Rising electricity rates are hitting consumers just about everywhere as utilities struggle to build enough power plants to meet rising demand from data centers.

But the effects on prices vary a lot by state.

Federal electricity data released on Tuesday helps to identify where the increases in bills have been the most drastic. I found several surprises.

As of July, the average household price of electricity in the United States has risen by 9.5 percent this year, according to the Energy Information Administration. You might guess that the largest increases were in states known for high electricity costs, such as California, or those that are part of the PJM Interconnection, a multistate grid region embroiled in controversy over rising prices.

Today’s Climate

Tuesdays

A once-a-week digest of the most pressing climate-related news, written by Kiley Price and released every Tuesday.

Breaking News

Don’t miss a beat. Get a daily email of our original, groundbreaking stories written by our national network of award-winning reporters.

ICN Sunday Morning

Go behind the scenes with executive editor Vernon Loeb and ICN reporters as they discuss one of the week’s top stories.

Justice & Health

A digest of stories on the inequalities that worsen the impacts of climate change on vulnerable communities.

But the largest percentage increase this year was in Missouri, which rose 38.3 percent, due in large part to rate hikes by the state’s largest utility, Ameren.

The rest of the top five are North Dakota, with 33.6 percent; New Jersey, with 28.6 percent; Iowa, with 27.5 percent; and Montana, with 25.3 percent.

Of those five, only New Jersey is in PJM, which covers parts of the Mid-Atlantic, South and Midwest.

California, with a 7.8 percent increase, trails the national average.

I’m looking at the changes in prices since January because that’s when President Donald Trump took office vowing to cut energy costs. Democrats are now seeking to tie him to rising bills.

But I should note that seven months of data is not enough to draw firm conclusions. Trump hasn’t had much time for his policy changes to affect what consumers pay for power.

And a 9.5 percent increase is high but has recent precedent. During the COVID-fueled inflation panic of Joe Biden’s administration, households faced some punishing electricity bills, including a 10.1 percent hike in the annual average for 2022 compared to 2021. Biden paid a heavy political price for inflation, so this example should not be a comfort to the Trump administration.

The bigger concern for consumers, in my view, is that the worst may be yet to come. Trump’s policies are likely to contribute to inflation, including pushing up electricity costs. For example, the Trump administration’s attempt to slow the development of renewable energy will likely reduce the supply of electricity at a time when solar is the country’s fastest-growing power source. And tariffs on imported metals are likely to increase the costs for electricity infrastructure.

To better understand the price trend, let’s take a step back and look at how July 2025 costs compare to those five years ago.

The largest increase in that time was in Washington, D.C., up 93.2 percent. The rest of the top five were Maine, up 66.1 percent; California, up 62.7 percent; Maryland, up 54.3 percent; and New Jersey, up 52.7 percent.

Pennsylvania, a state whose affordability crisis was the subject of a recent story by me and my colleague Kiley Bense, ranked sixth, with 46.5 percent. A key point in that story is that price increases in Pennsylvania vary by utility, and many households are paying much more than the state average.

And, while Iowa experienced a high percentage increase since January, it has the lowest percentage increase in the country since five years ago, with 7.6 percent. This helps to demonstrate how short-term changes can be misleading. North Dakota has a similar dynamic, with a high increase this year and a low increase—11.8 percent—over five years.

Why Are Prices Rising?

Prices are increasing mainly because the spike in electricity demand—a significant portion of it from AI data centers and other superusers—is not being met with an adequate amount of new power.

Regulators and lawmakers need to act quickly to respond to the situation, said Rob Kelter, a senior attorney for the Environmental Law & Policy Center, a Chicago-based environmental advocacy group.

“You’re talking about data centers that need as much electricity as a small city, and we’re just not ready to handle that,” he said.

The solution, he said, is to deploy a combination of energy storage systems, wind farms and solar arrays that work in conjunction with policies to help reduce electricity demand at times when it’s highest. The Trump administration and many utility companies are trying to meet demand in large part by delaying the shutdown of old coal-fired power plants and rapidly building new gas-fired power plants.

“I believe we can [meet demand] and still meet our carbon goals, but it certainly is going to be a challenge, and legislatures and regulatory commissions aren’t used to being in a situation where they’ve got to make so many big, important decisions so quickly,” he said.

Some states, such as Indiana and Ohio, have adopted policies designed to protect consumers from being left on the hook for data center projects that fail to materialize. But that’s just the beginning of what consumer advocates would like to see done.

Indiana ranks near the national average in its percentage increase in electricity rates, both for this year and the last five years. The experience there helps to show that an average increase in this inflationary period is still painful.

“We’re hearing, first and foremost, a combination of anxiety, fear and some anger,” said Kerwin Olson, executive director of the Citizens Action Coalition, an Indianapolis-based consumer advocacy group. “The affordability crisis is very prevalent, very real.”

His organization launched an advertising campaign this week, called “Stop Mike’s Hikes,” to put pressure on Gov. Mike Braun, a Republican, to take action to help people struggling to pay electricity bills.

Olson said Indiana’s leaders have exacerbated the problem by trying to attract data centers to the state and by supporting the use of fossil fuels to produce electricity. He is concerned that Braun and others aren’t fully aware of how difficult it is for low- and middle-income consumers to pay their utility bills.

Braun has expressed concerns about energy costs. On Tuesday, he announced three new appointees to the panel that helps choose new members of the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission. He said at a news conference that addressing energy affordability is a high priority when deciding who will fill open seats on the regulatory commission.

One reason I reached out to Kelter and Olson for their perspectives on electricity rates is that they’ve worked as consumer and environmental advocates for decades, and I wanted to get a sense of how this moment compares to other times of high anxiety about power costs.

Each said the current situation ranks near the top, but it’s distinct from other events—such as the natural gas price spike of the late 2000s—because of the complexity of the problem.

“People are leery of what the future holds,” Olson said.

A Baffling Coincidence

According to the new data, the country’s average residential price of electricity remained the same, down to a hundredth of a penny for three straight months. That’s a remarkable coincidence.

That price, in May, June and July, was 17.47 cents per kilowatt-hour, according to the Energy Information Administration. Looking back at decades of data, I can find examples of the average price remaining the same for two months in a row, but this is the first time I’ve seen it stay the same for three months.

How is this possible, especially when rates in some states went up a lot during that time?

I asked an EIA spokesman, who said the process for calculating the price hasn’t changed and that the result is indeed a coincidence.

I also looked at some of the underlying data that the office uses to determine this average, which includes the amount of electricity produced and the total dollars customers paid for it. No matter how I sliced it, the numbers came out the same: 17.47 cents.

One factor is that California and Texas both had rate decreases since May, which helped to offset the increases in other places.

Some people reading this may wonder if EIA is fiddling with the numbers to avoid negative headlines about rising prices. It isn’t an outlandish thing to suggest, given that the Trump administration fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics following a monthly jobs report that the president didn’t like.

But the people at EIA who produce this data are career staff, not political appointees, and I’ve seen no evidence of anything hinky with the numbers. Still, this result is unusual enough that I had to mention it.

Other stories about the energy transition to take note of this week:

A Federal Judge Allows Revolution Wind to Resume Construction: Revolution Wind, an offshore wind project that would serve Rhode Island and Connecticut, can resume construction following a federal judge’s ruling this week. The project was nearly complete when the Trump administration ordered it to pause on Aug. 22 for what it said were national security concerns, as Jennifer McDermott and Matthew Daly report for The Associated Press. At a hearing on Monday, a U.S. District Court judge said the delay was causing irreparable damage, and the developer could continue work while the federal government conducts its investigation of the potential harm the project may cause. The Trump administration has taken various actions to slow offshore wind development. Clare Fieseler wrote for Canary Media about the ruling and the larger picture of legal challenges facing offshore wind.

Pennsylvania Was Once a Clean Energy Leader. What Happened? Pennsylvania now ranks near the bottom of the country in the share of electricity generated from renewable energy. But in the 2000s, the state had policies that promoted wind and solar. My colleague Kiley Bense and I report for ICN about how the state failed to build on those early efforts.

Trump Brings His Talk of a ‘Green Energy Scam’ to the United Nations: President Donald Trump gave a rambling speech to the U.N. General Assembly in which he praised his administration’s support for fossil fuels and its opposition to renewable energy, and he said that other countries were foolish to want to choose a different course, as I wrote for ICN. The specifics were alarming, including a dismissal of the threat of climate change. Laurence Tubiana, CEO of the European Climate Foundation, said in a statement that Trump’s speech was “a denial of reality.” But the most striking aspect of the speech for me was its meandering delivery and its length, which took much more time than that of any other speaker.

EVs Are Now Cheaper Than Gasoline Vehicles, But Not for Long: The average price of an electric vehicle in the United States fell below that of a new gasoline-powered vehicle in July and August, according to data from J.D. Power. This shift is notable, but it’s not going to last long because a tax credit of up to $7,500 for qualifying new EVs expires at the end of this month. Dealers had added additional incentives this summer as they try to clear out inventory before the tax credit ends, as Tim Levin reports for InsideEVs.

Inside Clean Energy is ICN’s weekly bulletin of news and analysis about the energy transition. Send news tips and questions to [email protected].

Dan Gearino

Reporter, Clean Energy

Dan Gearino covers the business and policy of renewable energy and utilities, often with an emphasis on the midwestern United States. He is the main author of ICN’s Inside Clean Energy newsletter. He came to ICN in 2018 after a nine-year tenure at The Columbus Dispatch, where he covered the business of energy. Before that, he covered politics and business in Iowa and in New Hampshire. He grew up in Warren County, Iowa, just south of Des Moines, and lives in Columbus, Ohio.

• 
  @dangearino.bsky.social
  
• 
  [email protected]