Renewable Portfolio Standards Chart
Last month, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) released a Corporate Goal case model comparing utility emission reduction targets with the Reference Case of last year’s Annual Energy Outlook 2021 (AEO2021). The model shows electric power sector emissions decreasing 11.6% compared to the AEO2021 Reference Case because of additional carbon-neutral resources contributing to a greater share of power generation.
Included in the appendices of this report is a list of all Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) targets already established across the U.S., as well as an “effective RPS” for each state taking into account the carbon reduction goals of each state’s investor-owned utility. Oil & Energy is publishing the list here as a reference for heating fuel industry stakeholders regarding the electric power sector’s transition to renewable energy. Look for more information on this transition in our summary highlights of EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook 2022.
|State1||Reference case target2||Effective RPS for Corporate Goal case3|
|States with existing renewable portfolio standards|
|Arizona||15% renewable by 2025||44.71% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|California||60% renewable by 2030, 100% carbon-free by 2045||Maintains Reference case path|
|Colorado||30% renewable by 2020 for investor-owned utilities, 20% by 2020 for large electric cooperatives, and 10% by 2020 for other cooperatives and municipal utilities serving more than 40,000 customers||54% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Connecticut||48% by 2030 (44% renewable, 4% efficiency and combined heat and power)||50.89% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Delaware||25% renewable by 2026||Maintains Reference case path|
|District of Columbia||100% renewable by 2040||Maintains Reference case path|
|Illinois||25% renewable by 2026 (3,000 megawatts [MW] solar and 1,300 MW wind)||30.9% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Iowa||105 MW of eligible renewable resources||27.78% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Massachusetts||35% renewable by 2030 (and an additional 1% per year thereafter)||Maintains Reference case path|
|Maryland||50% renewable by 2030||Maintains Reference case path|
|Maine||100% carbon-neutral by 2050||Maintains Reference case path|
|Michigan||15% renewable by 2021 and specific new capacity goals for utilities that serve more than 1 million customers||66.91% carbon-neutral by 2040|
|Minnesota||31.5% renewable by 2020 (Xcel), 26.5% renewable by 2025 (other investor-owned utilities), or 25% renewable by 2025 (other utilities)||50.29% carbon-neutral by 2040|
|Missouri||15% renewable by 2021||57.51% carbon-neutral by 2040|
|Montana||15% renewable by 2015||52.40% carbon-neutral by 2045|
|North Carolina||12.5% renewable by 2021 for investor-owned utilities and 10% renewable by 2018 for municipal and cooperative utilities||35.32% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|New Hampshire||24.8% renewable by 2025||Maintains Reference case path|
|New Jersey||50% renewable by 2030. The solar carve-out reaches 5.1% in 2021 before gradually decreasing to 1.1% by 2033||Maintains Reference case path|
|New Mexico||80% renewable by 2040 and 100% carbon-free by 2045||Maintains Reference case path|
|Nevada||50% renewable by 2030 and 100% carbon-free by 2050||Maintains Reference case path|
|New York||70% renewable by 2030 and 100% carbon-free by 2040||Maintains Reference case path|
|Ohio||8.5% renewable by 2026||45.68% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Oregon||50% renewable by 2040||51.24% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Pennsylvania||18% renewable by 2020||30.73% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Rhode Island||38.5% renewable by 2035||68.10% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Texas||5,880 MW renewable by 2015||7.16% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Vermont||75% renewable by 2032||76.06% carbon-neutral by 2030|
|Virginia||100% carbon-neutral by 2050||Maintains Reference case path|
|Washington||100% carbon-free by 2045||Maintains Reference case path|
|Wisconsin||10% renewable by 2015||68.87% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|States with no existing renewable portfolio standards4|
|Alabama||61.47% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Arkansas||22.68% carbon-neutral by 2030|
|Florida||26.38% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Georgia||57.76% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Idaho||42.89% carbon-neutral by 2045|
|Indiana||69.35% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Kansas||50.65% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Kentucky||38.80% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Louisiana||38.80% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Mississippi||33.15% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|North Dakota||10.27% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Oklahoma||46.89% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|South Carolina||48.46% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|South Dakota||26.83% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Tennesee5||1.36% carbon-neutral by 2030|
|Utah||47.18% carbon-neutral by 2030|
|West Virginia||70.43% carbon-neutral by 2050|
|Wyoming||41.49% carbon-neutral by 2045|
1Although Hawaii has a renewable portfolio standard for 100% renewable generation by 2045, EIA did not include generation in Alaska and Hawaii in this analysis because the generation mix from these states is determined outside of the National Energy Modeling System because of the unique electricity supply markets in these states.
2All targets are defined by total sales in the given state.
3EIA calculates effective RPS by multiplying the collective investor-owned utility carbon-neutral goal for a state by the share of electricity sales from investor-owned utilities in that state. EIA compares this value with any existing renewable portfolio or clean energy standard that is most commonly applied to all utilities within a state. In cases where a utility in a state has carbon reduction goals but does not exceed the state-level RPS, the state-level RPS used in the Reference case is maintained. This path is noted by Maintains Reference case path.
4These states have no existing state renewable portfolio standard or clean energy standard and so have no existing policy in the Reference case.
5Tennessee has a low effective RPS because investor-owned utility sales account for less than 2% of total electricity sales in the state. EIA did not consider the Tennessee Valley Authority for this analysis.
Note: Carbon reduction policies use a variety of terms (carbon-free, carbon-neutral, clean energy standard) in the descriptions of their policies. All of the different terms largely mean allowing for technologies other than renewables to qualify. EIA uses carbon-neutral to describe these policy names collectively and only clarifies where the state-level policy explicitly states a term.