Electricity prices and bills, generation and fuel mix, and gasoline costs.
Residential electricity price11.52¢/kWh2024 · #49 of 50 · highest first
Regular gasoline price$4.234/gal2026-08 · #9 of 48* · highest first
Average monthly residential electricity bill$108.732024 · #45 of 50 · highest first
Idaho over time
Explore Idaho readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Idaho officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Idaho effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Idaho change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
Residential electricity price Idaho · source units
IdahoPublished U.S. benchmark
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
4 of 4 reviewed Idaho actions match · 4 date markers shown. 49 major events shown separately.
Idaho · 2024: 11.52¢/kWh · Rank #49 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 16.48¢/kWh
For 2024, FactVote combines EIA utility-scale net generation with EIA's estimated small-scale solar generation and groups sources into seven categories. The 2015–2023 historical points retain utility-scale coverage. The residential price is EIA's annual average revenue per kilowatthour and includes generation, transmission, distribution, taxes, and fees reflected in electric bills. Generation is electricity produced inside Idaho, not electricity consumed there; interstate imports and exports are not represented. The 2024 comparison includes EIA's estimated generation from small-scale solar systems under 1 megawatt. Historical points for 2015–2023 retain utility-scale coverage and exclude those estimates, so comparisons across 2023–2024 also reflect this change in coverage. Hydroelectric combines conventional and pumped-storage net generation; the 'other' category is the residual of remaining reported energy sources. The residential price is a statewide nominal average and can mask large differences among utilities, plans, and household usage. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.
View observations and export data
Idaho Residential electricity price · source units
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
Idaho · state comparison
Household energy prices
Unit prices are separate from bills: usage, weather, and household needs also determine spending.
Idaho · 202411.52¢/kWh
Idaho rank#49among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark16.48¢/kWhSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Residential electricity price
For 2024, FactVote combines EIA utility-scale net generation with EIA's estimated small-scale solar generation and groups sources into seven categories. The 2015–2023 historical points retain utility-scale coverage. The residential price is EIA's annual average revenue per kilowatthour and includes generation, transmission, distribution, taxes, and fees reflected in electric bills.
Generation is electricity produced inside Idaho, not electricity consumed there; interstate imports and exports are not represented. The 2024 comparison includes EIA's estimated generation from small-scale solar systems under 1 megawatt. Historical points for 2015–2023 retain utility-scale coverage and exclude those estimates, so comparisons across 2023–2024 also reflect this change in coverage. Hydroelectric combines conventional and pumped-storage net generation; the 'other' category is the residual of remaining reported energy sources. The residential price is a statewide nominal average and can mask large differences among utilities, plans, and household usage.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Idaho
2024 · Idaho: 11.52¢/kWh · Rank #49 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 16.48¢/kWh · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Idaho Residential electricity price history
Period
Idaho
Compare
2015
9.93¢/kWh
2016
9.95¢/kWh
2017
10.04¢/kWh
2018
10.15¢/kWh
2019
9.89¢/kWh
2020
9.95¢/kWh
2021
10.16¢/kWh
2022
10.37¢/kWh
2023
11.05¢/kWh
2024
11.52¢/kWh
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Idaho stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Idaho has a dark outline.
Lower value · 11.51¢/kWhHigher value · 42.86¢/kWhStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Idaho · 11.52¢/kWh2024 · Rank #49 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Idaho with every state · 50 ranked
Residential electricity price · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
42.86¢/kWh
—
#2
California
31.97¢/kWh
—
#3
Massachusetts
29.35¢/kWh
—
#4
Connecticut
28.75¢/kWh
—
#5
Rhode Island
28.65¢/kWh
—
#6
Alaska
24.82¢/kWh
—
#7
New York
24.43¢/kWh
—
#8
Maine
24.29¢/kWh
—
#9
New Hampshire
23.4¢/kWh
—
#10
Vermont
21.9¢/kWh
—
#11
New Jersey
19.34¢/kWh
—
#12
Michigan
19.3¢/kWh
—
#13
Maryland
17.86¢/kWh
—
#14
Pennsylvania
17.77¢/kWh
—
#15
Wisconsin
17.18¢/kWh
—
#16
Delaware
16.57¢/kWh
—
#17
Ohio
15.99¢/kWh
—
#18
Illinois
15.87¢/kWh
—
#19
Minnesota
15.45¢/kWh
—
#20
Alabama
15.18¢/kWh
—
#21
West Virginia
15.07¢/kWh
—
#22
Nevada
15¢/kWh
—
#23
Texas
14.94¢/kWh
—
#24
Colorado
14.92¢/kWh
—
#25
Arizona
14.91¢/kWh
—
#26
Indiana
14.77¢/kWh
—
#27
Oregon
14.7¢/kWh
—
#28
Virginia
14.41¢/kWh
—
#29
South Carolina
14.23¢/kWh
—
#30
New Mexico
14.2¢/kWh
—
#31
Kansas
14.15¢/kWh
—
#32
Florida
14.14¢/kWh
—
#33
North Carolina
14.13¢/kWh
—
#34
Georgia
14.08¢/kWh
—
#35
Iowa
13.4¢/kWh
—
#36
Mississippi
13.39¢/kWh
—
#37
Missouri
12.91¢/kWh
—
#38
South Dakota
12.86¢/kWh
—
#39
Kentucky
12.79¢/kWh
—
#40
Montana
12.66¢/kWh
—
#41
Wyoming
12.47¢/kWh
—
#42
Tennessee
12.42¢/kWh
—
#43
Arkansas
12.32¢/kWh
—
#44
Oklahoma
12.24¢/kWh
—
#45
Utah
12.22¢/kWh
—
#46
Washington
11.9¢/kWh
—
#47
Louisiana
11.73¢/kWh
—
#48
Nebraska
11.53¢/kWh
—
#49
Idaho · your comparison
11.52¢/kWh
—
#50
North Dakota
11.51¢/kWh
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Estimated average retail price of regular-grade gasoline across all formulations in EIA's Rocky Mountain region, including taxes. The region contains Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wyoming.
This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.
Recent EIA observations
Prior week
$4.266/gal
Weekly change
+4.8¢
One year earlier
$3.240/gal
Change from one year earlier
+107.4¢
Method and limitations
FactVote uses EIA’s Rocky Mountain series, the smallest current EIA retail region that includes Idaho. Changes are calculated from the published August 31, 2026 (prior week), and September 8, 2025 (52 weeks earlier), observations.
EIA does not publish a current Idaho statewide weekly gasoline-price series. This Rocky Mountain regional estimate should not be read as Idaho’s statewide average.
The regional average combines Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wyoming, and does not represent the price at every station or in every Idaho community.
Prices are nominal and not adjusted for inflation or seasonal patterns. Weekly estimates can be revised and can differ from monthly averages.
Price changes alone do not establish the effect of any bill, official, or government action.
Compare the bill, electricity used, and price per unit for the same year.
Idaho · 2024$108.73
Idaho rank#45among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$142.26Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Average monthly residential electricity bill
State residential revenue and sales divided by customer accounts, averaged across the year.
Bills describe average customer accounts rather than a particular household. Dollars are nominal; usage reflects climate and building characteristics as well as efficiency.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Idaho
2024 · Idaho: $108.73 · Rank #45 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $142.26 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Idaho Average monthly residential electricity bill history
Period
Idaho
Compare
2010
$81.46
2011
$82.5
2012
$87.52
2013
$98.35
2014
$95.51
2015
$95.01
2016
$94.9
2017
$100.38
2018
$95.84
2019
$93.83
2020
$95.04
2021
$97.62
2022
$104.23
2023
$106.65
2024
$108.73
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Idaho stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Idaho has a dark outline.
Lower value · $92.88Higher value · $212.12Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Idaho · $108.732024 · Rank #45 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Idaho with every state · 50 ranked
Average monthly residential electricity bill · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
$212.12
—
#2
Connecticut
$199.66
—
#3
Alabama
$173.5
—
#4
Massachusetts
$167.2
—
#5
Maryland
$165.87
—
#6
Texas
$163.72
—
#7
Rhode Island
$162.4
—
#8
California
$160.86
—
#9
Arizona
$160.24
—
#10
Florida
$156.09
—
#11
Mississippi
$154.83
—
#12
West Virginia
$154.76
—
#13
Georgia
$151.25
—
#14
Delaware
$150.87
—
#15
South Carolina
$149.51
—
#16
Virginia
$148.77
—
#17
Pennsylvania
$145.17
—
#18
New Hampshire
$144.87
—
#19
Alaska
$143.54
—
#20
North Carolina
$143.5
—
#21
Tennessee
$143.32
—
#22
Louisiana
$140.96
—
#23
New York
$139.53
—
#24
Nevada
$139.39
—
#25
Ohio
$135.16
—
#26
Kentucky
$133.81
—
#27
Maine
$133.6
—
#28
Indiana
$133.06
—
#29
Oklahoma
$132.05
—
#30
Oregon
$129.62
—
#31
Missouri
$129.18
—
#32
Arkansas
$129.13
—
#33
New Jersey
$128.13
—
#34
South Dakota
$127.81
—
#35
Vermont
$125.66
—
#36
Kansas
$123.9
—
#37
Michigan
$119.31
—
#38
North Dakota
$118.38
—
#39
Washington
$113.68
—
#40
Iowa
$111.54
—
#41
Wisconsin
$110.87
—
#42
Nebraska
$110.28
—
#43
Minnesota
$110.06
—
#44
Illinois
$109.99
—
#45
Idaho · your comparison
$108.73
—
#46
Montana
$107.91
—
#47
Wyoming
$107.65
—
#48
Colorado
$100.57
—
#49
Utah
$94.57
—
#50
New Mexico
$92.88
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare total generation and each fuel’s share using the same EIA year. A fuel share is not a performance score.
Idaho · 202420.3 TWh
Idaho rank#43among all 50 states
U.S. benchmarkNot availableSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Total electricity generation
For 2024, FactVote combines EIA utility-scale net generation with EIA's estimated small-scale solar generation and groups sources into seven categories. The 2015–2023 historical points retain utility-scale coverage. The residential price is EIA's annual average revenue per kilowatthour and includes generation, transmission, distribution, taxes, and fees reflected in electric bills.
Generation is electricity produced inside Idaho, not electricity consumed there; interstate imports and exports are not represented. The 2024 comparison includes EIA's estimated generation from small-scale solar systems under 1 megawatt. Historical points for 2015–2023 retain utility-scale coverage and exclude those estimates, so comparisons across 2023–2024 also reflect this change in coverage. Hydroelectric combines conventional and pumped-storage net generation; the 'other' category is the residual of remaining reported energy sources. The residential price is a statewide nominal average and can mask large differences among utilities, plans, and household usage.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Idaho
2024 · Idaho: 20.3 TWh · Rank #43 of 50, highest first · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Idaho Total electricity generation history
Period
Idaho
Compare
2015
15.7 TWh
2016
15.7 TWh
2017
17.4 TWh
2018
18.2 TWh
2019
18.4 TWh
2020
17.7 TWh
2021
16.8 TWh
2022
16.3 TWh
2023
17.8 TWh
2024
20.3 TWh
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Idaho stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Idaho has a dark outline.
Lower value · 2.5 TWhHigher value · 571.5 TWhStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Idaho · 20.3 TWh2024 · Rank #43 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Idaho with every state · 50 ranked
Total electricity generation · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
571.5 TWh
—
#2
Florida
270.7 TWh
—
#3
California
245.9 TWh
—
#4
Pennsylvania
242.5 TWh
—
#5
Illinois
186.7 TWh
—
#6
Ohio
143.3 TWh
—
#7
Alabama
142.9 TWh
—
#8
Georgia
140.4 TWh
—
#9
North Carolina
135.9 TWh
—
#10
New York
133.5 TWh
—
#11
Michigan
124.5 TWh
—
#12
Arizona
121.5 TWh
—
#13
Virginia
103.7 TWh
—
#14
Washington
103 TWh
—
#15
South Carolina
101.1 TWh
—
#16
Louisiana
100 TWh
—
#17
Indiana
97.4 TWh
—
#18
Oklahoma
94.3 TWh
—
#19
Mississippi
77.4 TWh
—
#20
Tennessee
76.3 TWh
—
#21
Iowa
70.9 TWh
—
#22
Missouri
67.6 TWh
—
#23
Kentucky
67.1 TWh
—
#24
Wisconsin
65.6 TWh
—
#25
Oregon
65.3 TWh
—
#26
New Jersey
63.6 TWh
—
#27
Arkansas
62.1 TWh
—
#28
Colorado
60.8 TWh
—
#29
Minnesota
59 TWh
—
#30
Kansas
57.9 TWh
—
#31
West Virginia
50.7 TWh
—
#32
Nevada
47.6 TWh
—
#33
Connecticut
46.2 TWh
—
#34
North Dakota
42.6 TWh
—
#35
Wyoming
40.7 TWh
—
#36
New Mexico
40.5 TWh
—
#37
Nebraska
37.3 TWh
—
#38
Maryland
36.9 TWh
—
#39
Utah
36.1 TWh
—
#40
Montana
27 TWh
—
#41
Massachusetts
25 TWh
—
#42
South Dakota
20.9 TWh
—
#43
Idaho · your comparison
20.3 TWh
—
#44
New Hampshire
17.3 TWh
—
#45
Maine
15.7 TWh
—
#46
Hawaii
10.7 TWh
—
#47
Rhode Island
10.1 TWh
—
#48
Alaska
6.7 TWh
—
#49
Delaware
5 TWh
—
#50
Vermont
2.5 TWh
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Outage comparisons use the same reporting standard. Major-event outages and ordinary-day outages use different EIA reporting definitions.
Idaho · 2024204.4 min/year
Idaho rank#35among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark662.6 min/yearSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Outage minutes per customer · all events
EIA distribution-system reliability for utilities using the IEEE standard. SAIDI is average customer interruption duration; SAIFI is average frequency.
Reported customer coverage is incomplete and differs by state. These figures cover reporting utilities, not every customer. Major-event definitions follow IEEE; a severe-weather year can dominate the all-events value. Coverage percentage is not itself outage performance.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Idaho
2024 · Idaho: 204.4 min/year · Rank #35 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 662.6 min/year · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Idaho Outage minutes per customer · all events history
Period
Idaho
Compare
2023
134.4 min/year
2024
204.4 min/year
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Idaho stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Idaho has a dark outline.
Lower value · 83.6 min/yearHigher value · 3,155 min/yearStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Idaho · 204.4 min/year2024 · Rank #35 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Idaho with every state · 50 ranked
Outage minutes per customer · all events · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
South Carolina
3,155 min/year
—
#2
Maine
1,748.6 min/year
—
#3
Texas
1,614.3 min/year
—
#4
North Carolina
1,518.1 min/year
—
#5
Florida
1,487.6 min/year
—
#6
Georgia
1,208.1 min/year
—
#7
West Virginia
1,165.5 min/year
—
#8
Virginia
962.1 min/year
—
#9
Vermont
895.8 min/year
—
#10
New Hampshire
735.5 min/year
—
#11
Nebraska
697.8 min/year
—
#12
Washington
643.5 min/year
—
#13
Louisiana
630.6 min/year
—
#14
Mississippi
607.3 min/year
—
#15
Oregon
579.3 min/year
—
#16
Kentucky
537.7 min/year
—
#17
Arkansas
527.8 min/year
—
#18
Ohio
511 min/year
—
#19
Michigan
481.7 min/year
—
#20
New York
477.3 min/year
—
#21
Hawaii
382.6 min/year
—
#22
Pennsylvania
353.1 min/year
—
#23
Montana
341.7 min/year
—
#24
Alaska
323.2 min/year
—
#25
Indiana
310 min/year
—
#26
Wisconsin
296.8 min/year
—
#27
Kansas
289.8 min/year
—
#28
Tennessee
289.3 min/year
—
#29
California
285 min/year
—
#30
New Mexico
272.6 min/year
—
#31
Colorado
257 min/year
—
#32
Minnesota
222.4 min/year
—
#33
Oklahoma
220.7 min/year
—
#34
Missouri
212.6 min/year
—
#35
Idaho · your comparison
204.4 min/year
—
#36
Iowa
200.3 min/year
—
#37
Alabama
197.7 min/year
—
#38
New Jersey
173.3 min/year
—
#39
Nevada
158.9 min/year
—
#40
Illinois
158 min/year
—
#41
Connecticut
152.8 min/year
—
#42
Wyoming
137.8 min/year
—
#43
Maryland
118.1 min/year
—
#44
Delaware
117.9 min/year
—
#45
Utah
115.4 min/year
—
#46
Rhode Island
104.3 min/year
—
#47
Massachusetts
103.7 min/year
—
#48
North Dakota
102.7 min/year
—
#49
South Dakota
85.6 min/year
—
#50
Arizona
83.6 min/year
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Total energy consumption includes more than electricity. EIA assigns electricity-related losses to consuming end-use sectors.
Idaho · 2024111.2 trillion Btu
Idaho rank#38among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark18,424 trillion BtuSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Residential energy consumption
Annual energy consumption by end-use sector, in trillion British thermal units (Btu).
2024 SEDS estimates. Industrial and total figures exclude noncombustible renewable energy inputs used to produce biofuels. Includes allocated electric-system energy losses. Size, climate, industry mix, and activity affect absolute rankings.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Idaho stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Idaho has a dark outline.
Lower value · 29.5 trillion BtuHigher value · 1,514 trillion BtuStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Idaho · 111.2 trillion Btu2024 · Rank #38 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Idaho with every state · 50 ranked
Residential energy consumption · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
1,514 trillion Btu
—
#2
Florida
1,183.3 trillion Btu
—
#3
California
1,147.1 trillion Btu
—
#4
New York
968.3 trillion Btu
—
#5
Pennsylvania
819.3 trillion Btu
—
#6
Illinois
817.1 trillion Btu
—
#7
Ohio
767.4 trillion Btu
—
#8
Georgia
717.1 trillion Btu
—
#9
North Carolina
662.2 trillion Btu
—
#10
Michigan
661.4 trillion Btu
—
#11
New Jersey
550.1 trillion Btu
—
#12
Virginia
526 trillion Btu
—
#13
Tennessee
492 trillion Btu
—
#14
Indiana
475.6 trillion Btu
—
#15
Missouri
459 trillion Btu
—
#16
Arizona
413.7 trillion Btu
—
#17
Massachusetts
379 trillion Btu
—
#18
Wisconsin
375.9 trillion Btu
—
#19
South Carolina
370.7 trillion Btu
—
#20
Maryland
357.2 trillion Btu
—
#21
Minnesota
346.2 trillion Btu
—
#22
Alabama
331.6 trillion Btu
—
#23
Washington
330.2 trillion Btu
—
#24
Kentucky
319 trillion Btu
—
#25
Colorado
311.9 trillion Btu
—
#26
Louisiana
282.6 trillion Btu
—
#27
Connecticut
235.3 trillion Btu
—
#28
Oklahoma
231 trillion Btu
—
#29
Arkansas
209.5 trillion Btu
—
#30
Utah
190.7 trillion Btu
—
#31
Mississippi
179.7 trillion Btu
—
#32
Oregon
173.1 trillion Btu
—
#33
Kansas
166.4 trillion Btu
—
#34
Iowa
162 trillion Btu
—
#35
Nevada
153.3 trillion Btu
—
#36
West Virginia
141 trillion Btu
—
#37
Nebraska
128.9 trillion Btu
—
#38
Idaho · your comparison
111.2 trillion Btu
—
#39
New Mexico
98.1 trillion Btu
—
#40
New Hampshire
91.8 trillion Btu
—
#41
Maine
80.5 trillion Btu
—
#42
Montana
73.9 trillion Btu
—
#43
Delaware
62.6 trillion Btu
—
#44
North Dakota
61.3 trillion Btu
—
#45
Rhode Island
61 trillion Btu
—
#46
Alaska
49.1 trillion Btu
—
#47
Wyoming
45.5 trillion Btu
—
#48
South Dakota
44.2 trillion Btu
—
#49
Vermont
32.7 trillion Btu
—
#50
Hawaii
29.5 trillion Btu
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Combustion emissions describe fossil energy use. Production, consumption, emissions, and international trade have different accounting boundaries.
Idaho · 202421.11 Mt CO₂
Idaho rank#43among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark4,780.66 Mt CO₂Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Total energy-related CO₂ emissions
Thousand metric tons of carbon dioxide from energy consumption.
2024 SEDS estimates. Energy-related CO₂ excludes non-energy greenhouse gases and is not a complete climate footprint. Production emissions are assigned to electric power, rather than reallocating electricity emissions to consumers.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Idaho stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Idaho has a dark outline.
Lower value · 5.36 Mt CO₂Higher value · 679.93 Mt CO₂Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Idaho · 21.11 Mt CO₂2024 · Rank #43 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Idaho with every state · 50 ranked
Total energy-related CO₂ emissions · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
679.93 Mt CO₂
—
#2
California
315.98 Mt CO₂
—
#3
Florida
230.85 Mt CO₂
—
#4
Pennsylvania
201.57 Mt CO₂
—
#5
Louisiana
186.89 Mt CO₂
—
#6
Ohio
186.34 Mt CO₂
—
#7
Illinois
163.98 Mt CO₂
—
#8
New York
163.69 Mt CO₂
—
#9
Indiana
152.3 Mt CO₂
—
#10
Michigan
143.11 Mt CO₂
—
#11
Georgia
127.83 Mt CO₂
—
#12
North Carolina
119.07 Mt CO₂
—
#13
Kentucky
106.87 Mt CO₂
—
#14
Alabama
104.32 Mt CO₂
—
#15
Virginia
99.24 Mt CO₂
—
#16
Missouri
98.03 Mt CO₂
—
#17
Tennessee
90.46 Mt CO₂
—
#18
Oklahoma
88.56 Mt CO₂
—
#19
New Jersey
87.84 Mt CO₂
—
#20
Wisconsin
85.12 Mt CO₂
—
#21
Arizona
82.2 Mt CO₂
—
#22
Colorado
79.57 Mt CO₂
—
#23
Minnesota
77.89 Mt CO₂
—
#24
Washington
73.81 Mt CO₂
—
#25
West Virginia
72.28 Mt CO₂
—
#26
South Carolina
70.81 Mt CO₂
—
#27
Iowa
65.23 Mt CO₂
—
#28
Mississippi
64.75 Mt CO₂
—
#29
Arkansas
58.42 Mt CO₂
—
#30
Massachusetts
58.07 Mt CO₂
—
#31
North Dakota
55.15 Mt CO₂
—
#32
Kansas
55.09 Mt CO₂
—
#33
Utah
55.03 Mt CO₂
—
#34
Wyoming
50 Mt CO₂
—
#35
Maryland
48.77 Mt CO₂
—
#36
Alaska
44.01 Mt CO₂
—
#37
Nebraska
43.54 Mt CO₂
—
#38
New Mexico
41.63 Mt CO₂
—
#39
Nevada
39.28 Mt CO₂
—
#40
Oregon
38.94 Mt CO₂
—
#41
Connecticut
37.09 Mt CO₂
—
#42
Montana
27.16 Mt CO₂
—
#43
Idaho · your comparison
21.11 Mt CO₂
—
#44
Hawaii
17.96 Mt CO₂
—
#45
Maine
15.99 Mt CO₂
—
#46
South Dakota
15.11 Mt CO₂
—
#47
New Hampshire
13.6 Mt CO₂
—
#48
Delaware
11.52 Mt CO₂
—
#49
Rhode Island
11.05 Mt CO₂
—
#50
Vermont
5.36 Mt CO₂
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
4 of 4 reviewed Idaho actions · newest first
Apr 10, 2026 · HB 911 · PUBLIC UTILITIES – Adds to existing law to provide for new large loads. · Enacted · Chapter 335Idaho Legislature · HB 911
PUBLIC UTILITIES – Adds to existing law to provide for new large loads.
Apr 10, 2026 · Enacted · Chapter 335
Michael Leman Veile · Floor sponsor / Jim Guthrie · Floor sponsor
FactVote reviewed summary
HB 911 requires a commission-approved service contract and a no-harm assessment before a public utility serves a new large load. Covered loads increase maximum contracted demand by at least 50 megawatts in a consecutive 60-month period, measured against the service entrance’s highest contracted demand in the previous 60 months, under contracts entered on or after July 1, 2026. The commission must approve or deny a filing within 270 days; approval requires expected service quality and reliability for other customers to remain at least as high as without the new load. Splitting an enterprise’s load among service entrances cannot evade coverage. The new load must fund its full cost of service, provide financial security against stranded costs, and remain subject to rate-case review. These are ratepayer protections and cost-allocation requirements, not evidence that statewide retail electricity prices changed.
Signed by Governor on 2026-04-10, Chapter 335 of the 2026 regular session. Signing, effectiveness, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
The fact measures average retail electricity revenue per kilowatthour across customer sectors in Idaho. Utility cost allocation directly concerns rates, while hydroelectric operations concern an input to electricity supply. Neither connection establishes a measured price effect. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Idaho evidence context: Average retail electricity price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
61-335. NEW LARGE LOAD AND RATEPAYER PROTECTION. (1) For the purposes of this section: (a) "Electric service" means electricity furnished to an ultimate consumer by a public utility. (b) "Increase in a cumulative power requirement" means the maximum contracted demand, expressed in megawatts, measured relative to the highest contracted demand of such service entrance in the previous sixty (60) month period. (c) "New large load" means any electrical load associated with a new service entrance, any additional electric service associated with a change, enlargement, or other modification of a service entrance, or the utilization of an existing service entrance that: (i) Results in an increase in a cumulative power requirement of such service entrance of fifty (50) megawatts or more in any consecutive sixty (60) month period; and (ii) Is subject to a service contract with a public utility that was entered into on or after July 1, 2026. (d) "No harm test" means an assessment by the public utilities commission to determine the impact a new large load will have on the rates of existing utility customers. (e) The following terms shall have the same meaning as provided for in section 61-332A, Idaho Code: (i) "Commission"; (ii) "Consumer"; (iii) "New service entrance"; (iv) "Public utility"; and (v) "Service entrance." (2) A public utility shall provide service to a new large load only pursuant to a commission-approved service contract. (3) A public utility shall file the service contract with the commission for approval prior to providing service to a new large load. Such filing shall include a no harm test and other supporting information sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this section. (4) The commission shall review and approve or deny a new large load service contract within two hundred seventy (270) days of receiving such filing by the public utility. The commission shall approve the service contract if the public utility demonstrates that: (a) It is reasonably expected to maintain the same or higher level of service quality and reliability available to the public utility's other customers as would have been reasonably expected to exist had the public utility not served the new large load; and (b) The new large load is responsible for funding its full cost of service, including its share of generation, transmission, substation, and distribution infrastructure investments that would not be placed in service or be required by the public utility but for the new large load. Such investments may be directly assigned or allocated in part as may be determined by the commission pursuant to this section. (5) A new large load shall not change its status as such by means of artifice, such as by splitting its load among more than one (1) electric service entrance or by adding additional connections, meters, or new service entrances to serve an otherwise single entity or enterprise. (6) Approval of a service contract shall be conditioned on the new large load furnishing financial security, in a form and amount approved by the commission, that is reasonably sufficient to protect the public utility and its other customers from the risk of stranded costs, unrecoverable costs, or unrecoverable investments incurred by the public utility in reliance on the new large load's contracted power requirement. (7)(a) In each general rate case filed by a public utility, the commission shall review the rates, charges, and cost recovery mechanisms applicable to an approved service contract as part of a comprehensive public utility cost study to ensure the new large load is assigned its full cost of service. (b) The commission may, if necessary, prospectively adjust the applicable rates, charges, and cost recovery mechanisms pursuant to this section. (8)(a) The commission shall issue orders setting forth guidance or other requirements necessary to implement the provisions of this section and to provide reasonable assurance that new large loads will not cause the rates charged to the public utility's other customers to increase. (b) The commission shall have the jurisdiction to resolve all disputes arising under this section. (9) Providing electric service pursuant to this section shall not be construed to: (a) Be a grant of preference or advantage; (b) Subject any person or corporation to any prejudice or disadvantage; or (c) Establish or maintain any unreasonable difference in rates, charges, or services in any respect.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 10, 2026 · HB 911 · PUBLIC UTILITIES – Adds to existing law to provide for new large loads. · SignedGovernor · HB 911
PUBLIC UTILITIES – Adds to existing law to provide for new large loads.
Apr 10, 2026 · Signed
Gov. Brad Little · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Brad Little signed HB 911. HB 911 requires a commission-approved service contract and a no-harm assessment before a public utility serves a new large load. Covered loads increase maximum contracted demand by at least 50 megawatts in a consecutive 60-month period, measured against the service entrance’s highest contracted demand in the previous 60 months, under contracts entered on or after July 1, 2026. The commission must approve or deny a filing within 270 days; approval requires expected service quality and reliability for other customers to remain at least as high as without the new load. Splitting an enterprise’s load among service entrances cannot evade coverage. The new load must fund its full cost of service, provide financial security against stranded costs, and remain subject to rate-case review. These are ratepayer protections and cost-allocation requirements, not evidence that statewide retail electricity prices changed.
Signed by Governor on 2026-04-10, Chapter 335 of the 2026 regular session. Signing, effectiveness, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
The fact measures average retail electricity revenue per kilowatthour across customer sectors in Idaho. Utility cost allocation directly concerns rates, while hydroelectric operations concern an input to electricity supply. Neither connection establishes a measured price effect. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Idaho evidence context: Average retail electricity price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
61-335. NEW LARGE LOAD AND RATEPAYER PROTECTION. (1) For the purposes of this section: (a) "Electric service" means electricity furnished to an ultimate consumer by a public utility. (b) "Increase in a cumulative power requirement" means the maximum contracted demand, expressed in megawatts, measured relative to the highest contracted demand of such service entrance in the previous sixty (60) month period. (c) "New large load" means any electrical load associated with a new service entrance, any additional electric service associated with a change, enlargement, or other modification of a service entrance, or the utilization of an existing service entrance that: (i) Results in an increase in a cumulative power requirement of such service entrance of fifty (50) megawatts or more in any consecutive sixty (60) month period; and (ii) Is subject to a service contract with a public utility that was entered into on or after July 1, 2026. (d) "No harm test" means an assessment by the public utilities commission to determine the impact a new large load will have on the rates of existing utility customers. (e) The following terms shall have the same meaning as provided for in section 61-332A, Idaho Code: (i) "Commission"; (ii) "Consumer"; (iii) "New service entrance"; (iv) "Public utility"; and (v) "Service entrance." (2) A public utility shall provide service to a new large load only pursuant to a commission-approved service contract. (3) A public utility shall file the service contract with the commission for approval prior to providing service to a new large load. Such filing shall include a no harm test and other supporting information sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this section. (4) The commission shall review and approve or deny a new large load service contract within two hundred seventy (270) days of receiving such filing by the public utility. The commission shall approve the service contract if the public utility demonstrates that: (a) It is reasonably expected to maintain the same or higher level of service quality and reliability available to the public utility's other customers as would have been reasonably expected to exist had the public utility not served the new large load; and (b) The new large load is responsible for funding its full cost of service, including its share of generation, transmission, substation, and distribution infrastructure investments that would not be placed in service or be required by the public utility but for the new large load. Such investments may be directly assigned or allocated in part as may be determined by the commission pursuant to this section. (5) A new large load shall not change its status as such by means of artifice, such as by splitting its load among more than one (1) electric service entrance or by adding additional connections, meters, or new service entrances to serve an otherwise single entity or enterprise. (6) Approval of a service contract shall be conditioned on the new large load furnishing financial security, in a form and amount approved by the commission, that is reasonably sufficient to protect the public utility and its other customers from the risk of stranded costs, unrecoverable costs, or unrecoverable investments incurred by the public utility in reliance on the new large load's contracted power requirement. (7)(a) In each general rate case filed by a public utility, the commission shall review the rates, charges, and cost recovery mechanisms applicable to an approved service contract as part of a comprehensive public utility cost study to ensure the new large load is assigned its full cost of service. (b) The commission may, if necessary, prospectively adjust the applicable rates, charges, and cost recovery mechanisms pursuant to this section. (8)(a) The commission shall issue orders setting forth guidance or other requirements necessary to implement the provisions of this section and to provide reasonable assurance that new large loads will not cause the rates charged to the public utility's other customers to increase. (b) The commission shall have the jurisdiction to resolve all disputes arising under this section. (9) Providing electric service pursuant to this section shall not be construed to: (a) Be a grant of preference or advantage; (b) Subject any person or corporation to any prejudice or disadvantage; or (c) Establish or maintain any unreasonable difference in rates, charges, or services in any respect.
The proposed Northwest Energy Security Act would require Federal Columbia River Power System operations to follow the specified September 2020 decision, with changes allowed only if all three designated secretaries, each in their sole discretion, determine a listed condition is met. New restrictions on hydroelectric generation would require specific and express authorization in a federal statute enacted after this proposal’s enactment, while necessary maintenance and capital improvements remain allowed. This concerns electricity supply in the regional system; it neither sets Idaho retail rates nor proves lower prices.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
The fact measures average retail electricity revenue per kilowatthour across customer sectors in Idaho. Utility cost allocation directly concerns rates, while hydroelectric operations concern an input to electricity supply. Neither connection establishes a measured price effect. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Idaho evidence context: Average retail electricity price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2.DefinitionsIn this Act:(1)FCRPSThe term FCRPS means those portions of the Federal Columbia River Power System that are the subject of the Supplemental Opinion.(2)SecretariesThe term Secretaries means—(A)the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation;(B)the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration; and(C)the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers.(3)Supplemental OpinionThe term Supplemental Opinion means the document entitled Columbia River System Operations Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision and dated September 2020.3.Operation of FCRPSThe Secretaries shall operate the FCRPS in a manner consistent with the reasonable and prudent alternative described in the Supplemental Opinion.4.Amendments to supplemental opinion(a)In generalNotwithstanding section 3, the Secretaries may amend portions of the Supplemental Opinion and operate the FCRPS in accordance with those amendments if all of the Secretaries determine, in the sole discretion of each Secretary, that—(1)the amendment is necessary for public safety or transmission and grid reliability; or(2)the actions, operations, or other requirements that the amendment would remove are no longer warranted.(b)Restriction on amendmentsThe process described in subsection (a) shall be the only method by which the Secretaries may operate the FCRPS in any way that is not consistent with the reasonable and prudent alternative set forth in the Supplemental Opinion.5.Limitation on restricting FCRPS electrical generation; clarification(a)Restricting FCRPS electrical generationNo structural modification, action, study, or engineering plan that restricts electrical generation at any FCRPS hydroelectric dam, or that limits navigation on the Snake River in the State of Washington, Oregon, or Idaho, shall proceed unless such proposal is specifically and expressly authorized by a Federal statute enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act. (b)ClarificationNothing in this section affects or interferes with the authority of the Secretaries to conduct operation and maintenance activities or make capital improvements necessary to meet authorized project purposes of FCRPS facilities.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Jan 31, 2022 · HB 492 · TAX – Adds to existing law to temporarily reduce the motor fuels tax for two years. · Not enactedIdaho Legislature · HB 492
TAX – Adds to existing law to temporarily reduce the motor fuels tax for two years.
Jan 31, 2022 · Not enacted
Tammy Nichols · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
HB 492 proposed a temporary motor-fuel tax rate of 16 cents per gallon, with a stated July 1, 2022 start and June 30, 2024 sunset. The bill did not pass. Its gasoline component connects to one input to the five-state Rocky Mountain price series; the proposed rate is not represented as enacted, current, or as a demonstrated pump-price reduction. Tammy Nichols was a House sponsor at the time and now serves in the Senate.
Reported Printed and Referred to Ways & Means. The 2022 regular session ended without enactment. The displayed date is the latest dated legislative action, not the session adjournment or a signed law.
Why this record is included
The fact is EIA’s Rocky Mountain regular-gasoline price, including taxes, for Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Wyoming. An Idaho fuel-tax proposal concerns one state and one component of that regional price, without establishing a regional pump-price effect. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Idaho evidence context: Rocky Mountain regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 1. That Chapter 24, Title 63, Idaho Code, be, and the same is hereby amended by the addition thereto of a NEW SECTION, to be known and designated as Section 63-2402A, Idaho Code, and to read as follows: 63-2402A. ADJUSTMENT OF TAX ON MOTOR FUEL. Notwithstanding section 63-2402(2), Idaho Code, the tax imposed in section 63-2402, Idaho Code, shall be at the rate of sixteen cents (16¢) per gallon of motor fuel received. SECTION 2. An emergency existing therefor, which emergency is hereby declared to exist, this act shall be in full force and effect on and after July 1, 2022. SECTION 3. The provisions of this act shall be null, void, and of no force and effect on and after June 30, 2024.
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Idaho officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about electricity, fuels, energy costs and emissions from FactVote’s Idaho candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
3 statements from 3 candidates
2026 Idaho U.S. House — District 1 — General Election
1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement
American taxpayers cover an unbelievable 36 Billion dollars in direct subsidies for fossil fuel companies every single year. That number skyrockets to a massive 750 Billion dollars if you include indirect subsidies, backroom loopholes, corporate tax breaks, and federal handouts. Gutting clean and re…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Public lands, natural resources, and energy
Candidate campaign source
American taxpayers cover an unbelievable 36 Billion dollars in direct subsidies for fossil fuel companies every single year. That number skyrockets to a massive 750 Billion dollars if you include indirect subsidies, backroom loopholes, corporate tax breaks, and federal handouts. Gutting clean and renewable energy contracts has stripped lucrative job opportunities away from Idaho trades and made the United States entirely reliant on fossil fuel monopolies who corner markets and jack up prices for everyday people. Utilizing renewable energy sources in ways that fit directly with local stakeholders and landowners to lower utility bills could be life-changing for working Idaho families. It’s time to get creative with all domestic energy options: using solar and wind to take pressure off the grid while expanding clean nuclear power and geothermal—but only when there is strict government oversight and ironclad regulations to protect local communities from reckless waste management and human error. Long-term safety and affordability must be the metric, not corporate shareholder profit margins.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
I strongly believe that our efforts to address this growing problem should be comprehensive in nature and that we should explore every opportunity to develop viable alternative energy sources. I strongly support a responsible, revitalized domestic nuclear energy program, and I am proud of the work d…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Candidate statement
Candidate campaign source
I strongly believe that our efforts to address this growing problem should be comprehensive in nature and that we should explore every opportunity to develop viable alternative energy sources. I strongly support a responsible, revitalized domestic nuclear energy program, and I am proud of the work done in Idaho to expanding the use of nuclear power to meet our nation’s growing energy needs. I also believe we must increase energy efficiency in the United States and encourage the development of renewable energy sources, while continuing to find domestic sources of traditional forms of energy, like oil and natural gas. Technology, incentives, and innovation can move our economy to a sustainable, independent energy source that will be a real solution to the challenges facing our nation.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026
America and Idaho have vast energy resources capable of powering our homes, economy, and innovation. We must strengthen our domestic energy supply to meet growing demand and end our country’s reliance on foreign nations. I am a leading voice on strengthening America’s nuclear energy infrastructure a…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Public lands, natural resources, and energy
Candidate campaign source
America and Idaho have vast energy resources capable of powering our homes, economy, and innovation. We must strengthen our domestic energy supply to meet growing demand and end our country’s reliance on foreign nations. I am a leading voice on strengthening America’s nuclear energy infrastructure and defending hydropower from activist dam breaching efforts.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026
This section matches specific electricity, fuels, energy costs and emissions terms in retained, attributed source text from published Idaho candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
Idaho incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Idaho legislators and Idaho’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Idaho’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
2 matching sponsorships or proposals · 2 Idaho incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Sen. James E. Risch
U.S. Senate, Idaho · R–ID
1 proposalView proposals from Sen. James E. RischU.S. Congress · Idaho delegation · S 182
Northwest Energy Security Act
Jan 22, 2025 · In Congress
Sen. James E. Risch · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The proposed Northwest Energy Security Act would require Federal Columbia River Power System operations to follow the specified September 2020 decision, with changes allowed only if all three designated secretaries, each in their sole discretion, determine a listed condition is met. New restrictions on hydroelectric generation would require specific and express authorization in a federal statute enacted after this proposal’s enactment, while necessary maintenance and capital improvements remain allowed. This concerns electricity supply in the regional system; it neither sets Idaho retail rates nor proves lower prices.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
The fact measures average retail electricity revenue per kilowatthour across customer sectors in Idaho. Utility cost allocation directly concerns rates, while hydroelectric operations concern an input to electricity supply. Neither connection establishes a measured price effect. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Idaho evidence context: Average retail electricity price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2.DefinitionsIn this Act:(1)FCRPSThe term FCRPS means those portions of the Federal Columbia River Power System that are the subject of the Supplemental Opinion.(2)SecretariesThe term Secretaries means—(A)the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation;(B)the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration; and(C)the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers.(3)Supplemental OpinionThe term Supplemental Opinion means the document entitled Columbia River System Operations Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision and dated September 2020.3.Operation of FCRPSThe Secretaries shall operate the FCRPS in a manner consistent with the reasonable and prudent alternative described in the Supplemental Opinion.4.Amendments to supplemental opinion(a)In generalNotwithstanding section 3, the Secretaries may amend portions of the Supplemental Opinion and operate the FCRPS in accordance with those amendments if all of the Secretaries determine, in the sole discretion of each Secretary, that—(1)the amendment is necessary for public safety or transmission and grid reliability; or(2)the actions, operations, or other requirements that the amendment would remove are no longer warranted.(b)Restriction on amendmentsThe process described in subsection (a) shall be the only method by which the Secretaries may operate the FCRPS in any way that is not consistent with the reasonable and prudent alternative set forth in the Supplemental Opinion.5.Limitation on restricting FCRPS electrical generation; clarification(a)Restricting FCRPS electrical generationNo structural modification, action, study, or engineering plan that restricts electrical generation at any FCRPS hydroelectric dam, or that limits navigation on the Snake River in the State of Washington, Oregon, or Idaho, shall proceed unless such proposal is specifically and expressly authorized by a Federal statute enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act. (b)ClarificationNothing in this section affects or interferes with the authority of the Secretaries to conduct operation and maintenance activities or make capital improvements necessary to meet authorized project purposes of FCRPS facilities.
1 proposalView proposals from Tammy NicholsIdaho Legislature · HB 492
TAX – Adds to existing law to temporarily reduce the motor fuels tax for two years.
Jan 31, 2022 · Not enacted
Tammy Nichols · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
HB 492 proposed a temporary motor-fuel tax rate of 16 cents per gallon, with a stated July 1, 2022 start and June 30, 2024 sunset. The bill did not pass. Its gasoline component connects to one input to the five-state Rocky Mountain price series; the proposed rate is not represented as enacted, current, or as a demonstrated pump-price reduction. Tammy Nichols was a House sponsor at the time and now serves in the Senate.
Reported Printed and Referred to Ways & Means. The 2022 regular session ended without enactment. The displayed date is the latest dated legislative action, not the session adjournment or a signed law.
Why this record is included
The fact is EIA’s Rocky Mountain regular-gasoline price, including taxes, for Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Wyoming. An Idaho fuel-tax proposal concerns one state and one component of that regional price, without establishing a regional pump-price effect. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Idaho evidence context: Rocky Mountain regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 1. That Chapter 24, Title 63, Idaho Code, be, and the same is hereby amended by the addition thereto of a NEW SECTION, to be known and designated as Section 63-2402A, Idaho Code, and to read as follows: 63-2402A. ADJUSTMENT OF TAX ON MOTOR FUEL. Notwithstanding section 63-2402(2), Idaho Code, the tax imposed in section 63-2402, Idaho Code, shall be at the rate of sixteen cents (16¢) per gallon of motor fuel received. SECTION 2. An emergency existing therefor, which emergency is hereby declared to exist, this act shall be in full force and effect on and after July 1, 2022. SECTION 3. The provisions of this act shall be null, void, and of no force and effect on and after June 30, 2024.
Only current Idaho officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Idaho statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Idaho snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Idaho, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.