Texas's evolving energy landscape means affordability for residents, a new report finds. Photo via Pexels

The Lone Star State is an economical option when it comes to energy costs, one report has found.

WalletHub, a personal finance website, analyzed energy affordability across the 50 states in its new report, Energy Costs by State in 2024, which looked at residential energy types: electricity, natural gas, motor fuel and home heating oil.

Texas ranked as the fourth cheapest state for energy, or No. 47 in the report that sorted by most expensive average monthly energy bill. Texans' average energy cost per month is $437, the report found.


Source: WalletHub

Here's how Texas ranked in key categories, with No. 1 being the most expensive and No. 50 being the cheapest:

  • No. 27 – price of electricity
  • No. 15 – price of natural gas
  • No. 44 – natural-gas consumption per consumer
  • No. 40 – price of motor fuel
  • No. 16 – motor-fuel consumption per driver
  • No. 49 – home heating-oil consumption per consumer

With the most expensive state — Wyoming — being over four times the cost compared to the cheapest state — New Mexico, the difference between energy costs between states varies greatly, but the reason for that isn't exactly a mystery.

“Energy prices vary from state to state based on several factors including energy sources, supply and demand, energy regulation, regulatory authorities, competition, and the free market," explains expert Justin Perryman, a professor at Washington University School of Law. "[States] such as Texas have a deregulated electricity marketplace. Missouri and 17 other states have a regulated energy market. In deregulated markets there are typically more energy providers which often leads to more competition and lower prices; however, other factors can contribute to energy prices.

"In regulated markets, the state energy regulatory authority sets the prices of energy," he continues. "It can be politically unpopular to raise energy costs, so those states may benefit from lower energy costs. Factors such as the state’s commitment to renewable energy may also factor into energy costs. Proximity to less expensive energy sources can lower energy costs.”

Texas's evolving energy landscape has been well documented, and earlier this year the state's solar energy generation surpassed the output by coal, according to a report from the Institute For Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.

A separate report found that, when compared to other states, Texas will account for the biggest share of new utility-scale solar capacity and new battery storage capacity in 2024. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the state will make up 35 percent of new utility-scale solar capacity in the U.S. this year.

The politicians point to a recent Texas merger. Photo via Getty Images

Politicians urge Justice Department to prosecute alleged collusion, price-fixing by oil industry

call for action

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and 22 other Democratic senators are calling on the Department of Justice to “use every tool” at its disposal to prevent and prosecute alleged collusion and price-fixing in the oil industry.

In a letter Thursday to Attorney General Merrick Garland and other officials, the Democrats said a recent Federal Trade Commission investigation into a high-profile merger uncovered evidence of price-fixing by oil executives that led to higher energy costs for American families and businesses.

The FTC said earlier this month that Scott Sheffield, the former CEO of Texas-based Pioneer Natural Resources, colluded with OPEC and OPEC+ to potentially raise crude oil prices. Sheffield retired from the company in 2016 but returned as CEO in 2019. After retiring again in 2023, he continued to serve on its board.

The FTC cleared Houston-based ExxonMobil's $60 billion deal to buy Pioneer on May 2 but barred Sheffield from joining the new company’s board of directors. Pioneer, which is based in Dallas, said it disagreed with the allegations but would not impede closing of the merger, which was announced in 2023.

In a report, the FTC said collusion by Pioneer and others may have cost the average American household up to $500 per car in increased annual fuel costs, an amount Democrats called “an unwelcome tax that is particularly burdensome for lower-income families.'' Meanwhile, Exxon Mobil and other major oil companies collectively earned more than $300 billion in profits over the last two years, "a surge that many market experts believe cannot be explained away by increased production costs from the (coronavirus) pandemic or inflation,” Democrats said.

The letter calls for the Justice Department to launch an industry-wide investigation into possible violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act. It outlined how “Big Oil’s alleged collusion with OPEC is a national security concern that aids countries looking to undermine the U.S.," including Russia and Iran.

“Corporate malfeasance must be confronted, or it will proliferate," the letter said. “These alleged offenses do not simply enrich corporations; hardworking Americans end up paying the price through higher costs for gas, fuel and related consumer products. The DOJ must protect consumers, small businesses and the public from petroleum-market collusion."

The letter by Senate Democrats was the latest in a series of partisan actions targeting the oil industry.

Separately, Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland have formally asked the Justice Department to investigate whether Exxon, Chevron and other oil companies misled the public over decades about the climate effects of burning fossil fuels. Whitehouse and Raskin led a multiyear investigation that uncovered what they described as “damning new documents that exposed the fossil fuel industry’s ongoing efforts to deceive the public and block climate action.”

Republicans, meanwhile, have attacked President Joe Biden's energy policies, including a freeze on liquefied natural gas exports, restrictions on new oil and gas leasing on a petroleum reserve in Alaska and a decision to charge companies higher rates to drill for oil and natural gas on federal lands.

Sen. John Barrasso, the top Republican on the Senate Energy Committee, said the Democratic president was “doing all he can to make it economically impossible to produce energy on federal lands.''

The letter released Thursday was signed by 23 Democrats, including Schumer, Whitehouse, Senate Commerce Committee Chairwoman Maria Cantwell of Washington state and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin of Illinois.

If you live in Texas, you're paying less than residents in almost every other state. Photo via Getty Images

Report ranks Texas as among least expensive states for energy

cha-ching

A new report analyzed energy costs across the United States to find out what states had the highest energy prices. Turns out, Texas falls rather low on that list.

The study from WalletHub ranked Texas as No. 49 on the list of the 2023 Most Energy-Expensive States. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, almost a third (27 percent) of the country report having difficulty meeting the energy needs of their household.

"To better understand the impact of energy on our finances relative to our location and consumption habits, WalletHub compared the total monthly energy bills in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia," reads the report. "Our analysis uses a special formula that accounts for the following residential energy types: electricity, natural gas, motor fuel and home heating oil."

The report ranked states based on their total monthly energy cost, but also identified the following:

  • Monthly electricity cost
  • Monthly natural-gas cost
  • Monthly motor-fuel cost
  • Monthly home heating-oil cost
Texas households' total monthly energy cost was reportedly $378, which is only beat by New Mexico ($373) and DC ($274). The top five most expensive states for monthly energy cost is as follows.
  1. Wyoming at $845
  2. North Dakota at $645
  3. Alaska at $613
  4. Connecticut at $593
  5. Massachusetts at $589
When comparing to other states, Texas monthly electricity costs are relatively high. At $153 a month, the Lone Star State ranks No. 11 in that category. Meanwhile, when it comes to monthly home heating-oil cost, Texans pay an average of $0 a month, as do Mississippi residents.
Fuel prices are also cheaper in Texas, as the state ranks No. 49 with only Louisiana and Mississippi with lower costs, respectively.

While Texans can find some comfort in the lower-than-average energy costs, the whole country is expected to see some prices increase, one of the report's experts says.

"Most likely, energy prices will continue to rise in 2023, although perhaps more slowly than at times in the past," writes Peter C. Burns, director of the Center for Sustainable Energy at Notre Dame. "The war in Ukraine continues to create uncertainty in energy supplies in Europe, while pledges to reduce oil production in the interests of reducing greenhouse gas emissions will also contribute to increasing prices."


Source: WalletHub
Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Tackling methane in the energy transition: Takeaways from Global Methane Hub and HETI

The view from heti

Leaders from across the energy value chain gathered in Houston for a roundtable hosted by the Global Methane Hub (GMH) and the Houston Energy Transition Initiative (HETI). The session underscored the continued progress to reduce methane emissions as the energy industry addresses the dual challenge of producing more energy that the world demands while simultaneously reducing emissions.

The Industry’s Shared Commitment and Challenge

There’s broad recognition across the industry that methane emissions must be tackled with urgency, especially as natural gas demand is projected to grow 3050% by 2050. This growth makes reducing methane leakage more than a sustainability issue—it’s also a matter of global market access and investor confidence.

Solving this issue, however, requires overcoming technical challenges that span infrastructure, data acquisition, measurement precision, and regulatory alignment.

Getting the Data Right: Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up

Accurate methane leak monitoring and quantification is the cornerstone of any effective mitigation strategy. A key point of discussion was the differentiation between top-down and bottom-up measurement approaches.

Top-down methods such as satellite and aerial monitoring offer broad-area coverage and can identify large emission plumes. Technologies such as satellite-based remote sensing (e.g., using high-resolution imagery) or airborne methane surveys (using aircraft equipped with tunable diode laser absorption spectroscopy) are commonly used for wide-area detection. While these methods are efficient for identifying large-scale emission hotspots, their accuracy is lower when it comes to quantifying emissions at the source, detecting smaller, diffuse leaks, and providing continuous monitoring.

In contrast, bottom-up methods focus on direct, on-site detection at the equipment level, providing more granular and precise measurements. Technologies used here include optical gas imaging (OGI) cameras, flame ionization detectors (FID), and infrared sensors, which can directly detect methane at the point of release. These methods are more accurate but can be resource and infrastructure intensive, requiring frequent manual inspections or continuous monitoring installations, which can be costly and technically challenging in certain environments.

The challenge lies in combining both methods: top-down for large-scale monitoring and bottom-up for detailed, accurate measurements. No single technology is perfect or all-inclusive. An integrated approach that uses both datasets will help to create a more comprehensive picture of emissions and improve mitigation efforts.

From Detection to Action: Bridging the Gap

Data collection is just the first step—effective action follows. Operators are increasingly focused on real-time detection and mitigation. However, operational realities present obstacles. For example, real-time leak detection and repair (LDAR) systems—particularly for continuous monitoring—face challenges due to infrastructure limitations. Remote locations like the Permian Basin may lack the stable power sources needed to run continuous monitoring equipment to individual assets.

Policy, Incentives, and Regulatory Alignment

Another critical aspect of the conversation was the need for policy incentives that both promote best practices and accommodate operational constraints. Methane fees, introduced to penalize emissions, have faced widespread resistance due to their design flaws that in many cases actually disincentivize methane emissions reductions. Industry stakeholders are advocating for better alignment between policy frameworks and operational capabilities.

In the United States, the Subpart W rule, for example, mandates methane reporting for certain facilities, but its implementation has raised concerns about the accuracy of some of the new reporting requirements. Many in the industry continue to work with the EPA to update these regulations to ensure implementation meets desired legislative expectations.

The EU’s demand for quantified methane emissions for imported natural gas is another driving force, prompting a shift toward more detailed emissions accounting and better data transparency. Technologies that provide continuous, real-time monitoring and automated reporting will be crucial in meeting these international standards.

Looking Ahead: Innovation and Collaboration

The roundtable highlighted the critical importance of advancing methane detection and mitigation technologies and integrating them into broader emissions reduction strategies. The United States’ 45V tax policy—focused on incentivizing production of low-carbon intensity hydrogen often via reforming of natural gas—illustrates the growing momentum towards science-based accounting and transparent data management. To qualify for 45V incentives, operators can differentiate their lower emissions intensity natural gas by providing foreground data to the EPA that is precise and auditable, essential for the industry to meet both environmental and regulatory expectations. Ultimately, the success of methane reduction strategies depends on collaboration between the energy industry, technology providers, and regulators.

The roundtable underscored that while significant progress has been made in addressing methane emissions, technical, regulatory, and operational challenges remain. Collaboration across industry, government, and technology providers is essential to overcoming these barriers. With better data, regulatory alignment, and investments in new technologies, the energy sector can continue to reduce methane emissions while supporting global energy demands.

———

HETI thanks Chris Duffy, Baytown Blue Hydrogen Venture Executive, ExxonMobil; Cody Johnson, CEO, SCS Technologies; and Nishadi Davis, Head of Carbon Advisory Americas, wood plc, for their participation in this event.

This article originally appeared on the Greater Houston Partnership's Houston Energy Transition Initiative blog. HETI exists to support Houston's future as an energy leader. For more information about the Houston Energy Transition Initiative, EnergyCapitalHTX's presenting sponsor, visit htxenergytransition.org.

Houston battery recycling company signs 15-year deal to supply Texas flagship facility

green team

Houston- and Singapore-headquartered Ace Green Recycling, a provider of sustainable battery recycling technology solutions, has secured a 15-year battery material supply agreement with Miami-based OM Commodities.

The global commodities trading firm will supply Ace with at least 30,000 metric tons of lead scrap annually, which the company expects to recycle at its planned flagship facility in Texas. Production is expected to commence in 2026.

"We believe that Ace's future Texas facility is poised to play a key role in addressing many of the current challenges in the lead industry in the U.S., while helping the country meet the growing domestic demand for valuable battery materials," Nishchay Chadha, CEO and co-founder of Ace, said in a news release. "This agreement with OM Commodities will provide us with enough supply to support our Texas facility during all of its current planned phases, enabling us to achieve optimal efficiencies as we deploy our solutions in the U.S. market. With OM Commodities being a U.S.-based leader in metals doing business across the Americas and Asia with a specialty in lead batteries, we look forward to leveraging their expertise in the space as we advance our scale-up efforts."

The feedstock will be sufficient to cover 100 percent of Ace's phase one recycling capacity at the Texas facility, according to the statement. The companies are also discussing future lithium battery recycling collaborations.

"Ace is a true pioneer when it comes to providing an environmentally friendly and economically superior solution to recycle valuable material from lead scrap," Yiannis Dumas, president of OM Commodities, added in the news release. "We look forward to supporting Ace with lead feedstock as they scale up their operations in Texas and helping create a more circular and sustainable battery materials supply chain in the U.S."

Additionally, ACE shared that it is expected to close a merger with Athena Technology Acquisition Corp. II (NYSE: ATEK) in the second half of 2025, after which Ace will become a publicly traded company on the Nasdaq Stock Market under the ticker symbol "AGXI."

"As we continue to scale our lead and lithium battery recycling technologies to help support the markets for both internal combustion engines and electric vehicles, we expect that our upcoming listing will be a key accelerator of growth for Ace,” Chada said.

China-based company to launch its largest U.S. energy storage project in Houston

coming soon

Trina Storage and FlexGen, a North Carolina-based company that develops integrated energy storage systems, are bringing a 371-megawatt battery energy storage system to Houston. The project will be the largest grid-scale deployment project in North America by Trina Storage, which is a business unit of China-based Trina Solar.

"This project is a testament to Trina Storage's ability to provide a fully bankable, integrated energy storage solution that meets the evolving needs of the market," Terry Chen, vice president of Trina Storage North America, said in a news release. "As our first grid-scale deployment in North America, this achievement reflects the industry's confidence in our technology and our commitment to de-risking energy storage investments and supporting the energy transition in the region."

The project, developed by Boulder, Colorado-based SMT Energy, will utilize Trina Storage's advanced Elementa 2 battery storage system, which is designed to optimize energy performance and reliability. The system uses Trinas proprietary lithium iron phosphate cells that are more than 95 percent energy efficient, according to the company.

FlexGen will provide system integration and use its HybridOS energy management software. The HybridOS allows site operators to manage systems, detect issues faster and predict maintenance needs.

"This collaboration with Trina Storage and SMT Energy represents another major step in accelerating the deployment of flexible energy storage assets to meet growing demand," Diane Giacomozzi, COO at FlexGen, added in the release. "By pre-integrating FlexGen HybridOS with Trina's Elementa 2 energy storage solution in our Durham Innovation Lab, we're enabling faster project delivery and optimized performance from the first moment of operation."

Trina Storage currently has 10 energy storage facilities in China and two in the UK. The Houston facility is part of its plans to expand across the U.S., according to a LinkedIn post form the company.