Skip to main content
Log in

Electric utility plans are consistent with Renewable Portfolio Standards and Clean Energy Standards in most US states

  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Electricity is one of the easiest—and therefore most urgent—sectors to decarbonize. In the USA, state-level Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) and Clean Energy Standards (CES) are key policy tools pursuant to this objective. These policies mandate that electric utilities achieve specified renewable compositions on specified timelines. In recent US history, electricity has been decarbonizing faster than major agencies predicted, which raises the question of whether utilities are decarbonizing faster than RPS and CES targets prescribe. We address this question by comparing state-level RPS and CES targets to historical progress and stated decarbonization targets from 220 utilities, comprising at least 52% of sales in every state and 76% of sales on average. In 18 of 26 states with current RPS or CES and 9 of 11 states with expired RPS or CES, utilities’ generation and targets meet, nearly meet, or exceed state targets. We project that utility targets and linear progress thereafter put six states without current RPS or CES on track for over 90% renewable electricity by 2050, and they put US electricity on track to reach 100% renewable by 2060. Including nuclear—unlike most RPS and CES policies—makes these results starker: utilities’ past and planned generation meets or exceeds 31 of 37 state targets, 14 states without RPS or CES would decarbonize electricity by 2050, and US electricity would also decarbonize by 2050. Our results suggest that electric utility plans are mostly consistent with state-level targets but are behind the Biden administration’s target of decarbonizing electricity by 2035.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Raw data used in our analysis are available as Supplementary Material.

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Jonathan Hughes, Roger Pielke Jr, members of the Center for Social and Environmental Futures at the University of Colorado Boulder, and three reviewers for helpful comments on previous drafts of the manuscript.

Materials availability

N/A.

Code availability

JMP journals used to run analyses and make figures are available from the corresponding author on request.

Funding

This work was supported by the Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program (UROP) at the University of Colorado Boulder.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

GDK and MGB designed the study, analyzed the data, and wrote the paper. GDK collected the data.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew G. Burgess.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

ESM 1

(XLSX 354 kb)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kroeger, G.D., Burgess, M.G. Electric utility plans are consistent with Renewable Portfolio Standards and Clean Energy Standards in most US states. Climatic Change 177, 1 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03645-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03645-7

Keywords

Navigation