Energy poverty isn’t just a technical problem. It’s social, environmental, and economic at the same time. It affects people’s health, their dignity, and their everyday opportunities. On top of that, climate change is making energy vulnerability worse, we all see how extreme weather hits the same households again and again.

For that reason, we’re trying to reduce energy poverty by combining simple technology, community work, and practical data. The idea is clear, the energy transition cannot leave people behind, and citizens have to be part of the solution, not just recipients of it.

At the heart of the project is awareness. Many households experience energy poverty without having the words to describe it. We work to make the problem visible, so communities can recognize it, talk about it openly, and start addressing it together. Then, we propose tailored actions to families, with energy efficiency tips, small low-cost improvements, and behavioral changes that can lower bills and make homes more comfortable. The way to do it, is training local organizations and community members so the knowledge stays in the neighborhood and doesn’t disappear when the project ends.

Our work sits where social justice, climate adaptation, and economic stability meet. We don’t only measure energy consumption; we try to understand how people experience their homes. Lived experience, cultural context, and local knowledge are part of the methodology, not an afterthought.

The ScienceUs funding changed the scale of what we could do. In the early phase, we built the first version of our assessment tool, ran interviews and co-design workshops with households experiencing energy poverty, and tested our approach with local partners and energy experts. We also created the first draft of our community training model.

That stage was essential. It forced us to listen carefully and understand how energy poverty is lived day to day. The project became grounded in real stories and practical constraints, not abstract models.

During the FLOURISH phase, we expanded to neighborhoods with very different climates and socioeconomic conditions and strengthened partnerships with municipalities, NGOs, and energy agencies.

The model is designed to be flexible. It works in cities and rural areas, across income levels and climates. It’s meant to be affordable and long-term. By training social workers, volunteers, and neighborhood associations, we’re building local capacity that can keep growing without constant external support.

The next year is critical. We’re preparing to launch a full digital platform that connects assessment, recommendations, and follow-up support. We plan to expand into regions facing stronger climate risks, publish our first impact report with real data on energy savings and comfort improvements, and deepen collaboration with public institutions so the model can feed into local climate and social policy.

We’re also exploring new funding paths to scale internationally.

By Sara Casas Osorio