Over the past 30 years, costs for everyday essentials have climbed — milk is up 34%, eggs by 65%. But what about the electricity powering your fridge? 

Surprisingly, Pennsylvania shoppers could be paying about the same for electricity in 2024 as they did in 1996 — if they take advantage of the state’s competitive energy market.

A new report released by former Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commissioner John Hanger — an architect of the state’s transition to competitive energy markets — revealed that the average 2024 residential retail supply price of electricity in Pennsylvania was just one-thousandth of a cent more per kWh than it was in 1996 –– virtually identical to the average utility rate 30 years ago.  

Hanger’s data analysis is a continuation of research he first started in 2016 as a way to evaluate consumer benefits in a competitive market years after breaking up utility monopolies.

Sharing the news of his latest white paper, Hanger said, “It’s clear that competition in an energy market is working. The monopoly utility structure made energy less affordable and customers still had roaming blackouts in the early 1990s. By introducing competition to the market, power generation has increased and customers are able to hold utility companies accountable because they can shop for their electricity supplier.”

Hanger’s analysis reveals that customers in three utility service territories –– who shopped the lowest fixed-price offers from a retail energy supplier –– likely paid LESS in 2024 than when they were with their vertically integrated utility company in 1996.

What does that mean in dollars and cents?

An electricity customer in the PECO service territory (southeast Pennsylvania) who shopped for the lowest retail energy supply offer paid nearly $15 less a month for 500 kWh of electricity than what they were paying with their utility company in 1996.

“Competition puts power where it belongs — in the hands of consumers,” said Chris Ercoli, president and CEO of the Retail Energy Advancement League. “John Hanger’s report makes it clear: retail competition has allowed active shoppers to win on price and choice –– and even if you don’t switch, it has kept everyone’s rate in check.”

Hanger found that when inflation adjustments were added to the 1996 rates, PECO’s captive ratepayers would have been paying $42 more a month in 2024 for PECO’s electric supply. But with the downward price pressure of retail supply competitive offers, PECO’s rate was contained to only $4 more a month in 2024 than what it was in 1996 –– demonstrating that competition was benefiting all residential energy users. 

Whether you’re actively shopping for electricity or sticking with your utility, Pennsylvania’s competitive energy market is already working in your favor. Customers have power with electricity competition because all suppliers have to compete for your business, helping to keep bills in check –– for everyone. And for those who do take the time to shop, the savings can go even further.

To read more about John Hanger’s white paper, click here.

BOSTON –– Massachusetts electric customers had 68 fixed-rate offers from competitive energy suppliers in May that were less than the standard supply rate offered by utility companies in the state’s seven service territories. The average rate for the competitive energy supply offers was 11.86 cents a kilowatt hour (kWh), while the collective average rate of the seven utility companies was 13.57 cents a kWh. Customers who shopped for the lowest competitive energy supply offer could have saved an average of more than 12 percent on their electric bill.

If a residential customer uses 1,000 kWh of electricity a month, the statewide average supply savings in May would have been nearly $15 for the month.

All Massachusetts electric customers could have collectively saved more than $20 million in May if every customer enrolled with a competitive electric supplier that offered the lowest rate in their area.

A total of 255 competitive electric supply offers were available in May. Customers had 139 green energy supply offers above renewable portfolio standards (RPS) to choose from.

This monthly rate summary analysis can be found here. 

Data for this analysis is sourced from Massachusetts’ state-managed energy shopping website, EnergySwitchMA.gov.

Harrisburg, PA –– The Retail Energy Advancement League (REAL) has issued the following statement in response to the development and publishing of R Street Institute’s State-By-State Scorecard on Electricity Competition. The following statement can be attributed to Chris Ercoli, the president and CEO of the Retail Energy Advancement League (REAL). 

“The Retail Energy Advancement League is excited about this new resource that R Street Institute has created to help state leaders improve energy markets for consumers. 

“This scorecard offers lawmakers and regulators in almost every state a clear, comparative assessment of how well they’re serving residents with electricity options — and, more importantly, where there’s room for improvement.

“The results of this state-by-state analysis further highlight the limitations of monopoly utility markets when compared to restructured markets. Competition applies downward pressure on prices, drives innovation, empowers consumers, and enhances accountability — all while reducing exposure to unnecessary utility risks.

“While the letter grades provide a benchmark, the scorecard’s true value lies in identifying where states may be underperforming and how they can learn from one another to deliver better outcomes for electric customers.

“R Street has produced a valuable resource with this scorecard, especially at a time when state leaders are attempting to address energy affordability and reliability concerns. We believe it is in the best interest of state leaders to work toward enhancing electricity competition while improving consumer benefits –– and ultimately reaching A+ status.“

The R Street Institute’s State-By-State Scorecard on Electricity Competition can be found here.

###