My friend lives in an old triple-decker in Somerville. Faced with high heating bills due to her outdated electric baseboard heating system, she called for a free Mass Save Energy Assessment. The friendly worker stuck a camera in the wall and discovered that, like many rentals in Somerville, her home was uninsulated. He explained that as far as heating was concerned, she might as well have been living in a tent.
The worker told her that she qualified to have her home insulated for free. This would save her and her roommates hundreds of dollars on heating bills, with no cost to her or the landlord. The catch? The landlord had to agree. Of course, this is a dead end. A landlord would sooner cut off their own nose than do something that wasn’t for their own benefit. Don’t believe me? Landlords are asked this question all the time, and as shown in the linked post, find the prospect of improving their own home confusing. As a fellow landlord pointed out, if he provided the home with insulation, next he’d be “waxing and washing” his tenant’s cars.
So even though we do not benefit directly from this program, my roommates and I – like all renters in the state – pay for it. And dearly, with upward of 10 percent of our monthly heating bills (which are hundreds of dollars in winter) going to the program.
Who does benefit? Let’s look at a case study from Mass Save. Travis Drury, a homeowner in Greenfield who works for the Department of Cars and Roads. For his 1,500-square-foot home, he got free insulation and a $10,000 credit for a new heat pump. Like many in Massachusetts, his home had no air conditioning. Thanks to his heat pump, his home is now cool in summer and warm in winter. Drury has become an “evangelist” for the program, recommending it to his friends and neighbors, and the article goes on to talk about his reduced carbon footprint. (Never mind that this guy almost certainly drives a car 30 or so miles to work.)
I’m glad that I could afford to buy Travis a heat pump. While I am as pro-handout as they come, the way this is structured is plainly regressive. Renters (many of whom are in a far worse financial position than I) pay enormous sums for energy, only to have that money redistributed to homeowners in the suburbs. It’s like we found a way to have socialism, but only for those who have capital.
Our necessary clean energy transition is going to be expensive. The question is who will pay for it. Right now, the best idea Massachusetts has is to get renters to open their wallets. I have some alternate proposals: Allow renters to opt out of Mass Save. I’m sure many would. Another idea is to make landlords cover the cost of excess energy bills if their heating systems are outdated. If these options sound unfair, you might be starting to get it.
Nicholas Marchuk is a local author and engineer. His work is available at major retailers and on his website, nicholasmarchuk.com. Comments and questions can be directed to his contact form and may be responded to in this publication.