COLUMBUS, Ohio -- As chilly autumn temperatures set in around the state, and National Weatherization Day arrives tomorrow, a program helping Ohioans stay warmer in their homes is celebrating a milestone.

The Weatherization Assistance Program marks its 45th year of helping reduce the energy burden for low-income households across the country.

Beth Urban, chief operating officer of IMPACT Community Action Agency based in Columbus, said weatherization services include attic and wall insulation, energy-efficiency and safety tests, as well as home repairs and improvements.

"We replace outdated electrical; we can help replace some roofing, sometimes broken windows," Urban outlined. "So weatherization for us can encompass a lot more than just the insulation."

Urban noted the energy savings after the complete weatherization of a home is about $283 a year, and the Department of Energy estimates families who are able to better control their home's temperature can reduce out-of-pocket medical expenses by roughly $500.

Over 45 years, the Home Weatherization Assistance Program has weatherized more than seven million homes, and Urban emphasized it has been life-changing for some clients.

She shared the story of a woman who was facing bankruptcy, distraught at being unable to pay her $1,200 electric bill. Urban explained upon inspecting her home, crews discovered it had no insulation.

"By the time we insulated and weatherized her home, her monthly bill was down to just $200," Urban recounted. "We were able to save her home, to save her from bankruptcy, and also to make her home a safer place."

To qualify for the Home Weatherization Program, a household's income must be at 200% of the federal poverty limit, which is $53,000 for a family of four.

Minnesota is seeing a flurry of utility rate hikes either being considered or taking effect.

Those who support renewable energy warn there's some misleading information in the public sphere about what is behind the activity.

Xcel Energy has a pending rate hike before state regulators. If approved, it would boost electricity rates by 21% over three years. Minnesota Power also proposes a substantial increase.

Some policy groups opposed to renewable energy have launched campaigns suggesting the plans are solely caused by wind and solar projects.

Isabel Ricker, senior manager for clean electricity at Fresh Energy, countered it does not tell the whole story, noting there is aging infrastructure to be updated.

"The fundamentals of our electricity system; the poles, the wires, some of the larger equipment at substations," Ricker outlined.

Xcel Energy acknowledged upgrades would help the utility better transition to clean energy. And Fresh Energy contended a more modern system would make it easier for Minnesota to rely on such sources, also arguing they are still a less-expensive investment than traditional power plants.

Both utilities won approval for smaller, interim hikes late last year.

Annie Levenson-Falk, executive director of the Citizens Utility Board (CUB) of Minnesota, pointed out while her group is fighting some rate hikes, utilities do see the need for investments in energy sources more economically viable in the long run.

"The sooner that utilities can move off of that old power generation, the more money that they are actually going to save for their customers," Levenson-Falk asserted.

Investment banking firm Lazard said wind and solar costs have declined by at least 70% over the past decade. As for rate hikes, CUB noted other factors, such as demand changes during COVID affecting utility revenue.

Fresh Energy emphasized there are still false claims being floated about the reliability of wind and solar.

Ricker stated in the Midwest, resources are managed in ways allowing them to function at a high-level in the winter.

"Wind turbines here are outfitted with winterizing equipment to ensure that they don't freeze, and they can operate at cold temperatures," Ricker stressed.

Ricker acknowledged other options, such as geothermal generators, will likely be needed to develop a robust renewable-energy system. Meanwhile, both groups say regulators traditionally try to keep rate hikes on the lower end, so customers are not paying for anything deemed unnecessary.

Iowa's tax credit for installing solar-energy systems is no longer in place, but lawmakers still face pressure to provide payments to those who were on a waiting list.

The credit was allowed to expire at the end of 2021 - and with the money set aside for residential installments already spent, those who applied but hadn't been paid were out of luck.

The Iowa Department of Revenue says more than 1,400 applications were ultimately denied. But Nick Summers - policy organizing assistant with the Center for Rural Affairs - said these property owners each made a substantial investment, hoping it would be offset by the credit.

"The state's failing to uphold its side of the deal," said Summers. "And we know the state has the means to pay this out, because the State of Iowa is sitting on a $1.2 billion surplus."

That surplus estimate was issued in the fall, and larger figures are now being floated as the legislative session gets underway.

The credit for installing a residential solar system averaged $3,200, with the average installation cost at more than $25,000. During debate about extending the credit, Republican lawmakers suggested it didn't align with need to implement broader tax relief.

Slater resident Lee Tesdell had received credits for solar-power installations on his farm, although he had to go to court to secure the second reimbursement. He called cutting off payments "shortsighted," noting that gains in renewable energy can't come only from large wind and solar farms.

"It seems to me that the state would be wise to encourage the distributed type," said Tesdell, "so that individuals can be manufacturing some of their own electricity at home."

He said combined with federal credits, the Iowa reimbursements covered a significant portion of his investments.

Meanwhile, the state says businesses on the waiting list will still get their credits, but no new projects can be added.

In her 2022 State of the State address, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul set new goals for electrifying the school bus fleets in the state.

Clean-energy advocates are hailing the move as a win for climate action. The governor has proposed new school bus purchases be zero-emission vehicles by 2027, and all school buses be emission-free by 2035.

Deb Peck Kelleher, policy director of the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, suggested in inner cities, the high asthma rate may be caused or exacerbated by diesel emissions. She thinks a move to electrify school buses will help the problem.

"As we start to electrify, not only will we see climate emissions go down, but we'll see air pollution go down," Peck Kelleher explained. "And there should be a dramatic impact on our residents' health because of that."

She noted more EV charging infrastructure will need to be built at schools. A report on electrifying New York City school buses found the biggest barrier to their widespread deployment has been the up-front purchase price.

Peck Kelleher countered the overall operating cost of electric vehicles is more affordable than diesel-powered vehicles.

There are more than 50,000 school buses operating in New York state. And while her group would like to see every school district make the switch to electric, Peck Kelleher argued the initial focus should be on places where air pollution is worst.

"Those areas with a high pollution level, I believe, should be switched over first," Peck Kelleher urged. "Those benefits of cleaner air, especially around our schools, would only double the benefits in our urban areas."

New York City has some of the highest air pollution in the state, and last April, former Mayor Bill de Blasio committed to making its school bus fleets electric by 2040.