Buckingham County

Here are concise, current demographics for Buckingham County, Virginia. Figures are from the U.S. Census Bureau (primary: 2020 Decennial Census; most other detail from ACS 2018–2022 5-year estimates).

Population

• Total population: ~16,800 (2020 Census); ~17,000 (2023 estimate)

Age

• Median age: ~42 years
• Under 18: ~17%
• 18–64: ~65%
• 65 and over: ~18%

Sex

• Male: ~55%
• Female: ~45% Note: The county’s male share is elevated due to a state correctional facility.

Race/ethnicity (Hispanic can be any race; shares rounded)

• White (non-Hispanic): ~61%
• Black or African American (non-Hispanic): ~34%
• Hispanic/Latino: ~3–4%
• Two or more races: ~2%
• Asian, American Indian/Alaska Native, other: <1% each

Households and housing

• Households: ~6,300–6,500
• Average household size: ~2.4–2.5
• Family households: ~65%
• Married-couple families: ~45–50%
• Owner-occupied rate: ~75–80%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey (ACS) 2018–2022 5-year estimates.

Summary for Buckingham County, VA (approx. population 16,500–17,000; ~29 people/sq. mile over ~580 sq. miles)

• Estimated email users: 12,000–13,000 residents. Basis: ~80% internet adoption in rural VA and ~90% of internet users using email.
• Age distribution of email users (approx.):
  • 13–24: 15–20%
  • 25–44: ~30%
  • 45–64: ~35%
  • 65+: 15–20% Younger adults are near-universal users; seniors’ usage lags but is rising.
• Gender split: roughly even (about 49% male, 51% female among users).
• Digital access trends:
  • Household broadband availability is roughly three-quarters of households, below the Virginia average but improving.
  • Mobile-only internet households likely around 10–15%; smartphones are the primary email device for many residents.
  • Ongoing fiber buildouts (e.g., Central Virginia Electric Cooperative/Firefly projects and state/federal rural broadband programs) are expanding high-speed coverage and reliability.
• Local connectivity/density notes:
  • Low population density makes last‑mile service costly and uneven, with pockets of limited fixed broadband.
  • Public Wi‑Fi (libraries, schools, county facilities) remains an important access point, especially for students and lower-income households.

Figures are reasoned estimates combining rural Virginia adoption patterns with county size and demographics.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Buckingham County, Virginia

Context and scale

• Population baseline: roughly 17,000–17,500 residents; adult (18+) population ~13,000–14,000.
• Estimated mobile phone users: 12,000–13,300 adults (about 92–95% of adults with any mobile phone).
• Estimated smartphone users: 10,800–11,600 adults (about 80–85% of adults).
• Mobile-only internet households (no home broadband, rely on smartphones/hotspots): roughly 15–25% of households, higher than the statewide share.

Demographic patterns (and how they differ from Virginia overall)

• Age
  • County skews older than Virginia, with a larger 65+ share. Smartphone adoption among 65+ is materially lower (about 60–70%) than younger adults; this pulls down the county’s overall smartphone rate vs the state.
  • Teens/young adults are near-saturated for smartphones (~95%+), comparable to the state; the gap appears mainly among 45+.
• Income
  • Below-median incomes are more prevalent than statewide; lower-income adults show lower smartphone ownership and are more likely to be mobile-only for home internet. Prepaid plans and MVNOs see above-average use relative to Virginia.
• Race/ethnicity
  • The county has a higher share of Black residents than the state average. Given home broadband gaps, Black and lower-income households show higher smartphone dependence for internet access than white and higher-income households, contributing to the county’s above-state mobile-only rate.
• Education
  • Lower educational attainment than the state correlates with more basic/older Android devices, longer upgrade cycles, and heavier reliance on text/voice versus data-heavy apps.

Usage and behavior trends distinct from statewide

• Network mix: Heavier reliance on 4G LTE; 5G coverage is patchy and largely confined to highway corridors and the town center. Statewide, 5G is far more pervasive (NoVA, Richmond, Hampton Roads).
• Plan types: Higher share of prepaid/MVNO subscriptions; family plans still common but with tighter data caps than statewide averages.
• Mobile-only reliance: Noticeably higher than state—smartphones and hotspots substitute for home broadband, especially in areas awaiting fiber.
• App usage: More emphasis on messaging, voice, navigation, weather, farming/outdoor tools, and school/work portals; relatively less high-definition streaming and cloud gaming than urban Virginia due to data and coverage constraints.
• Device lifecycle: Longer upgrade cycles (often 3–5 years), leading to a larger installed base of older LTE-only devices than the state average.

Digital infrastructure snapshot

• Carriers: Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile all present; coverage varies by terrain. MVNOs ride these networks.
• Coverage quality
  • Strongest along US-15 and US-60 and near Dillwyn; weaker indoors and in river valleys and forested interior areas (e.g., along the James/Slate river corridors).
  • 4G LTE is the baseline; 5G low-band exists in limited pockets; mid-band 5G capacity is sparse compared to metro Virginia; mmWave is effectively absent.
• Capacity/backhaul
  • Fewer macro sites per square mile than state average; some towers still rely on microwave backhaul. Ongoing regional fiber buildouts (electric co-op projects and state-funded expansions) are improving backhaul and enabling incremental 5G upgrades.
• Home connectivity interplay
  • Fixed wireless (4G/5G home internet) and WISPs fill gaps where cable/fiber is missing; households often offload to Wi‑Fi when fiber becomes available, reducing mobile data strain.
  • Public Wi‑Fi at libraries, schools, and county facilities is an important complement.
• Emergency services
  • E‑911 and Wireless Emergency Alerts are supported; however, dead zones in low-lying and wooded terrain create localized reliability concerns not typical in urban Virginia.

Key takeaways versus Virginia statewide

• Lower overall smartphone penetration, driven by older age structure and income mix.
• Higher dependence on mobile phones as the primary internet connection.
• Greater share of prepaid/MVNO users and longer device refresh cycles.
• Slower 5G rollout and more variable coverage; LTE remains dominant.
• Fiber expansion is a pivotal near-term factor: as backhaul and home broadband improve, expect better 5G performance, more Wi‑Fi offload, and gradual convergence toward state usage patterns.

Notes on estimation

• Estimates synthesize recent census demographics, national/rural mobile adoption benchmarks, and typical rural Virginia coverage patterns. Actual figures can vary by sub-area; for planning, use these as directional ranges and validate with local carrier maps and the latest FCC broadband map.

Below is a concise, county-level estimate based on Pew Research Center’s latest U.S. social media benchmarks (with rural adjustments) applied to Buckingham County’s size and age mix. Ranges reflect uncertainty and local variation.

County snapshot

• Population: ~17,000 residents
• Estimated residents using at least one social platform monthly: 10,000–13,000 (about 60–75% of residents; ≈75–85% of those age 13+)
• Daily social users: ~7,000–9,000

Most‑used platforms among adults (share of adults who use each platform)

• YouTube: 70–80%
• Facebook: 60–70%
• Instagram: 35–45%
• TikTok: 30–40%
• Pinterest: 25–35% (higher among women)
• Snapchat: 20–30% (skews under 30)
• WhatsApp: 15–25%
• X (Twitter): 12–20%
• Reddit: 10–15%
• Nextdoor: 5–10% (lower in very rural areas)

Age‑group patterns (share using each platform within the age band; estimates)

• Teens 13–17: Very high usage overall
  • YouTube 90%+, TikTok ~65–75%, Snapchat ~60–70%, Instagram ~55–65%, Facebook <35%
• 18–29:
  • YouTube ~90–95%, Instagram ~70–80%, TikTok ~55–65%, Snapchat ~55–65%, Facebook ~50–60%
• 30–49:
  • Facebook ~70–80%, YouTube ~80–85%, Instagram ~45–55%, TikTok ~35–45%, Pinterest (women) ~35–45%
• 50–64:
  • Facebook ~65–75%, YouTube ~70–80%, Instagram ~25–35%, TikTok ~15–25%, Pinterest ~25–35%
• 65+:
  • Facebook ~60–70%, YouTube ~55–65%; others much lower

Gender breakdown (share of adults within gender using each platform; estimates)

• Women: Facebook 65–75%, Instagram 40–50%, TikTok 30–40%, Pinterest 45–55%
• Men: YouTube 75–85%, Facebook 55–65%, X 18–25%, Reddit 15–20%, TikTok 25–35%

Behavioral trends observed in similar rural Virginia communities (likely in Buckingham)

• Facebook is the community hub: heavy use of Groups (schools, youth sports, churches, volunteer fire/EMS, yard‑sale and buy/sell/trade), event promotion, obituaries/announcements, local government and school closings.
• Marketplace is key for local commerce; “wanted” posts and seasonal goods perform well.
• Video habits: YouTube for repair/how‑to, farming/outdoors, equipment, sermons, and school sports; short vertical video (Reels/TikTok) growing among under‑40s.
• Messaging over posting: Facebook Messenger dominant; SMS still common; WhatsApp used by families with out‑of‑area ties.
• Timing: Peaks before work/school (6:30–8:30 a.m.), lunch (12–1 p.m.), and evenings (7–10 p.m.). Weather and road‑incident posts spike engagement.
• Content that travels: local kids’ achievements, sports highlights, church/community service, practical updates (utilities, roads), and deals; trust skews toward known local figures (pastors, coaches, small‑business owners).
• Access realities: Patchy broadband/cell in spots—short videos, smaller file sizes, and clear thumbnails/captions perform better.

Notes on methodology

• No official platform‑by‑county stats exist. Figures are estimates derived from Pew Research Center’s 2023–2024 U.S. social media usage (with rural adjustments) applied to a ~17K population and a typical rural Virginia age mix. Percentages are shares of adults unless noted.