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.

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

Spring-based private equity firm acquires West Texas wind farm

power deal

Spring-based private equity firm Arroyo Investors has teamed up with ONCEnergy, a Portland, Oregon-based developer of clean energy projects, to buy a 60-megawatt wind farm southeast of Amarillo.

Skyline Renewables, which acquired the site, known as the Whirlwind Energy Center, in 2018, was the seller. The purchase price wasn’t disclosed.

Whirlwind Energy Center, located in Floyd County, West Texas, comprises 26 utility-scale wind turbines. The wind farm, built in 2007, supplies power to Austin Energy.

“The acquisition reflects our focus on value-driven investments with strong counterparties, a solid operating track record, and clear relevance to markets with growing capacity needs,” Brandon Wax, a partner at Arroyo, said in a press release. “Partnering with ONCEnergy allows us to leverage deep operational expertise while expanding our investment footprint in the market.”

Arroyo focuses on energy infrastructure investments in the Americas. Its portfolio includes Spring-based Seaside LNG, which produces liquefied natural gas and LNG transportation services.

Last year, Arroyo closed an investment fund with more than $1 billion in total equity commitments.

Since its launch in 2003, Arroyo has “remained committed to investing in high-quality assets, creating value and positioning assets for exit within our expected hold period,” founding partner Chuck Jordan said in 2022.

$524M Texas Hill Country solar project powered by Hyundai kicks off

powering up

Corporate partners—including Hyundai Engineering & Construction, which maintains a Houston office—kicked off a $524 million solar power project in the Texas Hill Country on Jan. 27.

The 350-megawatt, utility-scale Lucy Solar Project is scheduled to go online in mid-2027 and represents one of the largest South Korean-led investments in U.S. renewable energy.

The solar farm, located on nearly 2,900 acres of ranchland in Concho County, will generate 926 gigawatt-hours of solar power each year. That’s enough solar power to supply electricity to roughly 65,000 homes in Texas.

Power to be produced by the hundreds of thousands of the project’s solar panels has already been sold through long-term deals to buyers such as Starbucks, Workday and Plano-based Toyota Motor North America.

The project is Hyundai Engineering & Construction’s largest solar power initiative outside Asia.

“The project is significant because it’s the first time Hyundai E&C has moved beyond its traditional focus on overseas government contracts to solidify its position in the global project financing market,” the company, which is supplying solar modules for the project, says on its website.

Aside from Hyundai Engineering & Construction, a subsidiary of automaker Hyundai, Korean and U.S. partners in the solar project include Korea Midland Power, the Korea Overseas Infrastructure & Urban Development Corp., solar panel manufacturer Topsun, investment firm EIP Asset Management, Primoris Renewable Energy and High Road Energy Marketing.

Primoris Renewable Energy is an Aurora, Colorado-based subsidiary of Dallas-based Primoris Services Corp. Another subsidiary, Primoris Energy Services, is based in Houston.

High Road is based in the Austin suburb of West Lake Hills.

“The Lucy Solar Project shows how international collaboration can deliver local economic development and clean power for Texas communities and businesses,” says a press release from the project’s partners.

Elon Musk vows to put data centers in space and run them on solar power

Outer Space

Elon Musk vowed this week to upend another industry just as he did with cars and rockets — and once again he's taking on long odds.

The world's richest man said he wants to put as many as a million satellites into orbit to form vast, solar-powered data centers in space — a move to allow expanded use of artificial intelligence and chatbots without triggering blackouts and sending utility bills soaring.

To finance that effort, Musk combined SpaceX with his AI business on Monday, February 2, and plans a big initial public offering of the combined company.

“Space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale,” Musk wrote on SpaceX’s website, adding about his solar ambitions, “It’s always sunny in space!”

But scientists and industry experts say even Musk — who outsmarted Detroit to turn Tesla into the world’s most valuable automaker — faces formidable technical, financial and environmental obstacles.

Feeling the heat

Capturing the sun’s energy from space to run chatbots and other AI tools would ease pressure on power grids and cut demand for sprawling computing warehouses that are consuming farms and forests and vast amounts of water to cool.

But space presents its own set of problems.

Data centers generate enormous heat. Space seems to offer a solution because it is cold. But it is also a vacuum, trapping heat inside objects in the same way that a Thermos keeps coffee hot using double walls with no air between them.

“An uncooled computer chip in space would overheat and melt much faster than one on Earth,” said Josep Jornet, a computer and electrical engineering professor at Northeastern University.

One fix is to build giant radiator panels that glow in infrared light to push the heat “out into the dark void,” says Jornet, noting that the technology has worked on a small scale, including on the International Space Station. But for Musk's data centers, he says, it would require an array of “massive, fragile structures that have never been built before.”

Floating debris

Then there is space junk.

A single malfunctioning satellite breaking down or losing orbit could trigger a cascade of collisions, potentially disrupting emergency communications, weather forecasting and other services.

Musk noted in a recent regulatory filing that he has had only one “low-velocity debris generating event" in seven years running Starlink, his satellite communications network. Starlink has operated about 10,000 satellites — but that's a fraction of the million or so he now plans to put in space.

“We could reach a tipping point where the chance of collision is going to be too great," said University at Buffalo's John Crassidis, a former NASA engineer. “And these objects are going fast -- 17,500 miles per hour. There could be very violent collisions."

No repair crews

Even without collisions, satellites fail, chips degrade, parts break.

Special GPU graphics chips used by AI companies, for instance, can become damaged and need to be replaced.

“On Earth, what you would do is send someone down to the data center," said Baiju Bhatt, CEO of Aetherflux, a space-based solar energy company. "You replace the server, you replace the GPU, you’d do some surgery on that thing and you’d slide it back in.”

But no such repair crew exists in orbit, and those GPUs in space could get damaged due to their exposure to high-energy particles from the sun.

Bhatt says one workaround is to overprovision the satellite with extra chips to replace the ones that fail. But that’s an expensive proposition given they are likely to cost tens of thousands of dollars each, and current Starlink satellites only have a lifespan of about five years.

Competition — and leverage

Musk is not alone trying to solve these problems.

A company in Redmond, Washington, called Starcloud, launched a satellite in November carrying a single Nvidia-made AI computer chip to test out how it would fare in space. Google is exploring orbital data centers in a venture it calls Project Suncatcher. And Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin announced plans in January for a constellation of more than 5,000 satellites to start launching late next year, though its focus has been more on communications than AI.

Still, Musk has an edge: He's got rockets.

Starcloud had to use one of his Falcon rockets to put its chip in space last year. Aetherflux plans to send a set of chips it calls a Galactic Brain to space on a SpaceX rocket later this year. And Google may also need to turn to Musk to get its first two planned prototype satellites off the ground by early next year.

Pierre Lionnet, a research director at the trade association Eurospace, says Musk routinely charges rivals far more than he charges himself —- as much as $20,000 per kilo of payload versus $2,000 internally.

He said Musk’s announcements this week signal that he plans to use that advantage to win this new space race.

“When he says we are going to put these data centers in space, it’s a way of telling the others we will keep these low launch costs for myself,” said Lionnet. “It’s a kind of powerplay.”