Evergreen Action and Wisconsin Conservation Voters contributed to this report, with commissioned analysis provided by Greenline Insights.
Background
A new analysis shows Wisconsin’s governor’s race presents a stark choice on household energy costs: policies modeled from David Crowley’s clean energy agenda would deliver significantly more savings for Wisconsin households, while policies modeled from Tom Tiffany’s energy agenda would leave families paying substantially more. Together, the two approaches amount to a $10 billion difference in cumulative household energy costs from 2027 through 2040 – $4,000 for the average Wisconsin household.
The analysis, conducted by Greenline Insights and commissioned by Evergreen Action and Wisconsin Conservation Voters, modeled key policy packages. The “Rollback” scenario reflects Tiffany’s platform to cut energy efficiency programming and restrict renewable energy build out. The “Expansion” scenario reflects a major piece of Crowley’s policy platform: investing in home weatherization and efficiency.
Sep 30, 2026
Tom Tiffany’s Anti-Renewable Energy Plan Could Cost Wisconsin Families Billions compared to Crowley’s Clean Energy Agenda
Crowley & Tiffany's Platforms Show Starkly Different Energy Cost Paths
Households could see about $4,000 in cost differences
One agenda saves families money. The other adds billions in costs.
Crowley Affordability Agenda
Tiffany Repeal Agenda
Average Wisconsin household (2027-2040 cumulative)
$826 in savings per household
$3,181 in added costs per household
Statewide household impact (2027-2040 cumulative)
$2.1B in savings statewide
$8B in added costs statewide
Tiffany's Approach: Cut Energy Efficiency Programs, Curtail Renewable Energy Build Out
The rollback scenario aligns with Tiffany’s support for curtailing renewable energy build out and energy efficiency programming. That includes provisions such as:
Cutting Focus on Energy energy efficiency funding
Limiting renewable energy build out in favor of fossil fuel power plants
Greenline modeled a policy to cut Wisconsin’s statewide energy efficiency programs through Focus on Energy, which accounts for $2.9B of the costs attributed to the rollback platform in the analysis. Households would stop paying the charge that funds the program, creating a real reduction on one line of their utility bills. But they would also lose the substantially larger energy savings those programs deliver. The savings lost from this policy outweigh the reduction in the program charge by more than eight to one.
Greenline also modeled a policy to limit renewable energy development, consistent with Tiffany’s platform. Restricting renewable energy buildout, even when renewables are the lower-cost option, accounts for over $5B in costs attributed to the rollback package.
Together, Greenline found that the full rollback package would add approximately $8 billion to Wisconsin household costs through 2040.
Crowley's Approach: Expand Clean Energy & Weatherize Homes
The modeled “expansion scenario” reflects major components of David Crowley’s energy platform and finds they could save Wisconsin households approximately $2.1 billion through 2040 by expanding home weatherization and efficiency.
This large savings estimate comes from investing in household energy efficiency and weatherization programming like Focus on Energy. Currently, Wisconsin’s state-wide efficiency program is funded by a charge on utility retail revenues currently set at 1.2%. Greenline modeled doubling the funding of that program to 2.4% and found the average household could save over $800 cumulatively through 2040 on their energy bills. The analysis also does not include savings from Crowley’s stronger utility accountability and renewable energy measures, which would directly lower costs for ratepayers. And when families spend less on energy, they have more money to spend on groceries, local businesses and other goods and services, supporting Wisconsin’s economy.
What the Governor's Race Could Mean for Wisconsin Energy Costs
Greenline’s analysis shows that the two energy policy directions could have significantly different consequences for Wisconsinites’ budgets.
Crowley-aligned policies: $2.1 billion in household savings.
Tiffany’ repeal agenda: $8 billion in added household costs.
Difference: $10 billion or $4,000 for the average Wisconsin household
For Wisconsin families already facing high energy costs, the next governor’s agenda could mean thousands of dollars in savings or added energy costs.
Source: Greenline Insights analysis commissioned by Evergreen Action. The underlying study models policy packages encoded from publicly stated positions in their strongest stated form; it makes no reference to candidates, parties, or legislation, and takes no position on any candidate or proposal. All candidate and platform characterizations in this document are those of Evergreen Action and Wisconsin Conservation Voters alone. Results are modeled impacts if enacted, 2027–2040, in 2026 dollars; per-household figures are statewide averages. Full methodology is available in the underlying report.
