Electricity prices and bills, generation and fuel mix, and gasoline costs.
Residential electricity price12.22¢/kWh2024 · #45 of 50 · highest first
Regular gasoline price$4.234/gal2026-08 · #9 of 48* · highest first
Average monthly residential electricity bill$94.572024 · #49 of 50 · highest first
Utah over time
Explore Utah readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Utah officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Utah effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Utah 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 Utah · source units
UtahPublished 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.
32 of 32 reviewed Utah actions match · 23 date markers shown. 49 major events shown separately.
Utah · 2024: 12.22¢/kWh · Rank #45 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 Utah, 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.
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.
Utah · state comparison
Household energy prices
Unit prices are separate from bills: usage, weather, and household needs also determine spending.
Utah · 202412.22¢/kWh
Utah rank#45among 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 Utah, 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.
Utah
2024 · Utah: 12.22¢/kWh · Rank #45 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 16.48¢/kWh · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Utah Residential electricity price history
Period
Utah
Compare
2015
10.88¢/kWh
2016
11.02¢/kWh
2017
10.95¢/kWh
2018
10.41¢/kWh
2019
10.4¢/kWh
2020
10.44¢/kWh
2021
10.43¢/kWh
2022
10.84¢/kWh
2023
11.2¢/kWh
2024
12.22¢/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. Utah 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. Utah 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.
Utah · 12.22¢/kWh2024 · Rank #45 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Utah with every state · 50 ranked
Residential electricity price · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
42.86¢/kWh
—
#2
California
31.97¢/kWh
—
#3
Massachusetts
29.35¢/kWh
—
#4
Connecticut
28.75¢/kWh
—
#5
Rhode Island
28.65¢/kWh
—
#6
Alaska
24.82¢/kWh
—
#7
New York
24.43¢/kWh
—
#8
Maine
24.29¢/kWh
—
#9
New Hampshire
23.4¢/kWh
—
#10
Vermont
21.9¢/kWh
—
#11
New Jersey
19.34¢/kWh
—
#12
Michigan
19.3¢/kWh
—
#13
Maryland
17.86¢/kWh
—
#14
Pennsylvania
17.77¢/kWh
—
#15
Wisconsin
17.18¢/kWh
—
#16
Delaware
16.57¢/kWh
—
#17
Ohio
15.99¢/kWh
—
#18
Illinois
15.87¢/kWh
—
#19
Minnesota
15.45¢/kWh
—
#20
Alabama
15.18¢/kWh
—
#21
West Virginia
15.07¢/kWh
—
#22
Nevada
15¢/kWh
—
#23
Texas
14.94¢/kWh
—
#24
Colorado
14.92¢/kWh
—
#25
Arizona
14.91¢/kWh
—
#26
Indiana
14.77¢/kWh
—
#27
Oregon
14.7¢/kWh
—
#28
Virginia
14.41¢/kWh
—
#29
South Carolina
14.23¢/kWh
—
#30
New Mexico
14.2¢/kWh
—
#31
Kansas
14.15¢/kWh
—
#32
Florida
14.14¢/kWh
—
#33
North Carolina
14.13¢/kWh
—
#34
Georgia
14.08¢/kWh
—
#35
Iowa
13.4¢/kWh
—
#36
Mississippi
13.39¢/kWh
—
#37
Missouri
12.91¢/kWh
—
#38
South Dakota
12.86¢/kWh
—
#39
Kentucky
12.79¢/kWh
—
#40
Montana
12.66¢/kWh
—
#41
Wyoming
12.47¢/kWh
—
#42
Tennessee
12.42¢/kWh
—
#43
Arkansas
12.32¢/kWh
—
#44
Oklahoma
12.24¢/kWh
—
#45
Utah · your comparison
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 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
$4.359/gal
Weekly change
-9.3¢
One year earlier
$3.183/gal
Change from one year earlier
+108.3¢
Method and limitations
FactVote uses EIA’s Rocky Mountain series, the smallest current EIA retail region that includes Utah. Changes are calculated from the published August 24, 2026 (prior week), and September 1, 2025 (52 weeks earlier), observations.
EIA does not publish a current Utah statewide weekly gasoline-price series. This Rocky Mountain regional estimate should not be read as Utah’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 Utah 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.
Utah · 2024$94.57
Utah rank#49among 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.
Utah
2024 · Utah: $94.57 · Rank #49 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $142.26 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Utah Average monthly residential electricity bill history
Period
Utah
Compare
2010
$68.43
2011
$70.61
2012
$78.7
2013
$82.79
2014
$79.49
2015
$80.92
2016
$82.57
2017
$81.65
2018
$77.25
2019
$75.63
2020
$80.24
2021
$80.87
2022
$84.87
2023
$84.97
2024
$94.57
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. Utah 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. Utah 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.
Utah · $94.572024 · Rank #49 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Utah with every state · 50 ranked
Average monthly residential electricity bill · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
$212.12
—
#2
Connecticut
$199.66
—
#3
Alabama
$173.5
—
#4
Massachusetts
$167.2
—
#5
Maryland
$165.87
—
#6
Texas
$163.72
—
#7
Rhode Island
$162.4
—
#8
California
$160.86
—
#9
Arizona
$160.24
—
#10
Florida
$156.09
—
#11
Mississippi
$154.83
—
#12
West Virginia
$154.76
—
#13
Georgia
$151.25
—
#14
Delaware
$150.87
—
#15
South Carolina
$149.51
—
#16
Virginia
$148.77
—
#17
Pennsylvania
$145.17
—
#18
New Hampshire
$144.87
—
#19
Alaska
$143.54
—
#20
North Carolina
$143.5
—
#21
Tennessee
$143.32
—
#22
Louisiana
$140.96
—
#23
New York
$139.53
—
#24
Nevada
$139.39
—
#25
Ohio
$135.16
—
#26
Kentucky
$133.81
—
#27
Maine
$133.6
—
#28
Indiana
$133.06
—
#29
Oklahoma
$132.05
—
#30
Oregon
$129.62
—
#31
Missouri
$129.18
—
#32
Arkansas
$129.13
—
#33
New Jersey
$128.13
—
#34
South Dakota
$127.81
—
#35
Vermont
$125.66
—
#36
Kansas
$123.9
—
#37
Michigan
$119.31
—
#38
North Dakota
$118.38
—
#39
Washington
$113.68
—
#40
Iowa
$111.54
—
#41
Wisconsin
$110.87
—
#42
Nebraska
$110.28
—
#43
Minnesota
$110.06
—
#44
Illinois
$109.99
—
#45
Idaho
$108.73
—
#46
Montana
$107.91
—
#47
Wyoming
$107.65
—
#48
Colorado
$100.57
—
#49
Utah · your comparison
$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.
Utah · 202436.1 TWh
Utah rank#39among 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 Utah, 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.
Utah
2024 · Utah: 36.1 TWh · Rank #39 of 50, highest first · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Utah Total electricity generation history
Period
Utah
Compare
2015
41.9 TWh
2016
38.1 TWh
2017
37.4 TWh
2018
39.4 TWh
2019
39.1 TWh
2020
37.1 TWh
2021
42.6 TWh
2022
39.4 TWh
2023
33.5 TWh
2024
36.1 TWh
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Utah 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. Utah 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.
Utah · 36.1 TWh2024 · Rank #39 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Utah 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 · your comparison
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
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.
Coal generation as a share of Utah's total in-state electric-industry net generation.
This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.
EIA generation totals
Coal generation
15,966,584 MWh
Total net generation
35,133,906 MWh
Selected generation shares
Coal
45.4%
Natural gas
33.1%
Solar
15.1%
Hydroelectric
2.2%
Wind
2.1%
Geothermal
1.3%
Method and limitations
FactVote divides the 15,966,584 MWh of coal generation in U.S. Energy Information Administration Table 5 by 35,133,906 MWh of total in-state net generation and rounds to one decimal place.
The selected shares round EIA's source-specific generation totals to one decimal place and do not list every small source.
In-state generation is not the same as electricity consumed in Utah because power crosses state lines.
Outage comparisons use the same reporting standard. Major-event outages and ordinary-day outages use different EIA reporting definitions.
Utah · 2024115.4 min/year
Utah rank#45among 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.
Utah
2024 · Utah: 115.4 min/year · Rank #45 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 662.6 min/year · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Utah Outage minutes per customer · all events history
Period
Utah
Compare
2023
127.7 min/year
2024
115.4 min/year
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Utah 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. Utah 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.
Utah · 115.4 min/year2024 · Rank #45 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Utah with every state · 50 ranked
Outage minutes per customer · all events · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
South Carolina
3,155 min/year
—
#2
Maine
1,748.6 min/year
—
#3
Texas
1,614.3 min/year
—
#4
North Carolina
1,518.1 min/year
—
#5
Florida
1,487.6 min/year
—
#6
Georgia
1,208.1 min/year
—
#7
West Virginia
1,165.5 min/year
—
#8
Virginia
962.1 min/year
—
#9
Vermont
895.8 min/year
—
#10
New Hampshire
735.5 min/year
—
#11
Nebraska
697.8 min/year
—
#12
Washington
643.5 min/year
—
#13
Louisiana
630.6 min/year
—
#14
Mississippi
607.3 min/year
—
#15
Oregon
579.3 min/year
—
#16
Kentucky
537.7 min/year
—
#17
Arkansas
527.8 min/year
—
#18
Ohio
511 min/year
—
#19
Michigan
481.7 min/year
—
#20
New York
477.3 min/year
—
#21
Hawaii
382.6 min/year
—
#22
Pennsylvania
353.1 min/year
—
#23
Montana
341.7 min/year
—
#24
Alaska
323.2 min/year
—
#25
Indiana
310 min/year
—
#26
Wisconsin
296.8 min/year
—
#27
Kansas
289.8 min/year
—
#28
Tennessee
289.3 min/year
—
#29
California
285 min/year
—
#30
New Mexico
272.6 min/year
—
#31
Colorado
257 min/year
—
#32
Minnesota
222.4 min/year
—
#33
Oklahoma
220.7 min/year
—
#34
Missouri
212.6 min/year
—
#35
Idaho
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 · your comparison
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.
Utah · 2024190.7 trillion Btu
Utah rank#30among 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. Utah 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. Utah 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.
Utah · 190.7 trillion Btu2024 · Rank #30 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 Utah 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 · your comparison
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
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.
Utah · 202455.03 Mt CO₂
Utah rank#33among 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. Utah 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. Utah 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.
Utah · 55.03 Mt CO₂2024 · Rank #33 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 Utah 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 · your comparison
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
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.
32 of 32 reviewed Utah actions · newest first
May 29, 2026 · 2026-03 · Establishing a Higher Bar for Data Center Development in Utah · IssuedGovernor · 2026-03
Establishing a Higher Bar for Data Center Development in Utah
May 29, 2026 · Issued
Gov. Spencer Cox · Issued
FactVote reviewed summary
Directs agencies to follow a data-center framework that includes opportunities to expand energy generation and transmission consistent with its water, air and ratepayer principles. This is a planning direction, not measured output.
Executive order issued. Later amendments and implementation are not inferred.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Ensure opportunities to expand energy generation and transmission capacity are consistent with the other principles of this Framework; vii. Lead on pro-human AI development in Utah; and viii. Provide transparent, meaningful and thorough opportunities for public comment. 5. Agency Responsibilities. Agencies shall, in matters related to data centers: a. Adhere to this Framework in agency efforts; b. Regularly review this Framework; c. Undertake extensive public outreach and engagement to further refine this Framework; d. Coordinate and communicate frequently across agencies and other governmental entities, including the Utah Inland Port Authority (UIPA), Military Installation Development Authority (MIDA), and local governments, to ensure consistent implementation of the Framework; and e. Work in partnership with the Legislature on recently approved interim study items in the Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment; Public Utilities, Energy and Technology; and Economic Development and Workforce Services interim committees, including policy recommendations, legislation, and best practices. THIS ORDER is effective immediately and shall remain in effect until otherwise modified, amended, rescinded, or superseded. IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused to be affixed the Great Seal of the State of Utah. Done on this, the 29th day of May, 2026. Spencer J. Cox Governor ATTEST: Deidre M. Henderson Lieutenant Governor
Sets a 60-day decision deadline for covered geothermal drilling permits after applicable environmental review requirements are met. Geothermal development concerns a possible source of electricity in the generation mix.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 568.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2.Effect of pending civil actions on processing applications related to geothermal leasingSection 4 of the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 1003) is amended by adding at the end the following:(h)Effect of pending civil actions on processing applications related to geothermal leasing(1)Requirement to process applicationsNotwithstanding the existence of any pending civil action that affects an application for a geothermal drilling permit, sundry notice, notice to proceed, right-of-way, or any other authorization under a valid existing geothermal lease, the Secretary shall, unless a United States Federal court vacates or provides injunctive relief for the applicable geothermal lease, geothermal drilling permit, sundry notice, notice to proceed, right-of-way, or other authorization, approve and issue, or deny, each such application not later than 60 days after completing all requirements under applicable Federal laws and regulations, including the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, and division A of subtitle III of title 54, United States Code.(2)No new authority for Federal courtsNothing in this subsection shall be construed as modifying any existing authority of a Federal court to vacate or provide injunctive relief for a geothermal lease, geothermal drilling permit, sundry notice, notice to proceed, right-of-way, or other authorization.(3)Definition of authorizationIn this subsection, the term authorization means any license, permit, approval, finding, determination, or other administrative decision issued by a Federal agency, or any interagency consultation, that is required or authorized under Federal law or regulations in order to site, construct, reconstruct, or commence operations of a geothermal project administered by a Federal agency.. May 20, 2026Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Bases the initial geothermal royalty period on each generating facility’s in-service date, rather than the first production under the lease.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 575.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2.Geothermal royalties(a)DefinitionsSection 2 of the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 1001) is amended by adding at the end the following:(h)Geothermal electric generating facility means a facility, including all necessary equipment or structures (including turbines and cooling equipment), that produces electricity using geothermal resources. For purposes of section 5(a)(1), a facility described in the preceding sentence shall be considered a separate facility from any other such facility unless the facility shares a turbine with any other such facility.(i)In-service date means, with respect to a geothermal electric generating facility, the date on which the geothermal electric generating facility begins operating..(b)Geothermal royaltiesSection 5(a)(1) of the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 1004(a)(1)) is amended—(1)in subparagraph (A)—(A)by inserting with respect to a geothermal electric generating facility producing electricity from such resources, before not less than;(B)by inserting by the geothermal electric generating facility after produced; and(C)by striking the first 10 years of production under the lease and inserting each year of the 10-year period following the in-service date of the geothermal electric generating facility; and(2)in subparagraph (B)—(A)by inserting with respect to a geothermal electric generating facility producing electricity from such resources, before not less than;(B)by inserting by the geothermal electric generating facility after produced; and(C)by striking such 10-year period and inserting the period of 10 years described in subparagraph (A).May 20, 2026Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 14, 2026 · S 4284 · Nuclear Energy Innovation and Deployment Act of 2026 · In CongressU.S. Congress · Utah delegation · S 4284
Nuclear Energy Innovation and Deployment Act of 2026
Apr 14, 2026 · In Congress
Sen. Mike Lee · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Directs expedited licensing coordination for advanced nuclear technologies tested or demonstrated through the proposed federal launch-pad program. Development authority does not establish an operating Utah plant.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Streamlined licensing pathwaysThe Assistant Secretary shall seek to leverage the existing Department authorities for advanced nuclear technologies and the existing framework for coordination with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, including the memorandum of understanding between the Department and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission relating to nuclear energy innovation and effective on October 7, 2019 (including subsequent addenda to that memorandum), or, if necessary, may enter into a new memorandum of understanding to provide for expedited licensing pathways for advanced nuclear technologies that are tested or demonstrated under the Launch Pad.(7)DoE authoritiesA facility constructed and operated under the Launch Pad for testing and demonstration purposes shall be considered to be under contract with and for the account of the Department for purposes of section 110 a. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2140(a)).
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 6, 2026 · HR 8204 · Western Refined Fuel Reserve Act of 2026 · In CongressU.S. Congress · Utah delegation · HR 8204
Western Refined Fuel Reserve Act of 2026
Apr 6, 2026 · In Congress
Rep. Celeste Maloy · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Directs creation of a western refined-fuel reserve with a minimum gasoline capacity of five million barrels and emergency drawdown authority. Utah is one of the eligible western states.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Why this record is included
The fact is the EIA Rocky Mountain regional regular-gasoline price, including taxes, covering Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Wyoming. Utah policy concerns only one state in that regional measure; this is not a Utah statewide average. Fuel taxes, fees, supply and retail pricing rules concern components of pump prices; they do not determine the regional average. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Rocky Mountain regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
164.Western Refined Fuel Storage Reserve (a)DefinitionsIn this section: (1)Refined Fuel Storage ReserveThe term Refined Fuel Storage Reserve means a storage facility that— (A)is a salt cavern formation; and (B)is capable of storing refined petroleum products. (2)Refined petroleum productThe term refined petroleum product means gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel. (3)Western StateThe term Western State means the States of Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. (b)Establishment (1)In generalNot later than 6 months after the date of enactment of the Western Refined Fuel Reserve Act of 2026, the Secretary shall establish a Refined Fuel Storage Reserve for the storage of refined petroleum products as part of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, pursuant to— (A)the authority of the Secretary under section 159(f) to address energy supply and transportation vulnerabilities in Western States, in accordance with Executive Order 14156 (90 Fed. Reg. 8433; relating to declaring a national energy emergency); and (B)this Act. (2)Requirements (A)Identification and selectionIn carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary shall— (i)identify existing or potential storage locations in Western States suitable to establish a Refined Fuel Storage Reserve, taking into account— (I)the proximity of existing distribution systems; (II)areas of the United States— (aa)most dependent on imported petroleum products; and (bb)areas of the United States most likely to experience shortages of refined petroleum products; (III)the capability for expeditious distribution of refined petroleum products from the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve to areas of the United States described in subclause (II); and (IV)the cost of establishing the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve— (aa)in the applicable Western State; and (bb)at the applicable storage location; and (ii)select 1 storage location. (B)Existing locationsIn carrying out subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable— (i)identify locations suitable for the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve in Western States; and (ii)enter into a contractual arrangement with a public or private entity for the use and operation of a public or private storage location. (c)Fill and maintenance (1)RequirementsDuring the 5 fiscal years following the date of establishment of the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve under subsection (b)(1), the Secretary shall, in accordance with paragraph (2), fill and maintain the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve at not less than 75 percent of the minimum capacity for each refined petroleum product on an adjusted annual basis using— (A)amounts appropriated by Congress for acquisition, by purchase, of petroleum products for storage in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve; and (B)revenues from emergency or test sales carried out pursuant to section 161. (2)Minimum capacityThe minimum capacity of the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve is— (A)5,000,000 barrels of gasoline; (B)3,000,000 barrels of diesel; and (C)2,000,000 barrels of jet fuel. (d)DrawdownThe Secretary may withdraw refined petroleum products stored in the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve to respond to emergencies, supply disruptions, or any other circumstances consistent with the intent of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve or the needs of Western States. (e)State and local government storageThe Secretary shall, as the Secretary determines appropriate, pursue agreements with applicable Western State governments and local governments for storage of non-Federal petroleum products within the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve. (f)ReportNot later than 1 year after the date of enactment of the Western Refined Fuel Reserve Act of 2026, and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the establishment and operations of the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve, which shall include— (1)an evaluation of— (A)the mechanisms used to carry out the requirements of this section; and (B)other potential mechanisms that could be used in the future to carry out the requirements of this section; (2)the process for purchase or leasing of storage facilities required for the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve, as applicable; and (3)recommendations for future storage of refined petroleum products in the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve, including any administrative actions and legislation necessary to implement the recommendations, as the Secretary determines appropriate..
Spencer Cox signed HB 16. Establishes eligibility criteria for state incentives for solar power plants based on land characteristics; provides for reduction of incentives for solar power plants located on certain protected farmland; requires wildlife impact consultation with state or federal agencies for solar power plants; establishes requirements for decommissioning plans and financial assurance for solar power plants; creates a permitting process for solar power plants.
Governor Signed. The connection uses the official active enrolled-version highlights; implementation and current enforceability are not inferred.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
establishes eligibility criteria for state incentives for solar power plants based on land characteristics; provides for reduction of incentives for solar power plants located on certain protected farmland; requires wildlife impact consultation with state or federal agencies for solar power plants; establishes requirements for decommissioning plans and financial assurance for solar power plants; creates a permitting process for solar power plants;
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Utah 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 6, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about electricity, fuels, energy costs and emissions from FactVote’s Utah 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.
10 statements from 6 candidates
2026 Utah U.S. House — District 1 — General Election
3 candidates with matching statements · 5 statements
Climate change is an existential threat that demands our immediate attention. I will work in Congress to curb greenhouse gas emissions and address the many other environmental crises facing our state so that our kids can breathe clean air, enjoy nature, and inherit a prosperous future. I will fight …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Energy, water, public lands, and environment
Candidate campaign source
Climate change is an existential threat that demands our immediate attention. I will work in Congress to curb greenhouse gas emissions and address the many other environmental crises facing our state so that our kids can breathe clean air, enjoy nature, and inherit a prosperous future. I will fight to protect Utah’s public lands, defend Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante, restore the Great Salt Lake, advance lasting protections for the Wasatch and work to pass America’s Red Rock Wilderness Act.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Sustainable Energy: Utah can lead in clean, affordable American-made energy that strengthens our economy and lowers costs for families. I support expanding clean energy, modernizing the electrical grid, and investing in transportation infrastructure that creates jobs and secures our energy future.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Energy, water, public lands, and environment
Candidate campaign source
Sustainable Energy: Utah can lead in clean, affordable American-made energy that strengthens our economy and lowers costs for families. I support expanding clean energy, modernizing the electrical grid, and investing in transportation infrastructure that creates jobs and secures our energy future.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Cut Local Clean Energy Red Tape: Empower communities to develop advanced small-scale nuclear and solar setups without waiting through multi-year federal administrative freezes.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Energy, water, public lands, and environment
Candidate campaign source
Cut Local Clean Energy Red Tape: Empower communities to develop advanced small-scale nuclear and solar setups without waiting through multi-year federal administrative freezes.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Utah is rich in natural resources, and responsible American energy development is good for our economy and our national security. I support an all-of-the-above energy strategy that includes oil, gas, coal, nuclear, and renewables — chosen by the market, not mandated by government. I believe we can e…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: National security, foreign policy, and veterans
Candidate campaign source
Utah is rich in natural resources, and responsible American energy development is good for our economy and our national security. I support an all-of-the-above energy strategy that includes oil, gas, coal, nuclear, and renewables — chosen by the market, not mandated by government. I believe we can expand domestic energy production while respecting the water rights, public lands, and agricultural communities that define Utah's 3rd district. Utah deserves a seat at the table on every federal lands decision that affects our state — not a mandate handed down from Washington bureaucrats who have never set foot here.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Inflation is a tax on working families, and it's caused by government overspending and artificial restrictions on American production. I will oppose reckless federal spending and push for a balanced budget — but the fastest way to bring prices down is to increase supply. When we unleash American ene…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Energy, water, public lands, and environment
Candidate campaign source
Inflation is a tax on working families, and it's caused by government overspending and artificial restrictions on American production. I will oppose reckless federal spending and push for a balanced budget — but the fastest way to bring prices down is to increase supply. When we unleash American energy production, reduce barriers for manufacturers, and get out of the way of farmers and small producers, we create more of everything — and more supply means lower prices across the board for every Utah family. The federal government didn't build this economy, the American worker did. My job in Congress is to make sure Washington stops making their job harder.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Celeste has voted to undo burdensome regulations that have stifled domestic energy production and driven up costs. She voted to bolster U.S. energy production and affordability by expanding and protecting American refining capacity. She will continue fighting for American energy independence and aff…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Energy, water, public lands, and environment
Candidate campaign source
Celeste has voted to undo burdensome regulations that have stifled domestic energy production and driven up costs. She voted to bolster U.S. energy production and affordability by expanding and protecting American refining capacity. She will continue fighting for American energy independence and affordability.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
UNLEASHING AMERICAN ENERGY Celeste has voted to undo burdensome regulations that have stifled domestic energy production and driven up costs. She voted to bolster U.S. energy production and affordability by expanding and protecting American refining capacity. She will continue fighting for American …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: STANDING UP FOR OUR PRO-LIFE VALUES
Candidate campaign source
UNLEASHING AMERICAN ENERGY Celeste has voted to undo burdensome regulations that have stifled domestic energy production and driven up costs. She voted to bolster U.S. energy production and affordability by expanding and protecting American refining capacity. She will continue fighting for American energy independence and affordability.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
In Congress, Kennedy is focused on lowering costs for families, restoring fiscal discipline and accountability in Washington, securing the border, strengthening American energy production, and defending the freedoms that make Utah strong and America great.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Immigration and border policy
Candidate campaign source
In Congress, Kennedy is focused on lowering costs for families, restoring fiscal discipline and accountability in Washington, securing the border, strengthening American energy production, and defending the freedoms that make Utah strong and America great.
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 Utah 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.
Utah incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Utah legislators and Utah’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Utah’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
24 matching sponsorships or proposals · 15 Utah incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Enacts provisions related to permitting and right-of-way coordination for certain oil and gas infrastructure; reduces the rate of the motor fuel tax; requires refineries to report to the Office of Energy Development regarding production; provides guidelines regarding information and data reported by refineries to the Office of Energy Development.
Governor Signed. The session has adjourned. This is the recorded disposition, not a determination of current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact is the EIA Rocky Mountain regional regular-gasoline price, including taxes, covering Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Wyoming. Utah policy concerns only one state in that regional measure; this is not a Utah statewide average. Fuel taxes, fees, supply and retail pricing rules concern components of pump prices; they do not determine the regional average. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Rocky Mountain regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
enacts provisions related to permitting and right-of-way coordination for certain oil and gas infrastructure; reduces the rate of the motor fuel tax; requires refineries to report to the Office of Energy Development regarding production; provides guidelines regarding information and data reported by refineries to the Office of Energy Development;
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Carl R. AlbrechtUtah Legislature · HB 249
Nuclear Power Amendments
Mar 26, 2025 · Enacted
Rep. Carl R. Albrecht · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Creates the Nuclear Energy Consortium within the Office of Energy Development (office) and establishes its membership and duties; establishes a process for designating electrical energy development zones; creates the Electrical Energy Development Investment Fund and provides for its administration.
Governor Signed. The session has adjourned. This is the recorded disposition, not a determination of current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
creates the Nuclear Energy Consortium within the Office of Energy Development (office) and establishes its membership and duties; establishes a process for designating electrical energy development zones; creates the Electrical Energy Development Investment Fund and provides for its administration;
U.S. House of Representatives, Utah District 2 · R–UT
3 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Celeste MaloyU.S. Congress · Utah delegation · HR 301
GEO Act
May 20, 2026 · In Congress
Rep. Celeste Maloy · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sets a 60-day decision deadline for covered geothermal drilling permits after applicable environmental review requirements are met. Geothermal development concerns a possible source of electricity in the generation mix.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 568.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2.Effect of pending civil actions on processing applications related to geothermal leasingSection 4 of the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 1003) is amended by adding at the end the following:(h)Effect of pending civil actions on processing applications related to geothermal leasing(1)Requirement to process applicationsNotwithstanding the existence of any pending civil action that affects an application for a geothermal drilling permit, sundry notice, notice to proceed, right-of-way, or any other authorization under a valid existing geothermal lease, the Secretary shall, unless a United States Federal court vacates or provides injunctive relief for the applicable geothermal lease, geothermal drilling permit, sundry notice, notice to proceed, right-of-way, or other authorization, approve and issue, or deny, each such application not later than 60 days after completing all requirements under applicable Federal laws and regulations, including the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, and division A of subtitle III of title 54, United States Code.(2)No new authority for Federal courtsNothing in this subsection shall be construed as modifying any existing authority of a Federal court to vacate or provide injunctive relief for a geothermal lease, geothermal drilling permit, sundry notice, notice to proceed, right-of-way, or other authorization.(3)Definition of authorizationIn this subsection, the term authorization means any license, permit, approval, finding, determination, or other administrative decision issued by a Federal agency, or any interagency consultation, that is required or authorized under Federal law or regulations in order to site, construct, reconstruct, or commence operations of a geothermal project administered by a Federal agency.. May 20, 2026Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Directs creation of a western refined-fuel reserve with a minimum gasoline capacity of five million barrels and emergency drawdown authority. Utah is one of the eligible western states.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Why this record is included
The fact is the EIA Rocky Mountain regional regular-gasoline price, including taxes, covering Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Wyoming. Utah policy concerns only one state in that regional measure; this is not a Utah statewide average. Fuel taxes, fees, supply and retail pricing rules concern components of pump prices; they do not determine the regional average. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Rocky Mountain regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
164.Western Refined Fuel Storage Reserve (a)DefinitionsIn this section: (1)Refined Fuel Storage ReserveThe term Refined Fuel Storage Reserve means a storage facility that— (A)is a salt cavern formation; and (B)is capable of storing refined petroleum products. (2)Refined petroleum productThe term refined petroleum product means gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel. (3)Western StateThe term Western State means the States of Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. (b)Establishment (1)In generalNot later than 6 months after the date of enactment of the Western Refined Fuel Reserve Act of 2026, the Secretary shall establish a Refined Fuel Storage Reserve for the storage of refined petroleum products as part of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, pursuant to— (A)the authority of the Secretary under section 159(f) to address energy supply and transportation vulnerabilities in Western States, in accordance with Executive Order 14156 (90 Fed. Reg. 8433; relating to declaring a national energy emergency); and (B)this Act. (2)Requirements (A)Identification and selectionIn carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary shall— (i)identify existing or potential storage locations in Western States suitable to establish a Refined Fuel Storage Reserve, taking into account— (I)the proximity of existing distribution systems; (II)areas of the United States— (aa)most dependent on imported petroleum products; and (bb)areas of the United States most likely to experience shortages of refined petroleum products; (III)the capability for expeditious distribution of refined petroleum products from the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve to areas of the United States described in subclause (II); and (IV)the cost of establishing the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve— (aa)in the applicable Western State; and (bb)at the applicable storage location; and (ii)select 1 storage location. (B)Existing locationsIn carrying out subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable— (i)identify locations suitable for the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve in Western States; and (ii)enter into a contractual arrangement with a public or private entity for the use and operation of a public or private storage location. (c)Fill and maintenance (1)RequirementsDuring the 5 fiscal years following the date of establishment of the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve under subsection (b)(1), the Secretary shall, in accordance with paragraph (2), fill and maintain the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve at not less than 75 percent of the minimum capacity for each refined petroleum product on an adjusted annual basis using— (A)amounts appropriated by Congress for acquisition, by purchase, of petroleum products for storage in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve; and (B)revenues from emergency or test sales carried out pursuant to section 161. (2)Minimum capacityThe minimum capacity of the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve is— (A)5,000,000 barrels of gasoline; (B)3,000,000 barrels of diesel; and (C)2,000,000 barrels of jet fuel. (d)DrawdownThe Secretary may withdraw refined petroleum products stored in the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve to respond to emergencies, supply disruptions, or any other circumstances consistent with the intent of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve or the needs of Western States. (e)State and local government storageThe Secretary shall, as the Secretary determines appropriate, pursue agreements with applicable Western State governments and local governments for storage of non-Federal petroleum products within the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve. (f)ReportNot later than 1 year after the date of enactment of the Western Refined Fuel Reserve Act of 2026, and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the establishment and operations of the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve, which shall include— (1)an evaluation of— (A)the mechanisms used to carry out the requirements of this section; and (B)other potential mechanisms that could be used in the future to carry out the requirements of this section; (2)the process for purchase or leasing of storage facilities required for the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve, as applicable; and (3)recommendations for future storage of refined petroleum products in the Refined Fuel Storage Reserve, including any administrative actions and legislation necessary to implement the recommendations, as the Secretary determines appropriate..
Extends specified exploration-cost amortization and working-interest tax treatment to geothermal deposits. The connection concerns geothermal development, not household income or measured generation.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2.Amortization of geological and geophysical expenditures in connection with exploration for or development of geothermal deposits(a)In generalSection 167(h)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking oil or gas and inserting oil, gas, or geothermal deposits.(b)Effective dateThe amendment made by this section shall apply to amounts paid or incurred in taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.3.Exception to passive loss limitations for working interests in geothermal properties(a)In generalSection 469(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended—(1)in the paragraph heading, by striking oil and gas and inserting oil, gas, and geothermal, and(2)by striking oil or gas each place it appears and inserting oil, gas, or geothermal in each such place.(b)Effective dateThe amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Christine F. WatkinsUtah Legislature · HB 413
Surplus Interconnection Service Amendments
Mar 6, 2026 · Did not pass
Rep. Christine F. Watkins · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Requires an affected electrical utility to analyze surplus interconnection service opportunities in integrated resource plan filings; requires an affected electrical utility to consider surplus interconnection service in the action plan; requires the commission to encourage inclusion of surplus interconnection service in integrated resource plans.
House/ filed. The session has adjourned. This is the recorded disposition, not a determination of current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
requires an affected electrical utility to analyze surplus interconnection service opportunities in integrated resource plan filings; requires an affected electrical utility to consider surplus interconnection service in the action plan; requires the commission to encourage inclusion of surplus interconnection service in integrated resource plans; and
4 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Colin W. JackUtah Legislature · HB 16
Solar Power Plant Amendments
Mar 25, 2026 · Enacted
Rep. Colin W. Jack · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Establishes eligibility criteria for state incentives for solar power plants based on land characteristics; provides for reduction of incentives for solar power plants located on certain protected farmland; requires wildlife impact consultation with state or federal agencies for solar power plants; establishes requirements for decommissioning plans and financial assurance for solar power plants; creates a permitting process for solar power plants.
Governor Signed. The session has adjourned. This is the recorded disposition, not a determination of current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
establishes eligibility criteria for state incentives for solar power plants based on land characteristics; provides for reduction of incentives for solar power plants located on certain protected farmland; requires wildlife impact consultation with state or federal agencies for solar power plants; establishes requirements for decommissioning plans and financial assurance for solar power plants; creates a permitting process for solar power plants;
Requires full cost attribution for supplemental resources in integrated resource plans; establishes requirements for calculating generation capacity; requires an affected electrical utility to include certain designations in the utility's action plan.
Governor Signed. The session has adjourned. This is the recorded disposition, not a determination of current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
requires full cost attribution for supplemental resources in integrated resource plans; establishes requirements for calculating generation capacity; requires an affected electrical utility to include certain designations in the utility's action plan;
Establishes eligibility criteria for state incentives for solar power plants based on land characteristics; provides for reduction of incentives for solar power plants located on certain protected farmland; requires wildlife impact consultation with state or federal agencies for solar power plants; establishes requirements for decommissioning plans and financial assurance for solar power plants; creates a permitting process for solar power plants.
House/ filed. The session has adjourned. This is the recorded disposition, not a determination of current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
establishes eligibility criteria for state incentives for solar power plants based on land characteristics; provides for reduction of incentives for solar power plants located on certain protected farmland; requires wildlife impact consultation with state or federal agencies for solar power plants; establishes requirements for decommissioning plans and financial assurance for solar power plants; creates a permitting process for solar power plants;
Requires the commission to make certain determinations before authorizing the early retirement of an electrical generation facility; requires the commission to submit an annual report related to requests to retire electric generating units.
Governor Signed. The session has adjourned. This is the recorded disposition, not a determination of current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
requires the commission to make certain determinations before authorizing the early retirement of an electrical generation facility; and requires the commission to submit an annual report related to requests to retire electric generating units.
Requires consultation with the Division of Wildlife Resources (division) as part of local government approval of utility scale solar and wind power plant projects.
Governor Signed. The session has adjourned. This is the recorded disposition, not a determination of current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Coal share is coal generation divided by Utah in-state electric-industry net generation from EIA Table 5. Coal plants and other utility-scale generating resources concern this mix; small-scale rooftop solar is outside this denominator; procurement targets and authorizations are distinct from an operating plant or measured output. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Utah evidence context: Coal share of in-state electricity generation. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
requires consultation with the Division of Wildlife Resources (division) as part of local government approval of utility scale solar and wind power plant projects;
Only current Utah 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 Utah statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 6, 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.
Utah 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 Utah, 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.