EPA GHGRP · reporting year 2023 · Power Plants

Mdu Resources Group - top-third GHGRP parent

According to the EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), an upper-third Scope 1 reporter: 8 facilities across 5 states (2.0M MT CO₂e in 2023).

MT CO₂e (latest facility reports)
2.0M
Reporting facilities
8
States covered
5
Overall rank
#216
Watchlist RSS for this company

Data updated May 2026

2.0M MT CO₂e · 2023

According to the EPA GHGRP, Mdu Resources Group reported 2.0M MT CO₂e in 2023 across 8 facilities in 5 states (ranks among the top 10% of U.S. corporate GHG emitters (#216 of 2,289)) Emissions decreased 45% over the tracked period.

  • Overall rank #216 of 2,289
  • #125 in Power Plants
  • -45.2% since 2011

Mdu Resources Group vs all U.S. GHGRP parent companies

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

2,030,794 216th of 2289 higher than 2,073 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 Mdu Resources Group 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: Mdu Resources Group.

Power Plants peer footprint table: Mdu Resources Group, 8 facilities, 2.03M 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 mdu-resources-group · 2023 #216 · 2.0M MT

CO2E-MID · TOP-DECILE · PHOTO-FINISH · FAC-MULTI · SPAN-MULTI · SECTOR-POWER-PLANTS · TREND-CUT · BOOK-RICH

  • CO2E-MID 2.0M MT
  • TOP-DECILE #216/2289
  • PHOTO-FINISH Colorado Springs Util… · Power Plants
  • FAC-MULTI 8 facilities
  • SPAN-MULTI 5 states
  • SECTOR-POWER-PLANTS Power Plants
  • TREND-CUT −45% since 2011
  • BOOK-RICH 7/8 fields

Nearest CO₂e peer: Colorado Springs Utilities · Power Plants (±8K MT)

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

2023 methane-weighted parent mix

Methane leads the non-CO₂ share for Mdu Resources Group: CH₄ is 1.7% of 2.0M MT CO₂e in 2023 (N₂O 0.5%). Non-CO₂ gases total 2.1%. Component shares sum this parent's facility CO₂ / CH₄ / N₂O rows for that year, not a corporate Scope 1-3 inventory.

CO₂
97.9%
2.0M MT
CH₄
1.7%
34K MT
N₂O
0.5%
10K MT

CO₂e neighbourhood around Mdu Resources Group

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

Vistra · Power Plants · high…86.3MAvista · Waste · near2.1MMdu Resources Group · Power …2.0MColorado Springs Util… · Pow…2.0MGolden Spread Electri… · Pow…2.0MVicinity Energy · Power Plan…2.0MPelican Renewables · Other ·…0
EPA GHGRP parent CO₂e · neighbourhood around Mdu Resources Group · May 2026

Largest sites in a top-third parent book

Mdu Resources Group - top sites (MT CO₂e)

Big Stone1.9MTioga Compressor Station32KCabin Creek Compressor Stati…29KR M Heskett22KCharbonneau Compressor Stati…19KLewis & Clark10KCascade Natural Gas Coporati…24Intermountain Gas Company3

Mdu Resources Group's largest facilities by latest available reported CO₂e

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

Emissions decline across reporting years

Mdu Resources Group - declining annual GHG

EPA GHGRP 2011–2023 · million metric tons CO₂e

Reported CO₂e in 2023
2.0M MT
13 annual EPA GHGRP reporting records
1.5M2M2.5M3M3.5M4M4.5M 2011201320152017201920212023 2.03M

Mdu Resources Group annual reported GHG emissions, 2011–2023

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

Mdu Resources Group reported 2.0M MT CO₂e in 2023, compared with 3.7M MT in 2011 - a decline of 45.2% across the EPA GHGRP reporting record.

Multi-site facilities (8)

Facility Emissions (MT CO2e)
Big Stone
Power Plants
BIG STONE CITY, SD
1.9M
Tioga Compressor Station
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems
Tioga, ND
32K
Cabin Creek Compressor Station
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems
Baker, MT
29K
R M Heskett
Power Plants
MANDAN, ND
22K
Charbonneau Compressor Station
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems
Cartwright, ND
19K
Lewis & Clark
Power Plants
RICHLAND, MT
10K
Cascade Natural Gas Coporation - Washington
Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids Suppliers
Kennewick, WA
24
Intermountain Gas Company
Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids Suppliers
Boise, ID
3

Where Mdu Resources Group's reported CO₂e sits by state

94.5% of this parent's latest facility CO₂e is in South Dakota (1 site) ; next is North Dakota at 3.6% . Shares are GHGRP facility rollups for this parent, not state economy totals.

SD1.9MND72KMT39KWA24ID3
EPA GHGRP · Mdu Resources Group facility CO₂e by state · May 2026

Mdu Resources Group reported facility CO₂e concentration by U.S. state

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

Mdu Resources Group's reported CO₂e by EPA sector

Top sector Power Plants is 96.1% of this parent's facility CO₂e (3 sites) ; Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems follows at 3.9% . Sector labels are EPA GHGRP facility industry_sector values.

Power Plants2.0MPetroleum and Natural Gas Sy…80KNatural Gas and Natural Gas …26
EPA GHGRP · Mdu Resources Group facility CO₂e by sector · May 2026

Mdu Resources Group reported facility CO₂e by EPA industry sector

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

Nationwide peers for a top-third GHGRP parent

Three EPA GHGRP peer sets for a top-third parent (2.0M 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 Mdu Resources Group's emissions profile

  • Mdu Resources Group runs high-intensity per facility (254K MT CO₂e/site); see how it stacks up against the rest of the Power Plants sector on the Power Plants industry page.
  • It ranks #216 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.