Montana · individual fact

Montana energy and electricity

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

Residential electricity price12.66¢/kWh2024 · #40 of 50 · highest first
Regular gasoline price$4.234/gal2026-08 · #9 of 48* · highest first
Average monthly residential electricity bill$107.912024 · #46 of 50 · highest first

Montana over time

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

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Montana 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 Montana · source units
MontanaPublished 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: 12.66¢/kWh9.88¢/kWh13.68¢/kWh17.48¢/kWhMontana, 2015: 10.88¢/kWhMontana, 2016: 10.94¢/kWhMontana, 2017: 10.95¢/kWhMontana, 2018: 10.96¢/kWhMontana, 2019: 11.13¢/kWhMontana, 2020: 11.24¢/kWhMontana, 2021: 11.22¢/kWhMontana, 2022: 11.33¢/kWhMontana, 2023: 12.54¢/kWhMontana, 2024: 12.66¢/kWh201520192024
✦ Major events & context · 49National 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 reviewMontana · DOE selects NorthWestern Energy grid-upgrade application · 2026-09-24NorthWestern Energy · SPARK selection● Montana Legislature · 1● U.S. Congress · Montana delegation · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.◆ Governor · 1■ Montana agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2005-08-012026-09-30

2 of 2 reviewed Montana actions match · 2 date markers shown. 49 major events shown separately.

Montana · 2024: 12.66¢/kWh · Rank #40 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 Montana, 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
Montana Residential electricity price · source units
PeriodMontanaRankU.S. benchmark
202412.66¢/kWh#40 of 5016.48¢/kWh
202312.54¢/kWh#39 of 50Not available
202211.33¢/kWh#44 of 50Not available
202111.22¢/kWh#41 of 50Not available
202011.24¢/kWh#36 of 50Not available
201911.13¢/kWh#39 of 50Not available
201810.96¢/kWh#40 of 50Not available
201710.95¢/kWh#39 of 50Not available
201610.94¢/kWh#39 of 50Not available
201510.88¢/kWh#38 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.

Montana · state comparison

Household energy prices

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

Montana · 202412.66¢/kWh
Montana rank#40among 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 Montana, 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.

Montana
Residential electricity price history in Montana10.04¢/kWh13.68¢/kWh17.32¢/kWh20152024
2024 · Montana: 12.66¢/kWh · Rank #40 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 16.48¢/kWh · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Montana Residential electricity price history
PeriodMontanaCompare
201510.88¢/kWh
201610.94¢/kWh
201710.95¢/kWh
201810.96¢/kWh
201911.13¢/kWh
202011.24¢/kWh
202111.22¢/kWh
202211.33¢/kWh
202312.54¢/kWh
202412.66¢/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. Montana 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. Montana 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.

Montana · 12.66¢/kWh2024 · Rank #40 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 Montana 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—
#39Kentucky12.79¢/kWh—
#40Montana · your comparison12.66¢/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.

Average retail electricity price

10.83¢/kWh2024

Average retail electricity revenue per kilowatthour across customer sectors in the EIA state profile.

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

Electric system

Primary generation source
Coal
In-state net generation
26.9 million MWh
Carbon dioxide emissions
11.839 million metric tons
Method and limitations

U.S. Energy Information Administration Forms EIA-860, EIA-861, and EIA-923.

  • The statewide average is not every customer's bill or current utility rate.
  • In-state generation differs from power consumed because electricity crosses state lines.

Rocky Mountain regular gasoline price

$4.31/galWeek of September 7, 2026

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 Montana. 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 Montana statewide weekly gasoline-price series. This Rocky Mountain regional estimate should not be read as Montana’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 Montana 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.
Montana · state comparison

What are households paying for electricity?

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

Montana · 2024$107.91
Montana rank#46among 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.

Montana
Average monthly residential electricity bill history in Montana$67.64$109.82$151.9920102024
2024 · Montana: $107.91 · Rank #46 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $142.26 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Montana Average monthly residential electricity bill history
PeriodMontanaCompare
2010$77.37
2011$84.97
2012$84.88
2013$88.85
2014$86.93
2015$89.03
2016$88.95
2017$94.75
2018$93.19
2019$95.43
2020$96.49
2021$97.84
2022$102.94
2023$109.5
2024$107.91

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. Montana 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. Montana 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.

Montana · $107.912024 · Rank #46 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 Montana 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$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 · your comparison$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.

Montana · state comparison

What generates Montana electricity?

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

Montana · 202427 TWh
Montana rank#40among 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 Montana, 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.

Montana
Total electricity generation history in Montana22.5 TWh26.3 TWh30.2 TWh20152024
2024 · Montana: 27 TWh · Rank #40 of 50, highest first · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Montana Total electricity generation history
PeriodMontanaCompare
201529.3 TWh
201627.8 TWh
201728.2 TWh
201828.2 TWh
201927.8 TWh
202023.4 TWh
202124.9 TWh
202227.1 TWh
202326.9 TWh
202427 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. Montana 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. Montana 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.

Montana · 27 TWh2024 · Rank #40 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 Montana 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—
#23Kentucky67.1 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—
#40Montana · your comparison27 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.

Montana · 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.

Montana · 2024341.7 min/year
Montana rank#23among 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.

Montana
Outage minutes per customer · all events history in Montana31.6 min/year388.3 min/year744.9 min/year20232024
2024 · Montana: 341.7 min/year · Rank #23 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 662.6 min/year · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Montana Outage minutes per customer · all events history
PeriodMontanaCompare
2023113.9 min/year
2024341.7 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. Montana 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. Montana 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.

Montana · 341.7 min/year2024 · 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 Montana 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—
#16Kentucky537.7 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—
#23Montana · your comparison341.7 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.

Montana · state comparison

Who uses energy?

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

Montana · 202473.9 trillion Btu
Montana rank#42among 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. Montana 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. Montana 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.

Montana · 73.9 trillion Btu2024 · Rank #42 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 Montana 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—
#24Kentucky319 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—
#42Montana · your comparison73.9 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.

Montana · state comparison

Energy-related carbon emissions

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

Montana · 202427.16 Mt CO₂
Montana rank#42among 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. Montana 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. Montana 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.

Montana · 27.16 Mt CO₂2024 · Rank #42 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 Montana 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—
#13Kentucky106.87 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—
#42Montana · your comparison27.16 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 Montana 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.

13 statements from 5 candidates

2026 Montana Public Service Commissioner — District 1 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 2 statements

Jeff Pattison

2 statements

Republican · Public Service Commissioner District 1 · MT

Energy & electricity

Montana’s energy mix must stay balanced with clean coal, natural gas, hydro, renewables, and new technology working together to keep energy reliable and affordable.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy, environment, public lands, and utilities

Candidate campaign source

Montana’s energy mix must stay balanced with clean coal, natural gas, hydro, renewables, and new technology working together to keep energy reliable and affordable.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Jeff Pattison — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
View 1 more statement from Jeff Pattison
Energy & electricity

Pattison supports modernizing transmission lines, expanding natural gas access, and improving broadband reliability so no community is left behind during outages.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy, environment, public lands, and utilities

Candidate campaign source

Pattison supports modernizing transmission lines, expanding natural gas access, and improving broadband reliability so no community is left behind during outages.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Jeff Pattison — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗

2026 Montana Public Service Commissioner — District 5 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Kevin Hamm

1 statement

Democratic · Public Service Commissioner District 5 · MT

Energy & electricity

We in Montana have been on the cutting edge of electrical generation before, and we can be there again. Wind and solar are key, and that requires that we build storage, which we know how to do, too. The PSC has the power to guide our utilities to invest in smart, clean, reliable energy sources that …

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy, environment, public lands, and utilities

Candidate campaign source

We in Montana have been on the cutting edge of electrical generation before, and we can be there again. Wind and solar are key, and that requires that we build storage, which we know how to do, too. The PSC has the power to guide our utilities to invest in smart, clean, reliable energy sources that don’t require us to give up our fresh air, beautiful waterways, or amazing public lands. Oh, and they reduce costs for consumers, too!

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026

Kevin Hamm — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Montana U.S. House — District 2 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 5 statements

Independent · U.S. House District 2 · MT

Energy & electricity

Promote ‘all of the above’ energy policies supporting oil/gas/coal industries and energy production in Montana, for both domestic use and international export

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy, environment, public lands, and utilities

Candidate campaign source

Promote ‘all of the above’ energy policies supporting oil/gas/coal industries and energy production in Montana, for both domestic use and international export

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael D. Eisenhauer — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗
View 4 more statements from Michael D. Eisenhauer
Energy & electricity

No clean-energy loopholes. Utilities cannot use data-center projects to weaken or sidestep other clean energy laws or regulations.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy, environment, public lands, and utilities

Candidate campaign source

No clean-energy loopholes. Utilities cannot use data-center projects to weaken or sidestep other clean energy laws or regulations.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael D. Eisenhauer — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗
Energy & electricity

Promote a bipartisan effort to review current EU regulations and to develop a comprehensive plan for effective monitoring, with a focus on ensuring the ethical use of AI, safeguarding human rights and safety, mitigating social and economic impact, and protecting national security (i.e.: exposures to…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy, environment, public lands, and utilities

Candidate campaign source

Promote a bipartisan effort to review current EU regulations and to develop a comprehensive plan for effective monitoring, with a focus on ensuring the ethical use of AI, safeguarding human rights and safety, mitigating social and economic impact, and protecting national security (i.e.: exposures to the national power grid).

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael D. Eisenhauer — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗
Energy & electricity

2. Power Consumption and Generation. This means that any proposed data center must provide for its’ own power needs, whether by novel-purchase or by new power generation. But it’s not just that – they must account for, and provide for, at least 200-300% of their expected needs to account for program…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy, environment, public lands, and utilities

Candidate campaign source

2. Power Consumption and Generation. This means that any proposed data center must provide for its’ own power needs, whether by novel-purchase or by new power generation. But it’s not just that – they must account for, and provide for, at least 200-300% of their expected needs to account for programmed growth. It is only in this way, that the local and regional consumer can be protected from higher electricity rates – nobody wants to see that happen. These assurances must be durable, and long-standing into the future for at least 10 years (with a potential guarantee-bond requirement for grid-reliability?).

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael D. Eisenhauer — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗
Energy & electricity

I support an “all of the above” energy policy that supports a wide range of domestic energy sources, including both non-renewable sources like oil, natural gas, and coal, and renewable sources such as solar, wind, hydropower and geothermal – and nuclear. The economics of energy production should be …

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy, environment, public lands, and utilities

Candidate campaign source

I support an “all of the above” energy policy that supports a wide range of domestic energy sources, including both non-renewable sources like oil, natural gas, and coal, and renewable sources such as solar, wind, hydropower and geothermal – and nuclear. The economics of energy production should be trusted to determine when each may be economically viable, or which is best used in any particular region or situation.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael D. Eisenhauer — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 2
How statements are selected

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

Montana incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

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

1 matching sponsorship or proposal · 1 Montana incumbent. These filters apply only to this section.

Rep. Courtenay Sprunger

Montana House of Representatives, District 7 · R–MT

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Courtenay Sprunger
Montana Legislature · HB 351

AN ACT CLARIFYING THE POINT OF TAXATION FOR GASOLINE AND SPECIAL FUELS TAXES TO THE FIRST LICENSED DISTRIBUTOR WHO OWNS THE GASOLINE OR SPECIAL FUEL AS IT IS WITHDRAWN FROM A TERMINAL OR REFINERY IN THIS STATE OR IMPORTED INTO THIS STATE; REVISING DEFINITIONS; AMENDING SECTIONS 15-70-401, 15-70-402, 15-70-403, 15-70-404, AND 15-70-441, MCA; AND PROVIDING A DELAYED EFFECTIVE DATE

May 5, 2025 · Enacted · Chapter 445

Rep. Courtenay Sprunger · Sponsored / Rep. Ed Byrne · Co-sponsored / Rep. Frank Smith · Co-sponsored / Sen. Denley Loge · Co-sponsored / Sen. Mike Yakawich · Co-sponsored / Rep. Steve Fitzpatrick · Co-sponsored / Rep. Denise Baum · Co-sponsored / Rep. Bob Carter · Co-sponsored / Rep. Julie Darling · Co-sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 351 clarifies who is treated as distributing fuel for Montana fuel-tax purposes. For withdrawal from an in-state refinery or pipeline terminal, it generally identifies the owner immediately before withdrawal; if shipped or delivered to a licensed distributor, it identifies the first licensed distributor taking possession as shown by the bill of lading. Imports are generally attributed to the owner when unloaded after arrival and coming to rest in Montana, excluding refinery or pipeline-terminal storage. If that owner is unlicensed and a licensed distributor ships or delivers the fuel, the licensed distributor is responsible. Fuel may not be exchanged tax-free between licensed distributors more than once. The law specifies July 1, 2026 and retains the existing gasoline tax rate. This concerns collection responsibility in one state within the Rocky Mountain price region, not a rate increase, tax holiday or demonstrated consumer savings.

The legislative docket records “Signed by Governor” and chapter 445. The displayed date is the docket timestamp, not an independently verified original execution date. Enactment does not prove implementation or current enforceability.

Why this record is included

The EIA fact is a five-state Rocky Mountain regional proxy covering Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Wyoming, not a Montana-only price. Rules identifying the distributor liable for gasoline tax concern a price component in one of those states. They do not establish a tax-rate change or consumer savings. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.

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

(4) (a) Except as provided in subsection (4)(b), when gasoline, special fuel, or aviation fuel is withdrawn from a refinery or pipeline terminal in this state, the gasoline, special fuel, or aviation fuel is considered to be distributed by the distributor who is the owner of the gasoline, special fuel, or aviation fuel prior to the time of withdrawal. (b) If gasoline, special fuel, or aviation fuel is withdrawn for shipment or delivery to a licensed distributor, it is considered to be distributed by the first licensed distributor to take possession of the gasoline, special fuel, or aviation fuel as shown by the bill of lading issued by the terminal or refinery. (5) Imported gasoline, special fuel, or aviation fuel, except for gasoline, special fuel, or aviation fuel placed in storage at a refinery or pipeline terminal, is considered to be distributed after it arrives and is brought to rest in this state by the person who is the owner of the gasoline, special fuel, or aviation fuel at the time the gasoline, special fuel, or aviation fuel is unloaded from its shipping vessel. If the owner is not licensed as a Montana distributor and if the gasoline, special fuel, or aviation fuel is shipped or delivered in this state by a person who is licensed as a distributor, then the gasoline, special fuel, or aviation fuel is considered to be distributed by the licensed distributor. (6) For the purposes of the tax provided for in this section, gasoline, special fuel, and aviation fuel may not be exchanged tax-free between licensed distributors more than one time.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Montana 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 Montana statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.