

Amendments 

Once a model code is adopted, many states modify it through state-specific amendments that tailor how the code is applied or enforced. Amendments can adjust performance requirements or provisions to accommodate local market or climactic conditions. 

States may amend for several reasons: to reflect regional climate, to balance cost and feasibility, or to harmonize with existing state policies. Some strengthen efficiency – tightening envelope requirements or improving lighting and controls – while others weaken it by relaxing testing standards or allowing lower equipment performance. 

For example, several states in the Southeast have adopted the 2015 IECC with state-specific amendments, which in effect perform closer to the 2009 IECC. These amendments may often be created to help codes pass politically or reduce near-term costs, but often result in lower long-term energy and health benefits. 

Impact of Amendments 

On paper, a state’s code might appear to meet a recent national standard. In practice, however, amendments can significantly alter its strength, that is, the actual level of efficiency the code delivers. To capture this nuance, analysts from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Building Energy Codes Program use comparative modeling to estimate how amendments shift a code’s effective performance.  

For example, a state that adopts the 2015 IECC but introduces multiple weakening amendments may, in effect, deliver energy savings closer to the 2009 IECC baseline. This map is intended to visualize those distinctions through both Code (what’s on the books) and Strength (what’s actually achieved), offering a clearer view of how policy choices translate into real-world outcomes for efficiency and affordability. 

To learn more about the DOE’s State Energy Code modeling methodology, visit the link here. 

The Impact (%) represents that estimated difference in energy performance caused by amendments alone – negative values indicate a weaker, less efficient code, while positive values reflect stronger-than-standard performance. Together, these measures show not just what code a state has adopted, but what level of efficiency it’s truly delivering. 

Source: https://www.energycodes.gov/state-portal 

By Amy Lovell, Ph.D.

Solar Potential of Impervious Surfaces in the Southeast 

Installation of solar photovoltaic panels on even a small fraction of the impervious surfaces in the urban environment in the Southeast could provide a significant boost in energy generation. 

As solar photovoltaic technology has become increasingly affordable for electricity generation, both utility-scale and small-scale solar power (<1MW) have grown.  Between June 2024 and June 2025, in the entire United States, solar power generation grew 25.4%.  In the Southeast, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Mississippi all increased their solar power generation over 90% during the same period. This increase has raised questions about land use and the potential conversion of agricultural land into solar farms. 

While the land area in use for solar power is a tiny fraction of the land in use as farms in the Southeast (and nationwide), it is worth considering what is the potential for solar power on land that is already in use. When land is covered with surfaces such as parking lots, buildings, sidewalks, and roads, water cannot effectively soak into the ground.  When it rains, such impervious surfaces limit access to natural infiltration in the soil, which can lead to increased water runoff, flooding, and concentration of pollutants in streams and drinking water.  Since solar panels are also impervious surfaces, placing them on rooftops and parking surfaces that are already in the built environment makes dual use of existing structures for supplementary power generation.  In this map of the month, we highlight where the impervious surfaces are located in the Southeast and estimate the potential solar power generation capacity of these locations. 

Using data from the U.S. Geological Survey National Land Cover Database, we determined the fractional surface area that is covered with artificial structures in our region.  We sum the areas where the fractional impervious surface is greater than 20%, yielding 75,000 km² of land area, shown in navy blue on the map below.  Not surprisingly, the highlighted areas are primarily in urban areas and along major highways. 

The National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) provides estimates of the average potential for solar power using global horizontal irradiance (GHI), which is measured in kilowatt-hours (kWh) per square meter per day.  In the Southeast, GHI varies approximately from 4-6 kWh/m²/day. If solar panels were deployed over even 1% of the (>20%) impervious surfaces on this map (185,000 acres or 750 km²), at 4 kWh/m²/day, with 20% panel efficiency, the region could generate 219,000 GWh annually.  Compare this with 75,300 GWh already generated by solar facilities in these states between July 2024 and June 2025, this one percent could increase the region’s solar power contribution by a factor of 2.8, with enough to power 20 million homes, or approximately half of homes in these states.   

Not all impervious surfaces are suitable for installation of solar panels, but adding panels to even a small percentage of the existing infrastructure could provide a significant additional source of electric power, without covering new land at all. This dual use of some of the urban built environment is equivalent to 400 farms at the 2022 average size of 463 acres each.  Furthermore, solar panels on existing rooftops or parking lots provide artificial shade that can help to reduce the urban heat-island effect, offset peak electric power demand in urban areas where there is a lot of daytime power demand, and are more readily tied into existing grid infrastructure than panels in more rural areas.  

By Laura Diaz-Villaquiran

Public EV Charging Stations in the Commonwealth 

Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Alternative Fuels Data Center 

The U.S. EV charging network has grown from 5,070 EV charging ports in 2011 to more than 184,000 in 2023, a 36-fold increase in just over a decade. This rapid expansion is vital for consumers, who depend on reliable and accessible charging infrastructure.  As the U.S. Department of Energy’s Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) explains, while most drivers begin by charging at home or at fleet facilities, public and workplace stations, “help bolster market acceptance by offering more flexible charging opportunities at commonly visited locations.” 

This Map of the Month highlights publicly available EV charging stations in the Commonwealth of Virginia, along with the state’s EV-ready and pending fuel corridors. Under the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) program, previous guidance stated that stations must be located within 50 miles of one another to qualify as corridor-ready, but that  has changed.  

Virginia’s network is steadily taking shape. Today, the Commonwealth is home to 1,838 public EV charging stations, with a total of 5,316 charging ports. Of these, 344 are Level 3 direct-current (DC) fast charging stations, the highest-capacity chargers available. These stations make long-distance EV travel increasingly practical and reliable, with the AFDC noting that “DC fast charging equipment (typically a three-phase AC input) enables rapid charging along heavy traffic corridors at installed stations at power outputs up to 500 kW.”  

Virginia’s interstates serve as a pass-through from the South to the Midwest and the Northeast, making this growing network especially significant for regional and national EV travel. Our map also indicates that charging “hot spots” are concentrated in Virginia’s urban areas, such as Arlington, Alexandria, Richmond, Norfolk, Lynchburg, and Blacksburg. These clusters highlight the state’s progress while underscoring the need to expand access in rural communities. 

On February 6, 2025, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) announced a pause on the current NEVI Formula Program. But even with this pause, Virginians still have access to a wide range of residential and non-residential utility incentives that are helping to accelerate EV adoption: 

• Appalachian Power offers time-of-use (TOU) rates for EV charging, rebates for Level 2 charging station purchases, and infrastructure support.
• Dominion Energy provides rebates and pilot programs for both residential and non-residential charging stations.
• Northern Virginia Electric Cooperative (NOVEC) and Rappahannock Electric Cooperative (REC) both extend TOU rate incentives to residential customers.
• Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) supports non-residential adoption through rebates for DC fast charging station purchases, installation incentives, and deployment pilot programs.

Together, these programs make it easier for households and businesses to invest in charging infrastructure and alternative fuel options. For the most up-to-date information, the Alternative Fuels Data Center maintains a comprehensive directory of incentives, laws, and regulations available in Virginia. 

By William D. Bryan, Ph.D.

The federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) is a lifeline for millions of Americans. Since 1981, this program has helped low-income households keep their lights on and remain safe during extreme weather through bill assistance, crisis intervention, and funding for weatherization improvements. 

Despite its demonstrated impact, LIHEAP faces an uncertain future. The White House proposed eliminating the program in its FY26 budget recommendations, and the entire staff at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) responsible for administering LIHEAP was terminated this April. Ending this program will leave millions of households with no stopgap for unaffordable energy and extreme weather, with ripple effects on states, utilities, and ratepayers in the South. 

Using data from the LIHEAP Data Warehouse, this month’s visualization explores the significant impact this program has had on the Southeast. Over the past decade, LIHEAP has supported 10.3 million households in the Southeast, and more than 52 million households nationally. In FY24, this made up nearly 15% of households at or below 150% of the federal poverty level across the region. Almost three-quarters of Southern households served (7.75 million) include at least one resident in a vulnerable age group (60+ or under 5 years old) or with a disability. 

Though benefits vary by state, LIHEAP provides emergency assistance for households who struggle to afford their energy bills and may face the disconnection of essential energy services – an event that can contribute to heightened health and safety risks, potential housing displacement, and strained household finances. Since 2016, this assistance has prevented or resolved disconnections for 4.6 million households in the South. As this month’s chart shows, Kentucky and North Carolina lead the region with the highest number of households who were able to avoid disconnection or have their service restored thanks to LIHEAP, followed by Alabama. In Kentucky alone, 1.25 million households have avoided disconnection entirely or been reconnected thanks to LIHEAP – more than in any other state in the nation. 

Although LIHEAP is primarily known as a bill assistance program, states can allocate a portion of their funding to support weatherization efforts that permanently reduce energy bills. Through the U.S. Department of Energy’s Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP), LIHEAP has funded the weatherization of 220,127 households in the South since 2001, allowing WAP providers extend their reach and serve more households with energy- and cost-saving home improvements. As the chart below shows, five states – Arkansas, Kentucky, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia – have reached their maximum contribution to weatherization, though they can exceed this 15% allocation through a waiver. 

The elimination of LIHEAP would remove a vital backstop for financially insecure households, making it harder for millions of people across the Southeast to catch up on overdue energy bills. In FY24, the average energy burden for LIHEAP recipients in the South was 14.5% of household income, well over the 12.4% national average and nearly two-and-a-half times the 6% threshold considered affordable. A 2018 survey conducted by the National Energy Assistance Directors Association (NEADA) underscored the difficult tradeoffs that LIHEAP recipients often have to make to maintain access to energy: 36% went without food for at least one day to save money for utility bills, 41% skipped medical or dental care, 30% resorted to heating their home with an oven or stove, and a quarter kept their homes at unhealthy or unsafe temperatures. Trade-offs like this were not always enough to make bills affordable, and 13% of LIHEAP recipients took out high-interest payday loans to cover utility bills, deepening their financial precarity. 

Besides the direct impacts on households receiving assistance and efficiency investment, the elimination of LIHEAP is likely to increase energy costs for all ratepayers. When customers fall behind on their bills and face disconnection, utilities incur “bad debt” costs that are often passed along to consumers through higher energy rates. In 2024, utilities nationwide faced $17.4 billion in bad debt from customers with substantial arrearages or disconnections due to nonpayment, an 8.4% increase from the previous year, which NEADA attributes to significant cuts in LIHEAP funding. Although this was less than during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, bad debt remains a challenge amid historic demand levels that are putting upward pressure on rates. Without access to LIHEAP, the 1.2 million households in the Southeast who successfully resolved utility disconnections last year will have no recourse, likely increasing bad debt and requiring utilities to invest in energy efficiency, bill management, and payment assistance programs to keep arrearages under control. 

LIHEAP is a critical safeguard serving a large population in the Southeast while helping to mitigate rate increases caused by utility bad debt. In FY24, LIHEAP assisted 1.1 million households in the region – outpacing all other federal, state, local, and utility assistance and weatherization programs. Beyond providing immediate bill assistance, LIHEAP also expands access to weatherization services that permanently reduce energy consumption, offering a long-term path to lower energy bills. The elimination of LIHEAP threatens to put energy affordability further out of reach for millions of households across the Southeast, driving up costs for all ratepayers, exacerbating financial hardship, and increasing risks of utility disconnections at a time when rising energy costs and extreme weather already strain household budgets. 

*Stay tuned for SEEA’s forthcoming policy brief on LIHEAP for a deeper dive into the program’s impact on the Southeast. Please reach out to Will Bryan, Director of Research, for more information. 

By Elizabeth Willis

Map: Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance (SEEA), Source: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S Department of Energy 

Residential construction in the Southeastern United States has ebbed and flowed over the past three decades, shaped by economic cycles, population shifts, and policy changes. Among these influences, statewide updates to building energy codes have attracted growing attention. Do they meaningfully affect construction activity? Or are their effects overstated?  

This month’s map looks at the relationship between residential building activity and the implementation of statewide energy codes across the region. As the Southeast continues to experience high rates of population growth and demand for affordable, resilient housing, policymakers and industry professionals should consider how residential energy efficiency measures can be advanced without constraining development. 

Using information from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Building Permits Survey (BPS), this month’s map displays the annual number of new, privately-owned, single-family residential building permits issued in each Southeastern state from 1995 through 2024. Overlaid on this time series are blue-flashing indicators marking the years when each state adopted a new or updated version of its residential building code. By visualizing these two datasets together, the map offers a regional snapshot of how construction activity has evolved over time—and whether building code updates influence permit volumes. 

The Building Permit Survey (BPS) data used here is publicly available through the U.S. Census Bureau and represents an estimate of new residential building permits. It does not include information on renovations, remodeling, or additions. The intent of this visual is to observe large-scale trends in Southeastern states and contextualize them within the timeline of code adoption. 

Most Southeastern states have updated their building energy codes at least once – often multiple times – since 1995. Yet in nearly all cases, these updates do not correspond with sharp declines in new residential construction. In fact, building permit volumes often continue to rise even after major code adoptions. The one clear and dramatic exception is the 2008 housing market crash, which triggered a steep regional decline in permit numbers. However, that downturn was rooted in macroeconomic instability, not regulatory change or code updates. 

State-by-state patterns provide further texture. Florida, for instance, consistently shows the highest permit volumes in the region, driven in part by sustained population growth. North Carolina stands out for its triennial code update cycle, which has not hindered its steady stream of residential development. Even in states that have adopted relatively stringent codes – such as Georgia or Virginia – there is no evidence to suggest a long-term construction suppression following code implementation. 

The data suggests that these impacts do not translate into a slowdown of regional construction. Instead, residential construction activity remains largely robust, even through multiple rounds of code revision. The dominant influences on residential construction activity are market-driven: availability of financing, consumer demand, labor supply, and broader economic health. 

Ultimately, statewide energy code updates, though sometimes perceived as a potential hindrance to development, have not restrained residential construction in practice. Policymakers and industry professionals should consider this perspective when evaluating future code proposals and updates. While regulation warrants scrutiny, the data in this map suggests that energy codes have largely coexisted with a robust, responsive housing market in the Southeastern United States. Alongside sustained patterns of residential growth, building energy codes are a key tool for advancing public health, safety, and affordability. By establishing minimum standards for ventilation, insulation, and mechanical systems, these codes improve indoor air quality, reduce risk of respiratory illness, increase comfort, and lower energy burdens. Over the lifespan of a home, they also yield significant cost savings for residents by improving efficiency and reducing utility bills (NEEP, 2021). 

SEEA has previously published The Economic Impact of Commercial Energy Codes in the Southeast, which found that stronger codes do not significantly hinder commercial construction. You can access the full report here. 

By Laura Diaz-Villaquiran

Source: Federal Insurance Office, U.S. Department of Treasury.

Home insurance costs are rising across the Southeast, threatening housing affordability for homeowners and renters alike. With the frequency and severity of climate-related disasters increasing, insurers are passing higher costs onto policyholders. Between 2018 and 2022, home insurance premiums written by the top 10 insurers in the region surged from $9.4 billion to $14.3 billion. Florida and Louisiana have been hit particularly hard and have some of the highest premium increases and non-renewal rates in the country.  

Using data from the same period provided by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, this month’s map highlights spatial patterns of home insurance costs across the Southeast through a geographic hot spot analysis. This dataset consists of comprehensive home insurance policies, which make up 85% of the home insurance market in the U.S. A hot spot analysis is a geospatial method used to detect statistically significant clusters of high or low values compared to surrounding regions. Insurance rates are calculated based on location, home value, and risk exposure. Nationally the median cost of home insurance was $1,500, while the average premium for that same period was $1,900. For the Southeast, the median premium was $1,600. See the recent average annual home insurance premiums for Southeastern states below: 

This month’s map highlights areas where insurance premiums are high and cluster with other high values, with 99% confidence. Hot spots are concentrated along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts, while areas with lower premiums, also with 99% confidence, are primarily found further inland and north, in states like Kentucky, Virginia, West Virginia, and western North Carolina. In climate-vulnerable states like Florida, where extreme weather events have led to frequent insurance payouts, insurers have hiked premiums to remain solvent. 

Beyond rising premiums, home insurance availability is shrinking as insurers withdraw from high-risk areas. Between 2018 and 2022, the average non-renewal rate in the Southeast (1.43%) was 38% higher than the national average (1.04%). This trend accelerated in 2023, with North Carolina and South Carolina experiencing sharp increases in non-renewals. Florida had the highest share of non-renewals, with insurers citing hurricane-related losses as the primary reason for exiting the market.  

For homeowners, insurance is a necessity. Lenders require coverage to secure mortgages, and without it, banks can foreclose on homes. For renters, rising insurance costs can translate to higher rents, as landlords pass increased premiums onto tenants.  

A 2025 First Street report found that in many Southeastern cities, insurance costs are outpacing home price growth. Traditionally, the region offered lower housing costs, but the risk of extreme weather has pushed insurance from 8% of mortgage payments in 2013 to more than 20% by 2022. Homeowners in Miami (322%), Jacksonville (226%), Tampa (213%), and New Orleans (196%) have seen the steepest premium increases in the region.  

As the Southeast braces for the impact of rising sea levels, extreme heat, and increasing hurricane activity, planning for resilience is more critical than ever. Mitigation strategies will play an essential role in ensuring long-term housing is affordable and resilient. Improving residential energy efficiency can play a role in enhancing the resilience of housing during extreme weather and improving housing affordability to offset premium increases. Strengthening building codes, expanding access to energy efficiency, and investing in resilient infrastructure will be key in offsetting rising insurance costs and protecting homeowners and renters across the region. 

By Amy Lovell

Map: Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance (SEEA) Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

After decades of steady demand, power consumption is increasing at unprecedented rates across the United States. According to one recent study, there will be 128 GW of new power demand – around 30% of the 2024 electric capacity – added to the grid just in the next five years, largely fueled by the outsized energy needs of data center and computing facilities. A 2024 report from McKinsey lists Georgia and Florida as “emerging demand,” in addition to lower but fast-growing demand in five other Southeastern States where companies have been rapidly siting new computing and manufacturing facilities.  

This month’s map considers the implications of this unprecedented load growth in the South. We use data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) to review how Southern utilities currently generate power, as well as the expected energy and financial implications of new generation infrastructure that will be required to meet these needs. 

The Southeast has a power generation capacity of 370 Gigawatts (GW), which is generated by a diverse portfolio of power plant types as shown in the chart below. Natural gas is the leading fuel source. It supplies around half of the region’s electric generating capacity, and is the main fuel in Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi. Coal-fired power plants supply 16% of the region’s electricity, dominating power generation in Kentucky (68%) and West Virginia (74%). Nuclear power is a consistent energy source in all areas except the islands, Kentucky, and West Virginia, providing 11% of the region’s electricity. Nuclear power supplies more than one-third of electric power in Alabama, Georgia, and the Carolinas.  Averaged over the region, oil comprises 2% of the power supply. Hydroelectric and pumped storage facilities throughout the region contribute 7%, with other renewable energy sources – including utility-scale solar – supplying the balance (11%). 

Profile of the energy generation capacity by type for the Southeast region, as well as the tropical islands of Hawai’i and Puerto Rico. The region draws a large portion of its energy capacity from natural gas-fired (NG) power plants, with the other half well diversified across other fuels.   The “other” category includes batteries, biofuels, geothermal, or wind, which is not a significant contribution to power generation in the region.   

The U.S. islands have a different energy mix given their climatic and geographic constraints. Petroleum-fired power plants dominate the energy supplied in the islands of Hawai’i and Puerto Rico, in addition to supplying small amounts of electric power in five other states. While the islands are largely reliant on petroleum oil-fired power plants, Hawai’i has committed to fully renewable electricity generation by 2045 and Puerto Rico has committed to a fully renewable portfolio by 2050 (en español), after a study in partnership with the Department of Energy. 

Between 2018 and 2024, the Southeast added 21 GW of net new capacity (6%). New utility-scale solar facilities contributed the most capacity, with 25 GW (a 340% increase from 2018), with natural gas facilities adding an additional 19 GW (11%). Wind power capacity is small compared to other regions, with 400 MW (32% increase from 2018). After the decommissioning of some coal power plants, the capacity of coal-fired generation has decreased by 25 GW (28%), almost entirely offset by the additional solar generation capacity. 

Expected power increases in the Southeast may strain available generation resources. With nationwide power demand predicted to increase 2% in both 2025 and 2026, the Southeast portion of the increase will require more than 15 GW of additional capacity by the end of 2026. If this were to be generated entirely from utility-scale solar power at 2022 prices ($1,588/kW), it would cost $24 billion to construct. From entirely natural gas ($820/kW), the cost would be $12.5 billion, along with an additional $2.4 billion annually for the fuel at $18/MWh.   

In this map, each dot represents a different type of power generation facility in the Southeast, Hawai’i and Puerto Rico, with its full capacity indicated by the size of the circle.  Nuclear power comes from 40 high-capacity generation units across the region, renewable (hydroelectric and solar shown in blue) generation comes from 2,400 smaller-capacity facilities, and natural gas provides the dominant share of regional electricity. Utility-scale electricity generation is not evenly spread across the region: facilities must be connected to the power grid to dispense to customers, and transmission lines must expand to incorporate new capacity to meet increasing demand. 

As power demand increases, we anticipate that the region will continue to rely on a diversified portfolio of sources to meet its power needs. Each new power plant built will contribute to meeting new demand: illustrated below are approximate numbers of buildings that could be powered by a single large solar facility if it were devoted entirely to a single type of building stock. 

But we should not meet this need simply by building more generation facilities. Energy efficiency must be a critical component of the region’s diverse power mix. Continued efforts to expand energy efficiency in commercial, industrial, and residential sectors and added demand flexibility can reduce existing demand and work in tandem with other efforts to meet growing power demands. As the Southeast works to make sure the power supply remains reliable in the face of historic increases in power consumption, energy efficiency must be a critical tool to save energy, reduce demand, and lower costs for residential and business customers.