Against the backdrop of Russia's massive strikes on Ukrainian energy facilities, the Rating Sociological Group conducted a survey on the work of Ukraine's energy sector, aimed at studying Ukrainians' awareness, assessments and plans in the context of energy consumption.

Awareness of the situation in the energy sector

   
• About 80% of respondents are aware of attacks on energy facilities, of which 38% are well informed, 43% are partially informed, and 12% know very little. Six per cent know nothing about the attacks. Residents of cities and central regions are more aware.
• More than half (57%) of respondents have seen photos or videos online showing the extent of the damage to energy facilities. Respondents from cities and more affluent groups have seen such materials more often.
      

Assessment of the energy supply situation

   
• One-third of respondents (35%) believe that the energy infrastructure is fully capable of withstanding challenges in the form of missile strikes, while the majority (56%) believe that it is partially capable; another 4% assess the situation as very critical.    
• For 54% of respondents, the situation with uninterrupted power supply is rather good, with no power cuts. However, 41% of respondents said that power cuts occur occasionally. 4% said that the situation is poor. Respondents from eastern regions reported power cuts most often — 17% said that power cuts occur frequently or constantly.
• 74% of respondents believe that missile strikes on energy facilities are part of Russia's long-term strategy aimed at destroying Ukraine's energy sector. 7% believe that such actions are sporadic. About 19% are undecided on this issue.
• 76% of respondents have heard calls from representatives of the energy sector to reduce electricity consumption during peak hours. Residents of central regions, cities, wealthier and older respondents are more likely to say they have heard such calls.
• Two-thirds of respondents said that a stable electricity supply is important to them, but that they are willing to tolerate short-term interruptions. Another 27% said that a stable energy supply is extremely important to them. Only 7% responded that a stable energy supply is not important and that they are willing to tolerate long-term outages.
• Two-thirds of respondents said that a stable electricity supply is important to them, but that they are willing to tolerate short-term interruptions. Another 27% said that a stable energy supply is extremely important to them. Only 7% responded that a stable energy supply is not important and that they are prepared to tolerate long-term interruptions.
• If the energy supply situation worsens, 54% of respondents plan to use power banks, and 43% plan to use alternative energy sources. Twenty-two per cent plan to use points of invulnerability, and 19 per cent plan to use public services. Five per cent are considering moving within Ukraine, and another 4 per cent plan to leave the country if the energy supply situation worsens.
• Urban residents, younger and wealthier respondents are more likely than other groups to mention plans to use individual energy storage devices. Respondents from the centre and west of the country, as well as rural residents, plan to make more active use of alternative energy sources. Urban residents and those with lower incomes were more likely to mention visiting points of invincibility or public places.

‍

Restoration of energy infrastructure

• 70% of respondents believe that last year's tariff increase allowed for the restoration of damaged energy infrastructure facilities to an adequate level. When asked whether capacity had been restored over the past year, 59% of respondents said that the infrastructure had been restored to a sufficient level, while 11% said it had been fully restored. Another 15% of respondents believe that the infrastructure was restored to an insufficient level, and 2% believe that it was not restored at all. 13% of respondents were unable to decide on this issue. Residents of eastern regions, regional centres and middle-aged respondents rate the effectiveness of restoration more poorly.
• According to 41% of respondents, all energy infrastructure needs to be restored now. 52% believe that only the most important facilities need to be restored now, with the rest to be restored after the war. Another 3% believe that any reconstruction should be postponed until after the war. Residents of the south and cities are more likely to believe that all infrastructure should be rebuilt now.

‍

Attitude towards tariff increases

• More than half (55%) of respondents understand the need to raise tariffs in order to repair damaged infrastructure. In particular, 45% of respondents believe that electricity tariffs can be increased to finance the repair campaign, taking into account the financial situation and consumption levels of households, while another 10% believe that tariffs should be increased for all consumers. At the same time, 40% believe that tariffs should not be increased, even if the electricity supply situation worsens. The need to increase tariffs, taking into account income and consumption, is more often mentioned by residents of central regions, regional centres, younger and wealthier respondents.    
• Most respondents (67%) agree that if tariffs are increased, vulnerable groups should receive assistance from the state. About a quarter (26%) disagree with this. Respondents from rural areas and lower-income groups are more likely than others to disagree with this statement.