The 2019 community power scorecard – renewable energy world gas efficient cars

#############

In the 2019 Community Power Scorecard, four states excelled, 11 states and the District of Columbia saw above average scores, 15 were mediocre, and 20 states received failing grades at enabling individuals and communities to take charge of their energy futures. Click or scroll down to view and share infographics of the latest Scorecard and state scores — including a list of the Top 5 and Bottom 5 states.

Details about our scoring methodology are available on our interactive Community Power Map. In addition to synthesizing information available from national resources provided by clean energy and policy groups such as DSIRE, Interstate Renewable Energy Council, and the National Conference of State Legislatures, we continue gas in california to track coverage of notable actions taken by legislatures and utility commissions that impact how communities can participate in decision-making in the energy system.

In addition, we also adjusted the way we scored state policies enabling community or shared renewable programs to give greater weight to these important efforts that increase access to distributed energy. We created a new rubric to evaluate existing policies and programs, giving credit to states with enabling policy and fully-fledged programs that include multiple utilities, meaningfully address access by low-income households, have more than 100 Megawatts of capacity online, and allow for multiple technologies (e.g., solar, wind, digesters). In doing so, we increased the number of available points in this category by two. As a result, a total of 38 points are available across all categories used in our 2019 Scorecard.

For each factor, passing grades power generation definition (represented by a black checkmark) correspond to whether or not the state has an enabling policy and, in some cases, the quality of its policy or program (we consider individual policy grades of C or above to be passing). Conversely, mediocre and failing grades, illustrated by a red X, mean the state does not have that particular policy — or that its policy does not sufficiently support local clean energy.

Massachusetts has a Community Power score of 32 out of 38. The state has many policies encouraging local power, including net metering and simplified interconnection to encourage distributed energy resources like solar, as well as requiring utility renewable energy procurement to include distributed resources. It also allows shared or community renewable energy, communities to pick their energy suppliers, and allows communities to provide financing to commercial properties with property assessed clean energy. Massachusetts also has a state building energy code with a standard “stretch” code for communities to go further than the state standard. The state only lacks a standard contract for distributed renewable energy projects and residential PACE.

California has a Community Power score of 31 out of 38. The state has many policies encouraging local power, including net metering and simplified interconnection to encourage distributed energy resources like solar. It also allows shared or community renewable energy, communities to pick their energy suppliers, and allows communities to provide financing to residential and commercial properties with property assessed clean energy. California is one of a few states to provide a standard electricity video ks1 offer contract or feed-in tariff to help finance distributed energy across the state. The state lags in requiring utility renewable energy procurement to include distributed resources, and its shared renewables program could be improved.

New York has a Community Power score of 29 out of 36. The state has many policies encouraging local power, including net metering gas finder and simplified interconnection to encourage distributed energy resources like solar, as well as requiring utility renewable energy procurement to include distributed resources. It also allows shared/community renewable energy, communities to pick their energy suppliers, and allows communities to provide financing to residential and commercial properties with property assessed clean energy. The state lacks a standard contract for distributed renewable energy projects and a stretch building energy code for cities to go further than the state standard.

Illinois has a Community Power score of 29 out of 38. The state has many policies encouraging local power, including net metering and simplified interconnection to encourage distributed energy resources like solar, as well as requiring utility renewable energy procurement to include distributed resources. It also allows shared/community renewable energy, communities to pick their energy suppliers, and allows communities to provide financing to commercial properties with property assessed clean energy. Illinois doesn’t offer a standard contract for distributed renewable energy projects or a stretch building energy code for cities to go further than the state standard. Its shared renewables program could also be improved.

New Jersey has a Community Power score of 27 out of 38. Notably, New Jersey passed and enacted a landmark energy policy bill in 2018 that enables a new community solar pilot program, which helped its overall score. The state has many policies encouraging local gas tax power, including net metering (including aggregate net metering for public entities) and above average interconnection to encourage distributed energy resources like solar, as well as requiring utility renewable energy procurement to include distributed resources. It also allows communities to pick their energy suppliers, and allows communities to provide financing to residential and commercial properties with property assessed clean energy. New Jersey doesn’t offer a standard contract for distributed renewable energy projects or a stretch building energy code for cities to go further than the state standard.

Alabama has a Community Power score of 2 out of 38. It is tied with Louisiana for the lowest scoring state and receives an F in our grade. The state allows communities to provide energy financing to commercial properties with property assessed clean energy, but lacks any other significant policy to support local renewable energy development.

South Dakota has a Community Power score of 3 out of 38. South Dakota’s score is tied with those of North Dakota and Kansas; its policies receive an F in our grade. The state allows communities to set their own building energy codes and receives a passing (C) grade for its grid interconnection rules (slightly better than either North Dakota and Kansas), but lacks any other significant policy to support local renewable energy development.

North Dakota has a Community Power score of 3 out of 38. North Dakota gas mask art’s score is tied with those of South Dakota and Kansas; its policies receive an F in our grade. The state allows communities to set their own building energy codes and receives a mediocre but failing (D) grade for its net metering environment, which is slightly better than South Dakota. The state lacks other significant policy to support local renewable energy development.