Kentucky · individual fact

Kentucky energy and electricity

Electricity prices and bills, generation and fuel mix, and gasoline costs.

Residential electricity price12.79¢/kWh2024 · #39 of 50 · highest first
Regular gasoline price$3.893/gal2026-08 · #26 of 48* · highest first
Average monthly residential electricity bill$133.812024 · #26 of 50 · highest first

Kentucky over time

Explore Kentucky readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Kentucky officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Kentucky effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Kentucky 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 Kentucky · source units
KentuckyPublished 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.

Residential electricity price2024: 12.79¢/kWh9.24¢/kWh13.36¢/kWh17.48¢/kWhKentucky, 2015: 10.24¢/kWhKentucky, 2016: 10.49¢/kWhKentucky, 2017: 10.85¢/kWhKentucky, 2018: 10.6¢/kWhKentucky, 2019: 10.8¢/kWhKentucky, 2020: 10.87¢/kWhKentucky, 2021: 11.5¢/kWhKentucky, 2022: 12.91¢/kWhKentucky, 2023: 12.65¢/kWhKentucky, 2024: 12.79¢/kWh201520192024
✦ Major events & context · 48National context · Energy Policy Act expands federal energy programs · 2005-08-08Energy Policy ActNational context · Hurricanes Katrina and Rita disrupt fuel supplies · 2005-08-29Katrina / RitaNational context · Energy law strengthens fuel economy, biofuels and efficiency · 2007-12-19Fuel / efficiency lawNational context · Global oil and energy prices surge · 2008-07-15Oil-price surgeNational context · Great Financial Crisis and Great Recession · 2008-09-15Great Financial CrisisNational context · Recovery Act funds grid modernization and clean energy · 2009-02-17Recovery Act energyNational context · EPA signs greenhouse-gas endangerment finding · 2009-12-07GHG findingNational context · Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill · 2010-04-20Deepwater HorizonNational context · Fukushima accident prompts U.S. nuclear safety response · 2011-03-11Fukushima safetyNational context · Global demand and Middle East unrest pressure oil prices · 2011-04-112011 oil pressuresNational context · Hurricane Sandy disrupts electricity and fuel distribution · 2012-10-29Hurricane SandyNational context · Polar vortex strains gas supplies and power systems · 2014-01-07Polar vortexNational context · Oil supply growth and OPEC decision deepen price collapse · 2014-11-27Oil-price collapseNational context · Clean Power Plan announced; implementation later stayed · 2015-08-03Clean Power PlanNational context · Congress lifts longstanding crude-oil export restrictions · 2015-12-18Crude export rulesNational context · First LNG export cargo from the Lower 48 · 2016-02-24Lower 48 LNG exportsNational context · Shale development transforms U.S. oil supply · 2016-03-15Shale expansionNational context · Natural gas overtakes coal in annual electricity generation · 2016-12-31Gas overtakes coalNational context · Hurricanes Harvey and Irma disrupt fuel markets · 2017-08-25Harvey / IrmaNational context · Attacks on Saudi oil facilities interrupt global supply · 2019-09-14Saudi oil attacksNational context · United States becomes an annual net total energy exporter · 2019-12-31Net energy exporterNational context · COVID-19 sharply reduces energy demand · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Expiring WTI oil futures settle below zero · 2020-04-20Negative WTI futuresNational context · Western heat wave leads to California rotating outages · 2020-08-14California outagesNational context · OPEC+ supply cuts help rebalance the pandemic oil market · 2020-09-23OPEC+ supply cutsNational context · Severe winter weather disrupts Texas and regional energy systems · 2021-02-08Winter Storm UriNational context · Cyberattack interrupts Colonial Pipeline fuel deliveries · 2021-05-07Colonial PipelineNational context · Infrastructure law funds grid and energy projects · 2021-11-15Infrastructure energyNational context · Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine · 2022-02-24Russia invades UkraineNational context · Large Strategic Petroleum Reserve release announced · 2022-03-31SPR releaseNational context · Freeport LNG fire shuts a major export terminal · 2022-06-08Freeport LNG outageNational context · Inflation Reduction Act expands energy incentives · 2022-08-16IRA energy incentivesNational context · Winter Storm Elliott disrupts gas and power supplies · 2022-12-21Winter Storm ElliottNational context · Renewables exceed coal in annual electric power sector generation · 2022-12-31Renewables pass coalNational context · Vogtle expansion adds new nuclear generation · 2023-07-31Vogtle nuclear unitsNational context · Red Sea attacks reroute oil and gas shipping · 2024-02-01Red Sea shippingNational context · EPA finalizes new power-plant greenhouse-gas rules · 2024-04-25Power-plant GHG ruleNational context · FERC adopts long-term regional transmission planning rule · 2024-05-13Transmission planningNational context · DOE report documents growing data-center electricity demand · 2024-12-20Data-center demandNational context · President declares energy emergency and directs policy changes · 2025-01-20Energy emergencyNational context · U.S. tariff announcement changes energy trade context · 2025-04-02U.S. tariff announcementNational context · EPA proposes repeal of power-sector greenhouse-gas rules · 2025-06-11Power-rule proposalNational context · Tax law accelerates several energy-credit expirations · 2025-07-04Energy tax changesNational context · EPA finalizes endangerment and vehicle GHG standard rescission · 2026-02-12Vehicle GHG repealNational context · EPA announces repeal of 2024 power-plant air-toxics amendments · 2026-02-20Air-toxics amendmentsNational context · Iran conflict and Strait of Hormuz energy disruption · 2026-02-28Iran / Hormuz shockNational context · IEA members agree to emergency oil-stock release · 2026-03-11Emergency oil stocksNational context · FERC and NERC report improved winter grid preparedness · 2026-09-10Winter grid review● Kentucky Legislature · 3● U.S. Congress · Kentucky delegation · 2◆ Governor · 3■ Kentucky agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2005-08-012026-09-30

8 of 8 reviewed Kentucky actions match · 8 date markers shown. 48 major events shown separately.

Kentucky · 2024: 12.79¢/kWh · Rank #39 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 Kentucky, 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
Kentucky Residential electricity price · source units
PeriodKentuckyRankU.S. benchmark
202412.79¢/kWh#39 of 5016.48¢/kWh
202312.65¢/kWh#37 of 50Not available
202212.91¢/kWh#35 of 50Not available
202111.5¢/kWh#35 of 50Not available
202010.87¢/kWh#41 of 50Not available
201910.8¢/kWh#42 of 50Not available
201810.6¢/kWh#43 of 50Not available
201710.85¢/kWh#42 of 50Not available
201610.49¢/kWh#42 of 50Not available
201510.24¢/kWh#43 of 50Not available
How major events are selected

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.

Kentucky · state comparison

Household energy prices

Unit prices are separate from bills: usage, weather, and household needs also determine spending.

Kentucky · 202412.79¢/kWh
Kentucky rank#39among 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 Kentucky, 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.

Kentucky
Residential electricity price history in Kentucky9.3¢/kWh13.36¢/kWh17.42¢/kWh20152024
2024 · Kentucky: 12.79¢/kWh · Rank #39 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 16.48¢/kWh · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Kentucky Residential electricity price history
PeriodKentuckyCompare
201510.24¢/kWh
201610.49¢/kWh
201710.85¢/kWh
201810.6¢/kWh
201910.8¢/kWh
202010.87¢/kWh
202111.5¢/kWh
202212.91¢/kWh
202312.65¢/kWh
202412.79¢/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. Kentucky 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. Kentucky 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.

Kentucky · 12.79¢/kWh2024 · Rank #39 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 Kentucky with every state · 50 ranked
Residential electricity price · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Hawaii42.86¢/kWh—
#2California31.97¢/kWh—
#3Massachusetts29.35¢/kWh—
#4Connecticut28.75¢/kWh—
#5Rhode Island28.65¢/kWh—
#6Alaska24.82¢/kWh—
#7New York24.43¢/kWh—
#8Maine24.29¢/kWh—
#9New Hampshire23.4¢/kWh—
#10Vermont21.9¢/kWh—
#11New Jersey19.34¢/kWh—
#12Michigan19.3¢/kWh—
#13Maryland17.86¢/kWh—
#14Pennsylvania17.77¢/kWh—
#15Wisconsin17.18¢/kWh—
#16Delaware16.57¢/kWh—
#17Ohio15.99¢/kWh—
#18Illinois15.87¢/kWh—
#19Minnesota15.45¢/kWh—
#20Alabama15.18¢/kWh—
#21West Virginia15.07¢/kWh—
#22Nevada15¢/kWh—
#23Texas14.94¢/kWh—
#24Colorado14.92¢/kWh—
#25Arizona14.91¢/kWh—
#26Indiana14.77¢/kWh—
#27Oregon14.7¢/kWh—
#28Virginia14.41¢/kWh—
#29South Carolina14.23¢/kWh—
#30New Mexico14.2¢/kWh—
#31Kansas14.15¢/kWh—
#32Florida14.14¢/kWh—
#33North Carolina14.13¢/kWh—
#34Georgia14.08¢/kWh—
#35Iowa13.4¢/kWh—
#36Mississippi13.39¢/kWh—
#37Missouri12.91¢/kWh—
#38South Dakota12.86¢/kWh—
#39Kentucky · your comparison12.79¢/kWh—
#40Montana12.66¢/kWh—
#41Wyoming12.47¢/kWh—
#42Tennessee12.42¢/kWh—
#43Arkansas12.32¢/kWh—
#44Oklahoma12.24¢/kWh—
#45Utah12.22¢/kWh—
#46Washington11.9¢/kWh—
#47Louisiana11.73¢/kWh—
#48Nebraska11.53¢/kWh—
#49Idaho11.52¢/kWh—
#50North Dakota11.51¢/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.

Midwest regular gasoline price

$3.85/galWeek of August 31, 2026

Estimated average retail price of regular-grade gasoline across all formulations in EIA's Midwest region, including taxes. The region contains Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.

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
$3.934/gal
Weekly change
-8.7¢
One year earlier
$3.088/gal
Change from one year earlier
+75.9¢
Method and limitations

FactVote uses EIA’s Midwest series, the smallest current EIA retail region that includes Kentucky. Changes are calculated from the published August 24, 2026 (prior week), and September 1, 2025 (52 weeks earlier), observations.

  • EIA does not publish a current Kentucky statewide weekly gasoline-price series. This Midwest regional estimate should not be read as Kentucky’s statewide average.
  • The regional average combines Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Wisconsin, and does not represent the price at every station or in every Kentucky 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.
Kentucky · state comparison

What are households paying for electricity?

Compare the bill, electricity used, and price per unit for the same year.

Kentucky · 2024$133.81
Kentucky rank#26among 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.

Kentucky
Average monthly residential electricity bill history in Kentucky$101.18$124.4$147.6220102024
2024 · Kentucky: $133.81 · Rank #26 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $142.26 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Kentucky Average monthly residential electricity bill history
PeriodKentuckyCompare
2010$107.77
2011$108.16
2012$106.54
2013$112.95
2014$119.66
2015$114.72
2016$117.65
2017$114.15
2018$123.57
2019$120.08
2020$116.62
2021$124.67
2022$141.23
2023$125.8
2024$133.81

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. Kentucky 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. Kentucky 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.

Kentucky · $133.812024 · Rank #26 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 Kentucky with every state · 50 ranked
Average monthly residential electricity bill · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Hawaii$212.12—
#2Connecticut$199.66—
#3Alabama$173.5—
#4Massachusetts$167.2—
#5Maryland$165.87—
#6Texas$163.72—
#7Rhode Island$162.4—
#8California$160.86—
#9Arizona$160.24—
#10Florida$156.09—
#11Mississippi$154.83—
#12West Virginia$154.76—
#13Georgia$151.25—
#14Delaware$150.87—
#15South Carolina$149.51—
#16Virginia$148.77—
#17Pennsylvania$145.17—
#18New Hampshire$144.87—
#19Alaska$143.54—
#20North Carolina$143.5—
#21Tennessee$143.32—
#22Louisiana$140.96—
#23New York$139.53—
#24Nevada$139.39—
#25Ohio$135.16—
#26Kentucky · your comparison$133.81—
#27Maine$133.6—
#28Indiana$133.06—
#29Oklahoma$132.05—
#30Oregon$129.62—
#31Missouri$129.18—
#32Arkansas$129.13—
#33New Jersey$128.13—
#34South Dakota$127.81—
#35Vermont$125.66—
#36Kansas$123.9—
#37Michigan$119.31—
#38North Dakota$118.38—
#39Washington$113.68—
#40Iowa$111.54—
#41Wisconsin$110.87—
#42Nebraska$110.28—
#43Minnesota$110.06—
#44Illinois$109.99—
#45Idaho$108.73—
#46Montana$107.91—
#47Wyoming$107.65—
#48Colorado$100.57—
#49Utah$94.57—
#50New 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.

Kentucky · state comparison

What generates Kentucky electricity?

Compare total generation and each fuel’s share using the same EIA year. A fuel share is not a performance score.

Kentucky · 202467.1 TWh
Kentucky rank#23among 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 Kentucky, 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.

Kentucky
Total electricity generation history in Kentucky60.2 TWh73.4 TWh86.6 TWh20152024
2024 · Kentucky: 67.1 TWh · Rank #23 of 50, highest first · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Kentucky Total electricity generation history
PeriodKentuckyCompare
201583.5 TWh
201680.3 TWh
201773.2 TWh
201878.8 TWh
201971.8 TWh
202063.5 TWh
202169.9 TWh
202269.1 TWh
202363.2 TWh
202467.1 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. Kentucky 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. Kentucky 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.

Kentucky · 67.1 TWh2024 · Rank #23 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 Kentucky with every state · 50 ranked
Total electricity generation · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas571.5 TWh—
#2Florida270.7 TWh—
#3California245.9 TWh—
#4Pennsylvania242.5 TWh—
#5Illinois186.7 TWh—
#6Ohio143.3 TWh—
#7Alabama142.9 TWh—
#8Georgia140.4 TWh—
#9North Carolina135.9 TWh—
#10New York133.5 TWh—
#11Michigan124.5 TWh—
#12Arizona121.5 TWh—
#13Virginia103.7 TWh—
#14Washington103 TWh—
#15South Carolina101.1 TWh—
#16Louisiana100 TWh—
#17Indiana97.4 TWh—
#18Oklahoma94.3 TWh—
#19Mississippi77.4 TWh—
#20Tennessee76.3 TWh—
#21Iowa70.9 TWh—
#22Missouri67.6 TWh—
#23Kentucky · your comparison67.1 TWh—
#24Wisconsin65.6 TWh—
#25Oregon65.3 TWh—
#26New Jersey63.6 TWh—
#27Arkansas62.1 TWh—
#28Colorado60.8 TWh—
#29Minnesota59 TWh—
#30Kansas57.9 TWh—
#31West Virginia50.7 TWh—
#32Nevada47.6 TWh—
#33Connecticut46.2 TWh—
#34North Dakota42.6 TWh—
#35Wyoming40.7 TWh—
#36New Mexico40.5 TWh—
#37Nebraska37.3 TWh—
#38Maryland36.9 TWh—
#39Utah36.1 TWh—
#40Montana27 TWh—
#41Massachusetts25 TWh—
#42South Dakota20.9 TWh—
#43Idaho20.3 TWh—
#44New Hampshire17.3 TWh—
#45Maine15.7 TWh—
#46Hawaii10.7 TWh—
#47Rhode Island10.1 TWh—
#48Alaska6.7 TWh—
#49Delaware5 TWh—
#50Vermont2.5 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.

Coal share of in-state electricity generation

67%2024

Approximate share of Kentucky's in-state electricity net generation supplied by coal.

This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.

Selected generation shares

Coal
67%
Natural gas
26%
Hydroelectric power
About 6%
Method and limitations

U.S. Energy Information Administration analysis based on annual electric-power surveys, including Forms EIA-860 and EIA-923.

  • The percentages are rounded and selected source shares are not a complete generation mix.
  • In-state generation is not the same as electricity consumed in Kentucky because power crosses state lines.
Kentucky · state comparison

Affordability, reliability, emissions, and demand

Outage comparisons use the same reporting standard. Major-event outages and ordinary-day outages use different EIA reporting definitions.

Kentucky · 2024537.7 min/year
Kentucky rank#16among 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.

Kentucky
Outage minutes per customer · all events history in Kentucky292.4 min/year614.1 min/year935.7 min/year20232024
2024 · Kentucky: 537.7 min/year · Rank #16 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 662.6 min/year · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Kentucky Outage minutes per customer · all events history
PeriodKentuckyCompare
2023861.5 min/year
2024537.7 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. Kentucky 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. Kentucky 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.

Kentucky · 537.7 min/year2024 · Rank #16 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 Kentucky with every state · 50 ranked
Outage minutes per customer · all events · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1South Carolina3,155 min/year—
#2Maine1,748.6 min/year—
#3Texas1,614.3 min/year—
#4North Carolina1,518.1 min/year—
#5Florida1,487.6 min/year—
#6Georgia1,208.1 min/year—
#7West Virginia1,165.5 min/year—
#8Virginia962.1 min/year—
#9Vermont895.8 min/year—
#10New Hampshire735.5 min/year—
#11Nebraska697.8 min/year—
#12Washington643.5 min/year—
#13Louisiana630.6 min/year—
#14Mississippi607.3 min/year—
#15Oregon579.3 min/year—
#16Kentucky · your comparison537.7 min/year—
#17Arkansas527.8 min/year—
#18Ohio511 min/year—
#19Michigan481.7 min/year—
#20New York477.3 min/year—
#21Hawaii382.6 min/year—
#22Pennsylvania353.1 min/year—
#23Montana341.7 min/year—
#24Alaska323.2 min/year—
#25Indiana310 min/year—
#26Wisconsin296.8 min/year—
#27Kansas289.8 min/year—
#28Tennessee289.3 min/year—
#29California285 min/year—
#30New Mexico272.6 min/year—
#31Colorado257 min/year—
#32Minnesota222.4 min/year—
#33Oklahoma220.7 min/year—
#34Missouri212.6 min/year—
#35Idaho204.4 min/year—
#36Iowa200.3 min/year—
#37Alabama197.7 min/year—
#38New Jersey173.3 min/year—
#39Nevada158.9 min/year—
#40Illinois158 min/year—
#41Connecticut152.8 min/year—
#42Wyoming137.8 min/year—
#43Maryland118.1 min/year—
#44Delaware117.9 min/year—
#45Utah115.4 min/year—
#46Rhode Island104.3 min/year—
#47Massachusetts103.7 min/year—
#48North Dakota102.7 min/year—
#49South Dakota85.6 min/year—
#50Arizona83.6 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.

Kentucky · state comparison

Who uses energy?

Total energy consumption includes more than electricity. EIA assigns electricity-related losses to consuming end-use sectors.

Kentucky · 2024319 trillion Btu
Kentucky rank#24among 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. Kentucky 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. Kentucky 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.

Kentucky · 319 trillion Btu2024 · Rank #24 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 Kentucky with every state · 50 ranked
Residential energy consumption · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas1,514 trillion Btu—
#2Florida1,183.3 trillion Btu—
#3California1,147.1 trillion Btu—
#4New York968.3 trillion Btu—
#5Pennsylvania819.3 trillion Btu—
#6Illinois817.1 trillion Btu—
#7Ohio767.4 trillion Btu—
#8Georgia717.1 trillion Btu—
#9North Carolina662.2 trillion Btu—
#10Michigan661.4 trillion Btu—
#11New Jersey550.1 trillion Btu—
#12Virginia526 trillion Btu—
#13Tennessee492 trillion Btu—
#14Indiana475.6 trillion Btu—
#15Missouri459 trillion Btu—
#16Arizona413.7 trillion Btu—
#17Massachusetts379 trillion Btu—
#18Wisconsin375.9 trillion Btu—
#19South Carolina370.7 trillion Btu—
#20Maryland357.2 trillion Btu—
#21Minnesota346.2 trillion Btu—
#22Alabama331.6 trillion Btu—
#23Washington330.2 trillion Btu—
#24Kentucky · your comparison319 trillion Btu—
#25Colorado311.9 trillion Btu—
#26Louisiana282.6 trillion Btu—
#27Connecticut235.3 trillion Btu—
#28Oklahoma231 trillion Btu—
#29Arkansas209.5 trillion Btu—
#30Utah190.7 trillion Btu—
#31Mississippi179.7 trillion Btu—
#32Oregon173.1 trillion Btu—
#33Kansas166.4 trillion Btu—
#34Iowa162 trillion Btu—
#35Nevada153.3 trillion Btu—
#36West Virginia141 trillion Btu—
#37Nebraska128.9 trillion Btu—
#38Idaho111.2 trillion Btu—
#39New Mexico98.1 trillion Btu—
#40New Hampshire91.8 trillion Btu—
#41Maine80.5 trillion Btu—
#42Montana73.9 trillion Btu—
#43Delaware62.6 trillion Btu—
#44North Dakota61.3 trillion Btu—
#45Rhode Island61 trillion Btu—
#46Alaska49.1 trillion Btu—
#47Wyoming45.5 trillion Btu—
#48South Dakota44.2 trillion Btu—
#49Vermont32.7 trillion Btu—
#50Hawaii29.5 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.

Kentucky · state comparison

Energy-related carbon emissions

Combustion emissions describe fossil energy use. Production, consumption, emissions, and international trade have different accounting boundaries.

Kentucky · 2024106.87 Mt CO₂
Kentucky rank#13among 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. Kentucky 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. Kentucky 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.

Kentucky · 106.87 Mt CO₂2024 · Rank #13 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 Kentucky with every state · 50 ranked
Total energy-related CO₂ emissions · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas679.93 Mt CO₂—
#2California315.98 Mt CO₂—
#3Florida230.85 Mt CO₂—
#4Pennsylvania201.57 Mt CO₂—
#5Louisiana186.89 Mt CO₂—
#6Ohio186.34 Mt CO₂—
#7Illinois163.98 Mt CO₂—
#8New York163.69 Mt CO₂—
#9Indiana152.3 Mt CO₂—
#10Michigan143.11 Mt CO₂—
#11Georgia127.83 Mt CO₂—
#12North Carolina119.07 Mt CO₂—
#13Kentucky · your comparison106.87 Mt CO₂—
#14Alabama104.32 Mt CO₂—
#15Virginia99.24 Mt CO₂—
#16Missouri98.03 Mt CO₂—
#17Tennessee90.46 Mt CO₂—
#18Oklahoma88.56 Mt CO₂—
#19New Jersey87.84 Mt CO₂—
#20Wisconsin85.12 Mt CO₂—
#21Arizona82.2 Mt CO₂—
#22Colorado79.57 Mt CO₂—
#23Minnesota77.89 Mt CO₂—
#24Washington73.81 Mt CO₂—
#25West Virginia72.28 Mt CO₂—
#26South Carolina70.81 Mt CO₂—
#27Iowa65.23 Mt CO₂—
#28Mississippi64.75 Mt CO₂—
#29Arkansas58.42 Mt CO₂—
#30Massachusetts58.07 Mt CO₂—
#31North Dakota55.15 Mt CO₂—
#32Kansas55.09 Mt CO₂—
#33Utah55.03 Mt CO₂—
#34Wyoming50 Mt CO₂—
#35Maryland48.77 Mt CO₂—
#36Alaska44.01 Mt CO₂—
#37Nebraska43.54 Mt CO₂—
#38New Mexico41.63 Mt CO₂—
#39Nevada39.28 Mt CO₂—
#40Oregon38.94 Mt CO₂—
#41Connecticut37.09 Mt CO₂—
#42Montana27.16 Mt CO₂—
#43Idaho21.11 Mt CO₂—
#44Hawaii17.96 Mt CO₂—
#45Maine15.99 Mt CO₂—
#46South Dakota15.11 Mt CO₂—
#47New Hampshire13.6 Mt CO₂—
#48Delaware11.52 Mt CO₂—
#49Rhode Island11.05 Mt CO₂—
#50Vermont5.36 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.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about electricity, fuels, energy costs and emissions from FactVote’s Kentucky 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.

11 statements from 7 candidates

2026 Kentucky U.S. House — District 3 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 2 statements

Morgan McGarvey

2 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 3 · KY

Energy & electricity

I support federal spending and tax incentives to dramatically expand renewable energy buildout in the United States, infrastructure spending to speed the deployment of electric vehicles, and tax incentives for consumer purchase of union-made and American-made electric vehicles. I support a federal c…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Coal, energy, and Appalachian economic development

Candidate campaign source

I support federal spending and tax incentives to dramatically expand renewable energy buildout in the United States, infrastructure spending to speed the deployment of electric vehicles, and tax incentives for consumer purchase of union-made and American-made electric vehicles. I support a federal clean energy standard that incentivizes investor-owned electric utilities to achieve greenhouse gas emissions reductions while creating millions of good-paying jobs to build the clean energy infrastructure necessary to make this transition. And I will fight for federal spending to incentivize rural electric cooperatives to transition to clean, renewable energy by relieving debt associated with coal-fired power plants, and conditioning such relief upon the coop’s investment in a clean energy transition.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026

Morgan McGarvey — candidate-owned primary source 5 ↗
View 1 more statement from Morgan McGarvey
Energy & electricity

Favor companies with union workforces when making federal investments in infrastructure, education, renewable energy, and electric vehicles and batteries.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Union Investment

Candidate campaign source

Favor companies with union workforces when making federal investments in infrastructure, education, renewable energy, and electric vehicles and batteries.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026

Morgan McGarvey — Part 88 verified source ↗

2026 Kentucky U.S. House — District 6 — General Election

5 candidates with matching statements · 8 statements

Jay J Bowman

1 statement

Independent · U.S. House District 6 · KY

Energy & electricity

Resources: Kentucky should require data centers to install solar/ battery storage/ Closed loop cooling / enact AI data process controls to allow data centers to act as a virtual battery systems enhancing our grid.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Technology and cybersecurity

Candidate campaign source

Resources: Kentucky should require data centers to install solar/ battery storage/ Closed loop cooling / enact AI data process controls to allow data centers to act as a virtual battery systems enhancing our grid.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Jay J Bowman — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗

Pete Lynch

2 statements

Kentucky Party · U.S. House District 6 · KY

Energy & electricity

Invest in solar, wind, and other renewables in rural and underserved areas

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Top Policy Priorities

Candidate campaign source

Invest in solar, wind, and other renewables in rural and underserved areas

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 18, 2026

Pete Lynch campaign source 2 ↗
View 1 more statement from Pete Lynch
Energy & electricity

Modernize the electricity grid for reliability and lower costs

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Top Policy Priorities

Candidate campaign source

Modernize the electricity grid for reliability and lower costs

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 18, 2026

Pete Lynch campaign source 2 ↗

Robert Quigley

2 statements

Write-In · U.S. House District 6 · KY

Energy & electricity

Invest in renewable energy projects to create jobs and protect natural resources.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy, water, and environment

Candidate campaign source

Invest in renewable energy projects to create jobs and protect natural resources.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Robert Quigley — candidate-owned primary source ↗
View 1 more statement from Robert Quigley
Energy & electricity

Fight Climate Change Effectively

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy, water, and environment

Candidate campaign source

Fight Climate Change Effectively

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Robert Quigley — candidate-owned primary source ↗

Zach Dembo

2 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 6 · KY

Energy & electricity

Right now, data centers are being built without enough community input or environmental oversight, and they’re exhausting our power grid in ways that drive up energy bills for working families. Some are also polluting clean air and water and destroying fertile farmland. That’s not progress – that’s …

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Technology and cybersecurity

Candidate campaign source

Right now, data centers are being built without enough community input or environmental oversight, and they’re exhausting our power grid in ways that drive up energy bills for working families. Some are also polluting clean air and water and destroying fertile farmland. That’s not progress – that’s passing the costs of corporate expansion onto the rest of us. If a community doesn’t want a data center in their backyard, they should not be forced to have one, and state, local, and county leaders should be responsive to their community’s desires. The first job of any elected official is to listen.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Zach Dembo — candidate-owned primary source 11 ↗
View 1 more statement from Zach Dembo
Energy & electricity

In Congress, I’ll push for legislation that requires transparency and local input in data center siting decisions, holds companies accountable for their environmental impact, and makes sure Big Tech can’t offload rising energy costs onto Kentucky families. I also support commonsense AI safeguards to…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Technology and cybersecurity

Candidate campaign source

In Congress, I’ll push for legislation that requires transparency and local input in data center siting decisions, holds companies accountable for their environmental impact, and makes sure Big Tech can’t offload rising energy costs onto Kentucky families. I also support commonsense AI safeguards to protect children interacting with chat bots and make sure the newest models don’t pose major risks to our cybersecurity.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Zach Dembo — candidate-owned primary source 11 ↗

2026 Kentucky U.S. Senate — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Andy Barr

1 statement

Republican · U.S. Senate · KY

Energy & electricity

No one fought Biden’s war on energy more than Andy Barr. Andy has a plan to bring back clean, beautiful coal, to create jobs, lower energy costs, and attract industries of the future to Kentucky. You can read his plan for Kentucky coal here.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Coal, energy, and Appalachian economic development

Candidate campaign source

No one fought Biden’s war on energy more than Andy Barr. Andy has a plan to bring back clean, beautiful coal, to create jobs, lower energy costs, and attract industries of the future to Kentucky. You can read his plan for Kentucky coal here.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Andy Barr — candidate-owned primary source 7 ↗
How statements are selected

This section matches specific electricity, fuels, energy costs and emissions terms in retained, attributed source text from published Kentucky 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.

Kentucky incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Kentucky legislators and Kentucky’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Kentucky’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

5 matching sponsorships or proposals · 5 Kentucky incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Rep. Andy Barr

U.S. House of Representatives, Kentucky District 6 · R–KY

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Andy Barr
U.S. Congress · Kentucky delegation · HR 5927

Securing Reliable Power for Advanced Technologies Act

Nov 7, 2025 · In Congress

Rep. Andy Barr · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The proposal would let the president designate qualifying AI infrastructure for expedited federal review. Generation facilities must have at least 100 MW capacity, meet specified continuous-service criteria, avoid intermittent renewables as the primary energy input, and be contractually committed to qualifying AI facilities. It also provides conditional regulatory exemptions, compensation subject to appropriations, and financing provisions. This concerns proposed generation development and protection, not an operating Kentucky plant or a measured coal-share change.

Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.

Why this record is included

Coal share is the portion of Kentucky in-state electricity net generation supplied by coal. Coal-fired plants and alternative generating resources concern this mix; in-state generation differs from electricity consumed in the state. Procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from operating plants or measured output. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kentucky evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

2.Acceleration of designated critical artificial intelligence infrastructure projects (a)In generalTitle III of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 4531 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following: 306.Acceleration of designated critical artificial intelligence infrastructure projects (a)DefinitionsIn this section: (1)Covered projectThe term covered project means a project to construct, expand, repower, or reopen critical artificial intelligence infrastructure. (2)Critical artificial intelligence infrastructureThe term critical artificial intelligence infrastructure means— (A)one or more data centers or high-performance computing facilities with a total connected electrical load of not less than 50 megawatts that is primarily dedicated to the training, development, or inference of artificial intelligence or other machine learning models; (B)any dispatchable baseload electric generation facility— (i)with a nameplate capacity of not less than 100 megawatts; (ii)capable, without regard to restrictions on use imposed solely for reasons other than engineering design or physical capability, of providing firm, dispatchable capacity and continuous electric service for not less than 85 percent of the hours in a typical calendar year; (iii)that does not derive its primary energy input from intermittent renewable sources, with or without energy storage; and (iv)is contractually committed, in whole or material part, to provide firm, dispatchable electric supply to facilities described in subparagraph (A), through the applicable retail electric utility or cooperative serving such facilities, consistent with State service laws; (C)associated high-voltage electric transmission facilities, including any network transmission upgrades necessary to reliably serve the facilities, essential to interconnect facilities described in subparagraph (A) or (B); or (D)fuel supply infrastructure essential to the operation of facilities described in subparagraph (B), including— (i)coal mines and coal preparation facilities, as defined in section 701 of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1291); (ii)natural gas gathering, processing, storage, and transportation facilities subject to the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 et seq.); (iii)oil and gas wells and wellhead production facilities (as defined in section 3(4) of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 (30 U.S.C. 1702(4))), together with oil or petroleum product pipelines and related terminals (as such term relates to hazardous liquid pipeline facilities under section 60101(a)(22) of title 49, United States Code); and (iv)rail, barge, or other transportation infrastructure (as such terms are used in sections 13102(27) of title 49 and 2101(3) of title 46, United States Code) materially dedicated to the delivery of fuel to such facilities. (3)Federal authorizationThe term Federal authorization means any permit, license, approval, or other administrative decision required under Federal law to site, construct, expand, operate, or maintain a covered project. (b)Presidential designationThe President may designate one or more covered projects as priority national defense projects and publish such designation in the Federal Register. (c)Concurrent permitting (1)CoordinationFor any covered project designated under subsection (a), the President shall require each head of a Federal agency with responsibility for issuing permits, licenses, or approvals to— (A)conduct reviews concurrently to the maximum extent practicable and consistent with applicable law; and (B)adhere to a consolidated schedule established by the President in accordance with paragraph (2). (2)ScheduleThe President shall ensure that a consolidated schedule described in paragraph (1)— (A)establishes interim milestones and deadlines for action by the head of a Federal agency described in paragraph (1) with respect to the designated covered project; and (B)requires completion of all necessary Federal authorizations not later than 2 years after receipt of a complete application from the owner of the covered project, unless the President determines that additional time is required due to extraordinary circumstances. (3)ConsultationThe President may consult with State, Tribal, or local permitting authorities in developing the consolidated schedule described in paragraph (2). (4)EnforcementFailure by a Federal agency to adhere to the consolidated schedule established for a designated covered project unless approved by the President shall be treated as a failure to act under section 706(1) of title 5, United States Code. (5)Dispute resolution (A)In generalThe President or a designee described in subparagraph (B) shall have exclusive authority to resolve disputes among Federal agencies regarding the scope, schedule, or terms of Federal authorizations. (B)Designee describedThe President may, for a covered project, assign a designee as follows: (i)The Secretary of Defense. (ii)After publication in the Federal Register, the head of another Federal agency. (d)Environmental reviewThe President shall designate a single Federal agency to serve as the lead agency responsible for preparing all environmental reviews and related documents for a designated covered project, which shall be deemed sufficient for such reviews required for relevant Federal authorizations. (e)Judicial review (1)Venue; limitationA civil action seeking review of a designation under subsection (b) shall be brought only in the District of Columbia Circuit. A civil action seeking review of a Federal authorization under subsection (c) shall be brought in the United States Court of Appeals for the circuit in which the covered project is principally located. (2)Timing of civil actionsA civil action described in paragraph (1) may only be brought during the 60-day period following the date on which the applicable designation or authorization is made. (3)Expedited considerationThe United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shall provide expedited consideration for a civil action described in paragraph (1), and shall issue a final decision on the merits not later than 60 days after date of filing of the complaint. Such decision may only be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. (4)Injunctive reliefThe United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit may not issue a preliminary injunction for a civil action described in paragraph (1) unless the court finds a designation or an authorization that is the subject of the civil action is arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law. Any injunctive relief shall be narrowly tailored to remedy such defect. (5)RemediesThe United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit may not vacate a designation or authorization unless the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the designation or authorization is unlawful. Relief shall be limited to the covered project that is the subject of the civil action. (f)National defense exemptionThe President may, by executive order, exempt a covered project designated under this section from the application of new emissions limitations or operational requirements promulgated under Federal law after the date of designation, if the President determines and publishes in the Federal Register that— (1)the continued operation of such project is necessary for national defense (as defined in section 702 of this Act); and (2)application of such new requirements would materially impair the ability of the project to provide critical capacity in support of national defense. (g)Compensation for Federal Regulatory Impairment (1)Right to compensationIf, after a project or facility is designated under subsection (b), any change in Federal statute, regulation, agency order, or permit condition imposed by a Federal agency prohibits or materially impairs the operation of a facility described in subsection (a)(2) for a continuous period of not less than 180 days—despite the facility’s compliance with all previously applicable Federal requirements—the United States shall pay monetary compensation to the owner or operator for the resulting loss in value and revenue, as determined under paragraph (2). (2)Determination of compensation amountThe amount of compensation shall equal the diminution in fair market value of the facility and the reasonably foreseeable loss of net revenue directly caused by the Federal action, as determined by an independent appraisal using generally accepted valuation methodologies that exclude unrelated market fluctuations or voluntary retirements. (3)ProcedureA claim shall be filed with the lead agency designated under subsection (d) within 270 days after the impairment period described in paragraph (1) is satisfied. The lead agency shall issue a final written determination within 180 days after a complete claim is filed. Failure to act within that period shall constitute final agency action for purposes of subsection (e). (4)Source of fundsCompensation under this subsection shall be paid from the Defense Production Act Fund established under section 304 of this Act, subject to the availability of appropriations. The head of the lead agency may enter into binding settlement agreements to satisfy liability under this subsection. (5)Limitations and exclusionsNo compensation shall be paid for losses attributable to— (A)gross negligence, willful misconduct, or knowing violation of law by the claimant; (B)voluntary retirement, decommissioning, or mothballing decisions not compelled by the Federal action; (C)non-Federal actions or orders; (D)routine permitting delays or conditions not rising to a material impairment; or (E)costs or losses already recovered from ratepayers or third parties, or that would result in double recovery. The claimant shall have a duty to mitigate losses reasonably. (6)Remedies and sovereign immunityThe United States waives sovereign immunity for monetary relief under this subsection, but not for punitive, exemplary, incidental, or consequential damages, and not for attorneys’ fees except as expressly provided by law. Venue, timing, expedited consideration, and standards of review shall be as set forth in subsection (e). Relief shall be limited to payment of the compensation amount. (7)SubrogationUpon payment, the United States shall be subrogated to the claimant’s rights against any third party with respect to the impairment to the extent of such payment. (h)Title III financial assistance for dispatchable baseload facilities serving designated projects (1)EligibilityA facility described in subsection (a)(2), including a coal-fueled facility meeting subsection (a)(2)(A)–(C) and contractually dedicated under subsection (a)(2)(D), shall be eligible to receive financial assistance under sections 302 and 303 of this title, including loans and loan guarantees, purchase commitments, and other instruments to expand or preserve productive capacity necessary to serve critical artificial intelligence infrastructure. (2)AdministrationThe President may carry out this subsection directly or through delegation to the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Energy, or another appropriate officer. Electric cooperatives and their subsidiaries shall be eligible recipients on the same terms as investor-owned or municipal utilities. (3)TermsSubject to sections 302 and 303, assistance may cover up to 90 percent of reasonable project costs, with a maximum maturity of 30 years or 90 percent of the reasonably expected economic life of the financed assets, whichever is shorter. The President may require collateral, seniority, covenants, or credit support as necessary to protect the interests of the United States. (4)PriorityIn making awards, the President shall give priority to facilities that— (A)directly supply one or more projects designated under subsection (b); (B)can commence commercial operation or repower within 36 months; and (C)materially improve regional reliability margins as determined by the applicable reliability entity. (5)Use of fundsAmounts made available to carry out title III may be used to provide assistance under this subsection, including for pre-construction activities, long-lead equipment, environmental controls, and interconnection or network upgrades essential to serve designated projects. (6)GuidanceNot later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this section, the President (or designee) shall issue guidance establishing application procedures and standard terms for assistance under this subsection. (i)FundingAmounts made available under this title may be used to carry out the consolidated schedule described in subsection (c)(2), including for staff, technical reviews, or contracting necessary to meet the requirements of such consolidated schedule. (j)Access to fundingIn carrying out this section, the President shall ensure that rural electric cooperatives that are eligible for financing, loans, and loan guarantees available through the Rural Utilities Service of the Department of Agriculture can be designated as a covered project, including such cooperatives involved in the generation, transmission, or interconnection of facilities that support critical artificial intelligence infrastructure. . (b)Conforming amendmentSection 702(14) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 4552(14)) is amended by inserting (including critical artificial intelligence infrastructure designated under section 306) after critical infrastructure protection and restoration.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Wade Williams

Kentucky House of Representatives, District 4 · R–KY

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Wade Williams
Kentucky Legislature · HB 398

AN ACT relating to decommissioning costs for electric generating units.

Apr 12, 2026 · Enacted

Rep. Wade Williams · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The law clarifies that utilities may seek recovery of generating-unit decommissioning, removal, salvage, and depreciation costs before retirement authorization. Cost recovery does not itself approve retirement or its timing. The bill became law without the governor’s signature.

04/12/26: became law without Governor's Signature (Acts Ch. 95). Latest official history entry: became law without Governor's Signature (Acts Ch. 95) (2026-04-12). Historical enactment is distinct from governor approval, implementation, later amendments and current enforceability.

Why this record is included

Coal share is the portion of Kentucky in-state electricity net generation supplied by coal. Coal-fired plants and alternative generating resources concern this mix; in-state generation differs from electricity consumed in the state. Procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from operating plants or measured output. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kentucky evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

(6) (a) Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, this section shall not be construed as limiting the commission's authority to approve a utility's right to record and seek, prior to retirement authorization, the recovery of any electric generating unit's decommissioning, removal and salvage costs, and depreciation expenses through rates over the electric generating unit's estimated depreciable life. (b) Approval to recover any costs or expenses und er this subsection shall not be considered approval of, or support for, retirement or approval of timing of retirement of an electric generating unit in any proceeding considering a retirement application filed pursuant to subsection (1) of this section.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Sen. Danny Carroll

Kentucky Senate, District 2 · R–KY

1 proposal
View proposals from Sen. Danny Carroll
Kentucky Legislature · SB 57

AN ACT relating to nuclear energy development.

Apr 8, 2026 · Enacted

Sen. Danny Carroll · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The law creates the Nuclear Reactor Site Readiness Pilot Program. On the authority’s recommendation, the General Assembly may award up to one third of actual costs of applying for and procuring qualifying federal permits or licenses, capped at $25 million per project. It requires a nuclear-ready community designation, security for repayment, and repayment when specified application or construction deadlines are missed, with certain extensions available. This supports potential nuclear generation; it is not an award of funds or an operating reactor.

04/08/26: signed by Governor (Acts Ch. 56). Latest official history entry: signed by Governor (Acts Ch. 56) (2026-04-08). Historical enactment is distinct from governor approval, implementation, later amendments and current enforceability.

Why this record is included

Coal share is the portion of Kentucky in-state electricity net generation supplied by coal. Coal-fired plants and alternative generating resources concern this mix; in-state generation differs from electricity consumed in the state. Procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from operating plants or measured output. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kentucky evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

SECTION 1. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 164 IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: (1) As used in this section: (a) "Affiliate" means any person, partnership, or corporation that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, a utility; (b) "Authority" means the Kentucky Nuclear Energy Development Authority established in Section 4 of this Act; (c) "Combined operating license" means a license issued b y the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission pursuant to 10 C.F.R. sec. 52.71 et seq., or other licensing frameworks as may be adopted in federal regulations by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission for advanced nuclear generating reactors, that enables its holder to construct and operate a nuclear power plant at a specific site; (d) "Construction permit" means a permit issued by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission pursuant to 10 C.F.R. pt. 50 that enables its holder to construct a nuclear power plant at a specific site; (e) "Early site permit" means a permit issued by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission pursuant to 10 C.F.R. sec. 52.12 et seq. that enables its holder to secure federal site approval for a nuclear power plant site prior to seeking an operating reactor license from the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission; (f) "Eligible applicant" means any utility or any affiliate of a utility and any current or prospective customer of a utility that is acting in partnership or collaboration with the utility or the affiliate; (g) "Generation III Plus" means the generation of nuclear reactor design following Generation III that incorporates passive and other safety measures and design improvements not included in pre vious nuclear reactor designs; (h) "Generation IV" means the nuclear reactor designs identified and selected by the Generation IV International Forum as follows: 1. Sodium-cooled fast reactors; 2. Gas-cooled fast reactors; 3. Lead-cooled fast reactors; 4. Molten salt reactors; 5. Supercritical water-cooled reactors; and 6. Very high temperature reactors; (i) "Nuclear energy generating facility" means a facility containing a nuclear reactor of Generation III Plus, Generation IV, or later design that produces electricity, at least some of which is sold to the public; and (j) "Utility" means a person, firm, corporation, association, cooperative corporation, federally owned electric utility corporation, or municipal corporation who owns, controls, operat es, or manages any facility used or to be used for or in connection with the generation, production, transmission, or distribution of electricity to or for the public for compensation. (2) (a) The authority shall create and implement the Nuclear Reactor Si te Readiness Pilot Program to facilitate the application for and procurement of early site permits, construction permits, or combined ACTS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2 operating licenses from the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the siting of new nuclear energy generating facilities in the Commonwealth. (b) Upon recommendation of the authority, the General Assembly may award eligible applicants grant funding of up to one -third (1/3) of the actual costs incurred in applying for and procuring an early site permit, construction permit, or combined operating license, not to exceed twenty -five million dollars ($25,000,000) per project. (c) The authority shall: 1. Create grant applications; 2. Establish grant applicant eligibility requirements; 3. Establish objective scoring criteria to evaluate grant applications; 4. Review any partnership agreement between eligible applicants for validity and completeness and to ensure that the agreement provides for the surety bonding or similar security requirements required under subsection (4 ) of this section and repayment responsibilities for all partners in the event that forfeiture and repayment of grant funding is required under subsection (5) of this section; and 5. Make determinations on applicant eligibility and evaluate and score each eligible applicant's grant application, in consultation with the Energy and Environment Cabinet's Office of Energy Policy and the Cabinet for Economic Development, according to the following criteria: a. The location, suitability, and previous use of the s ite for which the early site permit, construction permit, or combined operating license is sought; b. The economic condition of the region where the new nuclear energy generating facility would be located; c. The economic impact that the siting of a new nu clear energy generating facility would have in the region; d. Whether, in relation to other pending or past grant applications or awards under this section, the proposed site would be located in a geographically diverse region of the Commonwealth; e. The amount of additional investment being made in the proposed project by the eligible applicant or applicants or other sources; and f. Any other criteria the authority deems appropriate to evaluate. (d) Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, any information, data, or records provided as part of an application for grant funding under this section shall be confidential and exempt from disclosure under the requirements of KRS 61.870 to 61.884. (3) (a) To be eligible to apply for grant funding under this section, eligible applicants must demonstrate that: 1. The community where the proposed site of the new nuclear energy generating facility would be located has applied for a nuclear-ready community designation under KRS 164.2804; and 2. There would be material benefits, including but not limited to the provision of electric utility service, job creation, and return on investment to the ratepayers and the impacted community to be served by the proposed new nuclear energy generating facility. (b) To be e ligible to be awarded grant funding under this section, eligible applicants must demonstrate that the community where the proposed site of the new nuclear energy generating facility would be located has received a nuclear-ready community designation under KRS 164.2804. (4) In exchange for any grant funding authorized by the General Assembly under this section, the utility or the affiliate and any partners it may have shall procure a surety bond or other similar security acceptable to the authority in the am ount of the grant funding to be awarded. The surety bond or similar security shall bind the principal or principals and the surety to the Commonwealth to repay all grant moneys forfeited pursuant to subsection (5) of this section. The surety bond or other similar security shall be continuous and remain in effect until the completion of the construction of the nuclear energy generating facility for which the permit or license was issued or upon the repayment of all forfeited grant funds pursuant to subsectio n (5) of this section. Any cancellation of the bond or similar security shall not occur until thirty (30) days written notice is provided by the provider of the surety bond or other similar security to the authority. (5) A grant funding recipient and all o f its partners shall forfeit and repay all grant funding awarded under this section within sixty (60) days of: (a) If it has not already done so, failing to apply to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an early site permit within one (1) year of receiving any grant funding under this section; (b) Failing to apply to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a construction permit or combined operating license for a nuclear energy generating facility, or for a necessary license iss ued under other licensing frameworks that may be adopted in federal regulations by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission for advanced nuclear generating reactors, for which an early site permit was awarded within five (5) years of obtaining the e arly site permit. The authority may approve extensions of the deadline established by this paragraph in one (1) year increments for good cause shown; (c) Failing to commence construction of the nuclear energy generating facility for which all necessary permits or licenses have been awarded by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission within ten (10) years of obtaining all necessary permits or licenses. The authority may approve extensions of the deadline established by this paragraph in one (1) year increments for good cause shown; or (d) The transferring of the entirety of a utility's or affiliate's interest in the early site permit, the construction permit, or the combined operating license to an entity other than another utility prior to the commenc ement of construction of the nuclear energy generating facility for which a permit or license was awarded, unless the authority finds that the transfer is in the best interest of the Commonwealth.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Sen. Rand Paul

U.S. Senate, Kentucky · R–KY

1 proposal
View proposals from Sen. Rand Paul
U.S. Congress · Kentucky delegation · S 1841

Fuel Choice and Deregulation Act of 2025

May 21, 2025 · In Congress

Sen. Rand Paul · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The Fuel Choice and Deregulation Act would prohibit EPA restrictions on defined biomass fuels under the Clean Air Act. This concerns fuel supply and composition, including potential gasoline alternatives or blends; it does not set a pump price or establish a price effect.

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 is the EIA Midwest regional regular-gasoline price, including taxes, covering Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee and Wisconsin. Kentucky policy concerns only one state in that regional measure; this is not a Kentucky statewide average. Fuel taxes, fees, supply and retail pricing rules concern components of pump prices; they do not determine the regional average. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kentucky evidence context: Midwest regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

(b) Biomass fuels Section 211 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545) is amended by adding at the end the following: (w) Biomass fuels Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the Administrator may not prohibit or control biomass fuel (as defined in section 203 of the Biomass Energy and Alcohol Fuels Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 8802)) under this Act. .
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Sen. Robby Mills

Kentucky Senate, District 4 · R–KY

1 proposal
View proposals from Sen. Robby Mills
Kentucky Legislature · SB 100

AN ACT relating to the Energy Planning and Inventory Commission and declaring an emergency.

Apr 14, 2026 · Enacted

Sen. Robby Mills · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The law permits the Energy Planning and Inventory Commission’s executive director to submit a separate report on proposed power-plant retirements and requires the Public Service Commission to consider the submitted findings. This concerns review of generation retirements, not an order to close or operate a particular coal plant.

04/14/26: delivered to Secretary of State (Acts Ch. 157). Latest official history entry: delivered to Secretary of State (Acts Ch. 157) (2026-04-14). Historical enactment is distinct from governor approval, implementation, later amendments and current enforceability.

Why this record is included

Coal share is the portion of Kentucky in-state electricity net generation supplied by coal. Coal-fired plants and alternative generating resources concern this mix; in-state generation differs from electricity consumed in the state. Procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from operating plants or measured output. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Kentucky evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

2. The executive committee shall provide the executive director with all information, records, and data considered in the proposal to retire and shall include the executive director in all associated deliberations. Within one hundred eighty (180) days of the utility filing notice of the proposed activity, the executive director may submit his or her own written report with findings and recommendations, a written statement of position, or dissenting findings and recommendations to the Public Service Commission and the utility. (h) The executive committee's written report, the executive director's written report or position statement, and any dissenting statements provided to the Public Service Commission and the utility , shall be included in any retirement application made to the Public Service Commission under KRS 278.264, and the Public Service Commissio n shall not approve any retirement application without considering all information received from the executive committee , the executive director, or any member of the executive committee. Any order of the Public Service Commission in a proceeding under KRS 278.264 shall contain specific written findings of fact or conclusions of law addressing whether the executive committee's and the executive director's findings and recommendations , position statements, and dissenting statements were considered by the Public Service Commission. ACTS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 8 (i) No retirement application to the Public Service Commission under KRS 278.264 shall be deemed administratively complete unless it includes the executive committee's and the executive director's report, position statemen ts, and dissenting statements submitted pursuant to this section or evidence that more than one hundred eighty (180) days have passed since notice was submitted to the commission as required in paragraph (b) of this subsection and no executive committee or executive director report, position statement, or dissenting statement has been provided to the Public Service Commission or the utility.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Kentucky 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 Kentucky statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 5, 2026.