Houston receives abysmal ranking on list of greenest cities in the US

room for improvement

Yikes, Houston is very far from being considered among the greenest cities in the country. Photo via Getty Images

Bad news, Houston. The Bayou City is the third worst metro when it comes to the country's greenest cities.

According to WalletHub's recently released Greenest Cities in America report, Houston is No. 98 out of 100 of the largest cities that were ranked in the study, which was based on information from the U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, The Trust for Public Land, U.S. Department of Energy - The Alternative Fuels Data Center, and more.

“There are plenty of things that individuals can do to adopt a green lifestyle, from recycling to sharing rides to installing solar panels on their homes. However, living in one of the greenest cities can make it even easier to care for the environment, due to sustainable laws and policies, access to locally-grown produce and infrastructure that allows residents to use vehicles less often," says Chip Lupo, WalletHub Analyst. "The greenest cities also are better for your health due to superior air and water quality.”

Houston scored 36.88 points out of 100, and comes in dead last on the environment ranking. Here's how the city performs when it comes to the other metrics:

No. 87 for transportation
No. 52 for energy sources
No. 61 for lifestyle and policy
No. 91 for greenhouse-gas emissions per capita
No. 30 for percent of green space
No. 86 for median air quality index
No. 97 for annual excess fuel consumption
No. 56 for percent of commuters who drive
No. 39 for walk score
No. 33 for farmers markets per capita

The big winners on the report are mostly on the West Coast. Of the top 10, six cities are from California. These are the greenest cities, per the report:

San Diego, California
Washington, D.C.
Honolulu, Hawaii
San Francisco, California
San Jose, California
Seattle, Washington
Oakland, California
Portland, Oregon
Fremont, California
Irvine, California

Texas isn't seen on the list until Austin, which ranked No. 26. The rest of the major Lone Star State major metros include San Antonio at No. 44, Fort Worth at No. 76, and Dallas at No. 81.

While this report is pretty damning, there's not a general consensus that all hope is lost for Houston when it comes to being green. Last year, the city was ranked as having the lowest carbon footprint, based on a report from Park Sleep Fly.

However, WalletHub's report has pretty consistently ranked Houston low on the list. Last year, Houston was slightly higher up at No. 95. In 2022 and 2021, the city claimed the No. 93 spot.

From Your Site Articles

Texas's evolving energy landscape means affordability for residents, a new report finds. Photo via Pexels

Here's how Texas ranks when it comes to energy affordability

$$$

The Lone Star State is an economical option when it comes to energy costs, one report has found.

WalletHub, a personal finance website, analyzed energy affordability across the 50 states in its new report, Energy Costs by State in 2024, which looked at residential energy types: electricity, natural gas, motor fuel and home heating oil.

Texas ranked as the fourth cheapest state for energy, or No. 47 in the report that sorted by most expensive average monthly energy bill. Texans' average energy cost per month is $437, the report found.

Source: WalletHub

Here's how Texas ranked in key categories, with No. 1 being the most expensive and No. 50 being the cheapest:

No. 27 – price of electricity
No. 15 – price of natural gas
No. 44 – natural-gas consumption per consumer
No. 40 – price of motor fuel
No. 16 – motor-fuel consumption per driver
No. 49 – home heating-oil consumption per consumer

With the most expensive state — Wyoming — being over four times the cost compared to the cheapest state — New Mexico, the difference between energy costs between states varies greatly, but the reason for that isn't exactly a mystery.

“Energy prices vary from state to state based on several factors including energy sources, supply and demand, energy regulation, regulatory authorities, competition, and the free market," explains expert Justin Perryman, a professor at Washington University School of Law. "[States] such as Texas have a deregulated electricity marketplace. Missouri and 17 other states have a regulated energy market. In deregulated markets there are typically more energy providers which often leads to more competition and lower prices; however, other factors can contribute to energy prices.

"In regulated markets, the state energy regulatory authority sets the prices of energy," he continues. "It can be politically unpopular to raise energy costs, so those states may benefit from lower energy costs. Factors such as the state’s commitment to renewable energy may also factor into energy costs. Proximity to less expensive energy sources can lower energy costs.”

Texas's evolving energy landscape has been well documented, and earlier this year the state's solar energy generation surpassed the output by coal, according to a report from the Institute For Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.

A separate report found that, when compared to other states, Texas will account for the biggest share of new utility-scale solar capacity and new battery storage capacity in 2024. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the state will make up 35 percent of new utility-scale solar capacity in the U.S. this year.

In addition to its No. 22 overall ranking, Texas took first place in the "Vulnerability to Climate Change" category.

Texas named most vulnerable state to climate change in new report

lone star disappointment

The Lone Star State performed most averagely in a new report that ranked all 50 states on environmental protection.

Texas ranked No. 22 on the report from SmileHub, a nonprofit tech platform using data to evaluate charities. The report analyzed 23 metrics — from energy efficiency score and industrial toxins per square mile of land area to climate change vulnerability — factoring in data from U.S. Census Bureau, Internal Revenue Service, Department of Agriculture, and more.

"The U.S. produces over 292 million tons of waste per year, or over 4.9 pounds per person per day, according to the latest data from the Environmental Protection Agency," reads the report. "Additionally, due to pollution, California, Oregon, Michigan, Indiana and South Carolina each have over 12,000 miles of river unsuitable for human contact. Pollution and waste are issues across the U.S., but some states work harder than others to limit their impact."

In addition to its middle-of-the-pack No. 22 overall ranking, Texas took first place in the "Vulnerability to Climate Change" category. Here's how else the state measured up:

No. 18 – Environmental Protection Charities per Capita
No. 36 – Share of State Land Designated for Parks and Wildlife
No. 28 – Energy Efficiency Score
No. 28 – Share of Population Using Green Transportation
No. 33 – Total Tonnage of Landfill Waste per Capita
No. 28 – Industrial Toxins per Square Mile of Land Area

It's not the first time the state performed poorly on recent environmental reports. In April, WalletHub evaluated the current health of states' environment and residents’ environmental-friendliness. Texas ranked No. 38, meaning it was the thirteenth least green state, only scoring 50.40 points out of 100.

Additionally, Houston has stood out for the wrong reasons. In May, Houston was ranked as the No. 15 most polluted city in the U.S. according to data compiled by the National Public Utilities Council. No other Texas city appears in the ranking. Three California cities — Bakersfield, Visalia, and Fresno — took the top three spots.

Ad Placement 300x100

Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Energy giant Shell lists Houston HQ for sale for $325 million

asset offload

Energy giant Shell has put its U.S. headquarters in Houston’s Energy Corridor on the market and is exploring the sale of its U.S. chemical business.

Green Street News reported Shell just listed its longtime Energy Corridor campus at 150 N. Dairy Ashford Road. The asking price is $325 million, The Real Deal reported. Shell plans to lease back half of the nearly 1.5 million-square-foot Woodcreek campus for 15 years.

A sale-leaseback deal could transform the 43.6-acre campus into a multitenant hub, CoStar News reported.

“Houston is a critical hub for Shell globally and the headquarters of our U.S. businesses,” a Shell spokesperson told the Houston Business Journal. “We remain committed to Houston and are evaluating opportunities to optimize our Woodcreek campus as part of our ongoing review of workplace needs while maintaining a strong presence in the city.”

Shell occupied its first building at the West Houston campus in 1980. The company employs more than 6,000 people in Texas.

Shell is one of the highest-profile businesses occupying space in the Energy Corridor. It’s home to 67,000 workers, more than 27 million square feet of office and mixed-use space, and 3.8 million square feet of retail and restaurant space.

Shell considers $8B sale of chemical business

As the company seeks to unload its Woodcreek campus, The Financial Times reported Shell is looking into selling its U.S. chemical business. The price tag: $8 billion.

Potential buyers include Spring-based ExxonMobil and Houston-based LyondellBasell.

Shell operates four chemical plants in Texas, Louisiana and Pennsylvania, producing an array of chemicals for use in plastics, detergents and pharmaceuticals.

Shell CEO Wael Sawan said last year that the company had spent $45 billion in capital “that is underperforming for us,” split between its chemical business and renewable energy arm.

Shell also agreed to sell its solar and wind power business in India this summer. Read more here.

Trump continues to champion data center growth despite rising voter concerns

Data Development

President Donald Trump, speaking alongside cryptocurrency leaders at the White House, made a statement that Republican and Democratic candidates alike wouldn't touch.

“If I were the mayor of a town or the governor of a state, and I had a chance to get a big plant in, an AI plant or a data center,” Trump said, “I would absolutely want it because the jobs are enormous and the money paid, the taxes paid, are just enormous.”

It's not the kind of message anyone is using in competitive midterm races.

The race to build data centers, which power artificial intelligence and cloud computing, has run aground amid frustration from voters who don't want to live near the massive warehouse campuses. Even the Senate Republicans' campaign arm warned that anger over data centers — some of which dwarf football stadiums and use more energy than small cities — could cost them a seat.

Opposition stretches across the political spectrum because of fears that the behemoths will jack up electricity bills, drain people's water wells, create unhealthy amounts of air and noise pollution and forever change a community's character — all while getting lucrative tax breaks from states competing for their business.

Trump has framed data centers as a necessary component of a top national and economic security priority: winning the AI race against China. However, he also has acknowledged concern over rising electricity bills, previously saying “it’s only fair” for the companies to shoulder their costs.

He also suggested this week that data centers need “a little public relations help.” In recent months, he has gotten tech giants to sign a voluntary pledge to shield U.S. consumers from higher utility bills from data centers, even as he pushes to streamline the process for companies and utilities to build their own power plants.

But building power plants doesn't happen overnight, and the immediate political reality for candidates across the country is far different.

“It is yet another dimension in which the White House appears tone deaf — tone deaf at best and indifferent to the interest of other Republican candidates at worst,” said James Henson, the director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas, Austin, a nonpartisan research organization.

Republican committee issues warning over data centers in Ohio

Statewide candidates from Nevada to Pennsylvania, both Republican and Democratic, are weaponizing data centers against their opponents, and candidates who absorb those attacks are subsequently trying to distance themselves from them.

In Ohio, a data center hot spot with closely contested races for governor and U.S. Senate, the National Republican Senatorial Committee warned in a memo Tuesday that Sen. Jon Husted is vulnerable to losing his seat because of the centers.

Democratic nominee Sherrod Brown is airing attack ads against Husted that call him the “face of data centers in Ohio” as people gather signatures for a statewide referendum to ban their construction.

The Republican memo said it's been a “sleeper issue for the entire election cycle.”

“Brown is using it because it works,” the NRSC said. “More than any other thing in this race, data centers are the anchor hanging around Husted’s neck. If he loses and data centers get the blame, politicians across the country will take notice — and they will not go near the next one.”

The memo suggested voters may balk at Democratic candidates who want to stop data center construction altogether in favor of a Republican candidate who only wants data centers built if a community approves it in a local vote and it pays for its own power, water and other utilities.

Most registered voters oppose building a data center in their area, according to a July Fox News poll.

Still, the issue falls behind other voter concerns, such as cost of living, as November looms. A Quinnipiac Poll conducted in June asked voters what issues were important in deciding who to vote for in U.S. House elections, and about 4 in 10 mentioned AI data centers.

Trump’s statement already put to use in Nevada race

In Nevada, Democrat Aaron Ford quickly tied Trump’s statement to Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo, characterizing them as being in “lockstep on data centers.”

In a statement, Ford said Trump and Lombardo are “Nevada data centers’ biggest cheerleaders” who “only care about catering to their ‘billionaire friends’ while Nevadans pay the price.”

Ford this week unveiled a policy platform in which he said he would halt new state tax breaks for data centers — he estimated them at $200 million currently — while auditing existing projects to ensure they are delivering on promises. He also said he would ensure data centers pay for their electricity needs, do not deplete Nevada’s water supply and help local governments negotiate strong benefits agreements with developers.

Texas' governor changed course and got a jab from Trump

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who last November celebrated Google’s announcement of a $40 billion investment there by calling the state “the epicenter of AI development,” is under attack from his Democratic challenger, Gina Hinojosa, over his pursuit of data center development.

Abbott has since changed course by promising tougher action, such as removing the state’s sales tax exemption and holding up projects to review their energy usage.

Trump criticized the shift, saying “I think it's a mistake” in a recent interview with Punchbowl News.

Asked about Trump's support for data centers, Abbott's office said the governor's “top priority is to protect Texans’ safety and quality of life and ensure the integrity of our power grid and water supply.”

“Simply put, Texans must come first,” Abbott's office said.

Data centers complicated Wisconsin governor race

While Trump embraces data centers, even some of his allies are using them for political attacks. U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, running for Wisconsin governor, released a TV ad this week branding his Democratic opponent as “Data Center David Crowley.”

The ad includes a clip of Crowley saying Wisconsin could become the “AI and data hub not only for the entire country, but for the entire globe.”

Crowley has said local communities must have veto authority while also calling data centers a part of the modern economy that could bring significant economic benefits to the state.

Tiffany, who Trump has endorsed, has also said positive things about data centers. In January, Tiffany called data centers “exciting new technology,” in an interview with PBS Wisconsin. And last December, he voted for a bipartisan bill known as the SPEED Act, which is designed to accelerate construction of new AI infrastructure projects like data centers. It hasn't passed the Senate.

Neither Tiffany nor Crowley support a moratorium on new data center construction.

Tiffany has called for repealing the state tax incentive for data centers, while Crowley has not. They both have called for stricter regulation.

Crowley, at an event Wednesday where he received the endorsement of the environmental group Clean Wisconsin, downplayed the attacks Tiffany has made against his data center position.

“He’s getting very good at saying one thing and doing something different,” Crowley said, pointing to Tiffany’s votes in support of the SPEED Act.

“What Congressman Tom Tiffany’s doing is lying because he’s trying to run away from his record in Congress,” Crowley said.

Houston startup wins Space Force contract to advance quantum energy generator

quantum contract

Houston-based quantum energy technology startup Casimir Inc. has been awarded an STTR Phase I contract from the U.S. Space Force's SpaceWERX to support the development of the company's solid-state generator for potential use by the Department of the Air Force.

SpaceWERX is the innovation arm of the U.S. Space Force and a division within AFWERX, the incubator and innovation arm of the United States Department of the Air Force. The Air Force Research Laboratory and SpaceWERX, along with many other government agencies, help support innovation through the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) grants and contracts.

As part of the new contract, Casimir will work to refine a fully independent generator. Casimir’s solid-state power technology could support national security missions by providing reliable power even in difficult-to-service environments.

In May, Casimir emerged from stealth, netting a $12 million seed round to commercialize its quantum energy chip. The semiconductor chips can generate power from quantum vacuum fields without the need for batteries or charging. The company aims to include the chips in large-scale energy systems that can power homes, commercial infrastructure and electric vehicles.

“This STTR funds some analysis work to address our proposed scaling approach of making our chips multi-layer to increase aggregate power,” Harold “Sonny” White, founder and CEO of Casimir, tells Energy Capital.

White adds that the company will work with Texas A&M to develop chip planarization techniques to support Casimir’s plans to scale. Additionally, White says the company is working with the U.S. Space Force to explore more applications for its technology.

“Casimir’s technology brings a new capability to the market in the form of our persistent power chips,” White adds. “This approach will be relevant to ultra-low-power electronics, and with the scaling approach we are developing, connected with the STTR work, will eventually be relevant to consumer electronics and beyond.”

Casimir has previously reported that it plans to commercialize its first-generation MicroSparc chip by 2028. The chips are expected to power devices for years without the need for replacements.

The total funding for this project has not yet been disclosed.

View All Listings

ENERGYCAPITALHTX EMAILS ARE AWESOME