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

Texas falls lower on national ranking of greenest states for 2025

room to improve

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

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
From Your Site Articles
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.

It might only be Texas' grass that is green. Photo via Getty Images

Here's how Texas ranks among the greenest states

zooming in

Turns out — Texas might not be as green as you thought.

A new report from WalletHub looked at 25 key metrics — from green buildings per capita to energy consumption from renewable resources — to evaluate 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.

“It’s important for every American to do their part to support greener living and protect our environment. However, it’s much easier being green in some states than others," writes Cassandra Happe, a WalletHub Analyst, in the report. "For example, if a state doesn’t have a great infrastructure for alternative-fuel vehicles, it becomes much harder for residents to adopt that technology. Living in a green state is also very beneficial for the health of you and your family, as you benefit from better air, soil and water quality.”

Here's how Texas ranked among a few of the key metrics:

  • No. 35 for air quality
  • No. 38 for soil quality
  • No. 38 for water quality
  • No. 26 for LEED-certified buildings per capita
  • No. 32 for percent of renewable energy consumption
  • No. 45 for energy consumption per capita
  • No. 38 for gasoline consumption (in gallons) per capita
Despite Texas' solar energy generation surpassed the output by coal last month, according to a report from the Institute For Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, the Lone Star State has room for improvement.
California was ranked as the greenest state, with Vermont, New York, Maryland, and Washington, respectively, rounding out the top five. The country's least green state is West Virginia, followed by Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Kentucky.

The report also zeroed in on how politics play into a state's climate system. Democrat-led states ranked around No. 15 on average, whereas Republican states fell at around No. 36.


Source: WalletHub
Texas ranked as the 40th most energy efficient state, according to a recent report. Photo via Getty Images

Texas falls short on list of most energy efficient states

big yikes

The Lone Star State again failed to perform well on an annual ranking of the most energy efficient states.

Texas ranked as the 40th most energy efficient state, according to WalletHub's annual report. Only eight continental US states ranked poorer, including Oklahoma, Tennessee, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, and South Carolina, respectively.

Source: WalletHub

The report looked at home and auto energy efficiency, as the report's methodology outlines.

"We obtained the former by calculating the ratio of total residential energy consumption to annual degree days. For the latter, 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," reads the study.

Texas scored a 36 out of 50 points for home energy efficiency and 41 points for auto energy efficiency.

The report's experts were asked about federal incentivization of energy efficiency for customers, and all were in agreement that this is key to the future of energy.

"Energy conservation is a big piece that needs to be tackled efficiently for us to make any progress on energy transition. Incentivizing consumers and businesses is necessary but only if there is a clear demonstration of changes in personal and business work/living habits that reduce the energy footprint," says Sanjay Srinivasan, director at EMS Energy Institute and professor at Pennsylvania State University.

Another recent report looked at Texas from the solar perspective, and Houston failed to place in the top 15 most "solar" cities in the United States. However, Austin led the way for Texas, ranking the No. 3 most “solar” city in the U.S., per Thumbtack. Austin, with the highest net-new solar panel installations within the past year in Texas, split up four Californian cities in the top five. Only San Diego (No. 1) and Los Angeles (No. 2) outranked Austin.

While there's room for improvement for efficiency, Texas has among the best prices for energy, as WalletHub found in a report this summer. Texas ranked No. 49 on the list of the 2023 Most Energy-Expensive States.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Expert on powering Texas: The promise and challenges of renewable energy

Guest Column

Texas leads the nation in wind and solar energy, but that leadership is being tested as a surge in project cancellations raises new concerns about the future of renewables in the state.

While Texas clean energy has grown significantly in recent years, solar and wind often fall short of meeting peak electricity demand. As extreme weather, rising demand, and project cancellations strain the grid, Texas must confront the growing gap between renewable potential and real-time reliability.

Solar and Wind Energy

Solar generation in the Lone Star State has grown substantially over the past decade. The Texas solar industry is estimated to employ over 12,000 Texans and is contributing billions in local tax revenue and landowner income, and solar and storage are the largest sources of new energy on the Texas grid.

With a significant number of sunny days, Texas’ geography also enables it to be among the states with the greatest energy potential for solar power generation. Further moving to advance the use of solar energy generation, the 89th Texas legislature passed SB 1202 which accelerates the permitting process for home solar and energy storage installations. SB 1202 empowers homeowners to strengthen their own energy security and supports greater grid resilience across the state.

Texas has also led the United States in wind energy production for more than 17 years, with 239 wind-related projects and over 15,300 wind turbines, which is more than any other state. The economic impact of wind energy in Texas is substantial, with the industry contributing $1.7 billion a year to the state’s gross domestic product. With wind electric power generation jobs offering an average annual wage of $109,826, the growing sector provides lucrative employment opportunities.

However, solar and wind currently struggle to meet Texas’ peak electricity demand from 5 pm to 7 pm — a time when millions of residents return home, temperatures remain high and air conditioner use surges. Solar generation begins to decline just as demand ramps up, and wind production is often inconsistent during these hours. Without sufficient long-duration storage or dispatchable backup power, this mismatch between supply and demand presents a significant reliability risk — one that becomes especially urgent during heat waves and extreme weather events, as seen during ERCOT conservation alerts.

Geothermal Energy

Geothermal energy uses heat from beneath the Earth’s surface to provide reliable, low-emission power with minimal land use and no fuel transport. Though it currently supplies a small share of energy, Texas is emerging as a leader in its development, supported by state leaders, industry, and environmentalists. During the 89th legislative session, Texas passed HB 3240 to create a Geothermal Energy Production Policy Council, set to begin work on September 1, 2025.

In 2024, Sage Geosystems was selected to develop geothermal projects at the Naval Air Station in Corpus Christi, expanding its work with the Department of Defense. In partnership with the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program, Sage is using its proprietary Geopressured Geothermal Systems technology to evaluate the potential for geothermal to be a source of clean and consistent energy at the base.

One limitation of geothermal energy is location. Deep drilling is costly, and areas with high water tables, like some coastal regions, may not be viable.

Hydroelectric Energy

While hydropower plays a minor role in Texas’ energy mix, it is still an essential energy source. Its output depends on water availability, which can be affected by seasonal and long-term changes like droughts.

Texas has 26 hydropower plants with a total capacity of nearly 738 megawatts, serving about 2.9 million people as of 2019. Harris County holds 43% of all hydropower generation jobs in the state, and in 2021, hydroelectric power generation contributed $700 million to Texas’ gross domestic product.

Federal funding is helping expand hydropower in Texas. The Southwestern Power Administration has committed about $103 million to support infrastructure, including $32 million for upgrades to Central Texas’s Whitney Dam. The 2021 Inflation Reduction Act added $369 billion in tax credits for clean energy, supporting dam retrofits nationwide. In 2022, the Department of Energy launched over $28 million in new funding through the Infrastructure Law to help meet national clean energy goals by 2035 and carbon neutrality by 2050.

Tidal Energy

Driven by the moon and sun, tidal energy is predictable but limited to coastal areas with strong tides. Although Texas has modest tidal potential, research is ongoing to optimize it. Texas A&M University is developing a floating test platform for hybrid renewable systems, integrating tidal, wave, wind, and solar energy. In addition, St. Mary’s University in San Antonio is prototyping small-scale tidal turbines using 3D printing technology.

While commercial tidal power remains in the research phase, the state’s offshore capabilities, engineering talent, and growing university-led innovation could make it a player in hybrid marine renewable systems. Floating platforms that integrate wave, tide, solar, and wind offer a compelling vision for offshore power generation suited to Texas’ unique coastal conditions.

Biomass Energy

Biomass energy is the largest renewable source worldwide, providing 55% of renewables and over 6% of global energy. While reliable, it can be less efficient, sometimes using more energy to burn the organic matter than it produces, and demand may exceed supply.

In Texas, biomass is a nominal part of the state’s energy portfolio. However, substantial research is being conducted by Texas A&M University to attempt to convert algae and food waste into a cost-efficient source of biomass material. In addition, UK-based biomass and renewable energy company Drax opened its North American headquarters in Houston, which created more than 100 new jobs in Texas’ renewable energy industry.

It’s clear that renewable energy is playing an increasingly important role in shaping Texas’ energy future. But the road ahead demands a realistic view: while these sources can reduce emissions and diversify our generation mix, they do not yet solve for peak load reliability — especially during the critical 5 pm to 7 pm window when grid stress is highest.

Meeting that challenge will require not just investment in renewables, but also innovation in grid-scale storage, flexible generation, market reform and consumer programs. A diversified, resilient energy portfolio — one that includes renewables and reliable dispatchable sources — will be the key to ensuring that Texas remains powered, prepared and prosperous for generations to come.

---

Sam Luna is director at BKV Energy, where he oversees brand and go-to-market strategy, customer experience, marketing execution, and more.

Shell to shut down Volta EV charging business with 2,000 stations

pulling the plug

A little over two years after buying it for $169 million, Houston-based Shell USA is shutting down its Volta C electric vehicle charging business.

Shell confirmed to AdExchanger that it will dismantle Volta’s network of more than 2,000 EV charging stations this year. A Shell spokesperson said the energy giant is turning its attention to high-speed public charging stations at Shell-branded sites like gas stations and standalone EV hubs.

Around the world, Shell operates more than 70,000 public EV charging stations. In 2024, the company said it was aiming for a global total of about 200,000 charging stations by 2030.

When Shell announced in March 2023 that it had completed its acquisition of Volta, the energy company said it was gaining an EV charging network with more than 3,000 charging stations at places such as shopping centers, grocery stores and pharmacies.

Shell had said that although Volta’s revenue came from advertising on screens at EV charging stations, it planned to increase the number of charging stations that required motorists to pay for power.

Shell explored a sale of the Volta business earlier this year but didn’t find a buyer, according to AdExchanger.

ExxonMobil may delay or cancel plans for $7 billion Baytown hydrogen plant

project uncertainty

Spring-based ExxonMobil, the country’s largest oil and gas company, might delay or cancel what would be the world’s largest low-carbon hydrogen plant due to a significant change in federal law. The project carries a $7 billion price tag.

The Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act created a new 10-year incentive, the 45V tax credit, for production of clean hydrogen. But under President Trump’s "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," the window for starting construction of low-carbon hydrogen projects that qualify for the tax credit has narrowed. The Inflation Reduction Act mandated that construction start by 2033. But the Big Beautiful Bill switched the construction start time to early 2028.

“While our project can meet this timeline, we’re concerned about the development of a broader market, which is critical to transition from government incentives,” ExxonMobil Chairman and CEO Darren Woods said during the company’s recent second-quarter earnings call.

Woods said ExxonMobil is working to determine whether a combination of the 45Q tax credit for carbon capture projects and the revised 45V tax credit will help pave the way for a “broader” low-carbon hydrogen market.

“If we can’t see an eventual path to a market-driven business, we won’t move forward with the [Baytown] project,” Woods said.

“We knew that helping to establish a brand-new product and a brand-new market initially driven by government policy would not be easy or advance in a straight line,” he added.

Woods said ExxonMobil is trying to nail down sales contracts connected to the project, including exports of ammonia to Asia and Europe and sales of hydrogen in the U.S.

ExxonMobil announced in 2022 that it would build the low-carbon hydrogen plant at its refining and petrochemical complex in Baytown. The company has said the plant is slated to go online in 2027 and 2028.

As it stands now, ExxonMobil wants the Baytown plant to produce up to 1 billion cubic feet of hydrogen per day made from natural gas, and capture and store more than 98 percent of the associated carbon dioxide. The company has said the project could store as much as 10 million metric tons of CO2 per year.

View All Listings