Utah · individual fact

Utah energy and electricity

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.

Residential electricity price2024: 12.22¢/kWh9.4¢/kWh13.44¢/kWh17.48¢/kWhUtah, 2015: 10.88¢/kWhUtah, 2016: 11.02¢/kWhUtah, 2017: 10.95¢/kWhUtah, 2018: 10.41¢/kWhUtah, 2019: 10.4¢/kWhUtah, 2020: 10.44¢/kWhUtah, 2021: 10.43¢/kWhUtah, 2022: 10.84¢/kWhUtah, 2023: 11.2¢/kWhUtah, 2024: 12.22¢/kWh201520192024
✦ Major events & context · 49National context · Energy Policy Act expands federal energy programs · 2005-08-08Energy Policy ActNational context · Hurricanes Katrina and Rita disrupt fuel supplies · 2005-08-29Katrina / RitaNational context · Energy law strengthens fuel economy, biofuels and efficiency · 2007-12-19Fuel / efficiency lawNational context · Global oil and energy prices surge · 2008-07-15Oil-price surgeNational context · Great Financial Crisis and Great Recession · 2008-09-15Great Financial CrisisNational context · Recovery Act funds grid modernization and clean energy · 2009-02-17Recovery Act energyNational context · EPA signs greenhouse-gas endangerment finding · 2009-12-07GHG findingNational context · Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill · 2010-04-20Deepwater HorizonNational context · Fukushima accident prompts U.S. nuclear safety response · 2011-03-11Fukushima safetyNational context · Global demand and Middle East unrest pressure oil prices · 2011-04-112011 oil pressuresNational context · Hurricane Sandy disrupts electricity and fuel distribution · 2012-10-29Hurricane SandyNational context · Polar vortex strains gas supplies and power systems · 2014-01-07Polar vortexNational context · Oil supply growth and OPEC decision deepen price collapse · 2014-11-27Oil-price collapseNational context · Clean Power Plan announced; implementation later stayed · 2015-08-03Clean Power PlanNational context · Congress lifts longstanding crude-oil export restrictions · 2015-12-18Crude export rulesNational context · First LNG export cargo from the Lower 48 · 2016-02-24Lower 48 LNG exportsNational context · Shale development transforms U.S. oil supply · 2016-03-15Shale expansionNational context · Natural gas overtakes coal in annual electricity generation · 2016-12-31Gas overtakes coalNational context · Hurricanes Harvey and Irma disrupt fuel markets · 2017-08-25Harvey / IrmaNational context · Attacks on Saudi oil facilities interrupt global supply · 2019-09-14Saudi oil attacksNational context · United States becomes an annual net total energy exporter · 2019-12-31Net energy exporterNational context · COVID-19 sharply reduces energy demand · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Expiring WTI oil futures settle below zero · 2020-04-20Negative WTI futuresNational context · Western heat wave leads to California rotating outages · 2020-08-14California outagesNational context · OPEC+ supply cuts help rebalance the pandemic oil market · 2020-09-23OPEC+ supply cutsNational context · Severe winter weather disrupts Texas and regional energy systems · 2021-02-08Winter Storm UriNational context · Cyberattack interrupts Colonial Pipeline fuel deliveries · 2021-05-07Colonial PipelineNational context · Infrastructure law funds grid and energy projects · 2021-11-15Infrastructure energyNational context · Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine · 2022-02-24Russia invades UkraineNational context · Large Strategic Petroleum Reserve release announced · 2022-03-31SPR releaseNational context · Freeport LNG fire shuts a major export terminal · 2022-06-08Freeport LNG outageNational context · Inflation Reduction Act expands energy incentives · 2022-08-16IRA energy incentivesNational context · Winter Storm Elliott disrupts gas and power supplies · 2022-12-21Winter Storm ElliottNational context · Renewables exceed coal in annual electric power sector generation · 2022-12-31Renewables pass coalNational context · Vogtle expansion adds new nuclear generation · 2023-07-31Vogtle nuclear unitsNational context · Red Sea attacks reroute oil and gas shipping · 2024-02-01Red Sea shippingNational context · EPA finalizes new power-plant greenhouse-gas rules · 2024-04-25Power-plant GHG ruleNational context · FERC adopts long-term regional transmission planning rule · 2024-05-13Transmission planningNational context · DOE report documents growing data-center electricity demand · 2024-12-20Data-center demandNational context · President declares energy emergency and directs policy changes · 2025-01-20Energy emergencyNational context · U.S. tariff announcement changes energy trade context · 2025-04-02U.S. tariff announcementNational context · EPA proposes repeal of power-sector greenhouse-gas rules · 2025-06-11Power-rule proposalNational context · Tax law accelerates several energy-credit expirations · 2025-07-04Energy tax changesNational context · EPA finalizes endangerment and vehicle GHG standard rescission · 2026-02-12Vehicle GHG repealNational context · EPA announces repeal of 2024 power-plant air-toxics amendments · 2026-02-20Air-toxics amendmentsNational context · Iran conflict and Strait of Hormuz energy disruption · 2026-02-28Iran / Hormuz shockNational context · IEA members agree to emergency oil-stock release · 2026-03-11Emergency oil stocksNational context · FERC and NERC report improved winter grid preparedness · 2026-09-10Winter grid reviewUtah · DOE selects Rocky Mountain Power grid-upgrade application · 2026-09-24Rocky Mountain Power · SPARK selection● Utah Legislature · 152223● U.S. Congress · Utah delegation · 92◆ Governor · 823■ Utah agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2005-08-012026-09-30

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.

View observations and export data
Utah Residential electricity price · source units
PeriodUtahRankU.S. benchmark
202412.22¢/kWh#45 of 5016.48¢/kWh
202311.2¢/kWh#46 of 50Not available
202210.84¢/kWh#47 of 50Not available
202110.43¢/kWh#48 of 50Not available
202010.44¢/kWh#44 of 50Not available
201910.4¢/kWh#44 of 50Not available
201810.41¢/kWh#44 of 50Not available
201710.95¢/kWh#39 of 50Not available
201611.02¢/kWh#36 of 50Not available
201510.88¢/kWh#38 of 50Not available
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

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
Residential electricity price history in Utah9.49¢/kWh13.44¢/kWh17.39¢/kWh20152024
2024 · Utah: 12.22¢/kWh · Rank #45 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 16.48¢/kWh · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Utah Residential electricity price history
PeriodUtahCompare
201510.88¢/kWh
201611.02¢/kWh
201710.95¢/kWh
201810.41¢/kWh
201910.4¢/kWh
202010.44¢/kWh
202110.43¢/kWh
202210.84¢/kWh
202311.2¢/kWh
202412.22¢/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
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Hawaii42.86¢/kWh—
#2California31.97¢/kWh—
#3Massachusetts29.35¢/kWh—
#4Connecticut28.75¢/kWh—
#5Rhode Island28.65¢/kWh—
#6Alaska24.82¢/kWh—
#7New York24.43¢/kWh—
#8Maine24.29¢/kWh—
#9New Hampshire23.4¢/kWh—
#10Vermont21.9¢/kWh—
#11New Jersey19.34¢/kWh—
#12Michigan19.3¢/kWh—
#13Maryland17.86¢/kWh—
#14Pennsylvania17.77¢/kWh—
#15Wisconsin17.18¢/kWh—
#16Delaware16.57¢/kWh—
#17Ohio15.99¢/kWh—
#18Illinois15.87¢/kWh—
#19Minnesota15.45¢/kWh—
#20Alabama15.18¢/kWh—
#21West Virginia15.07¢/kWh—
#22Nevada15¢/kWh—
#23Texas14.94¢/kWh—
#24Colorado14.92¢/kWh—
#25Arizona14.91¢/kWh—
#26Indiana14.77¢/kWh—
#27Oregon14.7¢/kWh—
#28Virginia14.41¢/kWh—
#29South Carolina14.23¢/kWh—
#30New Mexico14.2¢/kWh—
#31Kansas14.15¢/kWh—
#32Florida14.14¢/kWh—
#33North Carolina14.13¢/kWh—
#34Georgia14.08¢/kWh—
#35Iowa13.4¢/kWh—
#36Mississippi13.39¢/kWh—
#37Missouri12.91¢/kWh—
#38South Dakota12.86¢/kWh—
#39Kentucky12.79¢/kWh—
#40Montana12.66¢/kWh—
#41Wyoming12.47¢/kWh—
#42Tennessee12.42¢/kWh—
#43Arkansas12.32¢/kWh—
#44Oklahoma12.24¢/kWh—
#45Utah · your comparison12.22¢/kWh—
#46Washington11.9¢/kWh—
#47Louisiana11.73¢/kWh—
#48Nebraska11.53¢/kWh—
#49Idaho11.52¢/kWh—
#50North Dakota11.51¢/kWh—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Rocky Mountain regular gasoline price

$4.27/galWeek of August 31, 2026

Estimated average retail price of regular-grade gasoline across all formulations in EIA's Rocky Mountain region, including taxes. The region contains Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wyoming.

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

Recent EIA observations

Prior week
$4.359/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.
Utah · state comparison

What are households paying for electricity?

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
Average monthly residential electricity bill history in Utah$57.36$105.35$153.3420102024
2024 · Utah: $94.57 · Rank #49 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $142.26 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Utah Average monthly residential electricity bill history
PeriodUtahCompare
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
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Hawaii$212.12—
#2Connecticut$199.66—
#3Alabama$173.5—
#4Massachusetts$167.2—
#5Maryland$165.87—
#6Texas$163.72—
#7Rhode Island$162.4—
#8California$160.86—
#9Arizona$160.24—
#10Florida$156.09—
#11Mississippi$154.83—
#12West Virginia$154.76—
#13Georgia$151.25—
#14Delaware$150.87—
#15South Carolina$149.51—
#16Virginia$148.77—
#17Pennsylvania$145.17—
#18New Hampshire$144.87—
#19Alaska$143.54—
#20North Carolina$143.5—
#21Tennessee$143.32—
#22Louisiana$140.96—
#23New York$139.53—
#24Nevada$139.39—
#25Ohio$135.16—
#26Kentucky$133.81—
#27Maine$133.6—
#28Indiana$133.06—
#29Oklahoma$132.05—
#30Oregon$129.62—
#31Missouri$129.18—
#32Arkansas$129.13—
#33New Jersey$128.13—
#34South Dakota$127.81—
#35Vermont$125.66—
#36Kansas$123.9—
#37Michigan$119.31—
#38North Dakota$118.38—
#39Washington$113.68—
#40Iowa$111.54—
#41Wisconsin$110.87—
#42Nebraska$110.28—
#43Minnesota$110.06—
#44Illinois$109.99—
#45Idaho$108.73—
#46Montana$107.91—
#47Wyoming$107.65—
#48Colorado$100.57—
#49Utah · your comparison$94.57—
#50New Mexico$92.88—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Utah · state comparison

What generates Utah electricity?

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
Total electricity generation history in Utah32.1 TWh38 TWh43.9 TWh20152024
2024 · Utah: 36.1 TWh · Rank #39 of 50, highest first · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Utah Total electricity generation history
PeriodUtahCompare
201541.9 TWh
201638.1 TWh
201737.4 TWh
201839.4 TWh
201939.1 TWh
202037.1 TWh
202142.6 TWh
202239.4 TWh
202333.5 TWh
202436.1 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
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas571.5 TWh—
#2Florida270.7 TWh—
#3California245.9 TWh—
#4Pennsylvania242.5 TWh—
#5Illinois186.7 TWh—
#6Ohio143.3 TWh—
#7Alabama142.9 TWh—
#8Georgia140.4 TWh—
#9North Carolina135.9 TWh—
#10New York133.5 TWh—
#11Michigan124.5 TWh—
#12Arizona121.5 TWh—
#13Virginia103.7 TWh—
#14Washington103 TWh—
#15South Carolina101.1 TWh—
#16Louisiana100 TWh—
#17Indiana97.4 TWh—
#18Oklahoma94.3 TWh—
#19Mississippi77.4 TWh—
#20Tennessee76.3 TWh—
#21Iowa70.9 TWh—
#22Missouri67.6 TWh—
#23Kentucky67.1 TWh—
#24Wisconsin65.6 TWh—
#25Oregon65.3 TWh—
#26New Jersey63.6 TWh—
#27Arkansas62.1 TWh—
#28Colorado60.8 TWh—
#29Minnesota59 TWh—
#30Kansas57.9 TWh—
#31West Virginia50.7 TWh—
#32Nevada47.6 TWh—
#33Connecticut46.2 TWh—
#34North Dakota42.6 TWh—
#35Wyoming40.7 TWh—
#36New Mexico40.5 TWh—
#37Nebraska37.3 TWh—
#38Maryland36.9 TWh—
#39Utah · your comparison36.1 TWh—
#40Montana27 TWh—
#41Massachusetts25 TWh—
#42South Dakota20.9 TWh—
#43Idaho20.3 TWh—
#44New Hampshire17.3 TWh—
#45Maine15.7 TWh—
#46Hawaii10.7 TWh—
#47Rhode Island10.1 TWh—
#48Alaska6.7 TWh—
#49Delaware5 TWh—
#50Vermont2.5 TWh—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Coal share of in-state electricity generation

45.4%2024

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.
Utah · state comparison

Affordability, reliability, emissions, and demand

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

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
Outage minutes per customer · all events history in Utah33.3 min/year389 min/year744.7 min/year20232024
2024 · Utah: 115.4 min/year · Rank #45 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 662.6 min/year · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Utah Outage minutes per customer · all events history
PeriodUtahCompare
2023127.7 min/year
2024115.4 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
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1South Carolina3,155 min/year—
#2Maine1,748.6 min/year—
#3Texas1,614.3 min/year—
#4North Carolina1,518.1 min/year—
#5Florida1,487.6 min/year—
#6Georgia1,208.1 min/year—
#7West Virginia1,165.5 min/year—
#8Virginia962.1 min/year—
#9Vermont895.8 min/year—
#10New Hampshire735.5 min/year—
#11Nebraska697.8 min/year—
#12Washington643.5 min/year—
#13Louisiana630.6 min/year—
#14Mississippi607.3 min/year—
#15Oregon579.3 min/year—
#16Kentucky537.7 min/year—
#17Arkansas527.8 min/year—
#18Ohio511 min/year—
#19Michigan481.7 min/year—
#20New York477.3 min/year—
#21Hawaii382.6 min/year—
#22Pennsylvania353.1 min/year—
#23Montana341.7 min/year—
#24Alaska323.2 min/year—
#25Indiana310 min/year—
#26Wisconsin296.8 min/year—
#27Kansas289.8 min/year—
#28Tennessee289.3 min/year—
#29California285 min/year—
#30New Mexico272.6 min/year—
#31Colorado257 min/year—
#32Minnesota222.4 min/year—
#33Oklahoma220.7 min/year—
#34Missouri212.6 min/year—
#35Idaho204.4 min/year—
#36Iowa200.3 min/year—
#37Alabama197.7 min/year—
#38New Jersey173.3 min/year—
#39Nevada158.9 min/year—
#40Illinois158 min/year—
#41Connecticut152.8 min/year—
#42Wyoming137.8 min/year—
#43Maryland118.1 min/year—
#44Delaware117.9 min/year—
#45Utah · your comparison115.4 min/year—
#46Rhode Island104.3 min/year—
#47Massachusetts103.7 min/year—
#48North Dakota102.7 min/year—
#49South Dakota85.6 min/year—
#50Arizona83.6 min/year—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Utah · state comparison

Who uses energy?

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
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas1,514 trillion Btu—
#2Florida1,183.3 trillion Btu—
#3California1,147.1 trillion Btu—
#4New York968.3 trillion Btu—
#5Pennsylvania819.3 trillion Btu—
#6Illinois817.1 trillion Btu—
#7Ohio767.4 trillion Btu—
#8Georgia717.1 trillion Btu—
#9North Carolina662.2 trillion Btu—
#10Michigan661.4 trillion Btu—
#11New Jersey550.1 trillion Btu—
#12Virginia526 trillion Btu—
#13Tennessee492 trillion Btu—
#14Indiana475.6 trillion Btu—
#15Missouri459 trillion Btu—
#16Arizona413.7 trillion Btu—
#17Massachusetts379 trillion Btu—
#18Wisconsin375.9 trillion Btu—
#19South Carolina370.7 trillion Btu—
#20Maryland357.2 trillion Btu—
#21Minnesota346.2 trillion Btu—
#22Alabama331.6 trillion Btu—
#23Washington330.2 trillion Btu—
#24Kentucky319 trillion Btu—
#25Colorado311.9 trillion Btu—
#26Louisiana282.6 trillion Btu—
#27Connecticut235.3 trillion Btu—
#28Oklahoma231 trillion Btu—
#29Arkansas209.5 trillion Btu—
#30Utah · your comparison190.7 trillion Btu—
#31Mississippi179.7 trillion Btu—
#32Oregon173.1 trillion Btu—
#33Kansas166.4 trillion Btu—
#34Iowa162 trillion Btu—
#35Nevada153.3 trillion Btu—
#36West Virginia141 trillion Btu—
#37Nebraska128.9 trillion Btu—
#38Idaho111.2 trillion Btu—
#39New Mexico98.1 trillion Btu—
#40New Hampshire91.8 trillion Btu—
#41Maine80.5 trillion Btu—
#42Montana73.9 trillion Btu—
#43Delaware62.6 trillion Btu—
#44North Dakota61.3 trillion Btu—
#45Rhode Island61 trillion Btu—
#46Alaska49.1 trillion Btu—
#47Wyoming45.5 trillion Btu—
#48South Dakota44.2 trillion Btu—
#49Vermont32.7 trillion Btu—
#50Hawaii29.5 trillion Btu—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Utah · state comparison

Energy-related carbon emissions

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
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas679.93 Mt CO₂—
#2California315.98 Mt CO₂—
#3Florida230.85 Mt CO₂—
#4Pennsylvania201.57 Mt CO₂—
#5Louisiana186.89 Mt CO₂—
#6Ohio186.34 Mt CO₂—
#7Illinois163.98 Mt CO₂—
#8New York163.69 Mt CO₂—
#9Indiana152.3 Mt CO₂—
#10Michigan143.11 Mt CO₂—
#11Georgia127.83 Mt CO₂—
#12North Carolina119.07 Mt CO₂—
#13Kentucky106.87 Mt CO₂—
#14Alabama104.32 Mt CO₂—
#15Virginia99.24 Mt CO₂—
#16Missouri98.03 Mt CO₂—
#17Tennessee90.46 Mt CO₂—
#18Oklahoma88.56 Mt CO₂—
#19New Jersey87.84 Mt CO₂—
#20Wisconsin85.12 Mt CO₂—
#21Arizona82.2 Mt CO₂—
#22Colorado79.57 Mt CO₂—
#23Minnesota77.89 Mt CO₂—
#24Washington73.81 Mt CO₂—
#25West Virginia72.28 Mt CO₂—
#26South Carolina70.81 Mt CO₂—
#27Iowa65.23 Mt CO₂—
#28Mississippi64.75 Mt CO₂—
#29Arkansas58.42 Mt CO₂—
#30Massachusetts58.07 Mt CO₂—
#31North Dakota55.15 Mt CO₂—
#32Kansas55.09 Mt CO₂—
#33Utah · your comparison55.03 Mt CO₂—
#34Wyoming50 Mt CO₂—
#35Maryland48.77 Mt CO₂—
#36Alaska44.01 Mt CO₂—
#37Nebraska43.54 Mt CO₂—
#38New Mexico41.63 Mt CO₂—
#39Nevada39.28 Mt CO₂—
#40Oregon38.94 Mt CO₂—
#41Connecticut37.09 Mt CO₂—
#42Montana27.16 Mt CO₂—
#43Idaho21.11 Mt CO₂—
#44Hawaii17.96 Mt CO₂—
#45Maine15.99 Mt CO₂—
#46South Dakota15.11 Mt CO₂—
#47New Hampshire13.6 Mt CO₂—
#48Delaware11.52 Mt CO₂—
#49Rhode Island11.05 Mt CO₂—
#50Vermont5.36 Mt CO₂—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

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

Ben McAdams

2 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 1 · UT

Energy & electricity

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

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

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

Ben McAdams — candidate-owned primary source 5 ↗

Unaffiliated · U.S. House District 1 · UT

Energy & electricity

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

Elias Henry Montgomery — candidate-owned primary source ↗

Jesse West

2 statements

Libertarian · U.S. House District 1 · UT

Energy & electricity

•Streamline permitting for renewable energy projects

Read exact statement & source

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

Candidate campaign source

•Streamline permitting for renewable energy projects

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Jesse West — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 1 more statement from Jesse West
Energy & electricity

•End taxpayer subsidies for fossil fuel extraction on public lands

Read exact statement & source

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

Candidate campaign source

•End taxpayer subsidies for fossil fuel extraction on public lands

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Jesse West — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

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

2 candidates with matching statements · 4 statements

Ayden Scott

2 statements

Unaffiliated · U.S. House District 3 · UT

Energy & electricity

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

Ayden Scott — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
View 1 more statement from Ayden Scott
Energy & electricity

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

Ayden Scott — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗

Celeste Maloy

2 statements

Republican · U.S. House District 3 · UT

Energy & electricity

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

Celeste Maloy — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 1 more statement from Celeste Maloy
Energy & electricity

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

Celeste Maloy — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Utah U.S. House — District 4 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Mike Kennedy

1 statement

Republican · U.S. House District 4 · UT

Energy & electricity

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

Mike Kennedy — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗
How statements are selected

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.

Rep. Calvin Roberts

Utah House of Representatives, District 46 · R–UT

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Calvin Roberts
Utah Legislature · HB 575

Fuel Tax and Supply Amendments

Mar 23, 2026 · Enacted

Rep. Calvin Roberts · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

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;
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Carl R. Albrecht

Utah House of Representatives, District 70 · R–UT

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Carl R. Albrecht
Utah 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;
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Celeste Maloy

U.S. House of Representatives, Utah District 2 · R–UT

3 proposals
View proposals from Rep. Celeste Maloy
U.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
Review official supporting evidence ↗
U.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..
Review official supporting evidence ↗
U.S. Congress · Utah delegation · HR 6873

Geothermal Tax Parity Act

Dec 18, 2025 · In Congress

Rep. Celeste Maloy · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

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.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Christine F. Watkins

Utah House of Representatives, District 67 · R–UT

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Christine F. Watkins
Utah 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
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Colin W. Jack

Utah House of Representatives, District 73 · R–UT

4 proposals
View proposals from Rep. Colin W. Jack
Utah 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;
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Utah Legislature · HB 201

Energy Resource Amendments

Mar 25, 2025 · Enacted

Rep. Colin W. Jack · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

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;
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Utah Legislature · HB 241

Solar Power Plant Amendments

Mar 7, 2025 · Did not pass

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.

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;
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Utah Legislature · HB 191

Electrical Energy Amendments

Mar 12, 2024 · Enacted

Rep. Colin W. Jack · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

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.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Doug Owens

Utah House of Representatives, District 33 · D–UT

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Doug Owens
Utah Legislature · HB 412

Energy Development Planning Amendments

Mar 25, 2026 · Enacted

Rep. Doug Owens · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

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;
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

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.