Comparison of "Green" state electric and gas costs to other states

[WVPATX]

15.84 cents/KWH in green states vs. 9.89 cents/KWH in the lowest "green" states. That is a huge difference and applies to individuals and businesses alike. Drives up the cost of products and hurts business competitiveness. I live in Texas where we get to choose our electric provider and my cost is just 7.5 cents/KWH for a fixed rate, 12 month contract.

Analysis: Blue States May Be Green, But They Have Very Pricey Energy

ANDREW FOLLETT
Energy and Science Reporter

The “greenest” U.S. states may be more environmentally friendly than their counterparts, but residents generally end up paying much higher electricity bills.

Wallethub released a ranking Tuesday of the top 10 greenest U.S. states based on 20 environmental indicators, including municipal solid waste and carbon dioxide emissions per capita. Left out of those rankings are the costs of being “green.”

The Daily Caller News Foundation found key energy cost indicators for “green” states using using data from the Energy Information Administration and the American Automobile Association.

The top 10 “greenest” states paid 15.84 cents per kilowatt-hour (kwh) on average for electricity, which is higher than the national average of 12.22 cents per kwh. Those states also paid on average $2.48 for a gallon of gasoline. The national average price of gasoline is $2.40.


Here’s the rankings of the “greenest” U.S. states and their energy costs:

1. Vermont — 17.05 cents per kwh, $2.42 per gallon

2: Massachusetts — 19.59 cents per kwh, $2.35 per gallon

3: Oregon — 10.40 cents per kwh, $2.77 per gallon

4: Washington — 9.24 cents per kwh, $2.91 per gallon

5: Connecticut — 19.28 cents per kwh, $2.49 per gallon

6: Maine — 15.95 cents per kwh, $2.39 per gallon

7: Minnesota — 12.13 cents per kwh, $2.33 per gallon

8: New York — 17.30 cents per kwh, $2.53 per gallon

9: New Hampshire — 18.48 cents per kwh, $2.30 per gallon

10: Rhode Island — 18.98 cents per kwh, $2.37 per gallon

In contrast, here are the rankings of the “least green” U.S. states and their energy costs:

1: Wyoming — 10.57 cents per kwh, $2.32 per gallon

2: Montana — 10.61 cents per kwh, $2.37 per gallon

3: West Virginia — 11.31 cents per kwh, $2.39 per gallon

4: North Dakota — 8.98 cents per kwh, $2.36 per gallon

5: Oklahoma — 9.09 cents per kwh, $2.19 per gallon

6: Louisiana — 7.71 cents per kwh, $2.22 per gallon

7: Nebraska — 9.28 cents per kwh, $2.37 per gallon

8: Kentucky — 10.26 cents per kwh, $2.36 per gallon

9: Kansas — 11.95 cents per kwh, $2.26 per gallon

10: Arkansas — 9.18 cents per kwh, $2.18 per gallon

Someone living in one of least “green” states paid less for energy than the national average or the greener states, spending 9.89 cents per kilowatt-hour and $2.29 per gallon of gasoline.

Expensive power and gasoline disproportionately hurts poorer families and other lower-income groups since the poor tend to spend a higher proportion of their incomes on “basic needs” like power.

The average Americans’ power bill rose nearly 11 percent since former President Barack Obama took office, according to an analysis of government data previously published by TheDCNF.

When essential goods like electricity or gasoline becomes more expensive, the cost of producing goods and services that use electricity increases, effectively raising the price of almost everything. The higher prices are ultimately paid for by consumers, not industries.





Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/19/a...t-they-have-very-pricey-energy/#ixzz4eiMTyn2I

 

[op2]

You're ignoring the cost of the extermalities. DUH! Of course if you can shove off part of the cost of your product to society at large you're going to be able to charge less at the point of purchase. That's just common sense.

That said though, although I don't doubt that fossil fuels are still cheaper a lot of the time and will be around for the foreseeable future, the larger story is that the green technologies are young technologies that will continue to make big gains in efficiency whereas fossil fuels are a mature technology where big gains are going to be harder to come by.

Solar City (an arm of Tesia) is in the process of building a large factory in Nevada to build lithium ion batteries. When it is done in 2020 that one factory will produce more lithium ion batteries than the entire world produced in 2013. That is what happens when a technology is young. The gains come fast and furious.

Another issue with that column is that the point isn't the cost of the energy per se but rather the cost relative to the cost of living in the state. If it costs 10% more to live in State X and energy there costs 10% more too then it's a wash.

 

[WVPATX]

You're ignoring the cost of the extermalities. DUH! Of course if you can shove off part of the cost of your product to society at large you're going to be able to charge less at the point of purchase. That's just common sense.

That said though, although I don't doubt that fossil fuels are still cheaper a lot of the time and will be around for the foreseeable future, the larger story is that the green technologies are young technologies that will continue to make big gains in efficiency whereas fossil fuels are a mature technology where big gains are going to be harder to come by.

Solar City (an arm of Tesia) is in the process of building a large factory in Nevada to build lithium ion batteries. When it is done in 2020 that one factory will produce more lithium ion batteries than the entire world produced in 2013. That is what happens when a technology is young. The gains come fast and furious.

Another issue with that column is that the point isn't the cost of the energy per se but rather the cost relative to the cost of living in the state. If it costs 10% more to live in State X and energy there costs 10% more too then it's a wash.

First of all, these energy costs are passed on directly to consumers and businesses. It hurts the poorest Americans the most and is very regressive. It also hurts businesses who have to compete with companies from cheaper energy cost states.

Second, you are wrong about technology changes benefitting only green companies. Fracking is a prime example. It made oil and gas costs much lower since it dramatically increased the supply at lower costs. And that technology continues to improve, so much that the Permian Basin can now produce oil at just $25/BBL.

Your final issue that the cost of energy is "irrelevant" without considering the cost of living in that state. This is demonstrably false. As I posted, it hurts business competitiveness from outside the state. Secondly, if the residents pay more for energy in high cost of living states, it really hurts their ability even more to make a decent living since they are paying more for energy and therefore have less money for everything else.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

You're ignoring the cost of the extermalities. DUH! Of course if you can shove off part of the cost of your product to society at large you're going to be able to charge less at the point of purchase. That's just common sense.

That said though, although I don't doubt that fossil fuels are still cheaper a lot of the time and will be around for the foreseeable future, the larger story is that the green technologies are young technologies that will continue to make big gains in efficiency whereas fossil fuels are a mature technology where big gains are going to be harder to come by.

Solar City (an arm of Tesia) is in the process of building a large factory in Nevada to build lithium ion batteries. When it is done in 2020 that one factory will produce more lithium ion batteries than the entire world produced in 2013. That is what happens when a technology is young. The gains come fast and furious.

Another issue with that column is that the point isn't the cost of the energy per se but rather the cost relative to the cost of living in the state. If it costs 10% more to live in State X and energy there costs 10% more too then it's a wash.

Charleston is getting its first SuperChargers next month. I think the only other one in WV is in Wheeling. Our state parks have a few slower chargers. Now if only we could buy a Tesla here. lol

 

[op2]

First of all, these energy costs are passed on directly to consumers and businesses. It hurts the poorest Americans the most and is very regressive. It also hurts businesses who have to compete with companies from cheaper energy cost states.

Second, you are wrong about technology changes benefitting only green companies. Fracking is a prime example. It made oil and gas costs much lower since it dramatically increased the supply at lower costs. And that technology continues to improve, so much that the Permian Basin can now produce oil at just $25/BBL.

Your final issue that the cost of energy is "irrelevant" without considering the cost of living in that state. This is demonstrably false. As I posted, it hurts business competitiveness from outside the state. Secondly, if the residents pay more for energy in high cost of living states, it really hurts their ability even more to make a decent living since they are paying more for energy and therefore have less money for everything else.

The costs of pollution that aren't paid by the company nor are paid at the point of purchase by the customer are paid by society at large.

Also, yes, new technologies can help fossil fuels (and even hurt fossil fuels at the same time, as fracking for shale oil putting coal out of business has shown) but there is just much more low hanging fruit for new technologies than old ones.

As far as the cost of living goes, maybe I didn't make my point clear. If everything in a state costs 10% more then the relative cost of energy isn't any different than in a state where everything costs 10% less. Yes, the energy costs 10% more, but so does everything else. In that case it's not the cost of the energy per se that's the problem but rather the cost of everything.

 

[Brushy Bill]

How about this, we stick green energy and fossil fuel energy in the Thunderdome, may the best man live.

 

[op2]

Charleston is getting its first SuperChargers next month. I think the only other one in WV is in Wheeling. Our state parks have a few slower chargers. Now if only we could buy a Tesla here. lol

Here is the supercharger map. The future will come to everywhere eventually, even WV.

https://www.tesla.com/supercharger

 

[WVPATX]

The costs of pollution that aren't paid by the company nor are paid at the point of purchase by the customer are paid by society at large.

Also, yes, new technologies can help fossil fuels (and even hurt fossil fuels at the same time, as fracking for shale oil putting coal out of business has shown) but there is just much more low hanging fruit for new technologies than old ones.

As far as the cost of living goes, maybe I didn't make my point clear. If everything in a state costs 10% more then the relative cost of energy isn't any different than in a state where everything costs 10% less. Yes, the energy costs 10% more, but so does everything else. In that case it's not the cost of the energy per se that's the problem but rather the cost of everything.

Your last point makes zero sense. Let's take New York City, a high cost of living city. If NYC can lower its cost of energy by 40%, would that not benefit the residents of this already high cost of living city? Wouldn't they have more disposable income? Wouldn't businesses benefit that compete across state lines? You seem to be assuming that a high cost of living state or city is not hurt by high energy costs without considering that those energy costs could be much lower thus helping the poorest the most.

And please don't confuse pollution with CO2 emissions.

 

[op2]

Your last point makes zero sense. Let's take New York City, a high cost of living city. If NYC can lower its cost of energy by 40%, would that not benefit the residents of this already high cost of living city? Wouldn't they have more disposable income? Wouldn't businesses benefit that compete across state lines? You seem to be assuming that a high cost of living state or city is not hurt by high energy costs without considering that those energy costs could be much lower thus helping the poorest the most.

And please don't confuse pollution with CO2 emissions.

I get the point about cost of living but I'm saying it's not energy per se that hurts poor people in high cost of living states but rather it's everything.

And believe it or not, lots of people think CO2 emissions do cost society money.

 

[WVPATX]

I get the point about cost of living but I'm saying it's not energy per se that hurts poor people in high cost of living states but rather it's everything.

And believe it or not, lots of people think CO2 emissions do cost society money.

I know that do but many disagree (re: CO2)

 

[Mog]

Charleston is getting its first SuperChargers next month. I think the only other one in WV is in Wheeling. Our state parks have a few slower chargers. Now if only we could buy a Tesla here. lol

A permit has been issued to build superchargers at the Sheetz just of Exit 1 of I68 in Morgantown, but apparently some logistical issues have delayed it. They're planning on constructing a station in Weston off of Exit 99 of I79 once they finish the one in Charleston, and they're planning to put one in Beckley at some point as well.

 

[op2]

A permit has been issued to build superchargers at the Sheetz just of Exit 1 of I68 in Morgantown, but apparently some logistical issues have delayed it. They're planning on constructing a station in Weston off of Exit 99 of I79 once they finish the one in Charleston, and they're planning to put one in Beckley at some point as well.

Awesome, not that I have a Tesla or live near there but I'm glad to see the spread of stations. From what I read Tesla is doing a big expansion in the number of stations to cope with the expected big increase in the number of Teslas on the round with the upcoming release of the Model 3. Not that it's a big number compared to big car companies but still they need enough stations to cope with whatever cars there are.

 

[Airport]

A permit has been issued to build superchargers at the Sheetz just of Exit 1 of I68 in Morgantown, but apparently some logistical issues have delayed it. They're planning on constructing a station in Weston off of Exit 99 of I79 once they finish the one in Charleston, and they're planning to put one in Beckley at some point as well.

Is the problem the boxing ring for all the blue lotters to throw down?

 

[Keyser76]

Lol, who cares, you win, fossil fuels are our future. But the DoD disagrees. How do you think we got Nuclear power

 

[WVPATX]

Lol, who cares, you win, fossil fuels are our future. But the DoD disagrees. How do you think we got Nuclear power

Fossil fuels are our future at least until renewables become price competitive at the delivery point.

 

[Mog]

Awesome, not that I have a Tesla or live near there but I'm glad to see the spread of stations. From what I read Tesla is doing a big expansion in the number of stations to cope with the expected big increase in the number of Teslas on the round with the upcoming release of the Model 3. Not that it's a big number compared to big car companies but still they need enough stations to cope with whatever cars there are.

Yeah, they definitely need to expand. They've got most of the major cross-country routes covered, so I think it'll be more adding capacity at the heavily traveled locations. Won't be a big deal on the east coast, but it could end up a clusterfuck out in California.

The idea behind them was that people would charge at home for regular travel, then just use the Superchargers while traveling long distance. Originally all Teslas had free supercharging for life, though that was discontinued recently. But part of the issue is that a large number of people who were able to spend $70k+ on a car were more than happy to regularly spend their time sitting in a parking lot somewhere to charge their car just so they could save a few bucks in electricity by not charging at home. Meanwhile people trying to get from A to B that actually needed to charge to continue their trip had to wait in line for the local people to finish.

The much bigger issue for Tesla, in my opinion, will be expanding their service centers.

 

[Mog]

Is the problem the boxing ring for all the blue lotters to throw down?

I think the problem is they're thinking about changing the design from a boxing ring to an octagon cage to capture the full blue lot experience [roll]

 

[D. Denzil Finney]

I know that do but many disagree (re: CO2)

Question is; which is liberal and which is not?

 

[WVPATX]

Question is; which is liberal and which is not?

I believe that it is primarily liberals that believe that CO2 must be regulated.

 

[dave]

And believe it or not, lots of people think CO2 emissions do cost society money.

Those same idiots want a green planet without CO2. Stuuuuuupid.

 

[WVPATX]

Those same idiots want a green planet without CO2. Stuuuuuupid.

Amazes me. Humans create CO2. That is why Bill Nye wants to punish Americans for having too many children, I guess. CO2 is essential for plant life. For human life. For all life. Yet, it is a pollutant, lmao.