EPA GHGRP · reporting year 2023 · Power Plants

Axium Kings Mountain - top-third GHGRP parent

According to the EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), an upper-third Scope 1 reporter: 1 facility across 1 state (1.2M MT CO₂e in 2023).

MT CO₂e (latest facility reports)
1.2M
Reporting facilities
1
States covered
1
Overall rank
#297
Watchlist RSS for this company

Data updated May 2026

1.2M MT CO₂e · 2023

According to the EPA GHGRP, Axium Kings Mountain reported 1.2M MT CO₂e in 2023 across 1 facility in 1 state (ranks #297 of 2,289 U.S. corporate GHG emitters by total reported CO₂e) Emissions increased 146% over the tracked period.

  • Overall rank #297 of 2,289
  • #164 in Power Plants
  • +145.7% since 2018

Axium Kings Mountain vs all U.S. GHGRP parent companies

Where this parent's reported Scope 1 CO₂e sits among every EPA GHGRP-reporting company

1,237,626 297th of 2289 higher than 1,992 of 2,289 companies

GHGRP parent companies, banded by reported CO₂e (MT)

Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more companies. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count and share, and where it sits relative to this entry.

Source EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program · 2023

How Axium Kings Mountain spreads its footprint vs Power Plants peers

Facility count against total reported CO₂e for 21 Power Plants companies. A company can lead its sector from one concentrated site or from many smaller ones; the split below uses the median of this peer group (19 facilities, 26.77M MT).

Median split: 19 facilities, 26.77M MT CO₂e among Power Plants peers. 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 21 entities by Reporting facilities (X) and Total CO₂e (million MT) (Y), with a crosshair dividing the plot into four quadrants. Large & distributedFew sites, outsized footprintMany sites, modest footprintSmall & concentrated 01020304050 0M20M40M60M80M100M Reporting facilities Total CO₂e (million MT) Facility count vs. total reported CO₂e, Power Plants
Median split: 19 facilities, 26.77M MT CO₂e among Power Plants peers.

You are here: Axium Kings Mountain.

Power Plants peer footprint table: Axium Kings Mountain, 1 facilities, 1.24M MT CO2e. Vistra, 40 facilities, 86.32M MT CO2e. The Southern, 26 facilities, 78.01M MT CO2e. Duke Energy, 39 facilities, 65.01M MT CO2e. CPN Management, 43 facilities, 47.58M MT CO2e. Nextera Energy, 19 facilities, 45.57M MT CO2e. American Electric Power CO, 22 facilities, 44.72M MT CO2e. Berkshire Hathaway, 27 facilities, 39.8M MT CO2e. US Government, 21 facilities, 38.21M MT CO2e. Entergy, 23 facilities, 33.86M MT CO2e. Xcel Energy, 28 facilities, 29.03M MT CO2e. PPL, 6 facilities, 26.77M MT CO2e. Dominion Energy, 22 facilities, 25.19M MT CO2e. DTE Energy, 12 facilities, 22.31M MT CO2e. NRG Energy, 14 facilities, 22.1M MT CO2e. Ameren, 11 facilities, 19.88M MT CO2e. Evergy, 12 facilities, 19.87M MT CO2e. Lightstone Generation, 4 facilities, 19.14M MT CO2e. Talen Energy, 11 facilities, 17.72M MT CO2e. Associated Electric Cooperative, 7 facilities, 15.57M MT CO2e. Aes, 8 facilities, 15.45M MT CO2e.

EPA GHGRP inventory plate

Parent axium-kings-mountain · 2023 #297 · 1.2M MT

CO2E-MID · UPPER-Q · PHOTO-FINISH · FAC-SINGLE · SPAN-HOME · SECTOR-POWER-PLANTS · TREND-SURGE · BOOK-RICH

  • CO2E-MID 1.2M MT
  • UPPER-Q #297/2289
  • PHOTO-FINISH Rayburn Energy Station · Power Plants
  • FAC-SINGLE 1 facility
  • SPAN-HOME 1 state
  • SECTOR-POWER-PLANTS Power Plants
  • TREND-SURGE +146% since 2018
  • BOOK-RICH 7/8 fields

Nearest CO₂e peer: Rayburn Energy Station · Power Plants (±4K MT)

Upper-third parent rollup stamps: CO₂e band, corpus rank, peer, facility book, state span, sector, trend. Not an EPA grade.

2023 nearly all-CO₂ parent book

This parent's 2023 facility book is almost entirely CO₂ (99.9% of 1.2M MT CO₂e). CH₄ and N₂O together are only 0.1%, a CO₂-shaped GHGRP profile, not a methane story. Component shares sum this parent's facility CO₂ / CH₄ / N₂O rows for that year, not a corporate Scope 1-3 inventory.

CO₂
99.9%
1.2M MT
CH₄
0%
573 MT
N₂O
0.1%
683 MT

CO₂e neighbourhood around Axium Kings Mountain

Lowest and highest poles plus nearest reported parents by CO₂e, not a full GHGRP corpus board reprint.

Vistra · Power Plants · high…86.3MWabash Valley Power A… · Pow…1.2MRayburn Energy Station · Pow…1.2MAxium Kings Mountain · Power…1.2MOhio Power Partners · Power …1.2MBayport Polymers · Other · n…1.2MPelican Renewables · Other ·…0
EPA GHGRP parent CO₂e · neighbourhood around Axium Kings Mountain · May 2026

Emissions growth across reporting years

Axium Kings Mountain - rising annual GHG

EPA GHGRP 2018–2023 · million metric tons CO₂e

Reported CO₂e in 2023
1.2M MT
6 annual EPA GHGRP reporting records
0.4M0.6M0.8M1M1.2M1.4M 201820192020202120222023 1.24M

Axium Kings Mountain annual reported GHG emissions, 2018–2023

Source: EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) As of Reporting year 2023

Axium Kings Mountain reported 1.2M MT CO₂e in 2023, compared with 504K MT in 2018 - a rise of 145.7% across the EPA GHGRP reporting record.

Facilities (1)

Facility Emissions (MT CO2e)
Kings Mountain Energy Center
Power Plants
Kings Mountain, NC
1.2M

Nationwide peers for a top-third GHGRP parent

Three EPA GHGRP peer sets for a top-third parent (1.2M MT): nearest totals, facility-book size, then per-facility intensity.

Source: EPA GHGRP Data is based on facility self-reporting. Not environmental compliance advice

What to do with this

Using Axium Kings Mountain's emissions profile

  • Axium Kings Mountain runs high-intensity per facility (1.2M MT CO₂e/site); see how it stacks up against the rest of the Power Plants sector on the Power Plants industry page.
  • It ranks #297 of 2,289 reporting parents nationwide, compare it directly against specific peers on the compare tool.
  • Not sure how to read a total-CO₂e figure or a per-facility intensity number, the how-to-read guide walks through what each field means and what it doesn't.

Related reading: How to read an emissions profile · Power Plants emitters · Methodology

Disclaimer: This information is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. Data is sourced from the EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP). Consult a qualified professional before making decisions based on this data.