{"id":37025,"date":"2023-02-27T18:59:46","date_gmt":"2023-02-27T23:59:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/test.greenmoney.com\/2025\/?p=37025"},"modified":"2023-02-28T19:41:06","modified_gmt":"2023-03-01T00:41:06","slug":"the-2023-community-power-scorecard","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/test.greenmoney.com\/2025\/the-2023-community-power-scorecard\/","title":{"rendered":"The 2023 Community Power Scorecard"},"content":{"rendered":"
>> Back to March 2023 Issue<\/a><\/div>\n

Each year, the Institute for Local Self-Reliance tracks and scores states based on how their policies help or hinder local clean energy action. The states that score the highest let individuals and communities take charge and build the energy future that best suits local needs \u2014 whether it\u2019s increased access to solar, efficient and affordable buildings, or choosing an electricity supplier who will create local jobs.<\/p>\n

In the 2023 Community Power Scorecard, 4 states excelled, 14 states and the District of Columbia saw above average scores, 6 were average, 14 were mediocre, and 13 states received failing grades.<\/p>\n

Read about\u00a0<\/em>Why ILSR\u2019s Community Power Scorecard Matters.<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

States are awarded an A, B, C, D, or F letter grade. The 2023 scores are evaluated out of a total of 41 points.\u00a0The scoring methodology and a breakdown of this year\u2019s scores are available in\u00a0<\/strong>this document<\/strong><\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Our scoring compiles data from the\u00a0American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy<\/a>,\u00a0DSIRE<\/a>, the\u00a0National Renewable Energy Laboratory<\/a>,\u00a0PACENation<\/a>,\u00a0SolarReviews<\/a>, and\u00a0Vote Solar<\/a>, as well as the data we regularly track on community solar, community choice aggregation, and state legislative changes in general. Last year\u2019s scores are available in our\u00a02022 Scorecard<\/a>.<\/p>\n

How Can Your State Get an \u201cA\u201d Community Power Score?<\/h2>\n

ILSR\u2019s community power scorecard evaluates state policies as they are written, not their implementation. The work of advancing energy democracy requires continued advocacy, vigilance, and effort. An \u201cA\u201d grade does not mean that the work is done. Even in high-scoring states, like Massachusetts or California,\u00a0advocates are still fighting for community power<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"ILSR<\/h2>\n

Policy and Regulatory Trends in 2022<\/h2>\n

States passed eight policies last year that impacted their 2023 community power scores.<\/p>\n

California, Illinois, Maryland, and New Mexico each changed their interconnection rules for distributed energy resources. All four states added specific considerations for battery storage, which is something the Interstate Renewable Energy Council advocates for with its\u00a0BATRIES interconnection reform package<\/a>. Out of those states, only Maryland had a less-than-perfect interconnection grade, so Maryland\u2019s community power score has increased by one point.<\/p>\n

To compare state interconnection environments, among other policies, see our interactive\u00a0<\/em>Community Power Map<\/em><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

The Washington and New Hampshire legislatures each demonstrated their desires to increase solar access with community solar policies that make specific accommodations for low-income subscribers (see\u00a0Wash. HB1814<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0N.H. SB270<\/a>). California, by our grading criteria, did not receive any additional points for its\u00a0new community solar policy<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 even though the policy is worthier than the state\u2019s existing Enhanced Community Renewables program. Several other states explored, but did not implement community solar in 2022, including Arizona (see\u00a0ILSR\u2019s commentary<\/a>), Ohio, and West Virginia.<\/p>\n

\n