ADVERTISEABOUT USSUBMIT A STORYSUBSCRIBETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICY
Visit our family of Brands

Texas ranks low on most energy-efficient states report

by the numbers

Texas ranked in the bottom half on WalletHub's list of the most energy-efficient states. Photo via unsplash.

Texas has room to improve when it comes to energy efficiency, recent data from WalletHub shows.

The personal finance website ranked Texas at No. 35 on the latest Most & Least Energy-Efficient States list. Texas improved by one spot on the 2025 report, after coming in at No. 36 last year.

The report measured and ranked the efficiency of auto energy and home energy consumption in the 48 U.S. mainland states based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau, National Climatic Data Center, U.S. Energy Information Administration and the U.S. Department of Transportation – Federal Highway Administration.

Texas earned an overall score of 50.60. It was ranked No. 27 for home energy efficiency and No. 41 for auto efficiency. By comparison, No. 1-ranked Vermont earned a score of 85.30, ranking No. 2 for home energy and No. 6 for out energy.

The top five overall states included:

  • No. 1 Vermont
  • No. 2 California
  • No. 3 Washington
  • No. 4 New York
  • No. 5 Massachusetts

South Dakota earned the top rank for home energy efficiency, and Massachusetts earned the top rank for energy efficiency.

“Energy efficiency doesn’t just help save the planet – it also helps save you money by lowering the amount of electricity, gas, oil or other types of energy you need to consume. While there are some steps you can take to become more energy-efficient on your own, living in the right area can give you a big boost," WalletHub analyst Chip Lupo said in the report. "For example, certain states have much better public transportation systems that minimize your need to drive, at least in big cities. Some places also have better-constructed buildings that retain heat better during the winter or stay cooler during the summer.”

According to the report, some progress is being made in increasing energy efficiency across the country. The U.S. Energy Information Administration expects 26 percent of electricity generation in 2026 will come from renewables. A number of them are being developed in the Houston area, including recent announcements like the Pleasure Island Power Collective in Port Arthur.

Still, Houston earned an abysmal ranking on WalletHub's greenest cities in the U.S. report earlier this year, coming in at No. 99 out of 100. Read more here.

From Your Site Articles
Houston had two big strikes against it on WalletHub's Greenest Cities in America report. Photo via Getty Images.

Houston ranks No. 99 out of 100 on new report of greenest U.S. cities

Sustainability Slide

Houstonians may be feeling blue about a new ranking of the greenest cities in the U.S.

Among the country’s 100 largest cities based on population, Houston ranks 99th across 28 key indicators of “green” living in a new study from personal finance website WalletHub. The only city with a lower ranking is Glendale, Arizona. Last year, Houston landed at No. 98 on the WalletHub list.

“‘Green’ living means a choice to engage in cleaner, more sustainable habits in order to preserve the planet as much as possible,” WalletHub says.

Among the study’s ranking factors are the amount of greenhouse gas emissions per capita, the number of “smart energy” policies, and the presence of “green job” programs.

In the study, Houston received an overall score of 35.64 out of 100. WalletHub put its findings into four buckets, with Houston ranked 100th in the environment and transportation categories, 56th in the lifestyle and policy category, and 52nd in the energy sources category.

In the environment category, Houston has two big strikes against it. The metro area ranks among the 10 worst places for ozone pollution (No. 7) and year-round particle pollution (No. 8), according to the American Lung Association’s 2025 list of the most polluted cities.

In the WalletHub study, San Jose, California, earns the honor of being the country’s greenest city. It’s followed by Washington, D.C.; Oakland, California; Irvine, California; and San Francisco.

“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,” WalletHub analyst Chip Lupo said in the report. “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. The greenest cities also are better for your health due to superior air and water quality.”

Texas fell four spots on WalletHub's annual Greenest States report. Photo via Pexels

Texas falls lower on national ranking of greenest states for 2025

room to improve

Texas dropped in the rankings on WalletHub's Greenest States 2025 report.

The report, released last month, considered 28 relevant metrics—from air and water quality to the number of alternative fuel stations and green buildings per capita—to call out states doing the best (and worst) jobs of caring for the environment.

Texas came in at No. 42 out of 50, with a total score of 42.54 out of 100. Last year, the Lone Star State ranked No. 38 with a score of 50.40 based on 25 metrics.

Texas' poor ranking was driven by its last-placed ranking, coming in at No. 50, for overall environmental quality. It was tied for No. 45 for air quality and ranked No. 46 for water quality, which helped comprise the overall environmental quality score.

Other metrics fell closer toward the middle of the pack. The state ranked No. 32 for eco-friendly behaviors and No. 39 for climate-change contributions.

California also fell on the annual report. While the state claimed the top spot in 2024, it came in at No. 7 this year. Vermont, which came in second in 2024, was named the greenest state in 2025.

Hawaii, which didn't crack the top five last year, was ranked No. 2 on the 2025 report. New York, Maryland and Maine rounded out the top five this year.

West Virginia was the country's least green state again this year, followed by Louisiana, Kentucky, Alabama and Mississippi.

The report also showed that Democrat-led states ranked around No. 12 on average, whereas Republican states fell at around No. 33.

While the WalletHub report seems bleak for Texas, others have shown more positive signs for the state. Texas was ranked slightly above average in a recent ranking of the best states for sustainable development. A recently released U.S. Energy Storage Monitor shows that Texas led all states and surpassed California in the fourth quarter of 2024 by installing 1.2 gigawatts of utility-scale energy storage for solar and wind power.

Still, WalletHub also recently ranked Houston No. 98 out of 100 of the largest cities on its Greenest Cities in America report. Read more here.

Source: WalletHub
The report ranked each state on both its home and auto efficiency. Photo via Getty Images

Here's how Texas ranks as an energy efficient state

by the numbers

How energy efficient is the Lone Star State? A new report finds that Texas has some room for improvement in that department.

In its 2024 "Most & Least Energy-Efficient States" report, WalletHub ranks Texas at No. 36 out of the 50 states with a score of 47.5 out of 100 points.

The report ranked each state on both its home and auto efficiency. Texas came in No. 32 for home energy efficiency, which factored in the National Weather Service's annual degree days.

For auto efficiency, Texas came in at No. 38, but ranked No. 43 for vehicle-fuel efficiency specifically and No. 20 for transportation efficiency.

"We divided the annual vehicle miles driven by gallons of gasoline consumed to determine vehicle-fuel efficiency and measured annual vehicle miles driven per capita to determine transportation efficiency," according to WalletHub, which used data from the U.S. Census Bureau, National Climatic Data Center, U.S. Energy Information Administration, and U.S. Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration.


Source: WalletHub

Texas receives mixed reviews when it comes to energy reports from WalletHub. A June report found that Texas ranked as the fourth cheapest state for energy, and in April the state was found to be the thirteenth least green state.

Zooming in on Houston, the reports don't look any better. Earlier this month, the Bayou City was ranked the third worst metro when it comes to the country's greenest cities.

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

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

room for improvement

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:

  1. San Diego, California
  2. Washington, D.C.
  3. Honolulu, Hawaii
  4. San Francisco, California
  5. San Jose, California
  6. Seattle, Washington
  7. Oakland, California
  8. Portland, Oregon
  9. Fremont, California
  10. 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.

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.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Houston geothermal company raises $97M Series B

fresh funding

Houston-based geothermal energy startup Sage Geosystems has closed its Series B fundraising round and plans to use the money to launch its first commercial next-generation geothermal power generation facility.

Ormat Technologies and Carbon Direct Capital co-led the $97 million round, according to a press release from Sage. Existing investors Exa, Nabors, alfa8, Arch Meredith, Abilene Partners, Cubit Capital and Ignis H2 Energy also participated, as well as new investors SiteGround Capital and The UC Berkeley Foundation’s Climate Solutions Fund.

The new geothermal power generation facility will be located at one of Ormat Technologies' existing power plants. The Nevada-based company has geothermal power projects in the U.S. and numerous other countries around the world. The facility will use Sage’s proprietary pressure geothermal technology, which extracts geothermal heat energy from hot dry rock, an abundant geothermal resource.

“Pressure geothermal is designed to be commercial, scalable and deployable almost anywhere,” Cindy Taff, CEO of Sage Geosystems, said in the news release. “This Series B allows us to prove that at commercial scale, reflecting strong conviction from partners who understand both the urgency of energy demand and the criticality of firm power.”

Sage reports that partnering with the Ormat facility will allow it to market and scale up its pressure geothermal technology at a faster rate.

“This investment builds on the strong foundation we’ve established through our commercial agreement and reinforces Ormat’s commitment to accelerating geothermal development,” Doron Blachar, CEO of Ormat Technologies, added in the release. “Sage’s technical expertise and innovative approach are well aligned with Ormat’s strategy to move faster from concept to commercialization. We’re pleased to take this natural next step in a partnership we believe strongly in.”

In 2024, Sage agreed to deliver up to 150 megawatts of new geothermal baseload power to Meta, the parent company of Facebook. At the time, the companies reported that the project's first phase would aim to be operating in 2027.

The company also raised a $17 million Series A, led by Chesapeake Energy Corp., in 2024.

Houston expert discusses the clean energy founder's paradox

Guest Column

Everyone tells you to move fast and break things. In clean energy, moving fast without structural integrity means breaking the only planet we’ve got. This is the founder's paradox: you are building a company in an industry where the stakes are existential, the timelines are glacial, and the capital requires patience.

The myth of the lone genius in a garage doesn’t really apply here. Clean energy startups aren’t just fighting competitors. They are fighting physics, policy, and decades of existing infrastructure. This isn’t an app. You’re building something physical that has to work in the real world. It has to be cheaper, more reliable, and clearly better than fossil fuels. Being “green” alone isn’t enough. Scale is what matters.

Your biggest risks aren’t competitors. They’re interconnection delays, permitting timelines, supply chain fragility, and whether your first customer is willing to underwrite something that hasn’t been done before.

That reality creates a brutal filter. Successful founders in this space need deep technical knowledge and the ability to execute. You need to understand engineering, navigate regulation, and think in terms of markets and risk. You’re not just selling a product. You’re selling a future where your solution becomes the obvious choice. That means connecting short-term financial returns with long-term system change.

The capital is there, but it’s smarter and more demanding. Investors today have PhDs in electrochemistry and grid dynamics. They’ve been burned by promises of miracle materials that never left the lab. They don't fund visions; they fund pathways to impact that can scale and make financial sense. Your roadmap must show not just a brilliant invention, but a clear, believable plan to drive costs down over time.

Capital in this sector isn’t impressed by ambition alone. It wants evidence that risk is being retired in the right order — even if that means slower growth early.

Here’s the upside. The difficulty of clean energy is also its strength. If you succeed, your advantage isn’t just in software or branding. It’s in hardware, supply chains, approvals, and years of hard work that others can’t easily copy. Your real competitors aren’t other startups. They’re inertia and the existing system. Winning here isn’t zero-sum. When one solution scales, it helps the entire market grow.

So, to the founder in the lab, or running field tests at a remote site: your pace will feel slow. The validation cycles are long. But you are building in the physical world. When you succeed, you don’t have an exit. You have a foundation. You don't just have customers; you have converts. And the product you ship doesn't just generate revenue; it creates a legacy.

If your timelines feel uncomfortable compared to software, that’s because you’re operating inside a system designed to resist change. And let’s not forget you are building actual physical products that interact with a complex world. Times are tough. Don’t give up. We need you.

---

Nada Ahmed is the founding partner at Houston-based Energy Tech Nexus.

Houston maritime startup raises $43M to electrify cargo vessels

A Houston-based maritime technology company that is working to reduce emissions in the cargo and shipping industry has raised VC funding and opened a new Houston headquarters.

Fleetzero announced that it closed a $43 million Series A financing round this month led by Obvious Ventures with participation from Maersk Growth, Breakthrough Energy Ventures, 8090 Industries, Y Combinator, Shorewind, Benson Capital and others. The funding will go toward expanding manufacturing of its Leviathan hybrid and electric marine propulsion system, according to a news release.

The technology is optimized for high-energy and zero-emission operation of large vessels. It uses EV technology but is built for maritime environments and can be used on new or existing ships with hybrid or all-electric functions, according to Fleetzero's website. The propulsion system was retrofitted and tested on Fleetzero’s test ship, the Pacific Joule, and has been deployed globally on commercial vessels.

Fleetzero is also developing unmanned cargo vessel technology.

"Fleetzero is making robotic ships a reality today. The team is moving us from dirty, dangerous, and expensive to clean, safe, and cost-effective. It's like watching the future today," Andrew Beebe, managing director at Obvious Ventures, said in the news release. "We backed the team because they are mariners and engineers, know the industry deeply, and are scaling with real ships and customers, not just renderings."

Fleetzero also announced that it has opened a new manufacturing and research and development facility, which will serve as the company's new headquarters. The facility features a marine robotics and autonomy lab, a marine propulsion R&D center and a production line with a capacity of 300 megawatt-hours per year. The company reports that it plans to increase production to three gigawatt-hours per year over the next five years.

"Houston has the people who know how to build and operate big hardware–ships, rigs, refineries and power systems," Mike Carter, co-founder and COO of Fleetzero, added in the release. "We're pairing that industrial DNA with modern batteries, autonomy, and software to bring back shipbuilding to the U.S."

View All Listings