Electricity prices and bills, generation and fuel mix, and gasoline costs.
Residential electricity price23.4¢/kWh2024 · #9 of 50 · highest first
Regular gasoline price$4.023/gal2026-08 · #18 of 48* · highest first
Average monthly residential electricity bill$144.872024 · #18 of 50 · highest first
New Hampshire over time
Explore New Hampshire readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. New Hampshire officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a New Hampshire effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a New Hampshire 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 New Hampshire · source units
New HampshirePublished 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.
3 of 3 reviewed New Hampshire actions match · 3 date markers shown. 49 major events shown separately.
New Hampshire · 2024: 23.4¢/kWh · Rank #9 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 New Hampshire, 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
New Hampshire Residential electricity price · source units
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
New Hampshire · state comparison
Household energy prices
Unit prices are separate from bills: usage, weather, and household needs also determine spending.
New Hampshire · 202423.4¢/kWh
New Hampshire rank#9among 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 New Hampshire, 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.
New Hampshire
2024 · New Hampshire: 23.4¢/kWh · Rank #9 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 16.48¢/kWh · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
New Hampshire Residential electricity price history
Period
New Hampshire
Compare
2015
18.5¢/kWh
2016
18.38¢/kWh
2017
19.2¢/kWh
2018
19.69¢/kWh
2019
20.05¢/kWh
2020
19.04¢/kWh
2021
19.85¢/kWh
2022
25.46¢/kWh
2023
28.15¢/kWh
2024
23.4¢/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. New Hampshire 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. New Hampshire 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.
New Hampshire · 23.4¢/kWh2024 · Rank #9 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 New Hampshire with every state · 50 ranked
Residential electricity price · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
42.86¢/kWh
—
#2
California
31.97¢/kWh
—
#3
Massachusetts
29.35¢/kWh
—
#4
Connecticut
28.75¢/kWh
—
#5
Rhode Island
28.65¢/kWh
—
#6
Alaska
24.82¢/kWh
—
#7
New York
24.43¢/kWh
—
#8
Maine
24.29¢/kWh
—
#9
New Hampshire · your comparison
23.4¢/kWh
—
#10
Vermont
21.9¢/kWh
—
#11
New Jersey
19.34¢/kWh
—
#12
Michigan
19.3¢/kWh
—
#13
Maryland
17.86¢/kWh
—
#14
Pennsylvania
17.77¢/kWh
—
#15
Wisconsin
17.18¢/kWh
—
#16
Delaware
16.57¢/kWh
—
#17
Ohio
15.99¢/kWh
—
#18
Illinois
15.87¢/kWh
—
#19
Minnesota
15.45¢/kWh
—
#20
Alabama
15.18¢/kWh
—
#21
West Virginia
15.07¢/kWh
—
#22
Nevada
15¢/kWh
—
#23
Texas
14.94¢/kWh
—
#24
Colorado
14.92¢/kWh
—
#25
Arizona
14.91¢/kWh
—
#26
Indiana
14.77¢/kWh
—
#27
Oregon
14.7¢/kWh
—
#28
Virginia
14.41¢/kWh
—
#29
South Carolina
14.23¢/kWh
—
#30
New Mexico
14.2¢/kWh
—
#31
Kansas
14.15¢/kWh
—
#32
Florida
14.14¢/kWh
—
#33
North Carolina
14.13¢/kWh
—
#34
Georgia
14.08¢/kWh
—
#35
Iowa
13.4¢/kWh
—
#36
Mississippi
13.39¢/kWh
—
#37
Missouri
12.91¢/kWh
—
#38
South Dakota
12.86¢/kWh
—
#39
Kentucky
12.79¢/kWh
—
#40
Montana
12.66¢/kWh
—
#41
Wyoming
12.47¢/kWh
—
#42
Tennessee
12.42¢/kWh
—
#43
Arkansas
12.32¢/kWh
—
#44
Oklahoma
12.24¢/kWh
—
#45
Utah
12.22¢/kWh
—
#46
Washington
11.9¢/kWh
—
#47
Louisiana
11.73¢/kWh
—
#48
Nebraska
11.53¢/kWh
—
#49
Idaho
11.52¢/kWh
—
#50
North Dakota
11.51¢/kWh
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Estimated average retail price of regular-grade gasoline across all formulations in EIA's New England region, including taxes. The region contains Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
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
$4.096/gal
Weekly change
+9.3¢
One year earlier
$3.110/gal
Change from one year earlier
+107.9¢
Method and limitations
FactVote uses EIA’s New England series, the smallest current EIA retail region that includes New Hampshire. 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 New Hampshire statewide weekly gasoline-price series. This New England regional estimate should not be read as New Hampshire’s statewide average.
The regional average combines Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont, and does not represent the price at every station or in every New Hampshire community.
Prices are nominal and not adjusted for inflation or seasonal patterns. Weekly estimates can be revised and can differ from monthly averages.
Price changes alone do not establish the effect of any bill, official, or government action.
Compare the bill, electricity used, and price per unit for the same year.
New Hampshire · 2024$144.87
New Hampshire rank#18among 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.
New Hampshire
2024 · New Hampshire: $144.87 · Rank #18 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $142.26 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
New Hampshire Average monthly residential electricity bill history
Period
New Hampshire
Compare
2010
$102.11
2011
$102.28
2012
$98.8
2013
$102.66
2014
$108.57
2015
$114.9
2016
$110.95
2017
$114.95
2018
$122.27
2019
$120.04
2020
$120.01
2021
$125.24
2022
$158.67
2023
$168.79
2024
$144.87
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. New Hampshire 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. New Hampshire 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.
New Hampshire · $144.872024 · Rank #18 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 New Hampshire with every state · 50 ranked
Average monthly residential electricity bill · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
$212.12
—
#2
Connecticut
$199.66
—
#3
Alabama
$173.5
—
#4
Massachusetts
$167.2
—
#5
Maryland
$165.87
—
#6
Texas
$163.72
—
#7
Rhode Island
$162.4
—
#8
California
$160.86
—
#9
Arizona
$160.24
—
#10
Florida
$156.09
—
#11
Mississippi
$154.83
—
#12
West Virginia
$154.76
—
#13
Georgia
$151.25
—
#14
Delaware
$150.87
—
#15
South Carolina
$149.51
—
#16
Virginia
$148.77
—
#17
Pennsylvania
$145.17
—
#18
New Hampshire · your comparison
$144.87
—
#19
Alaska
$143.54
—
#20
North Carolina
$143.5
—
#21
Tennessee
$143.32
—
#22
Louisiana
$140.96
—
#23
New York
$139.53
—
#24
Nevada
$139.39
—
#25
Ohio
$135.16
—
#26
Kentucky
$133.81
—
#27
Maine
$133.6
—
#28
Indiana
$133.06
—
#29
Oklahoma
$132.05
—
#30
Oregon
$129.62
—
#31
Missouri
$129.18
—
#32
Arkansas
$129.13
—
#33
New Jersey
$128.13
—
#34
South Dakota
$127.81
—
#35
Vermont
$125.66
—
#36
Kansas
$123.9
—
#37
Michigan
$119.31
—
#38
North Dakota
$118.38
—
#39
Washington
$113.68
—
#40
Iowa
$111.54
—
#41
Wisconsin
$110.87
—
#42
Nebraska
$110.28
—
#43
Minnesota
$110.06
—
#44
Illinois
$109.99
—
#45
Idaho
$108.73
—
#46
Montana
$107.91
—
#47
Wyoming
$107.65
—
#48
Colorado
$100.57
—
#49
Utah
$94.57
—
#50
New Mexico
$92.88
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare total generation and each fuel’s share using the same EIA year. A fuel share is not a performance score.
New Hampshire · 202417.3 TWh
New Hampshire rank#44among 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 New Hampshire, 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.
New Hampshire
2024 · New Hampshire: 17.3 TWh · Rank #44 of 50, highest first · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
New Hampshire Total electricity generation history
Period
New Hampshire
Compare
2015
20 TWh
2016
19.3 TWh
2017
17.4 TWh
2018
17.1 TWh
2019
18 TWh
2020
16.4 TWh
2021
17.2 TWh
2022
18.8 TWh
2023
16.8 TWh
2024
17.3 TWh
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. New Hampshire 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. New Hampshire 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.
New Hampshire · 17.3 TWh2024 · Rank #44 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 New Hampshire with every state · 50 ranked
Total electricity generation · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
571.5 TWh
—
#2
Florida
270.7 TWh
—
#3
California
245.9 TWh
—
#4
Pennsylvania
242.5 TWh
—
#5
Illinois
186.7 TWh
—
#6
Ohio
143.3 TWh
—
#7
Alabama
142.9 TWh
—
#8
Georgia
140.4 TWh
—
#9
North Carolina
135.9 TWh
—
#10
New York
133.5 TWh
—
#11
Michigan
124.5 TWh
—
#12
Arizona
121.5 TWh
—
#13
Virginia
103.7 TWh
—
#14
Washington
103 TWh
—
#15
South Carolina
101.1 TWh
—
#16
Louisiana
100 TWh
—
#17
Indiana
97.4 TWh
—
#18
Oklahoma
94.3 TWh
—
#19
Mississippi
77.4 TWh
—
#20
Tennessee
76.3 TWh
—
#21
Iowa
70.9 TWh
—
#22
Missouri
67.6 TWh
—
#23
Kentucky
67.1 TWh
—
#24
Wisconsin
65.6 TWh
—
#25
Oregon
65.3 TWh
—
#26
New Jersey
63.6 TWh
—
#27
Arkansas
62.1 TWh
—
#28
Colorado
60.8 TWh
—
#29
Minnesota
59 TWh
—
#30
Kansas
57.9 TWh
—
#31
West Virginia
50.7 TWh
—
#32
Nevada
47.6 TWh
—
#33
Connecticut
46.2 TWh
—
#34
North Dakota
42.6 TWh
—
#35
Wyoming
40.7 TWh
—
#36
New Mexico
40.5 TWh
—
#37
Nebraska
37.3 TWh
—
#38
Maryland
36.9 TWh
—
#39
Utah
36.1 TWh
—
#40
Montana
27 TWh
—
#41
Massachusetts
25 TWh
—
#42
South Dakota
20.9 TWh
—
#43
Idaho
20.3 TWh
—
#44
New Hampshire · your comparison
17.3 TWh
—
#45
Maine
15.7 TWh
—
#46
Hawaii
10.7 TWh
—
#47
Rhode Island
10.1 TWh
—
#48
Alaska
6.7 TWh
—
#49
Delaware
5 TWh
—
#50
Vermont
2.5 TWh
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Outage comparisons use the same reporting standard. Major-event outages and ordinary-day outages use different EIA reporting definitions.
New Hampshire · 2024735.5 min/year
New Hampshire rank#10among 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.
New Hampshire
2024 · New Hampshire: 735.5 min/year · Rank #10 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 662.6 min/year · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
New Hampshire Outage minutes per customer · all events history
Period
New Hampshire
Compare
2023
590.6 min/year
2024
735.5 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. New Hampshire 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. New Hampshire 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.
New Hampshire · 735.5 min/year2024 · Rank #10 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 New Hampshire with every state · 50 ranked
Outage minutes per customer · all events · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
South Carolina
3,155 min/year
—
#2
Maine
1,748.6 min/year
—
#3
Texas
1,614.3 min/year
—
#4
North Carolina
1,518.1 min/year
—
#5
Florida
1,487.6 min/year
—
#6
Georgia
1,208.1 min/year
—
#7
West Virginia
1,165.5 min/year
—
#8
Virginia
962.1 min/year
—
#9
Vermont
895.8 min/year
—
#10
New Hampshire · your comparison
735.5 min/year
—
#11
Nebraska
697.8 min/year
—
#12
Washington
643.5 min/year
—
#13
Louisiana
630.6 min/year
—
#14
Mississippi
607.3 min/year
—
#15
Oregon
579.3 min/year
—
#16
Kentucky
537.7 min/year
—
#17
Arkansas
527.8 min/year
—
#18
Ohio
511 min/year
—
#19
Michigan
481.7 min/year
—
#20
New York
477.3 min/year
—
#21
Hawaii
382.6 min/year
—
#22
Pennsylvania
353.1 min/year
—
#23
Montana
341.7 min/year
—
#24
Alaska
323.2 min/year
—
#25
Indiana
310 min/year
—
#26
Wisconsin
296.8 min/year
—
#27
Kansas
289.8 min/year
—
#28
Tennessee
289.3 min/year
—
#29
California
285 min/year
—
#30
New Mexico
272.6 min/year
—
#31
Colorado
257 min/year
—
#32
Minnesota
222.4 min/year
—
#33
Oklahoma
220.7 min/year
—
#34
Missouri
212.6 min/year
—
#35
Idaho
204.4 min/year
—
#36
Iowa
200.3 min/year
—
#37
Alabama
197.7 min/year
—
#38
New Jersey
173.3 min/year
—
#39
Nevada
158.9 min/year
—
#40
Illinois
158 min/year
—
#41
Connecticut
152.8 min/year
—
#42
Wyoming
137.8 min/year
—
#43
Maryland
118.1 min/year
—
#44
Delaware
117.9 min/year
—
#45
Utah
115.4 min/year
—
#46
Rhode Island
104.3 min/year
—
#47
Massachusetts
103.7 min/year
—
#48
North Dakota
102.7 min/year
—
#49
South Dakota
85.6 min/year
—
#50
Arizona
83.6 min/year
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Total energy consumption includes more than electricity. EIA assigns electricity-related losses to consuming end-use sectors.
New Hampshire · 202491.8 trillion Btu
New Hampshire rank#40among 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. New Hampshire 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. New Hampshire 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.
New Hampshire · 91.8 trillion Btu2024 · 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 New Hampshire with every state · 50 ranked
Residential energy consumption · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
1,514 trillion Btu
—
#2
Florida
1,183.3 trillion Btu
—
#3
California
1,147.1 trillion Btu
—
#4
New York
968.3 trillion Btu
—
#5
Pennsylvania
819.3 trillion Btu
—
#6
Illinois
817.1 trillion Btu
—
#7
Ohio
767.4 trillion Btu
—
#8
Georgia
717.1 trillion Btu
—
#9
North Carolina
662.2 trillion Btu
—
#10
Michigan
661.4 trillion Btu
—
#11
New Jersey
550.1 trillion Btu
—
#12
Virginia
526 trillion Btu
—
#13
Tennessee
492 trillion Btu
—
#14
Indiana
475.6 trillion Btu
—
#15
Missouri
459 trillion Btu
—
#16
Arizona
413.7 trillion Btu
—
#17
Massachusetts
379 trillion Btu
—
#18
Wisconsin
375.9 trillion Btu
—
#19
South Carolina
370.7 trillion Btu
—
#20
Maryland
357.2 trillion Btu
—
#21
Minnesota
346.2 trillion Btu
—
#22
Alabama
331.6 trillion Btu
—
#23
Washington
330.2 trillion Btu
—
#24
Kentucky
319 trillion Btu
—
#25
Colorado
311.9 trillion Btu
—
#26
Louisiana
282.6 trillion Btu
—
#27
Connecticut
235.3 trillion Btu
—
#28
Oklahoma
231 trillion Btu
—
#29
Arkansas
209.5 trillion Btu
—
#30
Utah
190.7 trillion Btu
—
#31
Mississippi
179.7 trillion Btu
—
#32
Oregon
173.1 trillion Btu
—
#33
Kansas
166.4 trillion Btu
—
#34
Iowa
162 trillion Btu
—
#35
Nevada
153.3 trillion Btu
—
#36
West Virginia
141 trillion Btu
—
#37
Nebraska
128.9 trillion Btu
—
#38
Idaho
111.2 trillion Btu
—
#39
New Mexico
98.1 trillion Btu
—
#40
New Hampshire · your comparison
91.8 trillion Btu
—
#41
Maine
80.5 trillion Btu
—
#42
Montana
73.9 trillion Btu
—
#43
Delaware
62.6 trillion Btu
—
#44
North Dakota
61.3 trillion Btu
—
#45
Rhode Island
61 trillion Btu
—
#46
Alaska
49.1 trillion Btu
—
#47
Wyoming
45.5 trillion Btu
—
#48
South Dakota
44.2 trillion Btu
—
#49
Vermont
32.7 trillion Btu
—
#50
Hawaii
29.5 trillion Btu
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Combustion emissions describe fossil energy use. Production, consumption, emissions, and international trade have different accounting boundaries.
New Hampshire · 202413.6 Mt CO₂
New Hampshire rank#47among 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. New Hampshire 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. New Hampshire 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.
New Hampshire · 13.6 Mt CO₂2024 · Rank #47 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 New Hampshire with every state · 50 ranked
Total energy-related CO₂ emissions · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
679.93 Mt CO₂
—
#2
California
315.98 Mt CO₂
—
#3
Florida
230.85 Mt CO₂
—
#4
Pennsylvania
201.57 Mt CO₂
—
#5
Louisiana
186.89 Mt CO₂
—
#6
Ohio
186.34 Mt CO₂
—
#7
Illinois
163.98 Mt CO₂
—
#8
New York
163.69 Mt CO₂
—
#9
Indiana
152.3 Mt CO₂
—
#10
Michigan
143.11 Mt CO₂
—
#11
Georgia
127.83 Mt CO₂
—
#12
North Carolina
119.07 Mt CO₂
—
#13
Kentucky
106.87 Mt CO₂
—
#14
Alabama
104.32 Mt CO₂
—
#15
Virginia
99.24 Mt CO₂
—
#16
Missouri
98.03 Mt CO₂
—
#17
Tennessee
90.46 Mt CO₂
—
#18
Oklahoma
88.56 Mt CO₂
—
#19
New Jersey
87.84 Mt CO₂
—
#20
Wisconsin
85.12 Mt CO₂
—
#21
Arizona
82.2 Mt CO₂
—
#22
Colorado
79.57 Mt CO₂
—
#23
Minnesota
77.89 Mt CO₂
—
#24
Washington
73.81 Mt CO₂
—
#25
West Virginia
72.28 Mt CO₂
—
#26
South Carolina
70.81 Mt CO₂
—
#27
Iowa
65.23 Mt CO₂
—
#28
Mississippi
64.75 Mt CO₂
—
#29
Arkansas
58.42 Mt CO₂
—
#30
Massachusetts
58.07 Mt CO₂
—
#31
North Dakota
55.15 Mt CO₂
—
#32
Kansas
55.09 Mt CO₂
—
#33
Utah
55.03 Mt CO₂
—
#34
Wyoming
50 Mt CO₂
—
#35
Maryland
48.77 Mt CO₂
—
#36
Alaska
44.01 Mt CO₂
—
#37
Nebraska
43.54 Mt CO₂
—
#38
New Mexico
41.63 Mt CO₂
—
#39
Nevada
39.28 Mt CO₂
—
#40
Oregon
38.94 Mt CO₂
—
#41
Connecticut
37.09 Mt CO₂
—
#42
Montana
27.16 Mt CO₂
—
#43
Idaho
21.11 Mt CO₂
—
#44
Hawaii
17.96 Mt CO₂
—
#45
Maine
15.99 Mt CO₂
—
#46
South Dakota
15.11 Mt CO₂
—
#47
New Hampshire · your comparison
13.6 Mt CO₂
—
#48
Delaware
11.52 Mt CO₂
—
#49
Rhode Island
11.05 Mt CO₂
—
#50
Vermont
5.36 Mt CO₂
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
3 of 3 reviewed New Hampshire actions · newest first
Jun 16, 2026 · HB 1733 · (New Title) relative to the reconciliation of default electric service rates. · Enacted · Chapter 147New Hampshire Legislature · HB 1733
(New Title) relative to the reconciliation of default electric service rates.
Jun 16, 2026 · Enacted · Chapter 147
Rep. Michael D Harrington · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
HB 1733 prohibits recovering differences between actual and estimated wholesale default-electric-service costs through non-bypassable charges, except when the Public Utilities Commission finds extraordinary circumstances in an adjudicative proceeding. It took effect upon approval on June 16, 2026. The exception remains, and the law does not establish a particular price reduction.
Chapter 147, approved 2026-06-16. Approval, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
The fact measures retail electricity revenue per kilowatthour across customer sectors. Default-service reconciliation charges concern one regulated price component, not every customer’s rate or a demonstrated statewide price reduction. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained New Hampshire evidence context: Average retail electricity price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
147:1 Restructuring Policy Principles. Amend RSA 374-F:3, V(e) to read as follows: (e) Notwithstanding any provision of subparagraphs (b) and (c), as competitive markets develop, the commission may approve alternative means of providing transition or default services which are designed to minimize customer risk, not unduly harm the development of competitive markets, and mitigate against price volatility without creating new deferred costs, if the commission determines such means to be in the public interest. No reconciliation of actual and estimated wholesale power supply costs incurred by a utility to provide default service shall be recovered through a non-bypassable charge, except in extraordinary circumstances as found to exist by the commission through an adjudicative proceeding. 147:2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect upon its passage.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Jun 16, 2026 · HB 1733 · (New Title) relative to the reconciliation of default electric service rates. · SignedGovernor · HB 1733
(New Title) relative to the reconciliation of default electric service rates.
Jun 16, 2026 · Signed
Gov. Kelly Ayotte · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Kelly Ayotte signed HB 1733. HB 1733 prohibits recovering differences between actual and estimated wholesale default-electric-service costs through non-bypassable charges, except when the Public Utilities Commission finds extraordinary circumstances in an adjudicative proceeding. It took effect upon approval on June 16, 2026. The exception remains, and the law does not establish a particular price reduction.
Chapter 147, approved 2026-06-16. Approval, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
The fact measures retail electricity revenue per kilowatthour across customer sectors. Default-service reconciliation charges concern one regulated price component, not every customer’s rate or a demonstrated statewide price reduction. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained New Hampshire evidence context: Average retail electricity price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
147:1 Restructuring Policy Principles. Amend RSA 374-F:3, V(e) to read as follows: (e) Notwithstanding any provision of subparagraphs (b) and (c), as competitive markets develop, the commission may approve alternative means of providing transition or default services which are designed to minimize customer risk, not unduly harm the development of competitive markets, and mitigate against price volatility without creating new deferred costs, if the commission determines such means to be in the public interest. No reconciliation of actual and estimated wholesale power supply costs incurred by a utility to provide default service shall be recovered through a non-bypassable charge, except in extraordinary circumstances as found to exist by the commission through an adjudicative proceeding. 147:2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect upon its passage.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Mar 12, 2026 · HR 7919 · Gas Prices Relief Act of 2026 · In CongressU.S. Congress · New Hampshire delegation · HR 7919
Gas Prices Relief Act of 2026
Mar 12, 2026 · In Congress
Rep. Chris Pappas · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
H.R. 7919 proposes suspending the specified federal gasoline excise tax and leaking-underground-storage-tank financing rate from enactment through September 30, 2026. It replaces trust-fund revenue from general funds and directs Treasury to use applicable powers to pass the benefit to consumers. The bill remains in Congress, so it establishes no tax holiday or price reduction. The linked gasoline fact represents New England, not New Hampshire alone.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
The EIA fact is a New England regional regular-gasoline price proxy, not a New Hampshire-only price. A proposed federal gasoline-tax holiday concerns a price component across the region and nation; it does not establish enactment or consumer savings. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained New Hampshire evidence context: New England regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2.2026 gasoline tax holiday (a)In generalIn the case of gasoline removed, entered, or sold on or after the date of the enactment of this Act and before October 1, 2026— (1)the rate of tax under section 4081(a)(2)(A)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be zero, and (2)the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund financing rate under section 4081(a)(2)(B) of such Code shall not apply to gasoline to which the rate under paragraph (1) applies. (b)Transfers to Trust Fund (1)In generalThe Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer from the general fund to the Highway Trust Fund established under section 9503(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund established under section 9508(a) of such Code amounts equal to the reduction in amounts credited (but for this subsection) to each such Trust Fund by reason of subsection (a). (2)Coordination rules (A)Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust FundAmounts transferred to the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund under paragraph (1) shall be treated for purposes of sections 9503(b)(1) and 9508(b)(2) of such Code as taxes received in the Treasury under section 4081 of such Code attributable to the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund financing rate. (B)Highway Trust FundAmounts transferred to the Highway Trust Fund under paragraph (1) shall be treated for purposes of section 9503(b)(1) of such Code as taxes received in the Treasury under section 4081 of such Code which are not attributable to the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund financing rate. (c)Benefits of tax reduction should be passed on to consumers (1)It is the policy of Congress that— (A)consumers immediately receive the benefit of the reduction in taxes resulting from the application of subsection (a), (B)transportation motor fuels producers and other dealers take such actions as necessary to reduce transportation motor fuels prices to reflect such reduction, and (C)transportation motor fuels producers and other dealers that fail to reduce transportation motor fuels prices to reflect such reduction shall be subject to monetary penalties which are not less than the amount of the reduction in taxes which should have been passed on to consumers. (2)EnforcementThe Secretary of the Treasury shall use all applicable authorities to ensure that the benefit of the reduction in taxes resulting from the application of subsection (a) is received by consumers.
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified New Hampshire officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about electricity, fuels, energy costs and emissions from FactVote’s New Hampshire 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 5 candidates
2026 New Hampshire U.S. House - District 1 General Election
1 candidate with matching statements · 3 statements
Upgrade our electric grid: To deliver meaningful energy savings we need to address the costs of transmission and distribution, as well as production. Upgrading our grid to allow local storage will help reduce overall grid strain, especially during peak hours saving money for all of us.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Electric-grid upgrades and local energy storage
Candidate campaign source
Upgrade our electric grid: To deliver meaningful energy savings we need to address the costs of transmission and distribution, as well as production. Upgrading our grid to allow local storage will help reduce overall grid strain, especially during peak hours saving money for all of us.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Eliminate home utility bills: The cheapest kilowatt is the one we never use. New housing developments in New Hampshire are already offering homes where families won’t pay a monthly electric bill. You shouldn’t need a new house to make it happen. Retrofitting homes, businesses and other buildings and…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Housing and cost of living
Candidate campaign source
Eliminate home utility bills: The cheapest kilowatt is the one we never use. New housing developments in New Hampshire are already offering homes where families won’t pay a monthly electric bill. You shouldn’t need a new house to make it happen. Retrofitting homes, businesses and other buildings and adding onsite generation reduces costs and our environmental impact at the same time.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Increase local clean energy production: New Hampshire is already home to a number of solar, wind, hydro, and bio fuel companies. We need a lot more. It’s a win-win, creating good paying jobs while simultaneously reducing our dependence on big oil companies and foreign countries.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Clean energy production and jobs
Candidate campaign source
Increase local clean energy production: New Hampshire is already home to a number of solar, wind, hydro, and bio fuel companies. We need a lot more. It’s a win-win, creating good paying jobs while simultaneously reducing our dependence on big oil companies and foreign countries.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Protect and expand proven assets like Seabrook Station while advancing next-generation Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). These factory-built reactors can be deployed faster and at lower upfront cost than traditional plants. They deliver clean, always-on baseload power with strong safety features and ca…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Nuclear energy and electric reliability
Candidate campaign source
Protect and expand proven assets like Seabrook Station while advancing next-generation Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). These factory-built reactors can be deployed faster and at lower upfront cost than traditional plants. They deliver clean, always-on baseload power with strong safety features and can be scaled to fit New Hampshire’s needs, from communities to industrial sites. SMRs will help stabilize and lower long-term electricity rates while creating high-paying jobs here at home.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
For Granite Staters across the 2nd District, affording basics needs like groceries and fuel are at the top-of-mind this year. Life is getting way too expensive, way too quickly. While inflation has subsided greatly from the sustained levels during the last presidential administration, there is more …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Economy, taxes, spending, and affordability
Candidate campaign source
For Granite Staters across the 2nd District, affording basics needs like groceries and fuel are at the top-of-mind this year. Life is getting way too expensive, way too quickly. While inflation has subsided greatly from the sustained levels during the last presidential administration, there is more work to be done amid positive geopolitical pressures.Let me be clear: my #1 priority when getting to Washington, DC to serve as your congresswoman is to work tirelessly every single day to drive down costs for ordinary New Hampshire folks.To that end, I will put more pressure to get special interests, corporations, and the Federal government out of managing the economy. Instead of pushing for public-private partnerships and regulations that seem only to end up helping politically-connected big players, I will endeavor to remove subsidies and red tape for all businesses, large and small, unleashing true market competition. We must allow the free market to thrive. Only then, do costs come down and real job growth and real prosperity naturally follow.Also, the cost of energy has a huge impact on the prices we pay for so many things. We must declare energy freedom and allow access, with appropriate mechanisms to control pollution, to all of our available resources: nuclear, oil, solar, coal, and wind. We should not be in an either/or political fight amongst ourselves on which energy sources to promote. Artificial energy restrictions not only do not make sense for national security (dependence on other countries), but it further divides and impoverishes the country.Lastly, plain and simple, the government must reduce its spending; we must grow the economy and start paying down the national debt. Our children and grandchildren will thank us.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
The fight for a fair deal also means combating climate change, standing up to Big Oil, and working to make America the world’s clean energy superpower. Maggie believes deeply in advancing environmental justice and was proud to help to launch the Justice Department’s first-ever Office of Environmenta…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Climate, clean energy, environmental justice, and oil taxes
Candidate campaign source
The fight for a fair deal also means combating climate change, standing up to Big Oil, and working to make America the world’s clean energy superpower. Maggie believes deeply in advancing environmental justice and was proud to help to launch the Justice Department’s first-ever Office of Environmental Justice dedicated to protecting overburdened and underserved communities across America from the harm caused by pollution, environmental crimes, and the climate crisis. In Congress, Maggie will be on the frontlines of the fight against our climate crisis and work to close the tax loopholes that have allowed Big Oil to make record profits while hardworking people are facing record prices at the pumps.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Protect family farms and local food independence from excessive regulation and high energy costs. 87% of NH farms report less than $50,000 in gross annual sales.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Economy, taxes, spending, and affordability
Candidate campaign source
Protect family farms and local food independence from excessive regulation and high energy costs. 87% of NH farms report less than $50,000 in gross annual sales.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Chris supports an all-of-the-above energy strategy to meet the needs of Granite Staters, lower costs, and ensure America can become truly energy independent. That is why he secured federal funding to bolster clean energy in New Hampshire, build out EV charging infrastructure, and help families weath…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Energy independence, clean energy, and household costs
Candidate campaign source
Chris supports an all-of-the-above energy strategy to meet the needs of Granite Staters, lower costs, and ensure America can become truly energy independent. That is why he secured federal funding to bolster clean energy in New Hampshire, build out EV charging infrastructure, and help families weatherize their homes and invest in alternative energies that keep their costs down.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Chris believes that Granite Staters should not have to worry about how they can afford to heat their homes, turn their lights on, or fill up their gas tanks. That’s why he’s fighting to lower energy costs for New Hampshire families by cutting energy taxes, protecting heating assistance programs like…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Energy and the environment
Candidate campaign source
Chris believes that Granite Staters should not have to worry about how they can afford to heat their homes, turn their lights on, or fill up their gas tanks. That’s why he’s fighting to lower energy costs for New Hampshire families by cutting energy taxes, protecting heating assistance programs like LIHEAP, lowering utility bills for veterans and military families, and defending clean energy tax credits that reduce costs, promote sustainability, and create jobs. He’s taking on Big Oil and standing up to the Trump Administration’s damaging policies that would raise heating, gas, and electricity costs. He’s also leading efforts with Senator Mark Kelly to suspend the federal gas tax and provide relief to Granite Staters at the pump. Read Chris’s full plan to lower energy costs.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
New Hampshire’s mountains, lakes, beaches, and forests are part of our way of life and drive our economy. Chris is fighting to protect our natural environment, address the existential threat of climate change, and invest in lower-cost, clean energy solutions.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Climate, environmental protection, and clean energy
Candidate campaign source
New Hampshire’s mountains, lakes, beaches, and forests are part of our way of life and drive our economy. Chris is fighting to protect our natural environment, address the existential threat of climate change, and invest in lower-cost, clean energy solutions.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
This section matches specific electricity, fuels, energy costs and emissions terms in retained, attributed source text from published New Hampshire 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.
New Hampshire incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current New Hampshire legislators and New Hampshire’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from New Hampshire’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
2 matching sponsorships or proposals · 2 New Hampshire incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Rep. Chris Pappas
U.S. House of Representatives, New Hampshire District 1 · D–NH
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Chris PappasU.S. Congress · New Hampshire delegation · HR 7919
Gas Prices Relief Act of 2026
Mar 12, 2026 · In Congress
Rep. Chris Pappas · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
H.R. 7919 proposes suspending the specified federal gasoline excise tax and leaking-underground-storage-tank financing rate from enactment through September 30, 2026. It replaces trust-fund revenue from general funds and directs Treasury to use applicable powers to pass the benefit to consumers. The bill remains in Congress, so it establishes no tax holiday or price reduction. The linked gasoline fact represents New England, not New Hampshire alone.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
The EIA fact is a New England regional regular-gasoline price proxy, not a New Hampshire-only price. A proposed federal gasoline-tax holiday concerns a price component across the region and nation; it does not establish enactment or consumer savings. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained New Hampshire evidence context: New England regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2.2026 gasoline tax holiday (a)In generalIn the case of gasoline removed, entered, or sold on or after the date of the enactment of this Act and before October 1, 2026— (1)the rate of tax under section 4081(a)(2)(A)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be zero, and (2)the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund financing rate under section 4081(a)(2)(B) of such Code shall not apply to gasoline to which the rate under paragraph (1) applies. (b)Transfers to Trust Fund (1)In generalThe Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer from the general fund to the Highway Trust Fund established under section 9503(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund established under section 9508(a) of such Code amounts equal to the reduction in amounts credited (but for this subsection) to each such Trust Fund by reason of subsection (a). (2)Coordination rules (A)Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust FundAmounts transferred to the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund under paragraph (1) shall be treated for purposes of sections 9503(b)(1) and 9508(b)(2) of such Code as taxes received in the Treasury under section 4081 of such Code attributable to the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund financing rate. (B)Highway Trust FundAmounts transferred to the Highway Trust Fund under paragraph (1) shall be treated for purposes of section 9503(b)(1) of such Code as taxes received in the Treasury under section 4081 of such Code which are not attributable to the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund financing rate. (c)Benefits of tax reduction should be passed on to consumers (1)It is the policy of Congress that— (A)consumers immediately receive the benefit of the reduction in taxes resulting from the application of subsection (a), (B)transportation motor fuels producers and other dealers take such actions as necessary to reduce transportation motor fuels prices to reflect such reduction, and (C)transportation motor fuels producers and other dealers that fail to reduce transportation motor fuels prices to reflect such reduction shall be subject to monetary penalties which are not less than the amount of the reduction in taxes which should have been passed on to consumers. (2)EnforcementThe Secretary of the Treasury shall use all applicable authorities to ensure that the benefit of the reduction in taxes resulting from the application of subsection (a) is received by consumers.
New Hampshire House of Representatives, Strafford 18 · R–NH
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Michael D HarringtonNew Hampshire Legislature · HB 1733
(New Title) relative to the reconciliation of default electric service rates.
Jun 16, 2026 · Enacted · Chapter 147
Rep. Michael D Harrington · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
HB 1733 prohibits recovering differences between actual and estimated wholesale default-electric-service costs through non-bypassable charges, except when the Public Utilities Commission finds extraordinary circumstances in an adjudicative proceeding. It took effect upon approval on June 16, 2026. The exception remains, and the law does not establish a particular price reduction.
Chapter 147, approved 2026-06-16. Approval, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
The fact measures retail electricity revenue per kilowatthour across customer sectors. Default-service reconciliation charges concern one regulated price component, not every customer’s rate or a demonstrated statewide price reduction. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained New Hampshire evidence context: Average retail electricity price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
147:1 Restructuring Policy Principles. Amend RSA 374-F:3, V(e) to read as follows: (e) Notwithstanding any provision of subparagraphs (b) and (c), as competitive markets develop, the commission may approve alternative means of providing transition or default services which are designed to minimize customer risk, not unduly harm the development of competitive markets, and mitigate against price volatility without creating new deferred costs, if the commission determines such means to be in the public interest. No reconciliation of actual and estimated wholesale power supply costs incurred by a utility to provide default service shall be recovered through a non-bypassable charge, except in extraordinary circumstances as found to exist by the commission through an adjudicative proceeding. 147:2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect upon its passage.
Only current New Hampshire 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 New Hampshire statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
New Hampshire snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to New Hampshire, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.